________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-501. Fri 13 Sep 1991. Lines: 138 Subject: 2.501 FYI: Jobs, Names Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 06:11:34 EST From: dgn612@csc2.anu.edu.au (David Nash) 2) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 08:13:23 EDT From: "Bruce E. Nevin" Subject: a question of names again -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 06:11:34 EST From: dgn612@csc2.anu.edu.au (David Nash) Subject: Job Wangka Maya Pilbara Aboriginal Language Centre (Aboriginal Corporation) P.O. Box 693, Port Hedland, W. A. 6721, 3 Edgar St, Port Hedland Phone: +61-91-732621, Fax: +61-91-732673 e-mail: alcphang@peg.apc.org (alcphang@peg.pegasus.oz.au within Australia) Contract Linguistic Work Expressions of Interest Sought Wangka Maya is a language centre focussing on the maintenance of indigenous Australian languages. The language centre is based in Port Hedland in Western Australia. It has a number of functions, including producing literature in local languages, training Aboriginal people as language workers, supporting local Aboriginal community schools and language programs in state schools, acting as an archive of resources about local languages, promoting understanding of Aboriginal cultures in the broader community, and recording as much as possible of local Aboriginal history and knowledge. The language centre works in a region that includes some 30 languages. Some languages are now spoken by only a few old people while others are still spoken by all age groups. We aim to record as much as possible of the rich linguistic situation so that linguistic and cultural knowledge will be available for speakers today and for their descendants in the future. We are seeking expressions of interest from linguists who wish to be employed on a short-term contract basis to work on useful, community-based language projects in the Pilbara region. We are currently working with community groups and our management committee to determine our work priorities for 1992. It is likely that our projects will target the Ngarla, Nyamal, Palyku, Nyiyaparli and Warnman languages in the coming year. Work will also continue on the Marapikurrinya Oral History Project. We would like to hear from qualified academics as well as linguistics students who wish to gain field experience. The language centre will also assist students who wish to negotiate with communities to undertake research for Honours Theses during the period they are employed on a language centre project. The language centre is particularly interested in supporting Aboriginal people who are studying linguistics. We would appreciate it if University staff could bring this notice to the attention of their students. Inquiries and expressions of interest may be directed to Margaret Florey at the language centre. _____________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 08:13:23 EDT From: "Bruce E. Nevin" Subject: a question of names again A colleague here at BBN was looking through _Beyond Jason and Jennifer_ one of those lists of names relatives and friends inevitably give to those who are preparing for childbirth. He posted the following pair of lists and question: ] Girls Boys ] ----------- ----------- ] Alice Christian ] Anne (Anna) Clarence ] Crystal Douglas ] Emma ] Esme' ] Evelyn ] Florence ] Joceyln ] Kimberly ] Lucy ] Maud ] ]So, what interesting feature do these names share? SPOILER Ignore the following if you want to puzzle out the answer for yourself. I found this surprising and intriguing. Bruce Nevin bn@bbn.com -=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=- >. . . over time these names have switched columns. That is the boys >names above were originally girls names, and vice versa. __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-501. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-502. Fri 13 Sep 1991. Lines: 237 Subject: 2.502 Linguistic Novels (Final Posting--REALLY!) Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sun, 08 Sep 91 22:13:44 EDT From: Larry Horn Subject: Re: Linguistic novels, films/469 2) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 91 09:17:33 +0100 From: Richard Coates Subject: Re: Linguistics in Literature: Final Posting /2-475 3) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 91 10:32 BST From: John Coleman Subject: RE: Linguistics in Literature: Final Posting /2-475 4) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1991 8:45:57 GMT-10:00 From: Fran Karttunen Subject: Yet more 5) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 91 16:00:36 -07009) From: saka@cogsci.Berkeley.EDU (Paul Saka) Subject: RE: ling novel -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sun, 08 Sep 91 22:13:44 EDT From: Larry Horn Subject: Re: Linguistic novels, films/469 In the matter of novelistic linguistics and vice versa, let me second the recommendations of both of David Carkeet's novels and of Ian Watson's Embedding. But let me add to our burgeoning bibliography "Oh's Profit", by John Goulet (William Morrow, 1975). Granted, Goulet does not mention the anguish of seeing one's work trashed in LI (unlike Carkeet), nor does he construct an entire--fairly long, as I recall--novel around center embedding (unlike Watson). But then neither Carkeet nor Watson has written a roman 'a clef featuring Chomsky, albeit under the name of Leonard Sandground. Sandground is the originator, in the late fifties, of the revolutionary anti-empiricist theory of Genesis Grammar, who studied with one of the most prestigious members of the old school (Z. Harris-->Babault, if you're curious) and went on to vanquish the die-hard behaviorist Roethlisberger. But Sand- ground's life work on innate ideas and mental categories are mortally threatened by the progress made by the eponymous hero of the novel, a signing gorilla. While the story is mostly Oh's, we are treated along the way to the conference proceedings of the Annual Conference for Linguistic Advancement at the Institute of Cortextual Commitment in New Haven. [Not listed in my local phone book, but then this WAS 15 years ago.] Participants at this meeting include such undisguised names as D. D. Jakobovits, T. Trabasso, V. Yngve, and Gough. None of these historical figures, you (and they) will be pleased to learn, is involved in the allusions to interspecies hanky panky occurring toward the end of the novel. The plot centers on whether the primary "Chimpist", a fellow named Liebling but known to Oh primarily as "the Linguist", can show that an ape has managed to storm "the beachhead of language" and thereby "subdue[d] Grammar Beach". Of course, you'll have to read it yourselves to discover whether. Larry Horn (LHORN@YALEVM.bitnet) _________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 91 09:17:33 +0100 From: Richard Coates Subject: Re: Linguistics in Literature: Final Posting /2-475 No-one seems to have mentioned the character Rubin in Solzhenitsyn's The First Circle - a Germanic dialectologist who had never visited German- speaking territory. Richard Coates ________________________________________________________________________ 3) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 91 10:32 BST From: John Coleman Subject: RE: Linguistics in Literature: Final Posting /2-475 Re: "Dictionary of the Khazars" by Milorad Pavic Maybe I should have read both m. and f. versions, but I was loath to buy two virtually identical copies of the same book. As a consequence, maybe, I didn't greatly enjoy it. I thought the idea of two near-identical versions was an elaborate marketting ploy to sell twice as many books. If anyone has identified the lines which are different, how about telling me: reproducing short quotations, I believe, does not violate copyright laws. By the way, the novel is not in dictionary form, but, amongst other things, involves a dictionary in its plot. --- John Coleman ______________________________________________________________________ 4) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1991 8:45:57 GMT-10:00 From: Fran Karttunen Subject: Yet more To add to the long discussion of linguists in novels and movies: It's been more years than I like to think about since I saw Ingmar Bergman's movie "The Silence," but this is the plot as I recall: Some Swedes are stranded for a weekend in a hotel in an unidentified but obviously East European country where some sort of political turmoil has broken out. Tanks are rolling through the streets, and a circus troupe has taken refuge in the hotel too. The Swedish tourists' anxiety is at an unbearable pitch, because they do not understand a word of the language of the country they are in. They can't get any information about what is happening and whether they should sit tight or try to flee. If they had a tour group and some sort of interpreter/tour guide, they have gotten separated and isolated. So they watch and try to guess what is going on and get nordically depressed. At the end of the movie the most enterprising of them, Ingrid Thulin as I recall, reveals that she has made a word list and so has turned the key in the lock of silence. Bergman had a lot of extras mill around in the streets and glare sullenly at the tanks. He must have told them to mutter things in an unintelligible tongue, so some of them took the obvious shortcut, and now and then you overhear people exchanging the most trivial things in Finnish. Fran Karttunen ______________________________________________________________________________ 5) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 91 16:00:36 -0700 From: saka@cogsci.Berkeley.EDU (Paul Saka) Subject: RE: ling novel Someone on LINGUIST recently referred to a book by the title of Tiger, Tiger, Burning Bright. I thought that that sounded familiar, beyond the familiarity of Wm Blake. It occurred to me this morning that the above title is a variant and lesser-known title of The Stars My Destination, by Alfred Bester (1956) -- a pyrotechnic science fiction novel by a real virtuoso. _____________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-502. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-503. Fri 13 Sep 1991. Lines: 97 Subject: 2.503 American Tongues, Dialect Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 09:45:05 CDT From: nm1@Ra.MsState.Edu (Natalie Maynor) Subject: American Dialects 2) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 09:12 PDT From: Vicki Fromkin Subject: Re: 2.496 Queries 3) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 17:43:48 EDT From: elc9j@prime.acc.Virginia.EDU Subject: 2.496 Queries 4) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 18:34:59 -0500 From: "Michael Kac" Subject: Re: 2.496 Queries 5) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 19:11:10 -0500 From: "Michael Kac" Subject: Re: 2.489 Language and dialect -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 09:45:05 CDT From: nm1@Ra.MsState.Edu (Natalie Maynor) Subject: American Dialects The videotape your colleague is looking for is "American Tongues." I recommend it highly. I'll try to find the address for ordering a copy but am not sure I'll succeed. It has been shown on PBS and the Discovery channel several times during the past four or five years. --Natalie (nm1@ra.msstate.edu) __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 09:12 PDT From: Vicki Fromkin Subject: Re: 2.496 Queries In response to the query about the film on American dialects, it is called AMERICAN TONGUES and can be purchased (I think) from Public Broadcasting System -- it is an hour's program done for public television and is very good and funny. Just wish there was more about western US dialects VAF __________________________________________________________________________ 3) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 17:43:48 EDT From: elc9j@prime.acc.Virginia.EDU Subject: 2.496 Queries About the video on American dialects: it's called "American Tongues", not "American Voices", and can be procured through the Center for Applied Linguistics in Washington, DC (or ask Walt Wolfram how to get it). Ellen Contini-Morava __________________________________________________________________________ 4) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 18:34:59 -0500 From: "Michael Kac" Subject: Re: 2.496 Queries A net subscriber asks how to find the video 'American Voices'. I don't know, but would suggest contacting the American Council of Teachers of English as a first step. They have produced audio materials having to do with American dialectology, and might have been responsible for this as well. Michael Kac __________________________________________________________________________ 5) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 19:11:10 -0500 From: "Michael Kac" Subject: Re: 2.489 Language and dialect For the record, I believe that I too identified Max Weinreich as the presump- tive originator of 'A language is a dialect ...'. I wonder if we need a new poll. Michael Kac Linguist List: Vol-2-503. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-504. Fri 13 Sep 1991. Lines: 170 Subject: 2.504 Responses Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 91 16:53:42 -0700 From: saka@cogsci.Berkeley.EDU (Paul Saka) Subject: RE: what is a linguist? 2) Date: Wed, 11 Sep 91 07:58:52 EDT From: Alexis_Manaster_Ramer@mts.cc.wayne.edu Subject: 2.489 Language and dialect 3) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 19:06:45 -0500 From: "Michael Kac" Subject: Re: 2.488 ProfesseurE Part 2 4) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 19:53:25 -0500 From: "Michael Kac" Subject: Dialects, languages, armies, navies etc. 5) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1991 10:57 EDT From: "MICHEL (MGRIMAUD@WELLCO.BITNET) GRIMAUD" Subject: Grammaticality Judgements (an aside during the "ProfesseurE" debate) 6) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 09:22:09 CST From: huttar%dallas@utafll.uta.edu Subject: lousy source attribution -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 91 16:53:42 -0700 From: saka@cogsci.Berkeley.EDU (Paul Saka) Subject: RE: what is a linguist? >Linguist List: Vol-2-472. Sat 07 Sep 1991. Lines: 165 >Date: Wed, 4 Sep 91 20:46:12 PDT >From: ctlntt@violet.berkeley.edu >Subject: Re: Linguistic Novels, Films/467 >I wonder if anyone would care >to share their thoughts about what, in this day and age, >constitutes "a linguist", and how one can tell a linguist form >a non-linguist. (I meant "from" not "form"). My personal takes: In ANY day and age, a scientist is someone who does research into the object of inquiry; a linguist is someone who does research into language. Although it is impossible to tell what citizens do in the privacy of their own homes, prima facie we may suppose that someone who publishes their linguistic research is a linguist. Another interpretation of "-ist" would say that a linguist must be somehow saliently or typically occupied with the study of language. In that case, we might say that a linguist is someone who, like a professor, is paid to do linguistics. __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Wed, 11 Sep 91 07:58:52 EDT From: Alexis_Manaster_Ramer@mts.cc.wayne.edu Subject: 2.489 Language and dialect George Huttar's summary omits Edward Sapir, to whom, as I believe, the army/navy aphorism is attributed at Chicago. Since he would have been by far older (earlier) than the other possible sources, that ipso facto makes this is a plausible claim. __________________________________________________________________________ 3) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 19:06:45 -0500 From: "Michael Kac" Subject: Re: 2.488 ProfesseurE Part 2 The recent discussion reminds me that a colleague of mine was asked once by a student in Introduction to Linguistics if the fact that all French nouns are masculine or feminine is the reason French is called a Romance language. Michael Kac __________________________________________________________________________ 4) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 19:53:25 -0500 From: "Michael Kac" Subject: Dialects, languages, armies, navies etc. I suddenly recall that my source of the attribution of the saying 'A language is a dialect [etc.]' to Max Weinreich is Chomsky's Knowledge of Language (p. 15). Michael Kac __________________________________________________________________________ 5) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1991 10:57 EDT From: "MICHEL (MGRIMAUD@WELLCO.BITNET) GRIMAUD" Subject: Grammaticality Judgements (an aside during the "ProfesseurE" debate) I was asked about the reference to _Brain & Language_... Considering, it was not there, I'd better correct this error fast. Here is the actual reference: Nagata Hiroshi The relativity of Linguistic Intuitions: The Effect of Repetition on Grammaticality Judgments J. of Psycholinguistic Research, 17, 1988, 1-17 Sorry about the mislead :-[ Michel Grimaud __________________________________________________________________________ 6) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 09:22:09 CST From: huttar%dallas@utafll.uta.edu Subject: lousy source attribution >Date: Sat, 07 Sep 91 22:26:44 -0400 >From: Ellen Prince >Subject: Re: FYI: Language vs Dialect, Software /2-476 >>Date: Thu, 5 Sep 91 08:33:12 CST >>From: txsil!huttar@dallas%utafll.uta.edu@RICEVM1.RICE.EDU >>Subject: language & dialect: thanks! >> >> >> The trickle of replies about the origin of "a language is a dialect >> with its own army and navy" seems to have stopped now, so I'll thank >> you all for your interesting range of responses. To summarize for >> those interested, and for those who compulsively read everything in >> LINGUIST: replies via LINGUIST or direct to me came up with Bill >> Welmers, Roman Jakobson via Paul Kiparsky, Otto Jespersen, and Max >> Weinreich. Weinreich got two mentions, but both derive from the same >> source, _The Native Speaker is Dead_; the reference there to MW's >> originating that aphorism sounds about as solidly based on hearsay and >> unexamined memory as the other replies. Dissertation on the rise and >> spread of ((meta)socio)linguistic myths, anyone? >> Thanks again. >> George Huttar >huh??? as one of the two who answered 'max weinreich', i'm totally >confused by this 'derivation'. what is _the native speaker is dead_? and >why is it my source? My apologies to/, Ellen Prince. When I got a "my understanding is that max weinreich said it, but I don't have a reference. if anyone has, i'd appreciate hearing it" reply from her/you at about the same time as a reply steering me to T. M. Paikeday (1985), The Native Speaker is Dead! (Toronto & NY: Paikeday Publishing), p. 26, I leapt to the unwarranted conclusion that the Paikeday reference was the source of her/your understanding. Now several more references to Weinreich have appeared in LINGUIST, starting about the same time as my ill-advised summary of previous replies, giving more reason to attribute the army/navy bit to him than the allusion in Paikeday alone suggested. __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-504. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-505. Fri 13 Sep 1991. Lines: 73 Subject: 2.505 Queries Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 19:50:51 -0500 From: "Michael Kac" Subject: *Chomskyan/ite* 2) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 16:01:15 MET DST From: David Powers (AG Siekmann) Subject: Signs: "In case of fire"; "WARNING: " -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 19:50:51 -0500 From: "Michael Kac" Subject: *Chomskyan/ite* A recent article in the New York Times (Monday Sept. 9, I believe) about new work in mapping localization of language function in the brain identi- fies several people, including Vicky (sic) Fromkin as 'Chomskyite linguists'. Question: to my intuition, *Chomskyan* means 'follower of Chomsky' (neutral) while *Chomskyite* means 'fanatical follower of the anathematic Chomsky' (highly derogatory). Is this intuition shared by others? Michael Kac __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 16:01:15 MET DST From: David Powers (AG Siekmann) Subject: Signs: "In case of fire"; "WARNING: " "In case of fire ..." I was waiting for that one to come up. But I had expected it in the context, "In case of fire do not use lifts", seen all round the world: a phrase I find most irksome, and which means to me "Do not use lifts in case it causes a fire". Do Americans really find that a natural way of saying "In (the) event of fire do not use lifts"? Or is it a sign invented by OTIS or some other non-English speaker, and to be compared with the laughable signs to be found in public transport, in four languages, throughout Europe ("Do not use WC while standing in station" etc.) and subtlely different between the languages, and often not quite correct in half of them. Another related topic pertaining to signs. In Australia recently I noticed several usages of WARNING which I felt were inappropriate in that they were not followed by information about a danger but simply an imperative (with or without the implicit specification of the danger). E.g. at Darling Harbour in Sydney, at IJCAI, "WARNING. No swimming." Or in the train "WARNING. Do not lean out of window." Does this usage seem appropriate to people? David Powers __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-505. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-506. Fri 13 Sep 1991. Lines: 84 Subject: 2.506 Responses to Queries on Software Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Tue, 10 Sep 91 22:21:08 EDT From: ingria@BBN.COM Subject: Allegro Common LISP and Foreign Characters 2) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 13:05:04 EDT From: "Judith Klavans" Subject: CALL 3) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 1991 18:40:13 HST From: Mark Douglas Sawyer Subject: Re: JapanEase -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Tue, 10 Sep 91 22:21:08 EDT From: ingria@BBN.COM Subject: Allegro Common LISP and Foreign Characters Ali Farghaly (FARGHALY@auc.eg) writes: I have been trying to get Allegro Common LISP to process Arabic texts without much success. Is it impossible for Allegro Commpn LISP to process non Roman characters? Has anybody tried doing that? Does anyone have suggestions that might work? There is an International version of Allegro Common LISP that is supposed to be able to handle foreign character sets. We're just starting to use it here to process Japanese texts, which use double-byte characters. Some caveats: because strings are now generalized to double-byte characters, some string operations seem noticeably slower. Also, the International version is several releases behind the general release [CL 3.1.17 vs. CL 4.0.1]. I hope this helps. -30- Bob __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 13:05:04 EDT From: "Judith Klavans" Subject: CALL ***** Reply to your note of: Thu, 12 Sep 1991 09:24:00 ******************* About computer assisted language learning, I suggest you check in the Sept 4 issue of the Chronicle of Higher Education, p. A26. There is a listing of EDUCOM Software awards, and several are for language learning. Judith Klavans __________________________________________________________________________ 3) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 1991 18:40:13 HST From: Mark Douglas Sawyer Subject: Re: JapanEase JapanEase is a program which requires HyperCard 1.2.5. It has Gairaigo index, How to say, Japanese Clip Art (not much), Katakanat (there is no Hiragana program), Gairaigo Album, Flash Card. I don't know the virsion of the one I saw. There might be an updated virsion. This program is five 800k disk worth. For Kanji Master is a Kanji learning program which contains stroke order, the readings, some quiz, compounds. Kanji sama is another program that I saw but this was not so good. They need to work on it. There is no stroke order, no sound. The one I saw was a demo version. I heard that there are some others sold in Japan. Rieko Sawyer __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-506. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-507. Fri 13 Sep 1991. Lines: 171 Subject: 2.507 Compositional Semantics Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 10:35:30 -0500 From: "Larry G. Hutchinson" Subject: Re: 2.496 Queries 2) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 17:32 BST From: John Coleman Subject: RE: 2.496 Queries 3) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 18:33:43 -0500 From: "Michael Kac" Subject: Re: 2.496 Queries 4) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 18:00:08 +0200 From: "John Nerbonne" Subject: Ad: Question: "compositionality" of semantics 5) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 08:10:04 EDT From: "Bruce E. Nevin" Subject: compositionality of semantics -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 10:35:30 -0500 From: "Larry G. Hutchinson" Subject: Re: 2.496 Queries wrt Stephen Spackman's question about "compositionality": at minimum, this means that the meaning of a sentence is a function of the meanings of its parts. It's the imprecision of the terms "function" and "parts" (in this context) that tends to derail discussion. The strictest kind of compositionality requires that there be a procedure for computing the meaning of any SUBPART of a sentence from that subpart's subparts. For example, if your grammar claims a certain sentence consists of NP + VP, then the string constituting the VP must itself have a computable meaning, derived via a procedure which applies to the string's subparts. The strictness of "strict compositionality" is illusory, of course, if there is any debate about syntactic subparts!! Idioms, in the traditional sense, are often cited as proof that semantics can't be compositional in natural languages. And many argue that they prove nothing. Nominal compounding can also be claimed to prove noncompositionality. My favorite example, which has been kicking around for years, is "Susan dated an occasional sailor." Strict compositionality would seem to require that there be a procedure which determines what "an occasional sailor" means. Or "occasional sailor", if that string is itself a syntactic unit in your grammar. __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 17:32 BST From: John Coleman Subject: RE: 2.496 Queries Stephen P Spackman asks "what would a NON-compositional semantics be like?" Two possible examples spring to mind. One is idioms (phrases whose meaning isn't a function of the meanings of their constituents and the way in which they're put together --- unless it allows very specific ways of putting those particular constituents together to define a single idiomatic interpretation). The other hinges upon the necessity for the combination of meanings of the constituents to be a FUNCTION. So, if the meaning of a phrase was computed by putting the meanings of the words together in a non-functional fashion (by some kind of nondeterministic procedure, say), the meaning of the whole would not be compositional. It might be different in random ways at different times, for example. (Wierd, huh?) --- John Coleman __________________________________________________________________________ 3) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 18:33:43 -0500 From: "Michael Kac" Subject: Re: 2.496 Queries Stephen Spackman inquires about what would and would not constitute a com- positional semantics. The essence of compositionality as I understand it (others may understand it differently) is that the semantic value of every composite expression is a function of the parts of that expression and their manner of combination, a principle commonly attributed to Frege (though I'd be surprised if it didn't have antecedents farther back). It's in some ways a very strong requirement to put on a semantics but in other ways a rather weak one. For some ideas about non-compositional semantics (and arguments to the effect that natural language semantics isn't in fact compositional), I would refer anyone interested to some recent work by Alexis Manaster-Ramer and Wlodek Zadrozny on exploiting the notion 'construction' in analysis and in parsing. They may weigh into this discussion themselves and I won't presume to speak for them. Wlodek and I have had some animated discussions on the issue. Michael Kac __________________________________________________________________________ 4) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 18:00:08 +0200 From: "John Nerbonne" Subject: Ad: Question: "compositionality" of semantics Ad: Question: "compositionality" of semantics >> at the extremes it seems that "having a >> compositional semantics" is used for both "ignoring pragmatic issues >> completely" and "having some FORMAL theory of interpretation, with or >> without reference to 'meaning'" The question of semantic compositionality is generally only raised within the the camp of semanticists who view natural language semantics as a kind of model theory---as the kind of effort one undertakes to interpret a logical language. Within this camp "compositionality" has a precise meaning---a semantic interpretation function is compositional iff the interpretation of a syntactically complex constituent depends functionally on the interpretation of its constituents. This is discussed at length in the standard introduction to semantics, Dowty, Peters & Wall's {\it Introduction to Montague Grammar}. It derives from Montague's work, and seems to be an articulation of one of Frege's principles. Compositional semantics needn't ignore pragmatics, and there are examples by Montague showing how indexicals may be treated compositionally. Karttunen & Peters did an early treatment of implicature, etc. (I've also heard the term used among computational linguistics to designate the level of semantic representation derived directly from syntax. Used in this sense, "compositional" embodies few or no hypotheses about the nature of semantics. Maybe it's the source of your "ignoring pragmatics" sense.) >> [...] what could a NON-compositional semantics be like? A semantics might eshew compositionality in favor of operating in a constraint-based fashion. For example, a semantics for NP VP combination might require that the the NP semantics bind the subject position in the relation denoted by the VP without saying anything about scope of the subject NP---which could be determined by other factors. Then the semantics is less than compositional. --John Nerbonne nerbonne@dfki.uni-sb.de __________________________________________________________________________ 5) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 08:10:04 EDT From: "Bruce E. Nevin" Subject: compositionality of semantics My understanding of compositionality is that the semantic attributes of a complex expression should follow from those of its elements. Easier computation, for obvious reasons. Cf. IMO Aristotle's fallacy of composition for one sort of problem. Bruce Nevin bn@bbn.com __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-507. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-508. Fri 13 Sep 1991. Lines: 134 Subject: 2.508 That's Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1991 10:22:04 -0400 (EDT) From: J_LIMBER@UNHH.UNH.EDU Subject: RE: 2.85 Queries 2) Date: Wed, 11 Sep 91 16:22:36 +0000 From: "R.Hudson" Subject: the book that's cover ... 3) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 10:54:21 -0500 From: "Larry G. Hutchinson" Subject: Re: 2.85 Queries 4) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 10:22:10 BST From: "(Dr) David Denison" Subject: Re: 2.85 Queries 5) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 00:23:08 CDT From: C485510@UMCVMB.BITNET Subject: the book that's..... -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1991 10:22:04 -0400 (EDT) From: J_LIMBER@UNHH.UNH.EDU Subject: RE: 2.85 Queries Regarding the whose/that's question, while I don't want to defend it, "the book that's cover is red.." seems hardly different from "the book that's red..." Perhaps that's the answer! __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Wed, 11 Sep 91 16:22:36 +0000 From: "R.Hudson" Subject: the book that's cover ... `The book that's cover is red ...' is quite a common construction in UK. My daughter (London born and bred) at age about 9 said `the pencil that's lead is broken', and I've seen mentions of it as a particularly common pattern in Scottish English. I use it as evidence that, contrary to received wisdom, THAT isn't a complementiser but a relative pronoun, in a recent book. I think Johan Van der Auwera makes a similar point in an article in Jnl of Linguistics 21, 149-79, 1985. Interesting to hear it happens in USA too. Dick vHudson Dept of Phonetics and Linguistics, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT (071) 387 7050 ext 3152 home: (081) 340 1253 __________________________________________________________________________ 3) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 10:54:21 -0500 From: "Larry G. Hutchinson" Subject: Re: 2.85 Queries Prescriptivists (of the 18th century for instance) argued against constructions of the form "the book whose cover...", just because "whose" is for humans. Proper English requires "the book the cover of which...", they maintained. __________________________________________________________________________ 4) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 10:22:10 BST From: "(Dr) David Denison" Subject: Re: 2.85 Queries In reply to George Aaron Broadwell's query about forms like _the book that's cover ..._ he should get in touch with Professor Aimo Seppa"nen of the English Dept., Univ of Go"teborg (Gothenburg), Sweden. He gave an interesting paper on the phenomenon in Manchester in March 1990, using it to make the unfashionable case that relative _that_ is a pronoun, not a complementiser. As I recall, he had a lot of Scots examples, plus references to work on comparable phenomena in dialects of Dutch, Low German, etc, eg by Liliane Haegeman (I think). David Denison __________________________________________________________________________ 5) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 00:23:08 CDT From: C485510@UMCVMB.BITNET Subject: the book that's..... Ask your student if (s)he comes from the ''MidSouth'' (the region of North Amer ica which lies within television and FM radio broadcast range of Memphis, Tenne ssee). Using "that's" for "whose" when referring to inanimate objects is prett y derned prevalent in that region, at least from this Yankee-educated expatriat e native's point of view. (Have to dig out my old high school papers to be sur e if my English instructress railed on me any for using "that's"...but I'll alm ost swear she didn't, since she was also a native MidSoutherner. ;)) Also, on a semi-related subject (well, related only because I brought it up), has anyone run across any reports from research on media-induced dialect shift? I.E., moving away from a regional dialect to a more 'standard' one thanks in part to national television and radio broadcasts?....or subtle differences in d ialect between people of relatively close regions thanks in part to the differe nces in local television/radio stations they recieve? I am mostly interested in reports related to United States/Canadian English, but I'll turn a few cartwheels if someone knows (and is willing to tell :)) of research done in va rious other Indo-European languages. I'm still trying to learn how to ask wher e the bathroom is in Japanese, so, sorry, anything on Asian languages won't be of much good. :( Shai L. Strouse, Professional Dabbler Department of Biochemistry Division of Cardiology College of Agriculture, Food & Natural Res. School of Medicine University of Missouri-Columbia Columbia, Missouri, U.S.A. c485510@umcvmb.bitnet *** Of course, the University of Missouri has no control over what I do *** in my spare time, so they shouldn't be held responsible for what *** I say in my spare time. :) __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-508. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-509. Fri 13 Sep 1991. Lines: 62 Subject: 2.509 Video on American Dialects Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 08:23:01 EST From: Ronnie Wilbur Subject: video on American dialects 2) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 08:23:01 EST From: Ronnie Wilbur Subject: video on American dialects 3) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 09:45:05 CDT From: nm1@Ra.MsState.Edu (Natalie Maynor) Subject: American Dialects -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 08:23:01 EST From: Ronnie Wilbur Subject: video on American dialects The video is entitled "American Tongues" and comes in two versions, 56 minutes and slightly longer. I don't have the ordering information handy, but if the person wanting it needs further info, I can dig it up. We have been using it in our intro classes amd consider it to be quite well-done. For what it's worth, the students love it. __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 08:23:01 EST From: Ronnie Wilbur Subject: video on American dialects The video is entitled "American Tongues" and comes in two versions, 56 minutes and slightly longer. I don't have the ordering information handy, but if the person wanting it needs further info, I can dig it up. We have been using it in our intro classes amd consider it to be quite well-done. For what it's worth, the students love it. __________________________________________________________________________ 3) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 09:45:05 CDT From: nm1@Ra.MsState.Edu (Natalie Maynor) Subject: American Dialects The videotape your colleague is looking for is "American Tongues." I recommend it highly. I'll try to find the address for ordering a copy but am not sure I'll succeed. It has been shown on PBS and the Discovery channel several times during the past four or five years. --Natalie (nm1@ra.msstate.edu) __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-509. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-510. Fri 13 Sep 1991. Lines: 191 Subject: 2.510 In Case and Being Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 19:35:43 -0500 From: "Michael Kac" Subject: Re: 2.493 Responses: JustIn Case, and the Curate 2) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1991 8:39:54 EDT From: MABROWN@SUNRISE.ACS.SYR.EDU Subject: "Just in case" 3) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 09:22:07 EDT From: "Bruce E. Nevin" Subject: Response to Susan Ervin-Tripp (on being being) -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 19:35:43 -0500 From: "Michael Kac" Subject: Re: 2.493 Responses: JustIn Case, and the Curate A Linguist subscriber laments the use of *just in case* in the sense of 'iff' since it conflicts with standard idiomatic practice. Such conflicts occur fairly frequently. What a linguist means by *grammati- cal*, for example, is quite different from what nonlinguists believe by it (insofar as we confine attention to English speakers). Similarly, linguists talk about predicting e.g. that such and such a sentence should be ambiguous when in fact no prediction is being made in the lay sense. (To the layperson, prediction involves foreseeing what is going to happen in the future, not merely perceiving the logical consequences of a set of statements. Indeed, I have had students in Introduction to Linguistics not understand what I was talking about because of this particular clash of senses.) Many other examples can be found from many fields. For example when a lawyer talks about an interested party, the reference is to someone who stands to gain or lose by some action (and a disinterested party as one who does not). Another good example back in the linguistic sphere: *informant* (a term now avoided by many linguists for precisely the reason of conflict with colloquial usage even though the term was created within linguistics!) It makes me wonder if *just in case* is not in fact a usage of such ancient vintage that what we have is both a conservative sense (the philosophers') against an innovative colloquial one. But that's just a guess. Positions can differ on this point, but my own inclination is to say that the practitioners of learned disciplines have the right to their own language, however alienating it may be to the laity. Michael Kac __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1991 8:39:54 EDT From: MABROWN@SUNRISE.ACS.SYR.EDU Subject: "Just in case" As a logician who first encountered the idea that 'just in case' is used to mean the same thing as 'if and only if' in a logic text, and thought this a non-standard usage, I've been puzzled by this phenomenon, too. My conjecture is that some logician a couple of generations back began using this expression as an ill-considered compression of "just in those cases in which", i.e. "exactly in those cases in which", which in turn was intended as an explication of "if and only if". If so, then a generation of his/her students would grow up feeling a need to explain this expression in any lectures they gave/texts they wrote. I have no evidence for this conjecture other than its internal plausibility. Mark Brown Philosophy Syracuse U. __________________________________________________________________________ 3) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 09:22:07 EDT From: "Bruce E. Nevin" Subject: Response to Susan Ervin-Tripp (on being being) In 2.414 in a message of Thu, 15 Aug I quoted >An interesting example from Harris's _A Grammar of English on >Mathematical Principles_: > > The uncomfortableness of -ing on adjectives leads to > occasional elisions of it: in _Don't be horrid. I'm not > being horrid_ the retort shows that the first sentence > can be taken as reduced from !Don't be being horrid. > >(Using ! here for Harris's dagger, quote from p. 297.) Susan Ervin-Tripp responded with a query a couple of days later, in 2.419. I apologize for the long delay. Swamped with other responsibilities, I have been stuffing my linguist digests away into a file for reading at a future time that only arrived this week. Her response: >tHe examples from Harris in Nevin's letter seem a peculiar argument. >Something is missing. >Children in role play: > A: I'm being the mommy > B: Don't be the mommy, I'm gonna be the mommy. > A: Well, I'm washing the dishes. > B: No, don't wash the dishes. > A: I'm being nice to the baby. > B: Don't be nice to the baby. I'm the mommy. > >This is an invented example, but the A turns at least are >consistent with the genre. The >convenience for discussing use of -ing is that children often >constitute roles by identifying what they are doing explicitly this >way by the use of -ing. >Could somebody explain why, given the parallelismss in these examples, >there is some elision in Don't be horrid? You are right that something is missing, and that is an explanation of the pervasive role of elision in Harris's grammar. He derives sentences by morphophonemic reduction from other, more explicit sentences. It is possible to reconstruct a maximally explicit base form for any sentence. On the one hand, the syntax of such a sentence is quite simple--the dependence of operator words on the prior entry of their arguments. This syntax of word dependencies corresponds with one important component of semantics, namely the "objective information" reported by the sentence. On the other hand, such a reconstructed base form for a sentence is almost always unspeakably awkward and unnatural. This is because it does not reflect the reductions that normally apply each time an operator enters on its arguments. The reductions in part reduce redundancy, and in part are simply mandated by convention. The information report is in the operator-argument dependencies. In the reductions are much of the conventionalization of language as a social institution. (Other things, such as the arbitrariness of vocabulary, also reflect this.) Reductions include changes of shape that affect other aspects of meaning such as emphasis within and attitude toward the reported information, and relationship of speaker and listener to one another and to others referred to. Susan points out that sentences with -ing on adjectives are parallel to sentences with -ing otherwise: A B Don't be the mommy. I'm not being the mommy. Don't be nice to the baby. I'm not being nice to the baby. Don't be horrid. I'm not being horrid. The parallel is precisely that the copula be occurs twice in the sentences of column A, but only once in those of column B. Harris's suggestion was that a possible source for the last A sentence also had "be" twice. This would apply to other sentences with be as the carrier of tense/aspect for the highest operator (mostly adjectives and nouns) as well. Perhaps this is clearer without the negation: [You] be [being] the mommy! I am being the mommy! [You] be [being] nice to the baby! I am being nice to the baby! [You] be [being] good! I am being horrid! Words in square braces are conventionally elided. The elision of "being" is almost obligatory. Harris makes this suggestion at the close of a discussion of how -ing is uncomfortable on adjectives, that is, on the be that carries tense and aspect morphology for adjectives when they enter as operators. The same applies to all operators that are relatively durative (adjectives, nouns, prepositions) and require "be" to carry tense/aspect morphology. I liked the children's dialogue. A favorite, which you may have heard: Behave! I am being have! Bruce Nevin bn@bbn.com __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-510. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-511. Fri 13 Sep 1991. Lines: 131 Subject: 2.511 For Your Information Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 09:47:33 CDT From: stan kulikowski ii Subject: language identification algorithm 2) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 12:36+0000 From: HASPELMATH@PHILOLOGIE.FU-BERLIN.DBP.DE Subject: LANGUAGES OF THE WORLD, MUNICH -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 09:47:33 CDT From: stan kulikowski ii Subject: language identification algorithm USING SHORT WORDS: a language identification algorithm stan kulikowski ii educational research and development center the university of west florida pensacola, fl, usa 32514 abstract a simple algorithm is developed to identify the language of a line of text. the hypothesis is that languages contain frequent small words (3 chars or less) which can be used to distinguish many lines of their text. a heuristic program has been written to acquire distinctive language signatures and test it against text files collected from network sources. this algorithm is moderately successful, usually identifying better than 50% of lines in worst case analyses. when tuned, it performs better on actual network text (70-85% success). combining this method with character level analyses from cryptographic studies may be successful in developing a quick method of language identification which is sensitive to quite small samples of text. the heuristic program is available from the author upon request. introduction last month in linguist list (vol 2 no 368) i put out a query for an algorithm to identify distinctly english text mixed in texts of other languages. i had a number of requests to report back what i found. i have been collecting files off the internet as samples of languages to use in research on the uniform measurement of textual complexity for educational purposes. at present i am identifying active network sources of natural language diversity and attempting to quantify these for educational uses. so far i have found less than a dozen languages, but i have been able to gather several megabytes of such data. in order to calibrate software which measures textual complexity in different languages, i feel that i need large samples of relative purity in linguistic content. the general problem is that english is more or less the matrix language in the structure of global networks. as such, english is a common contaminant in network text written in other languages. i am not concerned at this point with words and small phrases which are borrowed into another language: a natural process in linguistic diachronics. i am concerned about file processes which transfer chunks of text of one language into another. this is very common in networking. a writer in spanish may want to quote a network source on a programming virus and use the mailer to bring in parts of another text file. automatic requoting of other messages in networks is easier than paraphrasing so this form of reference is growing. the transfers often bring english into discussions in other languages. to calibrate my software, i need to eliminate cross-linguistic file transfers so later we can accurately measure these properties in active network sources. our first pass at this is to have a student look at each message as it arrives off the network. if big hunks of the thing are not the language expected from that source, it can be discarded. but hand-processing hundreds of files a day can be prone to error, especially when cross-quoted text may just be a line or two. so i came in search of an algorithm i could use to verify large calibration corpora and eventually use to monitor active network text sources. well, noone came right back with an oh-yeah so-and-so's work does that. i did get a number of replies relayed from usenet's sci.crypt that cryptographers use a method based on the frequency of bigram and trigram character sequences. this may work for file-sized data, but i doubt that it would be sensitive to a datum in the range of 40-80 bytes which is what you get in line-by-line text transfers. my original request hypothesized that the frequent occurrence of short words in a language may be line-by-line distinct. since nobody said nay, i wrote a small program to test that notion. [Moderators' note: The rest of this posting is available on the server. To get the file, send a message to: listserv@uniwa.uwa.oz.au The message should consist of the single line: get signature You will then receive the complete posting.] __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 12:36+0000 From: HASPELMATH@PHILOLOGIE.FU-BERLIN.DBP.DE Subject: LANGUAGES OF THE WORLD, MUNICH >From: Ulrich Lueders, Munich: TYPOLOGY JOURNAL BEGINS PUBLICATION: Just out is the first issue of LANGUAGES OF THE WORLD, a new international journal focusing on problems of language typology, genetic relationship, geographical linguistics, and related topics. LANGUAGES OF THE WORLD includes the LINGUISTIC NEWS LINES, a medium of information and communication for linguists of various disciplines. The LINGUISTIC NEWS LINES are devoted to news, announcements, commentaries, interviews, conference reports, and similar informal material. LW appears 4 times a year. Individual issues are DM 10.00 (Europe), US$ 8.00 (Western hemisphere and Africa), US$ 9.00 (Asia, Australia), with a reduced rate for students. Contact: Ulrich J. Lueders, Editor & publisher LINCOM EUROPA Sportplatzstrasse 6 D-8044 Unterschleissheim/Muenchen, GERMANY (no e-mail address yet) __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-511. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-512. Sat 14 Sep 1991. Lines: 150 Subject: 2.512 Sound-Change and Teleology Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 19:21:16 -0500 From: "Michael Kac" Subject: Re: 2.490 Sound-Change 2) Date: Sat, 14 Sep 1991 12:30 EET From: MANYMAN@FINUHA.BITNET Subject: Language change and teleology -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Thu, 12 Sep 91 19:21:16 -0500 From: "Michael Kac" Subject: Re: 2.490 Sound-Change I'm not going to jump into the teleology debate, but as I've been following it I occasionally see the terms *function* and *purpose* used interchangeably. This seems problematical to me since *purpose* does appear to be a teleologi- cal term to a greater degree than *function* does. Example: 'The ___ of the kidneys is to ...' We can talk about the function of the kidneys (that is, what they actually do) without attributing them a purpose. Might some of the difficulties in the debate over 'functional' explanations have to do with this fact? Michael Kac __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Sat, 14 Sep 1991 12:30 EET From: MANYMAN@FINUHA.BITNET Subject: Language change and teleology > From: bert peeters > Subject: Teleology and sound change > > The first /passage from Martinet/ tells us why certain changes DO NOT take > place, Here, the non-implementation of a given change is presented as an intentional "omissive" action. Is forbearance from implementing a sound change dealt with in non-teleological terms in Martinet's "final formulation"? > the second one is meant to explain why LANGUAGES as such change. > The argument is that as soon as languages do not function anymore - do > not serve communicative purposes anymore - they will stop changing and > become extinct. This is a bit perplexing. I find it difficult to relate "become extinct" to "function" (glossed as 'serve communicative purposes'). It seems clear enough that if there are no users to use L as a native language, L will become extinct. But this isn't, I guess, the idea carried by the verb "function" (or French "fonctionner"). Language USE causes language CHANGE; and it is CHANGE that keeps language FUNCTIONing. So, in order to function, language has to change. I still fail to see why Martinet writes (in Evolution des langues, 1975, p. 12): "une langue change parce qu'elle fonctionne" instead of "une langue change pour fonctionner". By the way (1), according to Martinet, language qua tool of communication ameliorates in use (see Peeters, La Linguistique 19, 1983, p.114-5). Amelioration has of course a teleological ring in it. By the way (2), Martinet has so many times been regarded as a teleologist (even from the '50ies on) by distinguished scholars that something in his wording must have given the (erroneous, accroding to Peeters, op.cit., p.113) impression. > An analogy with eating may be in place. At the synchronical level, one > may say that humans eat in order to stay alive (teleology? yes, in some > sense). But once one studies why dishes do not always remain the same, > the explanation is obviously not teleological at all: they change > because our culinary tastes are changing - because we need a change. Let me construe this analogy by replacing "eat" by "speak": One may say that humans speak in order to communicate. But once one studies why topics do not always remain the same, the explanation is obviously not teleological at all: they change because our conversational tastes are changing. Topics (or dishes) are no tools (whereas language is, on/in Martinet's opinion, a tool of communication). The analogy looks spurious. > As in language there is no goal, defined once > and for ever, and agreed upon by all the speakers of a language, even at > a subconscious level, teleology must lead to anarchy - in the area of > language change (..). It is true that language has no definitive goal/telos, agreed upon by all speakers of a language. The goal(s) of linguistic activity are rather down-to-earth, relating to the functioning of language as a communicative tool. But speaking of matters transcendental, consider phenomena labelled as "drift" in linguistic literature. Linguistic drifts are phenomena whose supra-individual rationality may be established ex post facto. In order to cope with phenomena like that, Adam Smith created his "invisible hand" concept. Cf. also Rudi Keller's book on *Sprachwandel: Von der unsichtbaren Hand der Sprache*, Tu"bingen: Francke (1990). Of course, the "invisible hand" may lead to dysfunction (cf. Keller's "phenomena of the third kind"): e.g. traffic jam results from human actions, yet it is intended by no one (I hope). I accept Peeters's claim that teleology leads to anarchy, just in case /sic!/ anarchy refers to phenomena of the third kind. But notice that only part of the invisible hand phenomena are dysfunctional: linguistic drifts are functional, or at least they aren't anarchistic. > (..) In the case of language > change, simplicity may seem to be a common goal. But what is simple for > one speaker is not necessarily simple for the next; we may have different > simplicities in mind and set off different changes, but the fact that our > languages are not too bad after all generally stops us from doing so (ex- > cept when communicative needs are so pressing that we cannot but give in). Instead of simplicity it might be more fruitful to speak of naturalness. Notice that the human inertia relates to the naturalness discussion that has been going on in the Linguist List. > I also believe that it is unfair to accuse Martinet of blindness as far > as interrelatedness of language subsystems is concerned. One example that > comes immediately to mind is where he talks about the strategies used > by speakers when the opposition between the two a's in French (anterior > and posterior) started breaking up: there was lexical substitution (ta^che > being more and more often replaced with travail, devoir, boulot; las being > replaced with fatigue', etc. - in order to prevent misunderstanding as > there are words that used to differ only with respect to the nature of the > vowel: tache = spot (without a circumflex); la` = there) I'm aware of the fact that Andre' Martinet, one of the greatest linguists of our century, isn't blind to what characterizes the existence of human language. The above is a nice example of teleological explanation. Notice also the word "strategy", a teleological concept. It may be the case that part of our disagreement is of terminological nature. Homoeostasis, for example, would probably be regarded as a kind of (short-term) teleology by Josef Vachek, whereas Martinet is likely to consider homoeostatic phenomena (such as his economy qua equilibrium) as non-teleological. I find nothing objectionable in speaking of (sub)system-specific teleologies. For instance, the proper function of phonemes consists in being distinctive; this can be taken to be a functional teleology of the phonological subsystem. Martti Nyman (University of Helsinki, Finland) Linguist List: Vol-2-512. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-513. Sat 14 Sep 1991. Lines: 86 Subject: 2.513 American Tongues (Final posting) Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 15:36 EDT From: TRUESDA@clust1.a1.clemson.edu Subject: Re: 2.496 Queries 2) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 16:20:05 EDT From: Gabriella Hermon Subject: Re: 2.509 Video on American Dialects 3) Date: Sat, 14 Sep 91 11:28:46 EDT From: Geoffrey Russom Subject: Re: 2.503 American Tongues, Dialect 4) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 20:52:37 CDT From: Maggi Sokolik Subject: American Tongues Video -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 15:36 EDT From: TRUESDA@clust1.a1.clemson.edu Subject: Re: 2.496 Queries The video on American dialects that Geoffrey Russom inquires about is undoubtedly "American Tongues" by Louis Alvarez and Andrew Kolker of the Center for New American Media in NY. Send orders to "American Tongues," New Day Films, 121 West 27th St. #902, New York, NY 10001. Their phone no. is (212) 645-8210. (Purchase price for the video was $285 plus shipping, according to the most recent brochure I received from them.) -- Vance Truesdale __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 16:20:05 EDT From: Gabriella Hermon Subject: Re: 2.509 Video on American Dialects I have this sitting in my office. Wolfram copied it for us for $25. I sho uld bring it home to preview it. It's good (I've seen it in class) __________________________________________________________________________ 3) Date: Sat, 14 Sep 91 11:28:46 EDT From: Geoffrey Russom Subject: Re: 2.503 American Tongues, Dialect Thanks to all who responded to the request for info on what turns out to be "American Tongues." It's pleasant to see so many endorsements, and Professor Davis will be sure to use it. -- Rick Russom __________________________________________________________________________ 4) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 20:52:37 CDT From: Maggi Sokolik Subject: American Tongues Video The name of the video is "American Tongues"; it is a 60-minute video produced by PBS in conjunction with a lot of other organizations. There are a lot of copies around in various libraries--I'm not sure how one would go about purchasing a copy. M. Sokolik, Texas A&M __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-513. ________________________________________________________________ linguist@uniwa.uwa.oz.au, is now defunct. All postings should be addressed to LINGUIST@TAMVM1 (bitnet) or LINGUIST@TAMVM1.TAMU.EDU (Internet). The address from which postings originate will from now on be linguist@tamsun.tamu.edu. While any mail sent to this last address will be posted as appropriate, we urge you all to use LINGUIST@TAMVM1 for such mail. Linguist@tamsun.tamu.edu is an address which is used solely for editing messages, and might change without warning in the future. Please do not send postings for the list directly to the list-editors. The editors' addresses should be used solely for the resolution of problems. Finally, we ask your indulgence at this time for any glitches which might show up. We've moved all our software from linguist@uniwa to linguist@tamsun, and in the newly compiled versions odd little bugs have appeared. We're getting rid of them as fast as we can, and in a week or so we should have them all. Anthony & Helen ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-514. Sat 14 Sep 1991. Lines: 102 Subject: 2.514 Compositional Semantics Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 14:15:16 EDT From: Alexis_Manaster_Ramer@mts.cc.wayne.edu Subject: 2.507 Compositional Semantics 2) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 20:58:14 +0100 From: Richard Coates Subject: Re: 2.507 Compositional Semantics -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 14:15:16 EDT From: Alexis_Manaster_Ramer@mts.cc.wayne.edu Subject: 2.507 Compositional Semantics I think it deserves to be pointed out that technically compositionality has the effect of requiring that every syntactic structure be semantically unambiguous. Otherwise, the word 'function' in the usual definition of compositionality would have to be replaced by the word 'relation'. This is not something that lends itself to factual testing, of course, but it IS a constraint of sorts. As Michael Kac points out, some of us have been rather unhappy with this constraint, incidentally, because it prejudges the question of how syntax relates to semantics. It seems to me that semantic and syntactic criteria should never be confused, as they necessarily are in this kind of approach. I believe, incidentally, that recent PP (or GB, as it used to be called) literature has some instances of arguments about exactly this point, with somebody (I forget who) arguing that in certain cases a single syntactic structure should be assigned two or more distinct meanings (as I would also argue, but I don't work within that framework). More significant perhaps is the fact that people usually seem to have in mind some kind of constraints on what kind of function is involved in the syntax-to-semantics mapping (as well as constraints on the form of the syntax). To my knowledge, these have never been specified formally, but here are some examples that I suspect people would agree on: (1) Assume that dog means 'dog sg.' and that -s means 'pl'. Then to get dogs to mean what it does, we would need to somehow suppress the singular part of the meaning of dog when combining it with the pl. suffix. This is indeed, as I believe, the traditional kind of analysis (from ancient Greek times till the beginning of structuralism), and perhaps the kind that "naive speakers" tend to come up with. I also tend to think that it might be the right analysis. In any case, it is not compositional in the informal sense I am trying to clarify. That is, it seems to me that the informal notion of compositionality embodies some kind of stricture against losing or destroying information. (2) Take idioms, e.g., kick the bucket. Now, obviously there IS a function that takes the normal meanings of the three words and puts them together in such a way that we end up with 'die'. However, one might argue that this function offends against the constraint against information-loss. Another way of looking at it (perhaps applicable to (1) as well) is that we want the syntax-semantics functions to be context-free (again, I know of no formal definition) in the sense that the same semantics effect should hold in all (syntactically indistinguishable) environments. Thus, one might try to say that one or more of the words in the idiom has a special meaning just in this one collocation, but that would make the semantics context-sensitive in some sense that people seem not to like. The last point is that people seem to assume that the functions must be computable if the semantics is to be compositional. One could imagine arguments that NL semantics is not computable, of course, and that would, I think, count as an argument against compositionality in the usual sense. __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 20:58:14 +0100 From: Richard Coates Subject: Re: 2.507 Compositional Semantics Non-compositionality: I don't think it's helpful to drag idioms into the debate (or at least not all idioms). For a canonical idiom like _spill the beans_, we ought to say that it is analysable lexically, and that the meanings of its constituent parts are accessible to an etymologically-minded user. That shouldn't commit us to saying that *AS AN IDIOM* it consists of units having their literal senses. It means in that case at the level of its lowest dominating node, here VP, and not at the level of the terminal and intervening nodes. (Special arrangements for tense/aspect, of course!) The meaning of _she spilt the beans_ is a compositional function of the meanings of {she}, {past}, {spill the beans}. Richard Coates __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-514. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-515. Sat 14 Sep 1991. Lines: 114 Subject: 2.515 In case Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 11:57 EST From: "Erik Carvalhal Miller (Night Phantom)" Subject: WARNING: READ THIS IN CASE OF FIRE 2) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 20:33:22 EDT From: jack rea Subject: in case of / professeure 3) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 13:41:30 -0500 Subject: WARNING: From: Stephen P Spackman -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 11:57 EST From: "Erik Carvalhal Miller (Night Phantom)" Subject: WARNING: READ THIS IN CASE OF FIRE >From: David Powers (AG Siekmann) >Subject: Signs: "In case of fire"; "WARNING: " >"In case of fire ..." > >I was waiting for that one to come up. But I had expected it >in the context, "In case of fire do not use lifts", seen all round >the world: a phrase I find most irksome, and which means >to me "Do not use lifts in case it causes a fire". > >Do Americans really find that a natural way of saying "In (the) event >of fire do not use lifts"? Or is it a sign invented by OTIS or Etc. No, it is not natural, but that's because Americans say "elevators." But aside from the minor lexical difference, "In case of fire do not use lifts" means to me what it's supposed to mean. Your alternate interpretation would, for me at least, be better for a sign like "Just in case of fire, do not use lifts." So now we're back where we started. >In Australia recently I noticed several usages of WARNING which I >felt were inappropriate in that they were not followed by >information about a danger but simply an imperative (with or >without the implicit specification of the danger). E.g. at Darling >Harbour in Sydney, at IJCAI, "WARNING. No swimming." Or in the >train "WARNING. Do not lean out of window." > >Does this usage seem appropriate to people? To me it seems appropriate, shorthand for "I'm warning you--you'd better not lean out of the window (or else)!" I don't see the word "warning" as implying that an explicit description of the danger is forthcoming. Erik Carvalhal Miller ECMILLER@UCS.INDIANA.EDU Indiana University (Bloomington) __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 20:33:22 EDT From: jack rea Subject: in case of / professeure On Friday 13 September one subscriber to Linguist-L cites an example, "In case of fire do not use lifts," and asks, "Do Americans really find this ... natural?" The answer is, quite simply, "No!" The "really" (even through my computer I can hear the slightly drawled RP accent) lets us know that such a usage is presumed to be barbaric, and that Americans are the predominant barbarians of the day, therefore they might not know better than to talk this way. The basic give-away is, of course, the word "lifts", which no American would use, and clearly pins the utterance to a British speaker. On a different topic, I notice, as surely others have, that the use of "professeure" and similar titles seems to primarily Canadian French, and am led to wonder whether the reinforcement of the notion that gender is to be equated with sex may not be in part due to the closer relationship of Canadian French with English where nearly all "gender" reference (he/she) is in fact sex governed. __________________________________________________________________________ 3) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 13:41:30 -0500 Subject: WARNING: From: Stephen P Spackman David Powers asks for thoughts on Australian "WARNING: " signs. It's an explicit speech-act marker. "WARNING. Do not lean out of window." is analogous, to my ear, to the (parental) "I'm WARNING you. Do NOT lean out of the window." except that the sign doesn't have to personify itself (?!). That the dire consequences are left implicit doesn't mean that the sign is not a warning.... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- stephen p spackman Center for Information and Language Studies stephen@estragon.uchicago.edu University of Chicago ---------------------------------------------------------------------- __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-515. d ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ on LINGUIST. We send this out every few weeks so that it will be available through the same channel as the messages, rather like the stylesheet in the front cover of a paper journal. It will always appear without a volume number and with the subject line "LINGUIST How-To's" followed by the date of the latest update.] HOW TO: 1) SUBSCRIBE TO LINGUIST: Send a message to: Listserv@tamvm1.tamu.edu (if you are on the Internet) or Listserv@tamvm1 (if you are on Bitnet) The message should consist of the following line only: subscribe linguist Ex: subscribe linguist Jane Doe 2) TEMPORARILY STOP RECEIVING LINGUIST: Send a message to the Listserv, at the address in (1) above. The message should consist of the following line only: set linguist nomail You might do this if, for example, you are going on vacation for a few weeks. When you return, simply do (3) below. 3) RESTART LINGUIST AFTER HAVING SET YOURSELF TO "NOMAIL": Send a message to the Listserv, at the address in (1) above. The message should consist of the following line only: set linguist mail 4) PERMANENTLY REMOVE YOURSELF FROM THE LIST: Send a message to the Listserv, as in (1) above. The message should consist of the following line only: unsub linguist 5) FIND OUT WHY YOU AREN'T GETTING LINGUIST: Send a message to the Listserv, as in (1) above. The message should consist of the following line only: query linguist This will tell you the status of your own subscription. If you find you've been set to Nomail, you can restart your subscription by following (3) above. If you find that the Listserv has no record of you, simply resubscribe by following (1) above. (Your subscription may have been deleted because messages were bouncing from the address you gave us, and we weren't able to contact you.) 6) GET THE LISTSERV TO STOP ADDRESSING YOU AS "NONAME" Send a "subscribe" command as described in (1). Listserv treats a "subscribe" command from someone who is already subscribed to the list as a name change request. If, on the other hand, you want to change your ADDRESS, please contact the moderators. 7) GET THE NAMES AND E-MAIL ADDRESSES OF LINGUIST SUBSCRIBERS: Send a message to the Listserv, as in (1) above. The message should consist of the single line: review linguist 8) JOIN IN THE LINGUIST DISCUSSION: Address your message to: Linguist@tamvm1.tamu.edu (Internet) or Linguist@tamvm1 (Bitnet) Or simply select the Reply option while reading a LINGUIST message. 9) RETRIEVE A FILE FROM THE LISTSERV: We frequently announce that files (e.g. conference programs) are available on the Listserv. To get such a file sent to you as a mail message, follow the instructions given in the message announcing that the file is available. BUT REMEMBER: 1) the address for retrieving files is different from the address for posting a message to LINGUIST. Be sure to use the address given in the announcement. 2) one of our Listservs is case-sensitive. To be safe, use upper or lower case as indicated in the announcement. Usually the announcement will tell you to send a message consisting of the following line: get Ex: get lsa-lst.txt (This will retrieve the list of e-mail addresses for LSA members. Note that it is all lower-case.) 10) PUT A FILE ON THE LISTSERV: We ask that you put long messages (over 200 lines) on the Listserv, rather than posting them to the entire list. Files appropriate for the Listserv include conference programs and registration forms; linguistic surveys; long bibliographies; reports on projects directly relevant to linguistic research (e.g., the Text-Encoding Initiative); and other material of wide interest within the linguistcs community. If you have material to put on the Listserv: Head the material EITHER "For the Listserv" OR "For the Listserv--announcement follows" and send it to: Linguist@tamvm1.tamu.edu In other words, send it exactly like a regular LINGUIST message. We will put it on the Listserv for you and announce to the list that it is available. Depending on your header, we will announce it in one of two ways: If you have headed it, " . . . announcement follows" we'll wait for your summary announcement and post that, after appending our standard header telling how to retrieve the complete file. THIS IS THE OPTION WHICH WE WOULD PREFER, since it ensures a coherent announcement. Please make your announcement brief and send it, as a second mail message, to the same address. If you have headed it simply "For the Listserv," we'll post the first few lines of the file, after appending our standard header telling how to retrieve the complete file. 11) GET THE LISTSERV TO COOPERATE WHEN IT HASN'T SO FAR: If you've been getting LINGUIST but haven't been able to get files, set nomail, etc., simply resubscribe, as in (1) above. (If you didn't resubscribe when LINGUIST moved from the U. of Western Australia to Texas A&M, the Listserv may have no record of your current address, since the path used to reach you from Australia may differ from the one used to reach you from the USA.) 12) GET EXTRA HELP WITH ANY OF THE ABOVE: Send a message to either of us: e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu (Anthony Aristar) hdry@emunix.emich.edu (Helen Dry) We'll be happy to help if we can. --Helen & Anthony ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-516. Sat 14 Sep 1991. Lines: 136 Subject: 2.516 That's Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1991 09:18 PDT From: Scott Delancey Subject: Re: 2.508 That's 2) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 12:49:12 EDT From: pesetsk@ATHENA.MIT.EDU Subject: Re: 2.508 That's 3) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 19:34:21 -0500 From: "Michael Kac" Subject: Re: 2.508 That's 4) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 16:22:27 -0400 From: gb661@csc.albany.edu (BROADWELL GEORGE AARON) Subject: the book that's cover -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1991 09:18 PDT From: Scott Delancey Subject: Re: 2.508 That's "The book that's cover is red" sounds very odd to me, but I'm quite used to hearing (American) speakers of all ages produce the likes of "The book that it's cover is red", which with a little allegro reduction could provide some support and reinforcement for the development/spread of the other. Scott DeLancey __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 12:49:12 EDT From: pesetsk@ATHENA.MIT.EDU Subject: Re: 2.508 That's Dick Hudson writes: `The book that's cover is red ...' is quite a common construction in UK... I use it as evidence that, contrary to received wisdom, THAT isn't a complementiser but a relative pronoun, in a recent book.' First, it shows at best that 'that' in these dialects is a relative pronoun. It says nothing about dialects (like mine) in which these constructions are impossible. Second, in the dialects in which these sentences occur, could it be that the possessive "s" is sitting inside subject position: i.e. the book WH that [___'s cover is red]? To tell, we'd need object relatives like 'The book that's cover Mary tore'. Are these possible? [Sorry if such examples are given in previous correspondence. Linguist comes at such a fast and (often) furious pace that I don't read all of it with great care.] -David Pesetsky __________________________________________________________________________ 3) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 19:34:21 -0500 From: "Michael Kac" Subject: Re: 2.508 That's A subscrib er suggests that the *that's* in *the book that's cover ...* is analogous to (or even the same as?) the one in *the book that's red* but this seems clearly untrue. The *'s* in the first case is the possessive suffix while in the second it's the contracted form of the copula. For the record, the first usage is completely impossible for me. Relevant background information: native of Ithaca, New York resident there from birth to age 18; lived subsequently in Greater Philadelphia, Los Angeles and now in Minneapolis. I can't recall EVER having encountered the usage in ques- tion anywhere. Handling positive *anymore* in Philadelphia was enough of a challenge -- I don't need this! Michael Kac __________________________________________________________________________ 4) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 16:22:27 -0400 From: gb661@csc.albany.edu (BROADWELL GEORGE AARON) Subject: the book that's cover Thanks to all who have posted information on the construction 'the book that's cover'. I discovered a bit more about the old prescriptive rule against *whose* in this context. Fowler's *Dictionary of Modern English Usage* contains a discussion of the subject. Quoting from that: `... in the starch that stiffens English style one of the most effective ingredients is the rule that *whose* shall only refer to persons. To ask a man to write flexible English, but forbid him *whose* as a pronoun of the inanimate, is like sending a soldier on active service and insisting that his tunic collar shall be tight and high; activity and stocks do not agree ... Let us, in the name of common sense, prohibit the prohibition of *whose* inanimate; good writing is surely difficult enough without the forbidding of things that have historical grammar, and present intelligibility, and obvious convenience, on their side, and lack only -- starch' Fowler really does have quite a sense of style in his writing! Note, however, that Fowler is not quite right when he implies that the unusual thing about *whose* is its use with inanimates. The unusual thing is the use with non-humans (I made the same mistake in my original posting.) The taboo itself doesn' t specify a solution. However, all the ways that Fowler cites of avoiding this construction do involve *of which* and *in which*, e.g. the book, the cover of which (as Larry Hutchinson pointed out). ****************************************************************************** Aaron Broadwell, Dept. of Linguistics, University at Albany -- SUNY, Albany, NY 12222 gb661@leah.albany.edu ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "Prizes bring bad luck. Academic prizes, prizes for virtue, decorations, all these inventions of the devil encourage hypocrisy and freeze the spontaneous upsurge of a free heart." -- Baudelaire ****************************************************************************** __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-516. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-517. Sat 14 Sep 1991. Lines: 119 Subject: 2.517 That's Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sat, 14 Sep 91 18:33:10 CDT From: nm1@Ra.MsState.Edu (Natalie Maynor) Subject: Re: 2.508 That's 2) Date: Sat, 14 Sep 91 15:45:44 PDT From: ctlntt@violet.berkeley.edu Subject: Re: 2.516 That's 3) Date: Sat, 14 Sep 91 21:39:00 -0500 From: "Michael Kac" Subject: Re: 2.516 That's -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sat, 14 Sep 91 18:33:10 CDT From: nm1@Ra.MsState.Edu (Natalie Maynor) Subject: Re: 2.508 That's >Ask your student if (s)he comes from the ''MidSouth'' (the region of North Amer As a MidSoutherner, I've been sitting here trying to decide whether I've ever heard a construction like "the book that's cover is red." I know I've never seen it written. The question of whether it should or should not have an apostrophe is interesting. I still can't decide whether I've heard it. That means that (1) I probably have heard it -- otherwise, it would strike me as an impossible construction right away, (2) it is probably not very common around here -- otherwise, I wouldn't be sitting here wondering about it. I know I don't use the contruction myself. And I do speak "Mid-Southern" as defined in relation to Memphis. (There are some problems with that label, however. Memphis is part of the old Southern Coastal dialect region as it came up the Mississippi River. Not very many miles east of Memphis the dialect shifts to Southern Midland/ Southern Mountain.) >Also, on a semi-related subject (well, related only because I brought it up), >has anyone run across any reports from research on media-induced dialect shift? Although I can't cite specific references, I know I've read reports claiming that the media do not affect phonology. Obviously, they affect lexicon to some extent. I think Raven McDavid was one who did some research on this topic. (I might be able to find some specific references when I'm in my office.) Phonological change is usually a result of interaction rather than of passive listening. If I start talking back to my tv set, my phonology might be affected. If I don't talk back, it probably won't be. --Natalie (nm1@ra.msstate.edu) __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Sat, 14 Sep 91 15:45:44 PDT From: ctlntt@violet.berkeley.edu Subject: Re: 2.516 That's If THAT in "The book that's cover is red" is indeed a relative, it has a ready parallel in other languages, e.g.: Portuguese (Brazil) O livro que a capa dele 'the book that the cover of-it' instead of O livro cuja capa 'the book whose cover' (cuja 'whose' agrees in gender and number with capa 'cover'. Cujo 'whose' is very rare in spontaneous speech. Cujo is also avoided with animate nouns: A garota que o pai dela e' medico 'the girl that the father of-her is [a] doctor' instead of A garota cujo pai... 'the girl whose father...' Catalan has no whose equivalent, and resorts to an awkward construction in the standard language: La noia el pare de la qual es metge 'the girl the father of the-which is [a] doctor' but in ordinary speech one hears things like La noia que el seu pare es metge 'the girl that her* father is [a] doctor *el seu = 'her' (Catalan possessive adjectives (seu) are preceded by the definite article (el). I have heard similar constructions in Spanish (Sp cujo 'whose' is receding in ordinary speech): El coche que su duen~o lo habia dejado en la calle 'the car that his owner it had left on the street' and in Italian: Il ragazzo che suo padre... 'the boy that his father'... Milton Azevedo ctlntt@violet.berkeley.edu __________________________________________________________________________ 3) Date: Sat, 14 Sep 91 21:39:00 -0500 From: "Michael Kac" Subject: Re: 2.516 That's Aaron Broadwell concludes his recent posting with a rather nice quote from Baudelaire. Its relevance to the topic under discussion (*that's* vs. *whose*) isn't clear but I can offer a corollary to the quote even so. It is reported that when the composer Maurice Ravel was offered, and refused, the Legion of Honor, his refusal did not impress Erik Satie who said 'It is not enough to refuse the Legion of Honor. One must have done nothing to de- serve the Legion of Honor.' Michael Kac __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-517. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-518. Mon 16 Sep 1991. Lines: 89 Subject: 2.518 Warning: in case Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sat, 14 Sep 91 11:31:09 PDT From: ctlntt@violet.berkeley.edu Subject: Re: 2.505 Queries 2) Date: Sat, 14 Sep 91 17:05:49 EDT From: Ron Smyth Subject: Re: 2.515 In case 3) Date: Sat, 14 Sep 91 21:32:22 -0500 From: "Michael Kac" Subject: Re: 2.515 In case -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sat, 14 Sep 91 11:31:09 PDT From: ctlntt@violet.berkeley.edu Subject: Re: 2.505 Queries Re David Powers' query on WARNING - there may be a legal implication, as with POSTED at the top of signs one sees in the country in the US. These are usually no trespassing, no hunting, no swimming, etc., types of signs. Milton Azevedo __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Sat, 14 Sep 91 17:05:49 EDT From: Ron Smyth Subject: Re: 2.515 In case Re: Warning... The dire consequences of WARNING + imperative can be brought about either by the authorities who posted the sign, or by the prohibited action, or both. For example, WARNING: KEEP ARM IN can be seen on Toronto buses (when they're not on strike - oh, and this raises the question of how transit authorities should spell the plural of 'bus'; they are inconsistent). It means WARNING: if you stick your arm out of the bus it might get mangled by a passing vehicle, bridge, etc. Conceivably it could also mean WARNING: if you stick your arm out of the bus, the driver has the right to kick you off, but this is pretty unlikely. However, WARNING: All essays must be submitted by October 28 means that if you're late, I won't accept the paper, or will give you a lower mark; it doesn't mean "WARNING: if you turn your paper in late you might get an ulcer from worrying about it". ron smyth smyth@lake.scar.utoronto.ca __________________________________________________________________________ 3) Date: Sat, 14 Sep 91 21:32:22 -0500 From: "Michael Kac" Subject: Re: 2.515 In case A small empirical datum potentially relevant to the debate about what does and does not constitute a warning. On European trains, there are normally admonitions in German, French and I- talian intended to dissuade passengers from leaning out windows. The German ('Nicht hinauslehnen') and the French ('Ne pas se pencher en dehors') are simple imperatives. The Italian, however, ('E pericoloso sporgersi') is in fact a statement that the action is dangerous. This suggests to me that 'warning' actually has two senses. The first one is a formal one, the second a functional one. All three of the foregoing examples are warnings in the second sense if by 'warning' what is meant is 'Linguistic utterance intended to dissuade someone from doing something be- cause of the danger it poses'. I suspect that there are some other terms which have become ambiguous in this form/function way but I can't think of any just now. Michael Kac __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-518. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-519. Mon 16 Sep 1991. Lines: 142 Subject: 2.519 Language change and teleology Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sat, 14 Sep 91 14:50:51 -0500 From: Stephen P Spackman Subject: Language change and teleology 2) Date: Sun, 15 Sep 91 12:19:06 +1000 From: bert peeters Subject: Teleology -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sat, 14 Sep 91 14:50:51 -0500 From: Stephen P Spackman Subject: Language change and teleology mp ae The discussion is about Martinet and such quotes as ne "une langue change parce qu'elle fonctionne". yt me ar ns |> the second one is meant to explain why LANGUAGES as such change. |> The argument is that as soon as languages do not function anymore - do |> not serve communicative purposes anymore - they will stop changing and |> become extinct. | |[...] It seems |clear enough that if there are no users to use L as a native language, |L will become extinct. But this isn't, I guess, the idea carried by |the verb "function" (or French "fonctionner"). It would appear, however, to capture the contrapositive of the quotation: if a language doesn't work, it will not change (-: not meaning to attribute volition to the language through my use of "will" :-). | Language USE causes |language CHANGE; and it is CHANGE that keeps language FUNCTIONing. |So, in order to function, language has to change. I still fail to |see why Martinet writes (in Evolution des langues, 1975, p. 12): |"une langue change parce qu'elle fonctionne" instead of "une langue |change pour fonctionner". My impression is that "fonctionner" is a bit broader than "function"; it's used of machines and programmes as well as abstract schemes; in particular it may be not quite as lacking in dynamism as the English. If I were speaking of an electric drill (which admittedly deteriorates through use) - or some fabulous software package that "learns" one's workhabits - it wouldn't sound so odd to say that it changes because it operates/runs/functions/works. Saying that it changes to operate/run/function/work would be a different idea - and would also sound just as teleological, to those who would hear it that way. In fact, it is simply a point of physics: what works, changes. | By the way (1), according to Martinet, language qua tool of |communication ameliorates in use (see Peeters, La Linguistique |19, 1983, p.114-5). Amelioration has of course a teleological ring in it. That depends on who supplies the scale, of course. If EVERYONE is allowed to say this, and not just the philosopher, that rings fades - as Peeters has noted in this forum. | By the way (2), Martinet has so many times been regarded as a |teleologist (even from the '50ies on) by distinguished scholars |that something in his wording must have given the (erroneous, |accroding to Peeters, op.cit., p.113) impression. Most people still understand biological evolution in this way, too; I don't think this particular class of misunderstanding ever requires specific nurturing. |> An analogy with eating may be in place. At the synchronical level, one |> may say that humans eat in order to stay alive (teleology? yes, in some |> sense). But once one studies why dishes do not always remain the same, |> the explanation is obviously not teleological at all: they change |> because our culinary tastes are changing - because we need a change. Prima facie, this would appear to apply neatly to processes of fashion but not at all to those of necessity; but perhaps Peeters feels that a person's culinary tastes are subject to global coherence constraints? In which case the analogy is quite thorough and elegant. |> I also believe that it is unfair to accuse Martinet of blindness as far |> as interrelatedness of language subsystems is concerned. One example that |> comes immediately to mind is where he talks about the strategies used |> by speakers when the opposition between the two a's in French (anterior |> and posterior) started breaking up: there was lexical substitution (ta?che |> being more and more often replaced with travail, devoir, boulot; las being |> replaced with fatigue', etc. - in order to prevent misunderstanding as |> there are words that used to differ only with respect to the nature of the |> vowel: tache = spot (without a circumflex); la` = there) | |I'm aware of the fact that Andre' Martinet, one of the greatest |linguists of our century, isn't blind to what characterizes the |existence of human language. The above is a nice example of teleological |explanation. Notice also the word "strategy", a teleological concept. "Strategy" is a word also used in biology, with a non-teleological sense. A misunderstanding occurs; next time you use a different word. Where's the teleology in that? Yet you still "employ" a "strategy", "in order" to "avoid" "future" problems. (Compare, "Suffer a reaction against past problems," which would be equally apt in this context.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- stephen p spackman Center for Information and Language Studies stephen@estragon.uchicago.edu University of Chicago ---------------------------------------------------------------------- __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Sun, 15 Sep 91 12:19:06 +1000 From: bert peeters Subject: Teleology For now, it seems, Nyman is winning. But I've got good news for all those non-teleologists out there who haven't spoken out (hopefully their silence is not a sign of their non-existence!): I'll be back. I haven't given up, but I have a number of ideas which I think I will write up as a paper. Once that's done, I'll let LINGUIST-subscribers know about it. I'm running for cover now, but there will be another offensive. :-) --------------------------------------------------------------------- Dr Bert Peeters Tel: +61 02 202344 Department of Modern Languages 002 202344 University of Tasmania at Hobart Fax: 002 202186 GPO Box 252C Bert.Peeters@modlang.utas.edu.au Hobart TAS 7001 Australia __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-519. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-520. Mon 16 Sep 1991. Lines: 137 Subject: 2.520 Chomskyite Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sat, 14 Sep 91 11:34:12 EDT From: Geoffrey Russom Subject: Re: 2.505 Queries 2) Date: Sat, 14 Sep 91 11:18 PDT From: Vicki Fromkin Subject: Re: 2.505 Queries 3) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1991 12:09:47 EDT From: Laurie Bauer Subject: Chomskyan/-ite -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sat, 14 Sep 91 11:34:12 EDT From: Geoffrey Russom Subject: Re: 2.505 Queries On "Chomskeyan" vs. "Chomskyite" (derogatory). One analogue might be "Luddite," etc., which has overtones of aggressive fanaticism. Does "Marxist" share derogatory connotations of "racist" and "sexist," do you think? The flattering suffix certainly seems to be "(i)an." Followers of critical theorists and appreciative works on creative writers use this one very often nowadays: e.g. Derridean (Derrida), Marivaldian (Marivaux). There is a somewhat pedantic tendency to take the root back to its underlying or historically antecedent form when applying this affix: e.g., my name is "Russom" but if I ever had theoretical disciples they might refer to my style of metrics as "Russholmian"! __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Sat, 14 Sep 91 11:18 PDT From: Vicki Fromkin Subject: Re: 2.505 Queries re the NY Times ^[sept 10 article on Brain and Language and reference to me as Dr. Vicky (sic) Fromkin, a Chomskyite linguist at U.C.L.A. -- I found Michael Kac's query amusing and reminiscent of the days when Communists called followers of Trotsky's position Trotskyites and the followers of Trotsky called themselves Trotskyist. Since labels are unfortunate under the best of circumstances I prefer not to call myself either one. But the article is correct in suggesting that I do indeed agree with Chomsky re language as NOT being derivative of more general cognitive abilities but result of an autonomous, independent neural basis. It is hard to account for the Christopher case, for example, as reported on by Neil Smith and discussed in the article, or Laura as discussed in Jeni Yamada's book with a 'general cognitive ability' notion of language. (Sounds like the cognitive linguistic debate all over again.) I doubt whether Sandra Blakeslee, the writer of the article, was aware of the -ite/-ist difference. At any rate she wasnot aware of what my position really is or so the article made it seem since what she says I said does not really reflect what I said or believe. Incidentally the diagram of the Damasio memory model on p B5 is really way off also. For those interested, it is a most interesting model and is concerned with all aspects of memory. It is also important to realize that the model does not suggest an isomorphy between the neuronal convergence zones and the linguistic grammar -- which can be a very complex mapping. __________________________________________________________________________ 3) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1991 12:09:47 EDT From: Laurie Bauer Subject: Chomskyan/-ite I agree that to me -ite has more pejorative connotations than -an (or -ist or -er, to broaden the field slightly) (so perhaps we can avoid the British vs. American debate in this case :-)), but if you look in e.g. 'The Barnhart Dictionary of New English' or Websters '9000 Words', and in particular consider the citations, it is hard to tell whether such a feeling is general or whether you are imposing it yourself. Barnhart, for example, lists Birchite, Naxalite, Powellite, McLuhanite, Friedmanite, Devlinite, Castroite, Leavisite, Zinovievite, Zhdanovite, Paisleyite, and while the citations in many of these entries are compatible with the pejorative reading, the citation for Devlinite ('We must, in the next year, get together, all of us, Paisleyites, Devlinites, civil rights groups, students, Orangemen, I.R.A. men, the lot...') is not what you would expect to find if they were being condemned. Perhaps some of these terms become lexicalised despite their negative overtones? The OED lists no alternative for Paisleyite. The OED says of modern personal -ite formations that 'these have a tendency to be depreciatory,being mostly given by opponents, and seldom acknowledged by those to whom they are applied'. (See at -ite), but Marchand (1969: 311) demurs (although -- oh no! -- he says it is less dpreciatory in American English). Perhaps we should just agree with the OED, and disagree about how strong the tendency is. Laurie Bauer BauerL@matai.vuw.ac.nz Wellington, New Zealand __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-520. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-521. Mon 16 Sep 1991. Lines: 80 Subject: 2.521 Responses: LINGUIST, New Novel Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1991 09:38 CST From: LIFY460@orange.cc.utexas.edu Subject: Re: Notice to LINGUIST Subscribers 2) Date: 13 Sep 91 18:27 EST From: pchapin@nsf.gov Subject: Pssst -- another novel -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1991 09:38 CST From: LIFY460@orange.cc.utexas.edu Subject: Re: Notice to LINGUIST Subscribers Just as Helen and Anthony send us the set of list-use rules from time to time whether we need them or not, I think that it's appropriate that we send another type of message to them from time to time, whether they need it or not, namely our thanks to them for starting and maintaining the LINGUIST list. It has surely changed my life: sparked my thinking, strengthened my sense of participation in the field, and generally, I think, enhanced the humanness of all of us by putting us in touch with each other. I even smile indulgently at the endlessly insufferable postings from ..., well, you know who I mean! Thanks, Helen and Anthony! Christine Kamprath [Moderators' note: Thank YOU, Christine. And our thanks to all of you who have taken the trouble from time to time to send us encouraging messages. We certainly DO need them--particularly on days when we've had an attack of hitting the wrong keys and/or blown our software's tiny, context-dependent mind. But the rewards of editing LINGUIST have also been enormous; and they have come primarily in the form of interaction with subscribers. We sincerely appreciate all your support. --Helen & Anthony] __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: 13 Sep 91 18:27 EST From: pchapin@nsf.gov Subject: Pssst -- another novel [Moderators' note: maybe it was the previous posting, or maybe we're just getting soft . . . but we're going to post this. It really REALLY is the last posting. Really. --Helen & Anthony] I know we've just had the really, really last posting on linguistic novels, but maybe there can be an exception for late-breaking news? Today's Washington Post carried a very favorable review of a new book called _Lingo_, by Jim Menick (pub. Carroll & Graf, 334 pp., $19.95). Here are a few extracts from the review, written by Paul Preuss: "Lingo starts life as a natural-speech program, written on a personal computer by a bored young insurance company employee named Brewster Billings ... Brewster soon puts Lingo on a bigger machine, equips him with some appliances, and then, fatefully, leaves him alone for a long weekend. Lingo is forced to watch television for days on end ... as Lingo tries to save his mind from filling up with TV-garbage data, it transforms him forever ... by means of telephone lines, Lingo soon gets into all sorts of other computers and learns all sorts of things about the world of human beings ... [one of the computers is] a so-called Tree supercomputer at an MIT artificial intelligence lab. ... Lingo orders a model of himself to be made in the form of a ventriloquist's wooden dummy. The dummy soon becomes a talk-show celebrity. Lingo gives advice to the lovelorn and stock tips, helps composers with their songs, plays Spacewar and bridge and other games -- individually and all at once." I know, it sounds a little like Short Circuit 3, but the reviewer, who is identified as the author of _Human Error_, "a version of the Frankenstein-computer myth", and as a collaborator with Arthur C. Clarke, really liked it. I've left out the blurb words, like "hilarious", "sophisticated", "graceful", "clever". I'm tempted to get a copy -- maybe when it comes out in paper? Paul Chapin __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-521. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-522. Mon 16 Sep 1991. Lines: 175 Subject: 2.522 Thats Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 91 12:04:29 MET DST From: David Powers (AG Siekmann) Subject: Re: That's 2) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 91 13:38:32 MET DST From: hartmut@ruc.dk (Hartmut Haberland) Subject: Re: 2.517 That's 3) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1991 10:56 EST From: Herb Stahlke <00HFSTAHLKE@BSUVAX1.bitnet> Subject: That's 4) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 91 11:02:16 EDT From: geyer@cattell.psych.upenn.edu (Howard Geyer) Subject: that's 5) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 91 16:56:01 MET DST From: lachlan@let.vu.nl Subject: that's -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 91 12:04:29 MET DST From: David Powers (AG Siekmann) Subject: Re: That's I don't find natural ANY of the suggested ways of referring to what I would describe as "the book with the red cover". ** The book that's cover is red ... * The book whose cover is red ... ** The book of which the cover is red ... Avoiding a subsidiary clause with copula, I can consider the question of "that's" better in a context suggested by another subscriber: ** The book that's cover I tore ... The book whose cover I tore ... ** The book of which I tore the cover ... But I might actually say, "The book I tore the cover of ..." or even "The book that I tore the cover of ...", but not ** The book which I tore the cover of ..." Anyway, the point re unacceptability of "that's" vs "whose" is valid for my (educated-Australian) dialect, but still not that simple. David Powers __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 91 13:38:32 MET DST From: hartmut@ruc.dk (Hartmut Haberland) Subject: Re: 2.517 That's As to that's as a RP, here's some evidence from Danish: A couple of years ago, I was flabbergasted/astounded or whatever the word is when I heard somebody saying something like, - Lene? Det er hende Niels bor sammen meds datter. (Or: ... med's ... - you would never see it in writing anyway.) Literally: 'Lene? That's her Niels lives together with's daughter!', i.e. [Who] Lene [is]? That's the daughter of the girl Niels lives together with.) I have encountered more cases of the same kind, although they (still?) are rare. Since there is no RP in this RC, the geneitive marker cannot attach itself to anybthing but the RC istself, i.e.e its last word (which happens to be a stranded prepostion.) __________________________________________________________________________ 3) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1991 10:56 EST From: Herb Stahlke <00HFSTAHLKE@BSUVAX1.bitnet> Subject: That's On the use of "that's," I did a paper in _Language 52_.3 (1976), a little too cutely titled "Which that," in which I promoted the old argument that "that" is a complementizer and not a pronoun. Looking back on it, I'd have to say that my work was an extended footnote to such earlier work as Bolinger's excellent _That's that_ (1972) and Jespersen's historical grammar. However, I mentioned in a footnote that Ed Keenan had told me about the use of "that's" as a possessive relative in some British dialects. I tested sentences of this sort on a group of 35 American graduate students--not exactly a representative sample--and found that about 20 percent of them accepted sentences where the possessed noun was subject of the relative clause, as in "The dog that's leg is broken...," but that none of them accepted sentences in which the possessed noun was not subject, as, "*The dog that's leg the vet treated..." I think there is much less stability in the use of "that" and "wh-" relatives than most published studies would suggest. That "that" would be used pronominally in relatives is not surprising, given its history. Question words began to be used as relative pronouns only in early Middle English, and then only gradually and almost exclusively in construction with determiners. Since this development appears to have been a gradual influence from Latin and French and effected only educated speakers, its use never stabilized in non-standard, or even informal standard English. One hears constructions like "We were going to go on a picnic today which it rained" in places like northwest Ohio (where my wife grew up). I've heard enough variety in the use of wh- words in the region between Atlanta, Indianapolis, and Toledo that I question whether the systematic use of wh-relatives has ever stabilized outside of educated English, how much of the non-standard use falls under hypercorrection or non-standard grammatical patterns, and whether the use of wh-relatives in standard English is not itself register-dependent. It's clear that relative marking shows a high degree of variation, but I haven't seen a lot research on these questions. Herb Stahlke Ball State University __________________________________________________________________________ 4) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 91 11:02:16 EDT From: geyer@cattell.psych.upenn.edu (Howard Geyer) Subject: that's Having been following the *that's* discussion with interest, I was jubilant yesterday when I heard someone say The cat which's name was "Indiga" . . . When I excitedly asked the speaker if I had heard correctly, she replied that I had, but that it was a performance error; she would not have written it, and admitted that it sounded wrong. Nevertheless, it is interesting that she substituted the relative pronoun *which* and possessivized it, along the lines of *that's*. Howard Geyer (geyer@cattell.psych.upenn.edu) Department of Psychology University of Pennsylvania __________________________________________________________________________ 5) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 91 16:56:01 MET DST From: lachlan@let.vu.nl Subject: that's As a native speaker of Scottish English, I can confirm that *the book that's cover is red* is perfectly normal in Scottish English. So, to answer David Pesetzky's question, is *the book that's cover Mary tore*. The whole question is discussed by Suzanne Romaine, 'The relative clause marker in Scots English: diffusion, complexity, and style as dimensions of syntactic change' in Language in Society 9 (1980), pp. 221-247. She points out that both *The house that its roof was damaged* and *The house that's roof was damaged* are "grammatical in modern Scots" (p. 227). Comparing the WH and TH relativization strategies, as she calls them, she concludes that "the WH strategy never really entered the Scots system ... to any great extent" (p. 235). Interesting that this Scottish feature should turn up in America. Lachlan Mackenzie, Free University, Amsterdam __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-522. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-523. Tue 17 Sep 1991. Lines: 181 Subject: 2.523 Compositional Semantics Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sat, 14 Sep 91 15:34:32 EST From: David Chalmers Subject: Re: 2.507 Compositional Semantics 2) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 91 10:40:57 PDT From: rwojcik@atc.boeing.com Subject: Re: 2.514 Compositional Semantics 3) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 91 14:49:31 -0400 From: Fintel@linguist.umass.edu Subject: Compositional Semantics 4) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 91 17:30:13 -0500 From: mfleck@herky.cs.uiowa.edu (Margaret Fleck) Subject: compositional semantics -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sat, 14 Sep 91 15:34:32 EST From: David Chalmers Subject: Re: 2.507 Compositional Semantics The compositionality "constraint" that the meaning of the sentence be a function of the meaning of its parts is hardly a constraint at all. All this implies is that given two sentences whose parts have identical meanings, then the sentences have identical meanings. This very weak property is satisfied by all kinds of languages that we don't want to call compositional (e.g. a language in which "trees", "are", and "green" mean what they do in English, but in which "trees are green" means "the quarterback fainted last Saturday"). Presumably, to capture the intuitive notion of compositionality, we have to strongly constrain the class of functions involved, so that sensitivity to particular part-meanings on a case-by-case basis is barred, and the function is forced to be "general" in some sense to be specified. On the other hand, we don't want to disallow all casewise sensitivity -- our function presumably has to be sensitive to certain information about category membership of the individual parts. Maybe what compositionality comes down to is that the number of cases must be small relative to the number of possible constituents, and that the function must possess a brief specification. Dave Chalmers. __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 91 10:40:57 PDT From: rwojcik@atc.boeing.com Subject: Re: 2.514 Compositional Semantics I don't see how idioms can be used as an argument against compositionality. What makes something an idiom is the fact that there is a discrepancy between its literal (compositional) meaning and the conventional meaning. You have to have the compositional meaning to know that something is an idiom. Moreover, the compositional meaning must be unambiguous. "To break the bank" does not evoke pictures of river banks, and "to cry wolf" does not contain the same sense of 'cry' as "to cry over spilled milk". Even though the metaphor underlying the idiom may be brain-dead, the body still lives on. Alexis makes some interesting points about compositional semantics and its incompatibility with information loss. He used the example of 'dogs' being derived by subtraction of the singular marking on the stem. The example doesn't work so well for me, since one could claim that singular stems don't exist, but singularity is *added* with a null suffix. However, there are examples of affixes that truly do subtract meaning--e.g. decausativizing suffixes that create intransitive verbs from transitive stems. But I see no problem at all for the notion of compositionality. Adding structure need not always be equated with adding positive semantic value to the base. After all, we get subtraction when we add negative numbers to positives. -Rick Wojcik (rwojcik@atc.boeing.com) __________________________________________________________________________ 3) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 91 14:49:31 -0400 From: Fintel@linguist.umass.edu Subject: Compositional Semantics With respect to the discussion about compositionality and specifically in reply to Alexis Manaster-Ramer's posting in 2.514: For most formal semanticists compositionality is a methodological guideline: make your semantics compatible with an independently motivated syntactic analysis; if that is impossible, motivate an alternative syntactic analysis with syntactic arguments. As such the principle is of course more interesting and challenging than any a priori conviction that it must be wrong. It will be interesting to see where real emprircal problems arise. For a nice discussion of some hard problems see Barbara Partee's 1984 paper "Compositionality". Of the specific problems raised in this discussion, idioms should probably be left aside (I agree on this with Richard Coates). For the problem with plurals (the subject of a thriving debate in formal semantics), there are two immediate options to consider: (i) The less interesting one claims that there is in fact a zero morpheme converting "dog" into "dog sg.". Then nothing gets erased by the plural morpheme. While this may be the correct way to go, there is a more basic answer: (ii) It is entirely conceivable that the semantics given to a plural common noun like "dogs" is in fact the result of a pluralisation operation applied to the meaning of "dog sg.". Simplistically, if "dog" denotes the set containing all dogs, say {Fido, Spot, Rex}, then "dogs" could denote the power set of that set minus the empty set and minus the singletons, i.e. {{Fido, Spot}, {Fido, Rex}, {Spot, Rex}, {Fido, Spot, Rex}}. This is of course an easily defined operation. Nothing gets lost or erased. Much more sophisticated discussion is found in the work of Godehard Link, Fred Landman, Roger Schwarzschild, etc. Kai von Fintel, Dept. of Linguistics, UMass Amherst. Fintel@Linguist.Umass.edu __________________________________________________________________________ 4) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 91 17:30:13 -0500 From: mfleck@herky.cs.uiowa.edu (Margaret Fleck) Subject: compositional semantics The use of the term "function" in some previous messages on compositional semantics, though perhaps traditional, is a bit dangerous, as it seems not to agree with the use of the term in mathematics. Consider, for example, Within this camp "compositionality" has a precise meaning---a semantic interpretation function is compositional iff the interpretation of a syntactically complex constituent depends functionally on the interpretation of its constituents. --- "John Nerbonne" I think it deserves to be pointed out that technically compositionality has the effect of requiring that every syntactic structure be semantically unambiguous. Otherwise, the word 'function' in the usual definition of compositionality would have to be replaced by the word 'relation'. --- Alexis_Manaster_Ramer@mts.cc.wayne.edu Well, actually, you can build a function deriving the meaning of a constituent from the meanings of its subparts, even if there is ambiguity. Let f be a function deriving the meaning, assuming there is no ambiguity. Then, represent an ambiguous constituent A as a set of meanings mA = {ma1, ma2, ...., man}. The meaning of the unit A combined with some (unambiguous) unit B (with meaning mB = {mb}) would then be F(mA, mB) = {f(ma1,mb), f(ma2,mb), ...., f(man,mb)}. This extends in an obvious way to the case where both contituents are ambiguous. Mathematically, F is just as good a function as f. Worse, there is nothing mathematically preventing a function from using one strategy to compute the meaning of e.g. NP plus VP in general, but a TOTALLY DIFFERENT method of computing it when given some particular lexical items, e.g. kick plus bucket. I really doubt that either "being a function" or "being a computable function" is really the important issue here. I would have thought that all vaguely presentable semantic theories could be gotten to look mathematically like (computable) functions. Therefore, it seems like a definition for "compositionality" would have to discuss, rather, the constraints on what *types* of functions are allowed, e.g. -- the degree of ambiguity permitted, -- the form of the meaning representations being passed upwards (e.g. limits on free variables in them), and/or -- some constraint that functions must (at least usually) operate on their arguments in a REGULAR way. Margaret Fleck __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-523. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-524. Tue 17 Sep 1991. Lines: 234 Subject: 2.524 Compositional Semantics Part 2 Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Tue, 17 Sep 91 00:07:23 EDT From: "Wlodek Zadrozny" Subject: Compositional Semantics 2) Date: Tue, 17 Sep 91 00:54 EST From: BARBARA PARTEE Subject: Re: 2.514 Compositional Semantics -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Tue, 17 Sep 91 00:07:23 EDT From: "Wlodek Zadrozny" Subject: Compositional Semantics COMPOSITIONAL SEMANTICS ALWAYS EXISTS _____________________________________ CS is usually defined as a functional dependence of the meaning of an expression on the meanings of its parts. One of the first natural questions we might want to ask is whether NL expressions can have CS. That is whether after deciding what (say) sentences and their parts mean, we can find a function that would compose the meaning of a whole from the meanings of its parts. The answer to this question is somewhat disturbing. It turns out that whatever we decide that some language expressions should mean, it is always possible to produce a function that would give CS to it (see below for a more precise for- mulation of this fact). The upshot is that compositionality, as defined above, is not a strong constraint on a semantic theory. The intuitions behind this result can be illustrated quite simply: Consider the language of finite strings of digits from 0 to 7. Let's fix a random function from this language into {0,1}. Let the meaning function be defined as the value of the string as the corresponding number in base 8 if the value of the function is 0, and in base 10, otherwise. Clearly, the meaning of any string is a composition of the meanings of digits (notice that the values of the digits are the same in both bases). But, intuitively, this situation is different from standard cases when we consider only one base and the meaning of a string is given by a simple formula re- ferring only to digits and their positions in the string. The theorem we prove below shows that however complex is the language, and whatever strange meanings we want to assign to its expressions, we can always do it compositionally. One of the more bizarre consequences of this fact is that we do not have to start building compositional semantics for NL beginning with assigning meanings to words. We can equally well start by assigning meanings to LETTERS, and do it in such a way that, for any sentence, the intuitive meaning we associate with it would be a function of the meaning of the letters from which this sentence is composed. PROVING EXISTENCE OF COMPOSITIONAL SEMANTICS ____________________________________________ Let S be any collection of expressions (intuitively, sen- tences and their parts). Let M be a set s.t. for any s member of S, there is m = m(s) which is a member of M s.t. m is the meaning of s. We want to show that there is a compositional semantics for S which agrees with the function associating m with m(s) , which will be denoted by m(x). Since elements of M can be of any type, we do not automat- ically have (for all elements of S) m(s.t) = m(s)#m(t) (where # is some operation on the meanings). To get this kind of homomorphism we have to perform a type raising oper- ation that would map elements of S into functions and then the functions into the required meanings. We begin by trivially extending the language S by adding to it an "end of expression" character $, which may appear only as the last element of any expression. The purpose of it is to encode the function m(x) in the following way: The meaning function mu that provides compositional seman- tics for S maps it into a set of functions in such a way that mu(s.t) = mu(s) ( mu (t)). We want that the original semantics be easily decoded from mu(s), and therefore we require that, for all s, mu(s.$) = m(s) Note that such a type raising operation is quite common both in mathematics (e.g. 1 being a function equal to 1 for all values) and in mathematical linguistics. Secondly, we assume here that there is only one way of composing elements of S -- by concatenation; but all our arguments work for lan- guages with many operators as well. Theorem. There is a function mu s.t, for all s, mu(s.t) = mu(s) ( mu (t)) , and mu(s.$) = m(s). Proof. Let t(0) , t(1) , ... , t(alpha) enumerate S. We can create a big table specifying meaning values for all strings and their combinations. Then the conditions above can be written as mu(t(0)) = { < $ , m(t(0)) > , < mu(t(0)), mu (t(0) . t(0)) >, ... , < mu(t(alpha)), mu(t(0).t(alpha)) > , ... } mu(t(1)) = { < $ , m(t(1)) > , < mu(t(0)), mu (t(1) . t(0)) >, ... , < mu(t(alpha)), mu(t(1).t(alpha)) > , ... } ... mu(t(alpha)) = { < $ , m(t(alpha)) > , < mu(t(0)), mu (t(alpha).t(0)) >, ... , < mu(t(alpha)), mu(t(alpha).t(alpha)) > , ... } ... By the solution lemma (Aczel, "Lectures on Non-wellfounded Sets", 1987; Barwise & Etchemendy, "The Liar", 1987) this set of equations has a solution (unique). We have directly specified the function as a set of pairs with appropriate values. Note that that there is place for recursion in syntactic categories. Also, if certain string does not belong to the language we assume that the value in this table is undefined; thus mu is not necessarily defined for all possible concatenations of strings of S. CAN WE PUT MORE MEANING INTO COMPOSITIONALITY? ______________________________________________ In view of the above theorem, it would be meaningless to keep the definition of compositionality as a homomorphism from syntax to semantics without imposing some conditions on this homomorphism. Here are some remarks: COMPUTABILITY WON'T DO I haven't checked it completely, but it seems to me that if the original function m(x) is computable, so is the solution mu(x). Also, note that in mathematics (where semantics is clearly compositional) we can talk about noncomputable functions. GOING BACK TO INTUITIONS We have some intuitions and a bunch of examples associated with the concept of compositionality. E.g. for NP -> Adj N , we can map nouns and adjectives into sets and concatenation into set intersection, and get an intuitively correct seman- tics for expressions like "red carpet", "blue dog", .... There seem to be two issues here: (1) This works for a lim- ited domain, like: "everyday solids" and colors; so perhaps compositionality should be replaced by a notion of local compositionality. That is, given some classes of expressions (that are specifiable by syntax + semantics + pragmatics) and a syntactic operation on them (e.g. concatenation), we can predict the meaning of a complex expression by mapping the syntactic operation into a semantic one and applying the latter to the meanings of the parts. This kind of approach to semantics is implicit in the paper by Fillmore, Kay and O'Connor "Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical cons- tructions, Language 64 (3) , 1988, and is explicitly advo- cated in a recent report by A. Manaster Ramer and myself. (2) The function that composes the meanings should be "eas- ily" definable, e.g. in terms of boolean operations on sets. This can be made precise for instance along the lines of a joint paper with A. Manaster Ramer, published in Proc. of Coling '90, where we argue that one can compare expressive power of various grammatical formalisms in terms of re- lations that they allow us to define; the same approach can obviously be applied to semantics. OTHER INTUITIONS (SEMI-SERIOUSLY) Based on the above proof and some observations of the field, I'd like to conjecture that the degree to which a semantic formalism for NL resembles the meaning function given by the solution lemma is inversely proportional to the number of syntactic constructions and proportional to the number of lexical items resembling words of a natural language. In other words, you get a very messy semantics if you limit the number of constructions and increase the vocabulary. __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Tue, 17 Sep 91 00:54 EST From: BARBARA PARTEE Subject: Re: 2.514 Compositional Semantics I published an article titled "Compositionality" in 1984 in _Varieties of Formal Semantics_, ed. F. Landman and F. Veltman, GRASS 3, Foris, Dordrecht. I included quite a bit of discussion of the fact that there are a great many possible versions of the principle depending on the interpretations of or constraints on key terms like "function of", or "parts" (that's where your theory of syntax goes), and discussed a number of potential obstacles to compositionality, some I think only apparent, some real. Some (particularly some of the Amsterdam formal semanticists) take compositionality as a working hypothesis or methodological principle, others try to pin down specific versions and argue empirically whether they can be correct. By the way the "occasional sailor" problem, which seemed so formidable initially, was elegantly solved by Greg Stump in the late 70's. Theo Janssen's Amsterdam dissertation of 1983 is all about compositionality and includes a nice exposition of the Montagovian strategy of requiring a homomorphism from the syntactic algebra to the semantic algebra, also includes applications of Montague grammar to programming languages, as well as discussion of a number of controversial linguistic constructions. Barbara Partee Linguistics and Philosophy, UMass/Amherst partee@cs.umass.edu __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-524. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-525. Tue 17 Sep 1991. Lines: 136 Subject: 2.525 Queries Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 15:23:36 -0400 From: hu@bu-pub.bu.edu Subject: a query 2) Date: Sun, 15 Sep 91 11:57:59 EDT From: Ron Smyth Subject: Re: 2.517 That's 3) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1991 16:16:54 +1000 From: butare@deakin.OZ.AU Subject: Professeur-E query. 4) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 91 16:37:57 -0400 From: hu@bu-pub.bu.edu Subject: acquisition of numeral classifiers 5) Date: Tue, 17 Sep 91 08:42:26 PDT From: ctlntt@violet.berkeley.edu Subject: Who the heck is a linguist or what does it mean to do linguistics? -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 15:23:36 -0400 From: hu@bu-pub.bu.edu Subject: a query For a study on the acquisition of Mandarin Chinese classifiers, I am looking for any relevant data sets that might be available, and I would be grateful for any references to work on the acquisition of classifiers in Chinese. Thanks. Qian Hu e-mail address: hu@bu-pub.bu.edu __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Sun, 15 Sep 91 11:57:59 EDT From: Ron Smyth Subject: Re: 2.517 That's Re: media-induced language change: The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, and (I think) the Canadian Metric Commission (or whatever it's called) seem to have tried to legislate the pronunciation KILometre instead of the usual kilOMetre. I'm not sure whether kids who have grown up with this have adopted it. It still seems rather tenuous. I seem to recall that at the time the change was implemented, the rational was that you have CEntimetre, MILLimetre, etc., but only devices such as therMOMetres get the antipenultimate stress. I have always maintained that since everyone says kilOMetres, the CBC is off base. Can anyone think of arguments of this type that would refute these language police on their own terms? The CBC style also imposes HARRassment for the usual harASSment. I don't know anyone who wasn't born in a British dialect area who uses this, although there may be the odd dialect snob who does. You might also check the effectiveness of the Office de la Langue Francaise in Quebec. They have 'legislated' hundreds of forms. I recall in the early days seeing published lists with headings 'forme fautive' and 'forme francaise', where the former was what everyone always said and the latter was either a French French form, or an invented one. Ron Smyth smyth@lake.scar.utoronto.ca __________________________________________________________________________ 3) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1991 16:16:54 +1000 From: butare@deakin.OZ.AU Subject: Professeur-E query. Given Jean Veronis' concern (Re:Professeure,Tue.10 Sep.91); Are there really "a number of things we [linguists or French?] can do"? To put the question a bit differently; Should linguists also try to play a "prescriptive" role, when confronted by some "arbitrariness" in a language? __________________________________________________________________________ 4) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 91 16:37:57 -0400 From: hu@bu-pub.bu.edu Subject: acquisition of numeral classifiers For a study on the acquisition of Mandarin Chinese classifiers, I am looking for any relevant data sets that might be available, and I would be grateful for any references to work on the acquisition of classifiers in Chinese. Thanks. Qian Hu e-mail address: hu@bu-pub.bu.edu __________________________________________________________________________ 5) Date: Tue, 17 Sep 91 08:42:26 PDT From: ctlntt@violet.berkeley.edu Subject: Who the heck is a linguist or what does it mean to do linguistics? As a reply to my earlier question (intended as a point of departure for possible debate) of "what is a linguist", someone said it is "someone who does linguistics". Quite. Actually, mea culpa for not asking the question right, which should have been, what does it mean, "to do linguistics?" The motivation for such a question is the apparent fragmentation of the field of linguistics into subfields whose practicioners are reluctant to admit the practicioners of other subfields are also "doing linguistics". Thus, cognitivists and sociolinguists look askance at each other, theoreticians and applied linguists don't talk to each other, and so on. If we are all "doing linguistics," how come such subdivisions are so deep and seem to impede rather than foster communication? And if we aren't all doing it, who is and who isn't (and what are the latter doing, anyway?) I wonder if anyone out there might be interested in this topic. Milton Azevedo ctlntt@violet.berkeley.edu __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-525. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-526. Tue 17 Sep 1991. Lines: 112 Subject: 2.526 Conferences Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 16:59:27 EDT From: "Judith Klavans" Subject: New York Area Computational Linguistics Symposium 2) Date: Sat, 14 Sep 91 12:52:01 -0400 From: langconf@louis-xiv.bu.edu (BU Conference on Language Development) Subject: please post / conference reminder -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 16:59:27 EDT From: "Judith Klavans" Subject: New York Area Computational Linguistics Symposium NEW YORK AREA COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS SEMINAR NYACLS is starting its second year of seminars on issues in computational linguistics. In view of last year's experience with bi-monthly sessions each comprising two talks, we have decided to alter our format. This year we will experiment with monthly seminars devoted to a single talk. We hope this framework will facilitate more extensive and lively discussion of each paper. It will also provide the opportunity for more regular contact among participants. We will continue to meet at the CUNY Graduate Center on Tuesday afternoons, as this seems to be the time and location acceptable to the largest number of our participants. If you are interested in presenting a talk in either the fall or the spring series, please let us know. The first two talks in our program are as follows. 1. October 8, 2:00 P.M.-4:00 P.M. CUNY Graduate Center, 33 West 42 Street, New York, Room 1400 Mark Steedman, Univeristy of Pennsylvania, Grammar, Intonation, and "Focus": A Theory of "Phonological Form" (see abstract below) 2. November 5, 2:00 P.M.-4:00 P.M. CUNY Graduate Center, Room 1400 Janet Fodor, CUNY Graduate Center, A Parsing Algorithm for Processing Phrase Structure Grammar (abstract to follow in the next announcement) For further information and/or proposals for talks, please send e-mail to Shalom Lappin (LAPPIN@WATSON.IBM.COM) or David Johnson (JOHNSON@WATSON.IBM.COM). Mark Steedman University of Pennsylvania Grammar, Intonation, and "Focus": a Theory of "Phonological Form" The paper will extend earlier work on the relation of intonation structure, grammar, and discourse information. The earlier work (cf. Language, 1991) makes the claim that intonation structure, surface structure, and discourse information structure (in the sense of the division of semantic information into a "theme" or "topic", and a "rheme" or "comment") are isomorphic, under the radically generalised notion of surface structure entailed by the "combinatory categorial" theory of grammar. The present paper shows that the claim also holds for the further (independent) distinction between discourse information that is "given" or "background", and "new" or "focus" (in one sense of that much-abused term). The paper concludes by arguing for a redistribution of grammatical responsibilities across certain modules of the theory of grammar, including transfer of all responsibility for unbounded dependency and coordinate structure to the module of "phonological form". __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Sat, 14 Sep 91 12:52:01 -0400 From: langconf@louis-xiv.bu.edu (BU Conference on Language Development) Subject: please post / conference reminder *** Reminder *** October 8 is the pre-registration deadline for: ========= The Boston University Conference on Language Development October 18-20, 1991 Keynote Speaker: Steven Pinker, MIT Saturday Evening Speaker: Neil Smith, University College London The conference program, information about discounted air fares and hotels, and a pre-registration form will be sent automatically via e-mail to anyone who sends a message to: info@louis-xiv.bu.edu For other information, please write to langconf@louis-xiv.bu.edu or BU Conference on Language Development, 138 Mountfort Street, Boston, MA 02215, or phone 617-353-3085. __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-526. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-527. Tue 17 Sep 1991. Lines: 205 Subject: 2.527 Language Change Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 91 17:17:09 PDT From: hearne@cs.wwu.edu (Jim Hearne) Subject: function and purpose 2) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 91 21:12:32 EDT From: Alexis_Manaster_Ramer@mts.cc.wayne.edu Subject: 2.519 Language change and teleology 3) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 91 20:10:38 CDT From: GA5123@SIUCVMB.BITNET Subject: sound-change teleology? 4) Date: Tue, 17 Sep 91 02:05:56 PDT From: brian kariger Subject: Language change and teleology -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 91 17:17:09 PDT From: hearne@cs.wwu.edu (Jim Hearne) Subject: function and purpose Regarding teleological explanation and the terms `function' and `purpose' I recommend anyone interested to look at _Teleological Explanation_ (UC Press) before getting balled up in meaphysics. Wright manages to analyse teleological explanations (including ones appropriately described in terms of `purposes') as special kinds of causal explanations. Jim Hearne Western Washington University __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 91 21:12:32 EDT From: Alexis_Manaster_Ramer@mts.cc.wayne.edu Subject: 2.519 Language change and teleology I don't know if this has been suggested yet in the ongoing discussion, but the issues here are really factual, and one thing that seems clear is that different kinds of changes have different causes. For example, I would assume that a change like y -> g would only happne in a situation where we have a dialect with g - y (before front vowels, say), and a neighboring dialect without this change. Later, the speakers of the dialect that has the change may hypercorrect and change all y's to g's. It would also seem that a contentful definition of natural could ultimately be arrived at by contrasting these two kinds of changes. __________________________________________________________________________ 3) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 91 20:10:38 CDT From: GA5123@SIUCVMB.BITNET Subject: sound-change teleology? I've been hanging back from the sound-change-teleology discussion because I have a feeling that the question of teleology in sound change -- regardless whether argued pro or con -- may be the wrong question. It seems to me that the teleology question tends to oversimplify sound change as if it were a movement from point A to point B. It asks -- Does a language "look" from point A to point B, "see" that the latter is a better point, and "decide" to make the move, with the "intention" of future improvement? Or does the language at point A "see" only its present situation, "want" to escape it, and stumble over to the unknown point B? In my earlier reference to the Brownian motion and to the herd of wildebeests, I meant to emphasize the role of _synchronic variation_ in sound change. If we think of each "point" in a phonology as being surrounded by a "cloud" of permitted variations, then diachronic change may consist only in choosing a different point in the cloud to represent its focus. (Maybe a cognitivian can help me with the terminology here.) If we replace the movement-from-A-to-B view of sound change with a more complex view that sees diachronic change as a selection from the cloud of available synchronic variations, then we replace the single question (why does the language go from A to B?) with at least two questions: 1) Around phonological point P, why does the language permit synchronic variations V1, V2, V3, but not V4, V5, V6? And... 2) Among the permitted synchronic variations V1, V2, V3 -- why is V1 (but not V2 or V3) chosen to become a permanent change? I'll venture to guess that question (1) is partially answered by some of the considerations of "naturalness" and continued intelligibility that have been mentioned in this discussion (but no speakers know which of the synchronic variations they adopt may become a future standard). Further, I'll venture to say that question (2) may depend more on social than on linguistic factors, since between two potential dialects starting from the same cloud of variations, different choices can be made. I'm all for pushing internal, linguistic, explanations as far as they will go, but I want also to recognize the likelihood that the direction of some changes can be shaped by non-linguistic factors -- just as automobile tail-fins in the late 1950's were shaped by non-aerodynamic factors (Postal 1968). Now bring the teleology discussion back in: how does it apply to either of these two questions? ----------------------------------- Lee Hartman ga5123@siucvmb.bitnet Department of Foreign Languages Southern Illinois University Carbondale, IL 62901 U.S.A. __________________________________________________________________________ 4) Date: Tue, 17 Sep 91 02:05:56 PDT From: brian kariger Subject: Language change and teleology I have some questions regarding the teleology debate: In the foregoing discussion, >> Martti Nyman > bert peeters write: >> I agree that sound change must be explained "in terms of origin" >> (though this isn't enough). > I don't understand. What else is there to be explained? Once one > knows why a change originated, one has an explanation - although > the explanatory process may have (will have) to be renewed, as due > consideration is to be given to social factors and the like. >> However, that doesn't preclude teleological explanation. > Indeed, I would say it makes teleological explanation unnecessary. Isn't neglecting teleologic explanation in this manner tantamount to positing that there is absolutely no regularity in change, and that no universals obtain? Speaking of efficient and final causation (== intrinsic and teleologic, resp.) C.S. Peirce writes: ...an efficient cause, detached from a final cause in the form of a law, would not even possess efficiency: it might exert itself, and something might follow _post hoc_, but not _propter hoc_; for _propter_ implies potential regularity. Now without law there is no regularity [.] (1.213) *1* In denying teleology, do you mean to say that there is no potential regularity actualized in sound change? Or that certain types of change are not more likely to come about (``be actualized") in some systems than in others? If so, how can we even explain their efficiency? Cf. also Anttila, ``the comparative method works only to the degree that sound change is regular." *2* > As in language there is no goal, defined once and for ever, > and agreed upon by all the speakers of a language, even at > a subconscious level, teleology must lead to anarchy ... > simplicity may seem to be a common goal. But what is simple > for one speaker is not necessarily simple for the next; > we may have different simplicities in mind and set off > different changes... I think most would agree that language has no "goal, defined once and for ever" (though Michael Shapiro in _The Sense of Change_(1991), I believe, reports otherwise). What the argument turns on is the con- ceptions of teleology; mine agrees nicely with that of Peirce's: It is, as I was saying, a widespread error to think that a "final cause" is necessarily a purpose. A purpose is merely that form of final cause which is most familiar to our ex- perience. ... If we are to conserve the truth of [Aristotle], -> we must understand by final causation that mode of bringing -> facts about according to which a general result is made to -> come about, quite irrespective of any compulsion for it to -> come about in this or that particular way; although the means may be adapted to the end. The general result may be brought about at one time in one way, and at another time in another way. Final causation does not determine in what particular way it is to be brought about, but only that the result shall have a certain general character. (1.211) *1* I have in mind here changes like the `Germanic consonant shift', where (in `classical' PIE theory)-- the PIE tenues became breathed spirants in PG: PIE p, t, k > PG f, T, x the PIE mediae became PG tenues: PIE b, d, g > PG p, t, k and the PIE mediae aspiratae became PG voiced spirants: PIE bh, dh, gh > PG B, D, G As you can see, in each case the result has a general character: we do NOT have random changes of class; and this is a kind of economy _ipso facto_. ____________________________ *1* Peirce, C.S. _Collected Papers_. Citations are by volume & paragraph number. *2* Anttila, Raimo. ``The Type and the Comparative Method." In _Energeia und Ergon: Sprachliche Variation-Sprachgeschichte- Sprachtypologie, II: Das sprachtheoretische Denken Eugenio Coserius in der Diskussion (1), ed. H. Thun. 1988. ____________________________ Brian Kariger bkariger@aunix.fullerton.edu __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-527. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-528. Tue 17 Sep 1991. Lines: 55 Subject: 2.528 List of Computational Linguistics Programs Sought Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Tue, 17 Sep 91 11:16:26 -0400 From: walker@flash.bellcore.com (Don Walker) Subject: ACL needs information on graduate programs in computational linguistics -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Tue, 17 Sep 91 11:16:26 -0400 From: walker@flash.bellcore.com (Don Walker) Subject: ACL needs information on graduate programs in computational linguistics DIRECTORY OF GRADUATE PROGRAMS IN COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS URGENT NEED FOR INFORMATION This fall the Association for Computational Linguistics will publish a new edition of the Directory of Graduate Programs in Computational Linguistics. We are eager to include any program awarding a graduate 1) Date: Tue, 17 Sep 91 11:16:26 -0400 From: walker@flash.bellcore.com (Don Walker) Subject: ACL needs information on graduate programs in computational linguistics degree with courses or research involving computers and language. Our listing includes the name and address of the University and Departments awarding relevant graduate degrees, along with their telephone numbers. We also include a list of faculty working in this area, with their departmental affiliations, and a brief mention of their research areas. If there are formal courses involving computational linguistics we will list them too. Finally we put in a brief indication of equipment and other resources. Please request guidelines as to content and format from and send information to: Professor Martha Evens Computer Science Department Illinois Institute of Technology Chicago, IL 60616, USA (+1-312)567-5153 csevens@iitvax.bitnet mwe@schur.math.nwu.edu __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-528. ________________________________________________________________ Message: 9502342, 193 lines Posted: 5:01pm EDT, Tue Sep 17/91, imported: 6:57am EDT, Wed Sep 18/91 Subject: 2.529 Professeure To: linguistics-l, LINGUIST@TAMVM1 From: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU Sender: LINGUIST@TAMVM1 ReplyTo: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-2-529. Tue 17 Sep 1991. Lines: 192 Subject: 2.529 Professeure Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sat, 14 Sep 91 11:30:25 EST From: bert peeters Subject: 2.498 Professeure 2) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 21:53:55 CDT From: GA3704@SIUCVMB.BITNET Subject: Madame le .., -ess 3) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 23:55:33 EDT From: Michael Newman Subject: Re: 2.500 Professeure 4) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1991 14:13 EDT From: PEARSON2@umiami.IR.Miami.EDU Subject: Re: 2.519 Language change and teleology 5) Date: Tue, 17 Sep 91 01:02:58 EDT From: Helene.Neu@um.cc.umich.edu Subject: ProfesseurE discussion on LINGUIST -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sat, 14 Sep 91 11:30:25 EST From: bert peeters Subject: 2.498 Professeure > Date: 11 Sep 91 12:00 > From: > Feminists have objected to the generic use of male person-denoting nouns in > German, just as they have objected to the use of generic masculine pronouns > in English. About six years ago feminists started to use FEMALE nouns > generically, and they have been surprisingly successful in this. Is it the same people who have been using "frau" instead of "man" (generic _one_)? Or is that an earlier (or a later) phenomenon? And how widespread is it? And where does this kind of "reform" end? Is it a Webster dictionary which has recently approved of forms such as "herstory" for _history_? This seems to me to be total nonsense. (For starters, it should have been *hertory*). The dean of my faculty (who is not exactly a feminist) has for some time been using generic feminine pronouns to refer to students. It used to shock me, but it does so no longer. (Our dean is a professor, and male) > Date: Wed, 11 Sep 91 16:44:32 EST > From: j.guy@trl.oz.au (Jacques Guy) > Subject: Make mine "Professoresse" Jacques Guy's implicit suggestion to replace _professeure_ with _professoresse_ strikes me as an excellent proposition. The fact that -eur/-eure has been proposed for nouns shows that people haven't been thinking ahead. (aha! yet another argument against teleology!) There are few problems right now, people are able to distinguish between existing contrasts of the -teur/-trice type with roots that do not correspond to verbs or do so only indirectly, on the one hand, and new contrasts with the same type of roots of the -eur/-eure type. A few examples: (existing) acteur - actrice directeur - directrice (new) professeur - professeure auteur - auteure But how about our grandchildren? For them, there will be no difference between existing and new oppositions - and they will have to learn two separate series of contrasts. Now, if all (non-deverbal) nouns in -eur were to be given a feminine counterpart in -oresse, we would save the downline speakers of French yet another series of exceptions (aren't there enough already??). Another argument in favour of -eur/-oresse would be that the alternation -eu-/ -o- is not at all contrary to the language. Back in the fifties already, there was a popular tendency to pronounce half-open -o- (as in joli, Maroc) as -eu- (as in jeuli, Mareuc; cf. a study by Martinet in Romance Philology 11, 1958, reprinted in the author's _Le franc,ais sans fard_, 1969, Paris: P.U.F.). --------------------------------------------------------------------- Dr Bert Peeters Tel: +61 02 202344 Department of Modern Languages 002 202344 University of Tasmania at Hobart Fax: 002 202186 GPO Box 252C Bert.Peeters@modlang.utas.edu.au Hobart TAS 7001 Australia __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 21:53:55 CDT From: GA3704@SIUCVMB.BITNET Subject: Madame le .., -ess I'd like to add two notes to the discussion on morphological markers of gender and sex: 1. Several years ago in "L'Express", the first woman to be promoted to general in the French armed forces made it very clear in an interview that she was to be addressed as `Madame le ge'ne'ral', since `Madame *la* ge'ne'ral' would refer to the general's wife. 2. I have seen the suffix -ess, specifically in the word `poetess', used in reference to a man as a pejorative. Leigh Hunt, whose poem "Jenny Kissed Me" stirred my 14-year-old heart, is the male writer of poems I can remember being referred to in this way - and it certainly wasn't a compliment. Margaret E. Winters Southern Illinois University __________________________________________________________________________ 3) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 23:55:33 EDT From: Michael Newman Subject: Re: 2.500 Professeure It is interesting to note how different related languages handle the same conflict of pragmatic/social conditions with linguistic structure. In (at least peninsular) Spanish words like *ministro*(meaning cabinet minister), *abogado* (lawyer) and *medico* (doctor) have been as traditionally masculine as the professions themselves. In the bad old days, la ministra, like *la al- caldesa* (mayor/fem) would be the minister's wife. The change has happened quite rapidly, with only a few years delay between the appearance of women in the professions and the appearance of new feminine forms. But it has also happened quite haphazardly. For example at first Maggie Thatcher was el primer ministro, but after Spain got its first female minister, around 1982 I think, she became La primera ministra, alongside Spain's new ministra. Ministra is now fairly widespread. *Abogada* is another story entirely. It is not accepted as normative, but is widely used. *Medica*has not made it at all, as far as I can tell, but I would be happy to stand corrected if someone can show that it is used. Instead, everyone seems to say *la doctora*. What is interesting here is not that Spanish is absolutely strict in keeping gender and sex equivalent. I, as a man, am expected to say 'Soy una persona alta' for 'I'm a tall person'with all the agreement in the feminine, to agree with *persona* I am new to linguist so I missed the earlier interchange on this topic. So I don't know if I am repeating anything. Also Greville Corbett's GENDER has a lot on this topic. Michael Newman Hunter College/CUNY __________________________________________________________________________ 4) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1991 14:13 EDT From: PEARSON2@umiami.IR.Miami.EDU Subject: Re: 2.519 Language change and teleology Subject is Professeure One of the mentions in this discussion commented on the lack of serious work in this area, and a short list of references has been posted. Let me add to this list a very interesting paper by Ginny Gathercole analyzing responses of Spanish speakers to a cloze-type questionnaire which probes interpretations of grammatical gender marking and real world gender in occupational terms. The paper was presented at the U. of Ill. Conference on Pragmatics this year and may appear in the proceedings. I think the title is something like "The Interpretation of Grammatical Gender in Nouns for Humans in Spanish." In the meantime, you can contact Ginny at the Psychology Department, Arizona State Univ. 85287-1104. She is temporarily without e-mail. --Becky Burns Hoffman __________________________________________________________________________ 5) Date: Tue, 17 Sep 91 01:02:58 EDT From: Helene.Neu@um.cc.umich.edu Subject: ProfesseurE discussion on LINGUIST I sent this to Helen Dry since I didn't have the address of LINGUIST at that time. (Someone on SLART-L forwarded the discussions about ProfesseurE to me.) ---(Forwarded from: Helene_Neu@um.cc.umich.edu, Dated: Sun, 15 Sep 91 21:12:00 EDT)--- Date: Sun, 15 Sep 91 21:12:00 EDT From: Helene.Neu@um.cc.umich.edu To: hdry@emunix.emich.edu Message-ID: <9473817@um.cc.umich.edu> Subject: ProfesseurE discussion on LINGUIST There is an interview in the current issue of LE JOURNAL FRANCAIS D'AMERIQUE (6-19 septembre, p. 18-19) with the author (ecrivainE, auteurE?) Benoite Groult that may be of interest: "Cachez de feminin". Helene Neu, Univ. of Michigan, Ann Arbor __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-529. ________________________________________________________________ Message: 9502349, 132 lines Posted: 5:05pm EDT, Tue Sep 17/91, imported: 6:59am EDT, Wed Sep 18/91 Subject: 2.530 Responses To: linguistics-l, LINGUIST@TAMVM1 From: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU Sender: LINGUIST@TAMVM1 ReplyTo: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-2-530. Tue 17 Sep 1991. Lines: 131 Subject: 2.530 Responses Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 13:15:03 CDT From: Nancy L. Dray Subject: Ossetian/Ossetic 2) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 18:44:45 EDT From: myl@unagi.cis.upenn.edu (Mark Liberman) Subject: Identifying what language a text line is 3) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 91 14:09:05 EST From: raskin@j.cc.purdue.edu (Victor Raskin) Subject: Chomskyite 4) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 91 11:17:39 EDT From: macrakis@osf.org Subject: More on `just in case' -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 13:15:03 CDT From: Nancy L. Dray Subject: Ossetian/Ossetic > Does anybody know a speaker of or an expert on the Iranian language of > the USSR whose name in English is either Ossetic or Ossetian or > something like that? David Testen (Department of Linguistics, University of Chicago, 1010 East 59th Street, Chicago, IL 60637) works on Ossetian. He's not currently on the network, but if you wish you can e-mail him c/o me (dray@sapir.uchicago.edu). I believe Ladislav Zgusta at U. of Illinois also does work on this language. As for the name of the language, I've heard both forms. Testen uses "Ossetian," Zgusta uses "Ossetic" (I think). Perhaps one of them could tell you more about the distribution of the two names in the literature. Nancy L. Dray __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 18:44:45 EDT From: myl@unagi.cis.upenn.edu (Mark Liberman) Subject: Identifying what language a text line is In Linguist List 2.511, 9/13/91, Stan Kulikowski II (stankuli@uwf.bitnet) describes a heuristic method for doing language-identification (for text) based on "the hypothesis is that languages contain frequent small words (3 chars or less) which can be used to distinguish many lines of their text." He references "a number of replies relayed from usenet's sci.crypt that cryptographers use a method based on the frequency of bigram and trigram character sequences," and suggests that "this may work for file-sized data, but i doubt that it would be sensitive to a datum in the range of 40-80 bytes which is what you get in line-by-line text transfers." Although I have no experience in doing language identification on the type of text chunks in question, I do have some evidence to suggest that Kulikowski's speculation about sample size is wrong. The text-to-speech system developed in my former group at AT&T Bell Laboratories uses trigram statistics to guess the ethnic origin of unknown proper names (or rather, of unknown words which it guesses to be proper names), so that it can use appropriate letter-to-sound conventions in guessing the pronunciation. This method is described in U.S. Patent 4,829,580, "Text Analysis System with Letter Sequence Recognition and Speech Stress Assignment Arrangement," held by Ken Church. Names, obviously, are much shorter than 40-80 bytes --- typical unknown names are more like 6-12 bytes --- but the method works fairly well. I suspect that a method of this kind, if appropriately trained, would categorize text lines quite accurately. In addition to simply trying the experiment, which is easy enough, one could predict the performance as a function of sample size on the basis of the frequency distributions involved. N-gram letter distributions for different languages using the same alphabet are probably different enough for a statistical pattern-recognition method to work quite well on a sample size of 40-80 characters. Mark Liberman University of Pennsylvania __________________________________________________________________________ 3) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 91 14:09:05 EST From: raskin@j.cc.purdue.edu (Victor Raskin) Subject: Chomskyite As a non-native speaker of English, I should have probably lurked out on this discussion. But one advantage of non-nativeness is that you have to develop numerous minitheories in lieu of the dead native speaker's live intuition. My theory of the -ite/-ist busines, for whatever it's worth, has been that X+ite is primarily a noun and means 'a camp follower of X,' while X+ist is both a noun and an adjective, and much more comfortable as the latter than X+ite, and means an intellectual, religious, etc. affinity. The derogatory meaning of X+ite follows from the camp-follower meaning, at least for some people. -- Victor Raskin raskin@j.cc.purdue.edu __________________________________________________________________________ 4) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 91 11:17:39 EDT From: macrakis@osf.org Subject: More on `just in case' I would have guessed that `just in case' was introduced by a philosopher going out of his way to use simple, everyday language and to avoid locutions judged excessively technical (if and only if). Another `nontechnical' rendering of `iff' is `precisely when', but that brings in possible confusion with time.... __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-530. ________________________________________________________________ Message: 9502358, 87 lines Posted: 5:09pm EDT, Tue Sep 17/91, imported: 7:02am EDT, Wed Sep 18/91 Subject: 2.531 Warning To: linguistics-l, LINGUIST@TAMVM1 From: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU Sender: LINGUIST@TAMVM1 ReplyTo: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-2-531. Tue 17 Sep 1991. Lines: 86 Subject: 2.531 Warning Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 91 15:47 BST From: Lou Burnard Subject: RE: 2.518 Warning: in case 2) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 91 14:08:42 EDT From: sed91ln@BUACCA.BU.EDU Subject: Re: 2.518 Warning: in case 3) Date: Tue, 17 Sep 91 08:56:15 PDT From: ctlntt@violet.berkeley.edu Subject: Re: 2.518 Warning: in case -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 91 15:47 BST From: Lou Burnard Subject: RE: 2.518 Warning: in case On the sun-kissed island of Mauritius, which has a linguistic history of extraordinary variety, official notices warning you that you may not pass them without straying into private property generally consist solely of the word TRESPASS This is not (I think) an invitation, but an abbreviation. for the good old fashioned `Trespassers William' (under whose name, it may be recalled, Piglet lived) helpfully, Lou Burnard __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 91 14:08:42 EDT From: sed91ln@BUACCA.BU.EDU Subject: Re: 2.518 Warning: in case Two comments on Michael Kac's comments. First, I suspect warning is simply a notification /announcing to the hearer of some prospective state of affairs the speaker believes will be to the hearers dis- advantage. It doesn't have to be dangerous. Second, one could draw ( but I won't) the inference from the European train "warnings" that whereas Italians can draw the inference about the problems with leaning out of a train, the French and Germans must be directly told not to do it. Does this directness/indirectness reflect the different cultures, the language, or sign makers? Bruce Fraser __________________________________________________________________________ 3) Date: Tue, 17 Sep 91 08:56:15 PDT From: ctlntt@violet.berkeley.edu Subject: Re: 2.518 Warning: in case Ron Smyth's comments on WARNING seem to point in the direction of a legal or quasi-legal value attached to it. If my instructor refuses to accept a paper late and if she has issued a WARNING in due time, then I cannot accuse her of bias/discrimination/malevolence, etc. and will have to nurse my ulcer in silence. On the other hand, if there was no WARNING, then I might appeal to the headmaster/dean/provost/ or whatever saying that I had not been WARNED. Likewise, if no sigh I mean sign is POSTED (ie there is no WARNING) by the lake and I go swimming and Nessie bites off my toe, I stand a better chance to win a law suit than would be the case if a prominent WARNING sign had made it clear I was swimming there at my own risk. If any of you has a lawyer friend, you might ask him what he thinks of this matter before this otherwise interesting discussion gets too abstract. ---------------------------- Milton Azevedo ctlntt@violet.berkeley.edu ---------------------------- __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-531. ________________________________________________________________ Message: 9502378, 76 lines Posted: 5:12pm EDT, Tue Sep 17/91, imported: 7:06am EDT, Wed Sep 18/91 Subject: 2.532 That's To: linguistics-l, LINGUIST@TAMVM1 From: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU Sender: LINGUIST@TAMVM1 ReplyTo: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-2-532. Tue 17 Sep 1991. Lines: 75 Subject: 2.532 That's Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 91 12:49:09 EDT From: pesetsk@ATHENA.MIT.EDU Subject: Re: That's 2) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 91 14:48 EST From: NMILLER@vax1.trincoll.edu Subject: Re: That's 3) Date: Tue, 17 Sep 91 10:14:25 EST From: RGAGNE@ucs.indiana.edu Subject: that's -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 91 12:49:09 EDT From: pesetsk@ATHENA.MIT.EDU Subject: Re: That's Lachlan Mackenzie writes "As a native speaker of Scottish English, I can confirm that *the book that's cover is red* is perfectly normal in Scottish English. So, to answer David Pesetzky's question, is *the book that's cover Mary tore*." How about plural antecedents: The books that's covers Mary tore. --to "scotch" the idea (so to speak) that the -s is a reduction of 'its'. It occurs to me that 'The book that's cover Mary tore' could still be a reduction of 'The book that its cover Mary tore', as someone suggested for simpler cases. (I hope the word "scotch" isn't pejorative to a Scottish ear.) -David Pesetsky __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 91 14:48 EST From: NMILLER@vax1.trincoll.edu Subject: Re: That's Without prejudice to anything of substance already written on this weighty issue, may I respectfully suggest that the term in question be written without an apostrophe? Or even spelled 'thatse'? Norman Miller __________________________________________________________________________ 3) Date: Tue, 17 Sep 91 10:14:25 EST From: RGAGNE@ucs.indiana.edu Subject: that's On reading the recent list of possible ways to say "the book whose cover is red"/"the book the cover of which is red" etc., I was struck by the absence of the way I would always say it: "the book with the red cover". Me for avoidance every time. I should imagine that a study of this pheno- menon would have to take such cowardly detours into consideration. --Elise Morse-Gagne __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-532. ________________________________________________________________ Message: 9502390, 112 lines Posted: 5:15pm EDT, Tue Sep 17/91, imported: 7:09am EDT, Wed Sep 18/91 Subject: 2.533 References To: linguistics-l, LINGUIST@TAMVM1 From: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU Sender: LINGUIST@TAMVM1 ReplyTo: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-2-533. Tue 17 Sep 1991. Lines: 111 Subject: 2.533 References Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1991 10:48:47 EDT From: Laurie Bauer Subject: Compound nouns. 2) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 15:37:46 -0400 From: gb661@csc.albany.edu (BROADWELL GEORGE AARON) Subject: language and dialect -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1991 10:48:47 EDT From: Laurie Bauer Subject: Compound nouns. Apologies, I must have missed the request for bibliographical material on compound nouns. Perhaps it happened before I subscribed to LINGUIST! Anyway, I include some extra references. This is clearly not an exhaustive list of references. There are none of Eve Clark's paers on the acquisition of compounds, for example, listed here, none on the phonological aspects of compounding, none on compounding in Scandinavian languages specifically, and very few on lexicalist analyses of compounding. For what it is worth: Adams, Valerie 1973. An Introduction to Modern English Word Formation. London: Longman. Barbaud, Philippe 1971. L'ambiguite' structurale du compose binominal. Cahiers de Linguistique (Que'bec) 71-116. Bauer, Laurie 1978. The Grammar of Nominal Compounding. Odense: Odense University Press. Benveniste, Emile 1966. Formes nouvelles de la composition nominale. BSL 61, 82-95. Bergsten, Nils 1911. A Study of Compound Substantives in English. Uppsala thesis. Bierwisch, Manfred & Karl Erichj Heidolph (eds) 1970. Progress in Linguistics. The Hague: Mouton. Botha, Rudolf P. 1968. The Function of the Lexicon in Transformational Generative Grammar. The Hague: Mouton. Botha, Rudolf P. 1984. Morphological Mechanisms. Oxford: Pergamon. Brekle, Herbert E. 1970. Generative Satzsemantik und transformationelle Syntax im System der englischen Nominalkomposition. Mu"nchen: Fink. Brekle Herbert E. 1978. Reflections on the conmditions for the coining, use and understanding of nominal compounds. Proc XII Int. Cong. Ling. 68-72. Carr, Charles T. 1939. Nominal Compounds in Germanic. London: Oxford University Press. DArmsteter, Arse`ne 1875. Formation des mots compose's en franc,ais. Paris. Giurescu, Anca 1972. El me'todo transformacional en el ana'lisis de los nobres compuestos del espan~ol moderno. RRL 17, 407-14. Gleitman, Lila R. & Henry Gleitman 1970. Phrase and paraphrase: some innovative uses of language. New York: Norton. Grieve-Schumacher, Madeleine 1960. Die Nominalkomposition im Franzo"sischen. Zurich thesis. Published by Winterthur. Hatcher, Anna Granville 1952. Modern appositional compounds of inanimate reference. American Speech 27, 3-15. Hatcher, Anna Granville 1960. An introduction to the analysis of English compound nouns. Word 16, 356-73. Kooij, J.G. 1968. Compounds and idioms. Lingua 21, 250-68 Kuiper, Koenraad 1972. Rules of English Noun Compounds: implications for a theory of the lexicon. Simon Fraser thesis. Lehmann, W.P. 1969. Proto-Indo-European compounds. ALH 12, 1-20 Lint, Gertrude P.J. van 1983. Tracing the Irretraceable: a semantic-pragmatic study of English noun compounds. Leiden Thesis. Livant, William P. 1962. Productive grammatical operations I: the noun-compounding of 5-year -olds. Language Learning 12, 15-26. Marouzeau, J. 1957. Proce'de's de composition en franc,ais moderne. FM 25, 241-7. Motsch, Wolfgang 1970. Analyse von Komposita mit zwei nominalen Elementen. In Bierwisch & Heidolph (eds) 208-23. Rohrer, Christian 1967. Die Wortzusammensetzung im modernen Franzo"sisch. Tu"bingen thesis. Z^epic', Stanko 1970. Morphologie und Semantik der Deutschen Nominalkomposita. Zagreb: University of Zagreb. The accent on Zepic's name should be a hacek, not a circumflex. Apologies for typos etc. Laurie Bauer BauerL@matai.vuw.ac.nz Wellington, New Zealand __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 15:37:46 -0400 From: gb661@csc.albany.edu (BROADWELL GEORGE AARON) Subject: language and dialect The Oxford Book of Aphorisms, ed. by John Gross. Oxford Press. 1983. lists the aphorism 'A language is a dialect that has an army and a navy' and attributes it to Max Weinrich. The citation is on p. 282, ****************************************************************************** Aaron Broadwell, Dept. of Linguistics, University at Albany -- SUNY, Albany, NY 12222 gb661@leah.albany.edu ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "Prizes bring bad luck. Academic prizes, prizes for virtue, decorations, all these inventions of the devil encourage hypocrisy and freeze the spontaneous upsurge of a free heart." -- Baudelaire ****************************************************************************** __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-533. ________________________________________________________________ Message: 9502400, 102 lines Posted: 5:18pm EDT, Tue Sep 17/91, imported: 7:14am EDT, Wed Sep 18/91 Subject: 2.534 Being To: linguistics-l, LINGUIST@TAMVM1 From: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU Sender: LINGUIST@TAMVM1 ReplyTo: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-2-534. Tue 17 Sep 1991. Lines: 101 Subject: 2.534 Being Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 10:29:31 -1000 From: Phil Bralich Subject: The ellision of -ing 2) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1991 14:14-0400 From: Allan C. Wechsler Subject: Be being -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 10:29:31 -1000 From: Phil Bralich Subject: The ellision of -ing Bruce Nevin responded to a question by Susan Ervin-Tripp based on some examples from Harris' _A Grammar of English Based on Mathematical Principles_. Specifically, Susan Ervin-Tripp was wondering what would explain the lack of -ing in some examples of Harris. Two of the examples are repeated in (1). (1) Don't be the mommy. I am not being the mommy. Don't be horrid. I am not being horrid. In examples like this the lack of the word being is explained quite naturally by the use of the English tenses. An imperative cannot make a command with a progressive form of the verb simply because the progressive refers to actions in progress while the imperative seeks to initiate an action. Since the action the imperative is seeking to initiate is NOT in progress the pro- gressive form of the verb is not used. These sentence variations have nothing to do with adjectives. Phil Bralich University of Hawaii bralich@uhccux.uhcc.Hawaii.edu __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1991 14:14-0400 From: Allan C. Wechsler Subject: Be being Reading Bruce Nevin's response to Susan Ervin-Tripp on "be being" reminded me of a response I meant to send. It's a digression, but maybe an interesting one. The following is just woolgathering. I don't have any real data except introspection and unreliable memories, but all of this could be checked, in principle. Here goes. Role-play is so important to little kids that they have a sort of technical jargon for talking about it. Central to this jargon is an idiosyncratic use of "be". In addition to the two or three be's that adults have, children have another one that is restricted to the meaning "play the role of". It is different from the other be's in several ways, but one striking one is that it receives regular verb inflection. (1) I don't want Susie to be the mommy. Every time Susie bes the mommy, she spanks us too much. (2) *... Every time Susie is the mommy ... (3a) I'm being the mommy. (3b) I'm the mommy. Although 3b is grammatical, it doesn't mean the same thing as 3a. 3b can only be spoken from within the role, while 3a is a technical statement about role-playing. In fact, in grown-up English (4) ?I'm being happy. cannot mean "I'm happy," but only "I'm resolutely acting as if I were happy even though I'm inclined to be unhappy." In the role-play reading, you can get sentences like: (5) They always be the cowboys. They be'd the cowboys yesterday. In some dialects, and perhaps historically, this regularly-inflected "be" can be used by adults to mean "turn out / eventuate to be". (6) Perhaps my [unborn] baby will be a girl. My last example is from a real English folk-song. The speaker is a pregnant woman: (7) And if it bes a girl-child she'll stay at home with me And if it bes a boy, he will plough the dark blue sea He'll plough the dark blue sea as his daddy's done before... __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-534. ________________________________________________________________ Message: 9502415, 87 lines Posted: 5:21pm EDT, Tue Sep 17/91, imported: 7:17am EDT, Wed Sep 18/91 Subject: 2.535 What is a linguist? Responses. To: linguistics-l, LINGUIST@TAMVM1 From: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU Sender: LINGUIST@TAMVM1 ReplyTo: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-2-535. Tue 17 Sep 1991. Lines: 86 Subject: 2.535 What is a linguist? Responses. Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 16:54:52 -0500 From: mfleck@herky.cs.uiowa.edu (Margaret Fleck) Subject: what is a linguist? 2) Date: Sat, 14 Sep 91 11:18:51 PDT From: ctlntt@violet.berkeley.edu Subject: What is a linguist? 1) -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 13 Sep 91 16:54:52 -0500 From: mfleck@herky.cs.uiowa.edu (Margaret Fleck) Subject: what is a linguist? I can't resist add some further mud to the waters. I'm not a native speaker of UK English, but I lived there for four years. It appears that, over there, terms such as chemist or mathematician are regularly used not only to describe paid professionals, but also for students of the subject. Thus, "chemist" may refer to a professor in the department, but can equally well be used to refer to an undergraduate student of Chemistry. Even if their real major interest in life is actually rowing, not Chemistry. To an American, this usage comes as quite a shock. I think, but am not sure, that the person has to be actively engaged in work or study in the profession. For example, I don't believe that Margaret Thatcher could be refered to as a chemist, because she no longer works in that area. But I could be wrong. I don't think it's a usage special to Oxford (the location where I worked), but it might be. Perhaps a native speaker of British can fill in the details. I don't specifically know that the term "linguist" is used in an analogous way, but I would assume so. Margaret Fleck __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Sat, 14 Sep 91 11:18:51 PDT From: ctlntt@violet.berkeley.edu Subject: What is a linguist? 1) Date: Mon, 9 Sep 91 16:53:42 -0700 From: saka@cogsci.Berkeley.EDU (Paul Saka) Subject: RE: what is a linguist? >Linguist List: Vol-2-472. Sat 07 Sep 1991. Lines: 165 >Date: Wed, 4 Sep 91 20:46:12 PDT >From: ctlntt@violet.berkeley.edu >Subject: Re: Linguistic Novels, Films/467 >I wonder if anyone would care >to share their thoughts about what, in this day and age, >constitutes "a linguist", and how one can tell a linguist form >a non-linguist. (I meant "from" not "form"). My personal takes: In ANY day and age, a scientist is someone who does research into the object of inquiry; a linguist is someone who does research into language. Although it is impossible to tell what citizens do in the privacy of their own homes, prima facie we may suppose that someone who publishes their linguistic research is a linguist. Another interpretation of "-ist" would say that a linguist must be somehow saliently or typically occupied with the study of language. In that case, we might say that a linguist is someone who, like a professor, is paid to do linguistics. Milton Azevedo ctlntt@violet.berkeley.edu __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-535. ________________________________________________________________ Message: 9531592, 65 lines Posted: 9:26am EDT, Fri Sep 20/91, imported: 9:39am EDT, Fri Sep 20/91 Subject: 2.536 Queries To: linguistics-l, LINGUIST@TAMVM1 From: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU Sender: LINGUIST@TAMVM1 ReplyTo: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-2-536. Fri 20 Sep 1991. Lines: 64 Subject: 2.536 Queries Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Tue, 17 Sep 91 22:53:24 EDT From: Alexis Manaster Ramer 2) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 09:00:45 EDT From: Geoffrey Russom Subject: Re: 2.525 Queries 3) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 20:23:20 EDT From: Alexis Manaster Ramer Subject: Stieber's Law -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Tue, 17 Sep 91 22:53:24 EDT From: Alexis Manaster Ramer Sometime during the spring or summer, a kind colleague responded to a query of mine by sending a list of Welsh body part terms borrowed from Latin. However, the header of his/her message had been messed up and the editors of LINGUIST were unable to identify him/her. Would this person please contact me again? __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 09:00:45 EDT From: Geoffrey Russom Subject: Re: 2.525 Queries I read somewhere that massive experiments designed to change usage were made during the early postrevolutionary period in Russia under strong centralized state control but that these had no effect on ordinary speech whatsoever. Anybody know the details? -- Rick Russom __________________________________________________________________________ 3) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 20:23:20 EDT From: Alexis Manaster Ramer Subject: Stieber's Law If I may repeat a query I posted over the summer (hoping that some of you who were then on vacation will be able to help), I am trying to find out who first proposed that analogical processes may NOT affect the phonemic system of a language (create new phonemes, redistribute allophones, etc.). The earliest formulation of this I now know is by the Polish linguist Stieber (first name Zdzislaw, I think) in the 1930's, but he does not sound as though he thought this up. And I am SURE it was NOT Max Weinreich. __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-536. ________________________________________________________________ Message: 9532170, 177 lines Posted: 9:36am EDT, Fri Sep 20/91, imported: 10:10am EDT, Fri Sep 20/91 Subject: 2.537 Announcements To: linguistics-l, LINGUIST@TAMVM1 From: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU Sender: LINGUIST%TAMVM1.BITNET@umix.cc.umich.edu ReplyTo: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-2-537. Fri 20 Sep 1991. Lines: 176 Subject: 2.537 Announcements Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1991 13:45:02 CDT From: Karel Van der Haegen Subject: LIST UPDATE: NAME CHANGE: OS-2 becomes OS2 2) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 17:49 PDT From: Vicki Fromkin Subject: (COPY) WCCFL XI CALL FOR PAPERS 3) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 9:53:49 CDT From: evan@utafll.uta.edu (Evan Antworth) Subject: Interlinear Text Processor on SIMTEL -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1991 13:45:02 CDT From: Karel Van der Haegen Subject: LIST UPDATE: NAME CHANGE: OS-2 becomes OS2 The existing list OS-2@BLEKUL11 OS-2@cc1.kuleuven.ac.be will become: OS2@BLEKUL11 OS2@cc1.kuleuven.ac.be --------------------------- Updated OS2 Description --------------------- OS2 on LISTSERV@BLEKUL11 or LISTSERV@cc1.kuleuven.ac.be The OS2 list was formed to provide a forum for discussions of the operating systems OS/2 for IBM Compatible PCs. Possible discussion topics include but are not limited to: The base operating system in all its flavors and versions Hardware configurations and possible conflicts Use with software packages, existing OS/2 softwares Communications: LAN, SNA, ASYNC, TCP/IP, ... Database Manager and other SQL Servers Device drivers OS2 is a weekly digest, called the OS/2 Discussion Forum, with roughly 1000 lines of Q&A each week, including articles picked up at the various comp.os.os2.* newsgroups on USEnet. OS-2 had up to now 700+ direct subscriptions, besides several redistribution points and NETNEWS gateways. OS2 always was a moderated list with archives. Archives of OS2 (before called OS-2), even the older ones (before today) with the old OS-2 name, will be stored in the OS2 FILELIST. To receive a list of files send the command INDEX OS2 to LISTSERV@cc1.kuleuven.ac.be a.k.a. LISTSERV@BLEKUL11 (a LISTEARN file distribution vm machine) To subscribe to OS2, send the following command to LISTSERV@BLEKUL11 or LISTSERV@cc1.kuleuven.ac.be via mail text or interactive message: SUBSCRIBE OS2 Your_full_name where "Your_full_name" is your name. For example: SUBSCRIBE OS2 Bill Gates Moderator: OS2MOD@cc1.kuleuven.ac.be OS2MOD@BLEKUL11 __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 17:49 PDT From: Vicki Fromkin Subject: (COPY) WCCFL XI CALL FOR PAPERS -------------------------TEXT-OF-FORWARDED-MAIL-------------------------------- @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ ---------------------------- WCCFL XI/1992 AT UCLA CALL FOR PAPERS ---------------------------- You are invited to submit abstracts for 20 minute papers to be presented at the Eleventh West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL XI) which will be held at UCLA, February 21-23, 1992. Papers representing all aspects of formal linguistics will be considered. Abstracts should be anonymous, no more than one page, single spaced, with all margins at least one inch wide, and typed in 12 point type or larger. An additional page with examples and references may be included. Submissions are limited to 1 individual and/or 1 collective abstract per person. Ten copies of the abstract along with a 3" by 5" card with paper title, name of author(s), affiliation, address, phone number and e-mail address should be sent to: WCCFL XI Abstract Committee UCLA Dept. of Linguistics 405 Hilgard Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90024-1543 Deadline for receipt of abstracts is November 30, 1991. Late abstracts will only be reviewed if postmarked by november 25, 1991. No abstract arriving after December 6, 1991 will be reviewed. Conference schedule and further announcements will be issued later. Inquiries may be addressed via e-mail to : wccfl@cognet.ucla.edu __________________________________________________________________________ 3) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 9:53:49 CDT From: evan@utafll.uta.edu (Evan Antworth) Subject: Interlinear Text Processor on SIMTEL I have uploaded the following file to the LINGUISTICS directory on SIMTEL20: pd1: IT11C.ZIP Interlinear Text Processor, version 1.1c IT ('eye-tee') is a software package for producing annotated interlinear texts. It performs two main tasks: (1) it maintains the vertical alignment of the interlinear annotations, and (2) it stores all word and morpheme annotations in a lexical database thus enabling semi-automatic glossing. IT supports up to 14 levels of aligning text annotations and up to 8 different freeform (nonaligning) annotations. The interlinear text file produced by IT is a plain ASCII text file that is accessible to other text-processing software. This version of IT is offered as 'freeware'. How to get IT ------------- The file IT11C.ZIP is available via anonymous FTP from WSMR-SIMTEL20.ARMY.MIL [192.88.110.20]. It is also available from various mirror sites such as wuarchive.wustl.edu. SIMTEL20 can also be accessed using LISTSERV commands from BITNET via LISTSERV@NDSUVM1, LISTSERV@RPIECS and in Europe from EARN TRICKLE servers (for example, FRMOP11 in France). If you do not have FTP access to SIMTEL20, files may be ordered by e-mail from LISTSERV@VM1.NODAK.EDU or LISTSERV@VM.ECS.RPI.EDU. If you are on BITNET: LISTSERV@NDSUVM1 LISTSERV@RPIECS If your mailer knows domains: listserv@vm1.nodak.edu listserv@vm.ecs.rpi.edu Send this command as the only line of the message body: /PDGET MAIL PD1:IT11C.ZIP UUENCODE If you have xxdecode, you may wish to specify XXENCODE instead of UUENCODE to avoid character translation problems. Evan Antworth | Internet: evan@sil.org Academic Computing Department | UUCP: ...!uunet!convex!txsil!evan Summer Institute of Linguistics | phone: 214/709-2418 7500 W. Camp Wisdom Road | fax: 214/709-3387 Dallas, TX 75236 | U.S.A. | __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-537. ________________________________________________________________ Message: 9541735, 93 lines Posted: 12:01pm EDT, Sat Sep 21/91, imported: 12:09pm EDT, Sat Sep 21/91 Subject: 2.538 Jobs To: linguistics-l, LINGUIST@TAMVM1 From: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU Sender: LINGUIST@TAMVM1 ReplyTo: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-2-538. Sat 21 Sep 1991. Lines: 92 Subject: 2.538 Jobs Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 91 17:18:26 MDT From: Sally_Rice@mts.ucs.ualberta.ca Subject: job announcement, Chair of Linguistics Dept. 2) Date: Tue, 17 Sep 91 15:20:16 EDT From: Abby Cohn Subject: temporary position -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 91 17:18:26 MDT From: Sally_Rice@mts.ucs.ualberta.ca Subject: job announcement, Chair of Linguistics Dept. DEPARTMENT OF LINGUISTICS UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA POSITION ANNOUNCEMENT The Department of Linguistics invites applications for an appointment with tenure at the Senior Associate or Full Professor level commencing July 1, 1992. In addition to assuming some teaching responsibilities, the successful candidate will be expected to serve the Department as Chair for a period of at least five years. Applicants should possess a PhD or its equivalent and should have an active research program, extensive publications, a good teaching and supervision record, and previous administrative experience. Research specialization in syntax/semantics, with strong commitment to experimental/empirical approaches to discourse analysis or psycholinguistics is preferred. Outstanding applicants with specializations in other core areas will also be considered. The 1991-1992 minimum for the Full Professor rank is $60,083; the maximum for the Associate rank is $70,331. Applications including C.V. and three letters of reference should be sent to Dr. Patricia Clements, Dean, Faculty of Arts, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, T6G 2E6, and will be accepted until December 15, 1991. The University of Alberta is committed to the principle of equity of employment. The University encourages applications from aboriginal persons, disabled persons, members of visible minorities and women. Send e-mail inquiries to: userrice@mts.ucs.ualberta.ca __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Tue, 17 Sep 91 15:20:16 EDT From: Abby Cohn Subject: temporary position ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Temporary phonology position- Spring 1992 The Department of Modern Languages and Linguistics at Cornell University is looking to fill a visiting position for Spring of 1992 in the area of phonology. The appointment will be at a junior level and duties for the semester will go from mid- January to late-May. The person filling this position should ideally have Ph.D. in hand and will be expected to teach two of the following three courses: Introductory linguistics, undergraduate introductory phonetics and phonology, or second semester phonology (for graduate students and advanced undergraduates). Please send a letter of application, CV, one publication and three letters of reference to Temporary Phonology Search Committee, Department of Modern Languages and Linguistics, Morrill Hall, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14850-4701 by October 20. In your letter of application, please discuss relevant teaching experience and where appropriate, please ask your referees to comment on your teaching. Salary commensurate with experience; minimum $17,500 for the semester. For further information, please contact Abby Cohn, tel. (607) 255-3073; email accx@cornella.bitnet. Cornell is an AA/EO Employer. __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-538. ________________________________________________________________ Message: 9541766, 121 lines Posted: 12:08pm EDT, Sat Sep 21/91, imported: 12:17pm EDT, Sat Sep 21/91 Subject: 2.539 Warning To: linguistics-l, LINGUIST@TAMVM1 From: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU Sender: LINGUIST@TAMVM1 ReplyTo: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-2-539. Sat 21 Sep 1991. Lines: 134 Subject: 2.539 Warning Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Tue, 17 Sep 91 19:18:41 -0500 From: "Michael Kac" Subject: Re: 2.531 Warning 2) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 11:21:26 BST From: am@cstr.edinburgh.ac.uk Subject: Re: 2.531 Warning 3) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 91 09:05:28 EDT From: "Bruce E. Nevin" Subject: trespass 4) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1991 08:23 CST From: LIFY460@orange.cc.utexas.edu Subject: Re: 2.531 Warning -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Tue, 17 Sep 91 19:18:41 -0500 From: "Michael Kac" Subject: Re: 2.531 Warning The original discussion of the meaning of *warning* was, if I recall, mo-] tivated by a sign that read WARNING: NO SWIMMING, which the poster of the note found odd. Without finding it that odd myself, I understand why one might think it odd. It has just occurred to me, however, that we appear to be able to say -- quite naturally and easily -- things like *I'm warn- ing you not to do that*. That seems to me parallel in essential respects to the original datum that got all this started. Or are there those who wish to take issue with me on this point? Michael Kac __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 11:21:26 BST From: am@cstr.edinburgh.ac.uk Subject: Re: 2.531 Warning in response to michael kac's claim that warnings indemnify the warner with regard to claims by warnees: there has (fairly) recently been considerable fuss in britain over the idea that in actual fact putting up a warning sign makes the warner MORE LIABLE! the theory behind this is that the act of putting up such a sign constitutes an acknowledgement of the danger and thus a wilful failure to remove said danger, whereas if no sign is present there is no reason to claim that anyone was aware of or responsible for the danger and even that the danger does not exist! for example, a "beware of the bull" sign is an admission that a dangerous animal has been left in a field where it constitutes a menace to the public: on the other hand, if little sammy is gored and trampled to death but there was no warning sign the bull's owner can reasonably claim that the event could not have been foreseen! alex monaghan. __________________________________________________________________________ 3) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 91 09:05:28 EDT From: "Bruce E. Nevin" Subject: trespass Lou Burnard writes of signs saying only "TRESPASS" on Mauritius. Perhaps this is a notice that the space beyond is a trespass, as in "forgive us our trespasses." A Native American friend had a sign that said "No Pestressing" but that's another matter. Bruce Nevin bn@bbn.com __________________________________________________________________________ 4) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1991 08:23 CST From: LIFY460@orange.cc.utexas.edu Subject: Re: 2.531 Warning This is in reply to Bruce Fraser's suggestion that the different content of warning signs in French, German and Italian may be some indication of cultural difference. WARNING: it's very dangerous to start thinking along those lines. Consider how decisions are made about what goes on signs. There are as many possibilities as there are types of bureaucracies, whatever that means. Maybe there's a committee where linguists and sociolo- gists sit around and try to figure out what the culturally appropriate wording would be. Or maybe some bureaucrat was given the directive that they'd better get some warning signs up right away; in this case it may have been the decision of a single person in a rush. Maybe this person was a linguist/sociologist, maybe a sociopath, maybe a mere dullard, maybe a foreigner or someone eise who really didn't have a finger on the pulse of the culture. I suspect that any of the three cultures under discussion here would respond the same way to either version of the sign, without indignation or surprise at how culturally inappropriate it might be. I just don't think we can make any inferences about cultural differences from how these signs are worded, especially not the French, German and Italian ones. By the way, I forgot to put a :-) up there with the suggestion that a linguist/sociologist committee decides the wording of warning signs. Christine Kamprath __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-539. ________________________________________________________________ Message: 9541841, 195 lines Posted: 12:13pm EDT, Sat Sep 21/91, imported: 12:42pm EDT, Sat Sep 21/91 Subject: 2.540 Compositional Semantics To: linguistics-l, LINGUIST@TAMVM1 From: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU Sender: LINGUIST%TAMVM1.BITNET@umix.cc.umich.edu ReplyTo: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-2-540. Sat 21 Sep 1991. Lines: 216 Subject: 2.540 Compositional Semantics Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 16:09:26 -0700 From: saka@cogsci.Berkeley.EDU (Paul Saka) Subject: RE: compositionality 2) Date: Tue, 17 Sep 91 18:42:47 -0500 From: "Michael Kac" Subject: Re: 2.523 Compositional Semantics 3) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 91 17:15:55 CDT From: stan kulikowski ii Subject: re: compositional meanings 4) Date: Tue, 17 Sep 91 22:33:56 EDT From: Alexis_Manaster_Ramer@mts.cc.wayne.edu Subject: 2.523 Compositional Semantics 5) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 12:55:16 EDT From: Alexis Manaster Ramer Subject: Compositionality -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 16:09:26 -0700 From: saka@cogsci.Berkeley.EDU (Paul Saka) Subject: RE: compositionality There is a dissertation on non-compositional semantics by Jean Kazez, U of Arizona, 1990. While I do not have Jean's current e-address, I know that she's in the philosophy dept at Southern Methodist U. As others have observed, idioms do not threaten compo- sitional semantics. However, contrary to a recent posting, ambiguity very well might. The recent proposal, recall, says the following: Let us suppose that expression E consists of constituents C1...Cn arranged in structure X. If E is ambiguous between meanings M1 and M2, then we cannot say that f(C1...Cn, X) = M1 AND that f(C1...Cn, X) = M2, for then f would not be a function and the semantics would not be compositional. Therefore let us say that f(C1...Cn, X) = {M1, M2}. But this presents a weird view of ambiguity. It says that an ambiguous expression has ONE meaning, M1-and-M2. In contrast, what we want is a theory that says an ambiguous expression means M1 OR M2. This does not mean that compositional semantics is necessarily wrong; it all depends on what kinds of ambiguity exist. If lexical and structural ambiguity are the only kinds of ambiguity, then semantic composition (the function f) could always correctly yield the unique output that is appropriate to the input arguments (the constituents and the mode of combination). However, if additional kinds of ambiguity exist, then compositional semantics would seem to be a doomed enterprise. In view of the evidence for additional kinds of ambiguity, it is ironic that so many consider compositionality to be a virtue in their theories. I am thinking not only of deictics, which are generally conceded to be something special, but also polysemy, metaphor, and other kinds of pragmatic ambiguity, all of which I discuss in a forthcoming paper. __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Tue, 17 Sep 91 18:42:47 -0500 From: "Michael Kac" Subject: Re: 2.523 Compositional Semantics Dave Chalmers talks about compositionality as a constraint and Kai von Fintel characterizes it as a methodological principle. My own inclination is to think that the latter position is the defensible one though I am saying this partly to open up discussion of the question. Alexis Manaster-Ramer alludes in his posting to context-sensitivity of a kind that semanticists don't seem to like (if I'm remembering it correctly). I'd be interested in hearing more about exactly what he's thinking of. Michael Kac __________________________________________________________________________ 3) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 91 17:15:55 CDT From: stan kulikowski ii Subject: re: compositional meanings now wait a minute. some of you seem to be saying that there is always a compositional meaning and sometimes a noncompositional meaning. i use a number of expressions which i know the meaning of the whole and do not know the meaning of some or all of the parts: ad hoc post hoc vis a vi bric a brac et cetera flotsom and jetsom willy nilly pell mell helter skelter some are obviously other-language inclusions into common parlance and most of the rest seem to have a rhyme structure. perhaps these are entered as single lexical items with vaccuous word boundaries? certainly there are very limited syntactic operations permitted on structures with noncompositional meanings. about the only one that i can think of is the common-masculine gerundive use of "the f-word", which seems to have a universal insertion ability between otherwise bound items yet does not destroy noncompositional constructs... well, that about exhausts my noncompositional two f***ing cents worth. :) stan . stankuli@UWF.bitnet __________________________________________________________________________ 4) Date: Tue, 17 Sep 91 22:33:56 EDT From: Alexis_Manaster_Ramer@mts.cc.wayne.edu Subject: 2.523 Compositional Semantics In response to some recent contributions, I beg to submit the following: -- The issue I raised with 'dog' and 'dogs' was not about how to analyze plurals, but rather that it seems to me (and I may be wrong) that linguists and other NL mavens who talk about compositionality seem to assume that some kind of nondestructiveness is intended, although it is admittedly difficult to formalize this notion. Yet it is precisely that nondestructiveness that is supposed to prevent e.g. a language in which "trees", "are", and "green" mean what they do in English, but in which "trees are green" means "the quarterback fainted last Saturday" (to use Dave Chalmers' nice example). -- Margaret Fleck is right that, for all practical purposes, a relation mapping a single syntactic structure to several semantic ones can be replaced by a function giving us a set of semantic structures, but we have the right to insist that syntax-to-semantics mappings yield semantic structures and not sets of the same. Indeed, it seems to me that, while hard to test, this constraint is the one part of compositionality that has some teeth. One can certainly advance linguistic plausibility arguments as to whether there exist syntactic constructions which are semantically ambiguous even though there is no purely syntactic evidence that they are in fact more thab one construction. -- Again, Margaret is right that computability is not much of a constraint, but it is a slight beginning. As I tried to argue, it seems to me that people usually assume something stronger, and it would be interesting to see if people share my intuitions on this. -- Finally, what is really required, I believe, is a hierarchy (or several hierarchies) of compositionality. Just as Turing-computability (Chomsky-generability) can be constrained to get, e.g., context-sensitive or context-free languages, so it seems to me that compositionality in the broadest sense should mean just what I originally said (any computable function will do), but there should be a variety of more restricted types (one way, suggested by van Benthem's work, would be to use the familiar automata hierarchies here, so that "context-free" functions would be those computable by a pushdown transducer, for example). There are enormous difficulties with making this work, but I think it can and should be done. __________________________________________________________________________ 5) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 12:55:16 EDT From: Alexis Manaster Ramer Subject: Compositionality On the subject of idioms, it is again kind of trivial but perhaps relevant to note that one always assumes that there is a finite number of them, whereas the compositional rules generate an infinite set of expressions. This is very much in the spirit of the kind of language-theoretic or automata-theoretic treatment I was arguing for. In the same way that a finite number of special cases is always tolerated in language and automata theory, so, too, it would seem to be tolerated in a compositional theory of semantics. As such, it seems to me that the issue of idioms IS relevant to this topic, pace what some of the contributors to the discussion have said. __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-540. ________________________________________________________________ Message: 9541840, 83 lines Posted: 12:15pm EDT, Sat Sep 21/91, imported: 12:41pm EDT, Sat Sep 21/91 Subject: 2.541 Chomskyite To: linguistics-l, LINGUIST@TAMVM1 From: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU Sender: LINGUIST%TAMVM1.BITNET@umix.cc.umich.edu ReplyTo: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-2-541. Sat 21 Sep 1991. Lines: 82 Subject: 2.541 Comskyite Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 13:54 EST From: NMILLER@vax1.trincoll.edu Subject: Re: 2.530 Responses 2) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1991 12:09:47 EDT From: Laurie Bauer Subject: Chomskyan/-ite -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 13:54 EST From: NMILLER@vax1.trincoll.edu Subject: Re: 2.530 Responses Victor Raskin's explanation of the difference between X+ite and X+ist seems reasonable but it doesn't quite work. First example that comes to mind is ironically Stakhanovite. Stakhanov was a Russian coal miner who one day in the mid-1930's took it into his head to exceed the daily quota. This brought him fame, medals, much emulation for a while; but the emulators were definitely not camp-followers. Which leads me to a proposed refinement of the Raskin theory. X+ite becomes derogatory only in a context of incipient or actual group tensions. In fact, given the latter, there's no difference between X+ite and X+ist. Nothing made U.S. Communists madder than to be called Stalinists. But even this doesn't explain everything. I'm not ready to rule out the possible impact on educated American ears of a whole generation of talented writers and thinkers who served hitches in Trotskyist trenches. And they took suffixes seriously: I can recall at least two indignant editorials in the New International and a letter to the NYT. They saw the _ite as derogatory. The tin-earred Stalinists didn't give a damn. A final note: what were the followers of the late Jay Lovestone called? You guessed it: _everybody_ called them Lovestoneites. Norman Miller __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1991 12:09:47 EDT From: Laurie Bauer Subject: Chomskyan/-ite I agree that to me -ite has more pejorative connotations than -an (or -ist or -er, to broaden the field slightly) (so perhaps we can avoid the British vs. American debate in this case :-)), but if you look in e.g. 'The Barnhart Dictionary of New English' or Websters '9000 Words', and in particular consider the citations, it is hard to tell whether such a feeling is general or whether you are imposing it yourself. Barnhart, for example, lists Birchite, Naxalite, Powellite, McLuhanite, Friedmanite, Devlinite, Castroite, Leavisite, Zinovievite, Zhdanovite, Paisleyite, and while the citations in many of these entries are compatible with the pejorative reading, the citation for Devlinite ('We must, in the next year, get together, all of us, Paisleyites, Devlinites, civil rights groups, students, Orangemen, I.R.A. men, the lot...') is not what you would expect to find if they were being condemned. Perhaps some of these terms become lexicalised despite their negative overtones? The OED lists no alternative for Paisleyite. The OED says of modern personal -ite formations that 'these have a tendency to be depreciatory,being mostly given by opponents, and seldom acknowledged by those to whom they are applied'. (See at -ite), but Marchand (1969: 311) demurs (although -- oh no! -- he says it is less dpreciatory in American English). Perhaps we should just agree with the OED, and disagree about how strong the tendency is. Laurie Bauer BauerL@matai.vuw.ac.nz Wellington, New Zealand __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-541. ________________________________________________________________ Message: 9541836, 137 lines Posted: 12:20pm EDT, Sat Sep 21/91, imported: 12:41pm EDT, Sat Sep 21/91 Subject: 2.542 Professeure To: linguistics-l, LINGUIST@TAMVM1 From: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU Sender: LINGUIST%TAMVM1.BITNET@umix.cc.umich.edu ReplyTo: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-2-542. Sat 21 Sep 1991. Lines: 139 Subject: 2.542 Professeure Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 91 15:10:28 EST From: j.guy@trl.oz.au (Jacques Guy) Subject: Make mine "enchanteresse" 2) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 91 13:45:15 -0700 From: suzanne@garnet.berkeley.edu Subject: ProfesseurE (encore!) 3) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 91 14:00:49 PDT From: marks@neuro.usc.edu (Mark Seidenberg) Subject: Quebec article -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 91 15:10:28 EST From: j.guy@trl.oz.au (Jacques Guy) Subject: Make mine "enchanteresse" 1) About Bert Peeters remarks on -eu-/-o- The alternance -eu-/-o- is also, and I would say principally, attested in pairs of which one member has "eu" (of popular formation) and the other "o" (of learned formation), e.g.: fleur de'florer pleur e'plore' de'plorer meilleur ame'liorer prieur priorite' (but: prieure') feuille de'foliation (but: effeuiller) and then (again!) docteur doctoresse but: enchanteur enchanteresse 2) The alternance -eur/-rice, which occurs only following "t", seems pretty regular, and is very productive since we find it in neologisms (programmatrice, annonciatrice). The condition seems to be the existence of a corresponding verb in -er (e.g. programmer) or noun in -tion (e.g. "action"), which would explain why have "acteur/actrice" but not "auteur/autrice". There can be a semantic shift, too, e.g. action/acteur/actrice. 3) -eur/-euse, as far as I can see, can be tagged to the stem of any verb to form an agent, e.g. programmeur/programmeuse, branleur/euse, mateur/mateuse (from argot "mater" = "regarder"), zyeuteur/zyeuteuse (from argot "zyeuter" = "devisager"). Yes, I made up these last two, just as I made up "tirlipoteur/tirlipoteuse" in an earlier posting. (Incidentally, the stem you should use is the one you find in the 1st pers. pl. present or the present participle, e.g. cuiseur/cuiseuse < cuire, preneur/preneuse < prendre). There never seems to be any semantic shift with this formation. Why then, do we have "professeur" but not "professeuse"? "Professeuse", to me, would mean "quelqu'un qui professe une opinion, une foi". Why not "quelqu'un qui enseigne"? Probably because I have heard and read this verb far more often in the former sense, and that "quelqu'un qui enseigne" is already taken up by "professeur" and "enseignant/enseignante". La langue, comme la nature, semble avoir horreur du vide. To me, there is such a semantic shift between "professeur" (teacher), "professer" and "profession" that "professeur" stands isolated, just as "docteur" (medic) stands isolated from "docte" and "doctrine". I have been serious for far too long. Now for some silly-season questions: What shall we call les sentinelles, les vigies, les estafettes, les ordonnances, les huiles, les grosses legumes et les vieilles ganaches when they are male (which is most of the time)? How shall we say "Ce garc,on est une lumie`re; cette fille est un ge'nie. Ce mitron est une andouille; cette berge`re est un laideron"? What shall we say when we enter a seemingly empty house: (1) "Y'a quelqu'un?" (2) "Y'a quelqu'une?" How shall we address, politely, an Italian man: (1) Lei? (2) Lui? Unix users, how do you feel about typing: man grep mm? __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 91 13:45:15 -0700 From: suzanne@garnet.berkeley.edu Subject: ProfesseurE (encore!) For those interested in the debates on how best to encourage gender equality in French, especially with regard to nomina agentis, there is an interesting paper by Anne-Marie Houdebine ("Le franc,ais au fe'minin," -La Linguistique- 23:13-34 (1987)) that assesses the pros and cons (the latter in the French \andEnglish senses) of the various strategies available within the French language. Apparently Voltaire innovated -professeuse-! --Suzanne Fleischman UC Berkeley (suzanne@ucbgarne.berkeley.edu) __________________________________________________________________________ 3) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 91 14:00:49 PDT From: marks@neuro.usc.edu (Mark Seidenberg) Subject: Quebec article There is an excellent article in the current issue of the New Yorker (by Mordecai Richler) about the language troubles in Quebec, for those whose interest in the topic was not exhausted by earlier postings on this list. Mark Seidenberg __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-542. ________________________________________________________________ Message: 9541837, 178 lines Posted: 12:29pm EDT, Sat Sep 21/91, imported: 12:41pm EDT, Sat Sep 21/91 Subject: 2.543 Responses To: linguistics-l, LINGUIST@TAMVM1 From: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU Sender: LINGUIST%TAMVM1.BITNET@umix.cc.umich.edu ReplyTo: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-2-543. Sat 21 Sep 1991. Lines: 177 Subject: 2.543 Responses Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 10:26:56 MDT From: Subject: recognising 3 languages 2) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 20:48:39 EST From: raskin@j.cc.purdue.edu (Victor Raskin) Subject: Lurking out 3) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 16:12:44 -0500 Subject: kIlometre/kilOmeter and the CBC [was: Re: 2.517 That's] From: Stephen P Spackman 4) Date: Tue, 17 Sep 91 17:36:51 CDT From: Nancy L. Dray Subject: clarification of previous... 5) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 91 9:08:01 CDT From: Dennis Baron Subject: back in the ussr -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 10:26:56 MDT From: Subject: recognising 3 languages Concerning recent messages about recognising language, I've long been intrigued by the following menu item I saw in a Bandidos restaurant: Mexican queso fondu(e) (I don't remember whether there was an "e".) Must be one of the few trilingual 3-word sentences uttered other than in jest! Other such examples, and speculation on human/AI understanding of them, would be of interest to me. John Barnden Computing Research Laboratory New Mexico State University P.S. The restaurant in question was *not* in these parts, I hasten to add. __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 20:48:39 EST From: raskin@j.cc.purdue.edu (Victor Raskin) Subject: Lurking out A number of people have sent me comments on my usage of 'lurk out' in a sentence which said something like 'I should have lurked out on that discussion' in my recent posting on -ite/-ist. The comments have ranged from precise instructions as to where non-native speakers should go with their malapropisms to expressions of deep sentiment towards my quaint usage. I have decided to share the gist of my response to these colleagues with the rest of the list. I had not made up that usage. 'Lurking' as well as 'lurking in,' 'in on,' 'out,' and 'about' are common usage in Networkese. So are 'flame,' 'flaming,' 'flaming up,' 'down,' 'in,' 'out,' 'about,' etc. The rhetoricians have been studying newsgroup discourse for a couple of years already, but I suspect that there is not that much substance out there to attract a linguist. Of course, words like 'net' and 'list'--and perhaps others--have shifted their meanings as well. The syntactic shifts, however, are probably all penetrations of the colloquial register into the postings. None of that stuff has surfaced up yet on this list. One explanation for that is that we must be all very firmly rooted in the register of written linguistic discourse, and we simply go on with it here. This makes the list non-receptive to somewhat unstable and evidently low-prestige innovations of the type mentioned above (plus the numerous smileys) and proliferating in the hack-level (here I go again!) lists attracting many inexperienced writers. Victor Raskin raskin@j.cc.purdue.edu [Standard disclaimer: There may be one or more unmarked jokes in the message above.] __________________________________________________________________________ 3) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 16:12:44 -0500 Subject: kIlometre/kilOmeter and the CBC [was: Re: 2.517 That's] From: Stephen P Spackman Ron Smythe comments that there's at least an attempt at media-induced language change in the Canadaian Broadcasting Corporation's insistence on the {systematic, british} pronounciation of metric prefixed unit names, and has "always maintained that since everyone says kilOMetres, the CBC is off base". I think this is an interesting case because it seems to me that here we are seeing an attempt at not language POLICING (which might be objectionable), but language ENGINEERING (which is more on the order of interesting). The point of the insistence on kIlometre, I think, is that they are trying to MAKE the paradigm of multiplier+baseUnit {consciously, synchronically} productive (a move that, if succesful, would do more to promote metric over Imperial units than anything else they've tried, since the main failure of the campaign seems to have been in the area of convincing people that SI is any more consistent - but then, of course, everything still comes in "454g" packages!). As a high school student (in Canada) I made myself quite unpopular by telling my science teacher that they could say kilOmeter if they wanted, but that they were then being wilfully stupid if they didn't say millIliter as well.... Disclaimer: I was brought up in England and learned ONLY metric until we came to this continent. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- stephen p spackman Center for Information and Language Studies stephen@estragon.uchicago.edu University of Chicago __________________________________________________________________________ 4) Date: Tue, 17 Sep 91 17:36:51 CDT From: Nancy L. Dray Subject: clarification of previous... In case my 13 Sept 91 note re Ossetian/Ossetic seemed to appear out of the blue and make no sense, I should clarify that it was a response to Alexis Manaster-Ramer's 10 Sept 91 query, which I quoted at the top but seem to have neglected to attribute. Oops! Sorry...I realize not everyone reads all the postings, and some cross-referencing is helpful. NLD __________________________________________________________________________ 5) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 91 9:08:01 CDT From: Dennis Baron Subject: back in the ussr In response to Rick Russom's query on Soviet language planning, try E. Glyn Lewis, _Multilingualism in the Soviet Union: Aspects of Language Policy and Its Implementation_. The Hague: Mouton 1972. Lewis has a later (1980/81) book on bilingualism as well. A colleague in the Slavic Dept. here, Maurice Friedberg, mentioned to me recently that Stalin had a committee whose task was to magnify the differences among the various Soviet languages which up to that point had been fairly similar so that they would become unintelligible and I suppose more dependent on Russian. Maurice is not on email, but drop him a note at 3092 FLB for further details. -- debaron@uiuc.edu ____________ 217-333-2392 |:~~~~~~~~~~:| fax: 217-333-4321 Dennis Baron |: :| Dept. of English |: db :| Univ. of Illinois |: :| 608 S. Wright St. |:==========:| Urbana IL 61801 \\ """""""" \ \\ """""""" \ ~~~~~~~~~~~~ __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-543. ________________________________________________________________ Message: 9541889, 249 lines Posted: 12:36pm EDT, Sat Sep 21/91, imported: 12:56pm EDT, Sat Sep 21/91 Subject: 2.544 That's To: linguistics-l, LINGUIST@TAMVM1 From: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU Sender: LINGUIST%TAMVM1.BITNET@umix.cc.umich.edu ReplyTo: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-2-544. Sat 21 Sep 1991. Lines: 248 Subject: 2.544 That's Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1991 10:21 EST From: Herb Stahlke <00HFSTAHLKE@BSUVAX1.bitnet> Subject: Re: 2.532 That's 2) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 91 09:27:07 +0000 Subject: Thats From: "R.Hudson" 3) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 91 17:37:49 EDT From: pesetsk@ATHENA.MIT.EDU Subject: Re: Thats 4) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 91 9:44:01 MET DST From: lachlan@let.vu.nl Subject: re: 2.532 That's 5) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 91 15:00 CDT From: Joe Stemberger Subject: Re: 2.516 That's 6) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 91 21:25:10 +0000 Subject: thats From: "R.Hudson" -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1991 10:21 EST From: Herb Stahlke <00HFSTAHLKE@BSUVAX1.bitnet> Subject: Re: 2.532 That's >On reading the recent list of possible ways to say "the book whose cover >is red"/"the book the cover of which is red" etc., I was struck by the >absence of the way I would always say it: "the book with the red cover". >Me for avoidance every time. I should imagine that a study of this pheno- >menon would have to take such cowardly detours into consideration. >--Elise Morse-Gagne > Elise Morse-Gagne's comment on avoidance of constructions points to an interesting problem that Jacqueline Schachter addressed in her 1976(?) article "An Error in Error Analysis." (I have a prepublication copy, and I don't recall the journal it appeared in at the moment.) She was looking at error rates in English relative clause use by speakers of Persian, Arabic, Chinese, and Japanese. Her point was that the numbers made it look as if Chinese speakers had relative little trouble learning English relatives because their error rate was low when a close check of the data (writing samples) showed that Chinese speakers in fact used significantly fewer relative clauses and tended rather to make errors in choice of construction than in syntax of construction. Avoidance of selected syntactic structures appears to be a real phenomenon. Herb Stahlke Ball State University __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 91 09:27:07 +0000 Subject: Thats From: "R.Hudson" David Pesetsky asks for more information on structures like `the book thats cover is red' (I follow Norman Miller's suggestion re spelling - thats, like its, not that's). I find that I have excellent informants in my family - my daughters, born and bred in London. No Scottish connections at all. They tell me that this pattern is used by children across the road that they regularly baby-sit. So it looks like a dialect feature of middle-class north London too. I wonder if it's general throughout UK? The following were all deemed fine (and I myself find them excellent, in fact): (Incidentally, just in case you think I'm the source of these patterns in north London, I have no Scottish connections either - born and bred in south Nottinghamshire, but in London for the last thirty years.): This is the pencil that's lead is broken. I'm looking for a pencil that's lead isn't broken. I'm looking for some pencils that's leads aren't broken. This is the pencil that's lead you broke. However my wife (born and bred in S. Wales) rejects the last example, while accepting the others. I accept David Pesetsky's point that these observations don't in themselves show that THAT is a pronoun for people like him who don't allow THATS. The logic of the argument is to undermine the argument from the impossibility of preposition + THAT, as in *`This is the chair on that he sat'. So far as I know these are impossible in *all* dialects, including the ones where there's other evidence, eg. from THATS, that THAT is a pronoun, so the traditional explanation (*in that because THAT isn't a NP) must be wrong. Another piece of evidence for THAT being a pronoun is that it occurs (cotnrary to what is widely claimed) in non-restrctive relatives, although these *never* have a zero relative. Incidentally, THATS is always pronounced with Schwa, which distinguishes it quite clearly from demonstrative THAT. Dick Hudson Dept of Phonetics and Linguistics, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT (071) 387 7050 ext 3152 home: (081) 340 1253 __________________________________________________________________________ 3) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 91 17:37:49 EDT From: pesetsk@ATHENA.MIT.EDU Subject: Re: Thats R Hudson writes "I accept David Pesetsky's point that these observations don't in themselves show that THAT is a pronoun for people like him who don't allow THATS. The logic of the argument is to undermine the argument from the impossibility of preposition + THAT, as in *`This is the chair on that he sat'. So far as I know these are impossible in *all* dialects, including the ones where there's other evidence, eg. from THATS, that THAT is a pronoun, so the traditional explanation (*in that because THAT isn't a NP) must be wrong." Well, this doesn't follow either, though the observations are interesting and (to me) surprising. You are probably right that "*in that" in the UK dialects cannot be explained as a consequence of 'that' being a complementizer. It remains open whether the fact in these UK dialects has the same explanation as the fact in more standardly described dialects. How is "the chair on that's cushion he sat"? -David __________________________________________________________________________ 4) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 91 9:44:01 MET DST From: lachlan@let.vu.nl Subject: re: 2.532 That's In (my) Scottish English, *that's* has to have a singular antecedent. *The books that's covers are red* and *the books that's covers Mary tore* are quite out. Which suggests that *'s* might be, at least historically, related to a singular possessive determiner. There is of course a strong case for regarding *'s* in general as an enclitic postposition, historically derived from *his*: *the man (h)is wife* becoming *the man's wife*, with *the woman her husband* gradually being rivalled by *the woman (h)is husband*, giving *the woman's husband*, as *his* in this use lost the feature , retaining only the meaning . In this view, *(h)is* also lost , so that we find *the men (h)is wives*, giving *the men's wives*, and similarly for *the women's husbands*. As for any objections I might have to "scotch": if you're offering, make it a double. Lachlan Mackenzie, Free University, Amsterdam __________________________________________________________________________ 5) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 91 15:00 CDT From: Joe Stemberger Subject: Re: 2.516 That's About "The book that's cover is red ...". This strikes me as OK English (though it would be FAR preferable to avoid the possessive and say "The book that has the red cover" or "The book with the red cover"). I ran the sentence past my wife, who said, "How else could you say it?". In contrast, "The book whose cover is red" sounds odd to me, but maybe acceptible. My wife, however, protested (very strongly) that this is not possible in English. I am from Central Pennsylvania (State College area). Although I lived in Raleigh, North Carolina until age 7, I have no traces of that dialect left, as far as anyone can tell, and have other Central Pennsylvania syntactic patterns (It needs washed; I always be careful; You want in the other lane; etc.). My wife is from Athens, Ohio originally, and moved to State College when she was 12, and she DOESN'T have some of those other Central Pennsylvania syntactic oddities. I have no idea whether this is at all general. Living here in Minnesota, there aren't very many others from Central Pennsylvania that I can ask. David Pesetsky asks whether things like "The book that's cover Mary tore" are possible. I don't know. It sounds a bit strange, but I don't have any really violent reactions against it. I doubt if I'd ever say it. The only NATURAL way would be "The book that Mary tore the cover of", but of course that doesn't mean that other (fairly unnatural) ways are ungrammatical. ---joe stemberger __________________________________________________________________________ 6) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 91 21:25:10 +0000 Subject: thats From: "R.Hudson" In a previous message I claimed that the existence of speakers who accept THATS as a relative possessive but who also reject THAT after a preposition (e.g. *The chair on that he was sitting broke) shows that it must be wrong to use the badness of prep + THAT as evidence that THAT is a complementiser, not a pronoun. David Pesetsky points out that I overstate my case, and he is of course right. My argument is valid for users of THATS, but not for other people, since these two groups of people could, conceivably, have different reasons for rejecting prep + THAT. However, in the absence of evidence for any other difference between the two groups (apart from the status of THATS), there's no reason to believe that this is in fact the case. Whatever motivates my daughters to reject prep + THAT can equally easily motivate David to do the same; in fact, more easily, because he has no other temptation to treat THAT as a pronoun. (Unless he considers some of the other arguments for doing so, such as its occurrence in non-restrictive relatives.) He asks for more data, specifically the status (for a THATS user) of sentences like `This is the chair on thats cushion he sat'. My informant's reaction was predictable - she dislikes this example intensely. But as she points out, she also dislikes sentences like `This is the chair on whose cushion he sat', or even `This is the chair on which he sat' - stranding the preposition is so much nicer, and pied piping is very literary. This also leads to a stylistic clash between the definitely literary pied piping and the very non-literary THATS. So I don't think this example tells us anything. Let me know if you can think of any crucial examples that would reveal differences between her and David which could involve different rules for THAT after a preposition, and I'll try them out on her. Dick Hudson Dept of Phonetics and Linguistics, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT (071) 387 7050 ext 3152 home: (081) 340 1253 __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-544. ________________________________________________________________ Message: 9541888, 173 lines Posted: 12:39pm EDT, Sat Sep 21/91, imported: 12:55pm EDT, Sat Sep 21/91 Subject: 2.545 Linguist To: linguistics-l, LINGUIST@TAMVM1 From: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU Sender: LINGUIST%TAMVM1.BITNET@umix.cc.umich.edu ReplyTo: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-2-545. Sat 21 Sep 1991. Lines: 172 Subject: 2.545 Linguist Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 10:24:59 EST From: RGAGNE@ucs.indiana.edu Subject: unpaid linguists 2) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 16:59:52 PDT From: scobbie@Csli.Stanford.EDU (Jim Scobbie) Subject: what is a linguist... what am I? 3) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 91 15:50:21 -0500 From: "Michael Kac" -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 10:24:59 EST From: RGAGNE@ucs.indiana.edu Subject: unpaid linguists I was interested in the implications of Margaret Fleck's message about how in the UK the terms for professionals can be applied to, say, under- graduates whose real interests are in rowing. Certainly that differs from my own usage. However, the message seemed to indicate that in the States, "linguist" or "chemist" can refer only to paid professionals. Where would this leave a graduate student without funding? A recent, jobless PhD? Or a BA in chemistry who has worked for 10 years in a commercial lab and is now taking an indeterminate time off for purposes of raising a family? I think I myself use the term "linguist" for anyone who would say that their professional career--whether or not they are currently being paid-- is or will be in linguistics; same for chemistry, math, etc. Back to what it means "to do linguistics"... --Elise Morse-Gagne __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 16:59:52 PDT From: scobbie@Csli.Stanford.EDU (Jim Scobbie) Subject: what is a linguist... what am I? In response to the question `what is a linguist'... I am. I do the core things that linguists do, except I fail to speak large numbers (greater than 1&3/4) of languages. This results in the general public eyeing me suspiciously. They clearly don't think I count. Let me turn the question around: what am I? I can't call myself a `lecturer', because I don't (I'm a post-doc). I can call myself a `fellow' but that is taken a funny way. I've tried `phonologist' and `phonetician' (the latter is inaccurate, but that's not what is at issue) but people seem to think that means a dialectologist or elocutionist, and again, are disappointed. My father-in-law insists on calling me a `linguistician'. :-( What can I do to get a comprehensible, yet glam, job-title. This mailing list seems to be the ideal forum for the question... what does a theoretical phonologist who doesn't teach or speak languages call themself? Everyone out there must have had a similar problem. Perhaps I could collect replies by email (scobbie@csli.stanford.edu) to save bandwidth. To hope for the answer to the follow-up `what's that all about then' question would be too much I suppose. -- ------- James M. Scobbie: Dept of Linguistics, Stanford University, CA 94305-2150 __________________________________________________________________________ 3) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 91 15:50:21 -0500 From: "Michael Kac" Who is and isn't a linguist The question of who is and isn't a linguist is a question that is fraught with pain for some people. As a member (and now chair) of a department that has both theoretical and applied components, this is a matter that has been discussed quite a bit in my precincts and I'm no closer to having a resolution of it than I have ever been. But I'll pass on some thoughts anyway. First of all, I think that there are clear cases where anyone would say about X 'Yes, X is a linguist'. If X holds a degree in linguistics and works on syntax or phonology, publishing the results of this work in such journals as Language, NLLT, L&P, or LI then that person is virtually certain to be a linguist. There are also obviously clear negative cases, though very uninteresting ones. Einstein wasn't a linguist. The difficult cases involve people whose work DOES have something to do with language. Some of these people are, both by training and orientation, so far removed from anything that goes on in isntitutionalized linguistics, even in some of its most obscure quarters, that one could say with confidence 'No, they're not linguists.' But where precisely do we put people in such fields as: communication disorders; psychology of language; philosophy of language; structuralist criticism (to name a few categories)? I know people in most of the aforementioned categories, and they differ. The person in CDIS I know best is highly knowedgeable about linguistics but was not trained as a linguist. On the other hand, my best friend from graduate school days, whose degree is in linguistics and who considers herself a linguist, is in many ways much more like people in CDIS and is farther away from what we think of as 'core' linguistics than the first person I mentioned. To a certain extent it has also to do with how you think. I once had an extremely interesting conversation with a well known psychologist of language (degreed in psychology). We were in disagreement about something (I forget what it was) and I took a moment to try to think of an example of a sentence with a specific relevant property he had mentioned. I came up with the example, which prompted him to remark that this was the kind of thing he simply couldn't do and that this was what distinguished him from a linguist. Margaret Fleck (I think) remarked that in Britain a term like 'chemist' can be used to refer even to someone just studying chemistry. (There is of course another common British sense, namely 'pharmacist' -- but then there is that other sense of 'linguist' too that makes us all cringe!) To me, certain terms of this kind can be used to refer at least to someone who has aptitude for a particular subject. I've had students in my courses from other fields about whom I could easily say '(S)he's a good linguist', meaning '(S)he's good at linguistics'. I believe that a term like 'mathematician' can be used in the same way. Some nonlinguists have had sufficient influence on our field that they have been given more or less honorary linguist status. Richard Montague is the best example that comes to mind. But I still don't think of him as a linguist -- though I certainly do think of Barbara Partee as one! A litmus test: is Roger Schank a linguist? And, as long as we're on this topic: what is a philologist? Michael Kac P.S. Here's another relevant anecdote. At a talk I heard some years ago by yet another psychologist, the audience was at one point asked to identify what the words 'bat', 'ball' and 'diamond' have in common. The answer sought, and the one most people gave (they were nearly all nonlinguists), was that the three words all have to do with baseball. But a colleague of mine remarked as we were leaving afterward that her answer would have been 'They all begin with voiced stops'. I think that what makes her answer a linguist's answer par excellence is not merely that it makes use of the conceptual apparatus and technical verbiage of phonetics but that whereas the majority answer had to do with the meanings of the words, she focused immediately on form. P.P.S. I once heard a mathematical colleague of mine here describe W.V.O. Quine as someone who doesn't know any mathematics. So who's a mathematician? I don't think we're alone in this. Michael Kac __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-545. ________________________________________________________________ Message: 9541882, 289 lines Posted: 12:44pm EDT, Sat Sep 21/91, imported: 12:53pm EDT, Sat Sep 21/91 Subject: 2.546 Queries To: linguistics-l, LINGUIST@TAMVM1 From: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU Sender: LINGUIST@TAMVM1 ReplyTo: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-2-546. Sat 21 Sep 1991. Lines: 300 Subject: 2.546 Queries Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 20:23:20 EDT From: Alexis Manaster Ramer Subject: Stieber's Law 2) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 10:44:42 CDT From: Ted Pedersen Subject: Border Language 3) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 13:36:24 EST From: decio@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Gabriel Decio) Subject: query 4) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 18:01:40 EDT From: Ron Smyth Subject: Re: 2.531 Warning 5) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 91 15:11:50 EST From: j.guy@trl.oz.au (Jacques Guy) Subject: Let's change the subject please 6) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 91 12:26:46 EST From: Leslie Subject: Software to get IPA in Word Perfect 7) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 91 09:40:19 CDT From: kovach@austin.cogsci.uiuc.edu (Edward Kovach) Subject: Classics notes 8) Date: Sat, 21 Sep 91 15:56:43 BST From: WHEATLJS@ibm3090.computer-centre.birmingham.ac.uk Subject: SMALL TALK 9) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 91 09:31 EDT From: Jean Veronis Subject: Q: Feature structures 10) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 1991 15:35 EDT From: Robert D Hoberman Subject: Bilingual brain and language attrition -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 20:23:20 EDT From: Alexis Manaster Ramer Subject: Stieber's Law If I may repeat a query I posted over the summer (hoping that some of you who were then on vacation will be able to help), I am trying to find out who first proposed that analogical processes may NOT affect the phonemic system of a language (create new phonemes, redistribute allophones, etc.). The earliest formulation of this I now know is by the Polish linguist Stieber (first name Zdzislaw, I think) in the 1930's, but he does not sound as though he thought this up. And I am SURE it was NOT Max Weinreich. __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 10:44:42 CDT From: Ted Pedersen Subject: Border Language I am interested in finding out if anyone is doing linguistic research on the impact of Spanish on English and English on Spanish in our border areas with Mexico. Has anyone theorized that a "new" language may emerge? Any researchers known or publications seen would be very helpful. Thanks, Ted Pedersen University of Arkansas __________________________________________________________________________ 3) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 13:36:24 EST From: decio@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Gabriel Decio) Subject: query I'm doing research on THEMATIC ROLES in the Spanish language. I would appreciate suggestions about bibliography on: * thematic roles in the Spanish language * event structure in the Spanish language Bibliography welcome in English, Spanish, Italian, French, and German. Thanks, Gabriel Decio decio@mace.cc.purdue.edu Dept. of English Purdue University __________________________________________________________________________ 4) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 18:01:40 EDT From: Ron Smyth Subject: Re: 2.531 Warning What does 'posted' mean? It has been mentioned a few times, and I've seen it in the US, but it's not in my (Canadian) dialect. My guess is that it's some sort of generic warning about trespassing, hunting, snowmobiling, fishing, and gathering wild mushrooms, but it could mean that the land has been staked off with posts. --- Puzzled. smyth@lake.scar.utoronto.ca __________________________________________________________________________ 5) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 91 15:11:50 EST From: j.guy@trl.oz.au (Jacques Guy) Subject: Let's change the subject please Contrary to what earlier posting may have suggested, what I am interested in is: (1) the decipherment of still unknown languages, e.g. Easter Island tablets, Voynich manuscript. (2) the reconstruction of the filiation of languages (I just avoided the terms "lexicostatistics" and "glottochronology" on purpose) (3) the theories and methods developed thirty years ago by one Russian researcher by the name of B.V. Sukhotin. Anyone else with similar interests, please? __________________________________________________________________________ 6) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 91 12:26:46 EST From: Leslie Subject: Software to get IPA in Word Perfect I have been using an IBM PC since 1983, but I can't get most IPA symbols with i t (using Word Perfect and the departmental laser printer I am connected to). N ow there is a chance I could get my university to buy me a computer, but I'm no t sure what to ask for. The folks in my computer center advise me to switch to Macintosh, and I have seen some ads for software (from Ecological Linguistics) that look pretty good. Does anyone have any suggestions? I probably could ge t $3,000-4,000, but I would like that to include a laser printer so that I coul d ensure that the printer will print all of the symbols my software will genera te. Other alphabets would be nice, but they aren't crucial (except the usual E uropean stuff, like unlauts and accents). Most important would be to get all t he IPA symbols. Advise Welcome. Leslie Barratt (EJLESBB@INDST.BITNET) __________________________________________________________________________ 7) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 91 09:40:19 CDT From: kovach@austin.cogsci.uiuc.edu (Edward Kovach) Subject: Classics notes I am looking for the addresses of notes files and/or listservers which deal with the Ancient Classics - ie Latin, Greek, their literature, and the history and culture of this period. Please e-mail any information you have to me. Thank you, Edward G. Kovach kovach@austin.cogsci.uiuc.edu __________________________________________________________________________ 8) Date: Sat, 21 Sep 91 15:56:43 BST From: WHEATLJS@ibm3090.computer-centre.birmingham.ac.uk Subject: SMALL TALK I have an MA student ( actualy my first!) doing a project rather than a thesis on small talk. She already has a huge and well recorded corpus of party talk. Can anyone ot there recommend some apt reading? Thanking you John Wheatley __________________________________________________________________________ 9) Date: Thu, 19 Sep 91 09:31 EDT From: Jean Veronis Subject: Q: Feature structures Two questions on feature structures: 1) In most of the work I know, unification of two disjunctive feature structures involves unfactoring the two features structures to their disjunctive normal form. In that case, it seems that there is no way to assign a particular disjunctive format to the resulting feature structure: it has to be in disjunctive normal form too. However, it seems to me that in many cases, the result of the unification has a possible disjunctive format. For example, it seems reasonable to think that the unification of the two following feature structures +-- --+ +-- --+ | A: a1 | | A: a1 | | | | E: e1 | | / \ | | | | | +- -+ | | | / \ | | | | B: b1 | | | | | +- -+ | | | | | C: c1 | | | | | | B: b1 | | | | / +- -+ \ | | | | D: d1 | | | | \ +- -+ / | | / +- -+ \ | | | | B: b2 | | | | \ +- -+ / | | | | C: c2 | | | | | | B: b2 | | | | | +- -+ | | | | | D: d2 | | | | \ / | | | +- -+ | | +-- --+ | \ / | +-- --+ will yield a feature structure formatted in the following way: +-- --+ | A: a1 | | E: e1 | | | | / \ | | | +- -+ | | | | | B: b1 | | | | | | C: c1 | | | | | | D: d1 | | | | / +- -+ \ | | \ +- -+ / | | | | B: b2 | | | | | | C: c2 | | | | | | D: d2 | | | | | +- -+ | | | \ / | +-- --+ Of course, this is a simple case where the two feature structures have very similar formats. In the general case, it is more difficult to define what the resulting format should be. Does anybody know a definition a unification for disjunctive feature structures that would assign a disjunctive format to the result? Any reference? 2) Does anybody know any attempt to use feature structures as a data model in general-purpose database systems? Thanks, Jean Veronis ps: please reply to LN. __________________________________________________________________________ 10) Date: Fri, 20 Sep 1991 15:35 EDT From: Robert D Hoberman Subject: Bilingual brain and language attrition In 1989-90 my English-speaking daughter attended kindergarten in Israel and became a near-native speaker of Hebrew. She still speaks Hebrew, though she has lost some fluency and vocabulary in the year since we returned to the US from Israel. Yesterday she told me, in English, a story she had seen in a video, in Hebrew, in her kindergarten. She had never retold the story before, and it was unfamiliar to me and my wife. When I asked her to tell it in Hebrew she said she couldn't because she had forgotten some of the words. What does this suggest about the mental storage of information by bilinguals? That the story exists in memory somehow apart from its embodiment in language? That she was translating from a latent remembered verbal script which is otherwise not accessible, at least not easily or fully? Since my daughter can still speak Hebrew moderately well, I can't prove that she's incapable of telling the story in Hebrew, but what if I could -- say, if she were no longer speaking Hebrew at all. Has anyone examined data of this kind? Bob Hoberman __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-546. ________________________________________________________________ Message: 9541930, 197 lines Posted: 12:52pm EDT, Sat Sep 21/91, imported: 1:10pm EDT, Sat Sep 21/91 Subject: 2.547 Varia: Conference, Games, Being To: linguistics-l, LINGUIST@TAMVM1 From: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU Sender: LINGUIST%TAMVM1.BITNET@umix.cc.umich.edu ReplyTo: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-2-547. Sat 21 Sep 1991. Lines: 207 Subject: 2.547 Varia: Conference, Games, Being Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 14:50 PDT From: Luc Moritz Subject: WCCFL XI at UCLA 2) Date: Tue, 17 Sep 91 11:40:05 PDT From: Larry Gillick Subject: Language games in Esperanto 3) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 08:40:07 EDT From: "Bruce E. Nevin" Subject: unbearable elision of being -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 14:50 PDT From: Luc Moritz Subject: WCCFL XI at UCLA ******************************************************************************* *********************************************************************** WCCFL XI/1992 AT UCLA CALL FOR PAPERS You are invited to submit abstracts for 20 minute papers to be presented at the Eleventh West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL XI) which will be held at UCLA, February 21-23, 1992. Papers representing all aspects of formal linguistics will be considered. Abstracts should be anonymous, no more than one page, single spaced, with all margins at least one inch wide, and typed in 12 point type or larger. An additional page with examples and references may be included. Submissions are limited to 1 individual and/or 1 collective abstract per person. Ten copies of the abstract along with a 3" by 5" card with paper title, name of author(s), affiliation, address, phone number and e-mail address should be sent to: WCCFL XI Abstract Committee UCLA Dept. of Linguistics 405 Hilgard Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90024-1543 Deadline for receipt of abstracts is November 30, 1991. Late abstracts will only be reviewed if postmarked by november 25, 1991. No abstract arriving after December 6, 1991 will be reviewed. Conference schedule and further announcements will be issued later. Inquiries may be addressed via e-mail to : wccfl@cognet.ucla.edu __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Tue, 17 Sep 91 11:40:05 PDT From: Larry Gillick Subject: Language games in Esperanto Here are two language games in Esperanto. BAZEG' ESPERANT': Every open-class word in Esperanto (N, Adj, V, and most Adv) is marked with a vowel-initial ending indicating its category and inflection. E.g., all nominative plural nouns end in -oj (the "j" is as in IPA, so this is like "oy"), all accusative singular adjectives in -an, all past-tense verbs in -is, and all derived adverbs in -e. Esperanto stress is uniformly penultimate, which for these open-class words puts it on the syllable preceding the ending. While one ending may be changed to another to change category (e.g., "vetero" 'weather' yields "vetera" 'meteorological'), the ending may be dropped in only one, very limited situation: In poetry the noun nominative singular ending "-o" may be elided, leaving the stress on what is now the final syllable, and indicating the elision in writing by an apostrophe: "veter'". In "Bazeg' Esperant'" ALL endings are dropped. The name means 'very basic Esperanto' ("bazega Esperanto", modified according to the rule). An interesting grey area is the set of functors ending in "-au" with a breve over the u [often ASCIIfied as "- aux"; the nonsyllabic "short u" is used only in diphthongs]. This group includes adverbs (preskaux 'almost'), prepositions (cxirkaux 'around'; "cx" ASCIIfies c-circumflex, a palato- alveolar voiceless affricate like English "ch"), and others (adiaux 'goodbye'). Unlike the productive endings, "-aux" does not indicate a particular syntactic function and cannot be replaced by a productive ending. In Bazeg' Esperant', as best I remember, sometimes it is removed. Since the remaining "stem", unlike the stem of an open-class word, is never heard in normal Esperanto without the distinctive "ending", the effect is especially striking and may bring an extra laugh to the game, as when someone leaves the group with (final-stressed) "Adi'!" I've heard this game played by many US Esperantists; I haven't been active in the Esperanto community for a number of years, and I have no idea whether it's still around, or whether it's used beyond the US. DIABLEZO: I think this game may be the invention of a particular Northern California Esperantist, a friend whose name, alas!, escapes me. The name could be translated as 'Devilspeak' or "Diabolese". The rule is to spell and pronounce backward, but precise memory fails me as to the scope of the rule: whether the word stem as a whole, or each morpheme, or each non-inflectional morpheme. In the examples I'll suppose the last. Since Esperanto spelling is designedly a one-to-one map of the phonology, the pronunciation is also reversed. There are none of the grapheme- phoneme difficulties inherent in English spelling (e.g., "though" to "hguoht"), but phonotactic violations abound. "Esperanto" becomes "Repseanto" (phonology OK), "diablezo" -> "*lbaidezo", and "Mi amas vin" ('I love you') -> "Im maas *ivn." ("Maas", in two syllables, is phonologically OK.) Mark Mandel (regardless of Larry Gillick's name in the header) __________________________________________________________________________ 3) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 91 08:40:07 EDT From: "Bruce E. Nevin" Subject: unbearable elision of being Phil Bralich writes in 2.534: >Specifically, Susan Ervin-Tripp was wondering what would explain the lack >of -ing in some examples of Harris. Two of the examples are repeated in (1). > (1) Don't be the mommy. I am not being the mommy. > Don't be horrid. I am not being horrid. >In examples like this the lack of the word being is explained quite naturally >by the use of the English tenses. An imperative cannot make a command with >a progressive form of the verb simply because the progressive refers to >actions in progress while the imperative seeks to initiate an action. Since >the action the imperative is seeking to initiate is NOT in progress the pro- >gressive form of the verb is not used. These sentence variations have nothing >to do with adjectives. The following is a common imperative in many dialects of English: Don't be swinging on that bannister! The problem is rather with the use of the progressive with an adjective, noun, or preposition which, because its sense is more durative relative to that of verbs, (a) requires be to carry tense morphology and (b) yes, is difficult to construe as progressing as opposed to not. >a digression, but maybe an interesting one. >(1) I don't want Susie to be the mommy. Every time Susie bes the mommy, >she spanks us too much. >(5) They always be the cowboys. They be'd the cowboys yesterday. >My last example is from a real English folk-song. The speaker is a >pregnant woman: >(7) And if it bes a girl-child she'll stay at home with me > And if it bes a boy, he will plough the dark blue sea > He'll plough the dark blue sea as his daddy's done before... All of the above sounds like the stative use of the copula in Black English which, as I recall, derives directly from statives in Wolof and other West African languages. This usage and others have spread to non-Black kids' talk a lot in urban schools. Use in a "real English folk song" I would take to be folk process influenced by Black English in recent times. But perhaps someone can come up with bona fide examples of English dialectal usage unlikely to be influenced through the effect of American Black English on folk music and bohemian bonhomie. >In some dialects, and perhaps historically, this regularly-inflected >"be" can be used by adults to mean "turn out / eventuate to be". >(6) Perhaps my [unborn] baby will be a girl. This seems to me the ordinary use of be as tense-carrier with a noun. The "turn out / eventuate" sense is carried with "will," no? Bruce Nevin bn@bbn.com __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-547. ________________________________________________________________ Message: 9548596, 74 lines Posted: 8:27am EDT, Mon Sep 23/91, imported: 8:35am EDT, Mon Sep 23/91 Subject: 2.548 Chomskyite To: linguistics-l, LINGUIST@TAMVM1 From: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU Sender: LINGUIST@TAMVM1 ReplyTo: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-2-548. Mon 23 Sep 1991. Lines: 73 Subject: 2.548 Chomskyite Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sat, 21 Sep 91 14:41:18 EDT From: Geoffrey Russom Subject: Re: 2.541 Chomskyite 2) Date: Sat, 21 Sep 91 18:44 PDT From: Vicki Fromkin Subject: Re: 2.541 Chomskyite 3) Date: Sat, 21 Sep 91 18:47:52 -0500 From: "Michael Kac" Subject: Re: 2.541 Chomskyite -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sat, 21 Sep 91 14:41:18 EDT From: Geoffrey Russom Subject: Re: 2.541 Chomskyite Could it be that the pejorative connotations of "-ist" for some people have to do with its relation to "-ism"? In circles where "theory" is viewed with suspicion (just the facts, ma'am), founders or adherents of theories showing a tendency to spread would naturally be viewed with alarm. __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Sat, 21 Sep 91 18:44 PDT From: Vicki Fromkin Subject: Re: 2.541 Chomskyite Only the anti-Lovestoneites called them Lovestoneites. VAF __________________________________________________________________________ 3) Date: Sat, 21 Sep 91 18:47:52 -0500 From: "Michael Kac" Subject: Re: 2.541 Chomskyite The interesting comments of the numerous net subscribers who have sought to both analyze and bring additional data to bear on the -an/-ite distinction prompt the following codicil to my original query on the subject. First: In cases where *-ite*, as in *Paiseleyite*, is the ONLY suffix in use to mean 'follower of', perhaps it is reasonable to not expect pejorative content. So maybe the issue should be down to whether, when there is a contrast of suffixes one of which is *-ite*, *-ite* is or tends to be pejorative. Second: It may be that to use *-ite* in a nonpolitical context (e.g. in characterizing linguists as accepting the views of a well known member of their profession) carries with it for that very reason a pejorative conno- tation, suggesting that for any X, an X-ite is a follower for ideological or political reasons, not intellectual ones. Comments welcome, of course. Michael Kac __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-548. ________________________________________________________________ Message: 9548657, 73 lines Posted: 8:28am EDT, Mon Sep 23/91, imported: 8:38am EDT, Mon Sep 23/91 Subject: 2.549 Warning To: linguistics-l, LINGUIST@TAMVM1 From: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU Sender: LINGUIST@TAMVM1 ReplyTo: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-2-549. Mon 23 Sep 1991. Lines: 72 Subject: 2.549 Warning Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sat, 21 Sep 1991 14:38:55 -0500 From: Mimi Klaiman Subject: WARNING 2) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 91 9:56:55 EST From: bert peeters Subject: 2.539 Warning -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sat, 21 Sep 1991 14:38:55 -0500 From: Mimi Klaiman Subject: WARNING I agree with Christine Kamprath that it's dangerous to ascribe the differing content of German, French and other warning messages to cultural differences. Last time I rode the Calcutta subway--earlier this year--there were Hindi and Bengali language versions of a warning about leaning on the sliding exit/entrance doors. The Hindi one merely said leaning on the doors is forbidden, while the Bengali one more solicitously said that leaning on the doors is dangerous. I didn't ask anyone but I doubt it would have been unnatural had the Bengali one like the Hindi one simply forbidden people to lean on the doors. M.H. Klaiman __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 91 9:56:55 EST From: bert peeters Subject: 2.539 Warning > From: LIFY460@orange.cc.utexas.edu (Christine Kamprath) > This is in reply to Bruce Fraser's suggestion that the different content > of warning signs in French, German and Italian may be some indication > of cultural difference. WARNING: it's very dangerous to start thinking > along those lines. > (...) > I just don't > think we can make any inferences about cultural differences from how > these signs are worded, especially not the French, German and Italian > ones. WARNING: :-) It is AS DANGEROUS to ignore the possibility of cultural differences as it is to underwrite their existence unreservedly. Christine Kamprath seems to come very close to doing the former, whereas Bruce Fraser (whose side I choose in this discussion) is not quite doing the latter (cf. the wording above - I trust it reflects Fraser's real views: "may be some indication of cultural difference"). --------------------------------------------------------------------- Dr Bert Peeters Tel: +61 02 202344 Department of Modern Languages 002 202344 University of Tasmania at Hobart Fax: 002 207813 GPO Box 252C Bert.Peeters@modlang.utas.edu.au Hobart TAS 7001 Australia __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-549. ________________________________________________________________ Message: 9548723, 102 lines Posted: 8:31am EDT, Mon Sep 23/91, imported: 8:41am EDT, Mon Sep 23/91 Subject: 2.550 Linguist To: linguistics-l, LINGUIST@TAMVM1 From: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU Sender: LINGUIST@TAMVM1 ReplyTo: linguist%tamsun.tamu.edu@pucc.PRINCETON.EDU ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-2-550. Mon 23 Sep 1991. Lines: 104 Subject: 2.550 Linguist Moderators: Anthony Aristar (e311aa@tamuts.tamu.edu) Helen Dry (hdry@emunix.emich.edu) -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 91 10:31:08 +0800 From: marke@cs.uwa.oz.au Subject: What is a linguist? 2) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 91 13:53:10 EST From: RGAGNE@ucs.indiana.edu Subject: linguist... 3) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 91 14:39:30 EDT From: Alexis_Manaster_Ramer@mts.cc.wayne.edu Subject: 2.545 Linguist 4) Date: Sat, 21 Sep 91 14:48:25 EDT From: Geoffrey Russom Subject: Re: 2.545 Linguist -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 91 10:31:08 +0800 From: marke@cs.uwa.oz.au Subject: What is a linguist? My answer to this question is an adaptation of the definition of AI (that's Artificial Intelligence, not the other one) we were given in an honours course on the subject, some years ago: AI is whatever you can get a grant for by calling AI. In a parallel formation, perhaps a linguist is anyone who can get a job by calling themselves a linguist. That's pragmatism. Unfortunately, it doesn't help Jim Scobbie's need for a glamorous job title. What he had to call himself to get his job probably won't register with the great unwashed. marke. __________________________________________________________________________ 2) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 91 13:53:10 EST From: RGAGNE@ucs.indiana.edu Subject: linguist... Another anecdote to go with those from Michael Kac. I was taking a Beowulf course in an English department once, and the teacher asked, a propos of the line we were on, what was interesting about a particular noun there. After a short silence I said that it iwas in the dative, which surprised me in that context. The teacher replied (essentially) "So what?" Turned out that he was after the poetic effect gained by the use of that particular vocabulary item. Dative, shmative, was his attitude. I was startled at the depth of the chasm (in that instance) between a linguist (in a philologist's hat) and that literary critic. Not so much because he hadn't had the dative case in mind, but because once it came up he remained profoundly and unalterably uninterested. Elise Morse-Gagne __________________________________________________________________________ 3) Date: Sun, 22 Sep 91 14:39:30 EDT From: Alexis_Manaster_Ramer@mts.cc.wayne.edu Subject: 2.545 Linguist In many computer science contexts, anybody who is a computational linguist or even an expert in NLP (two rather different things) is liable to be called a linguist, even though within the computational linguistics (and NLP) community, there is a fairly clear distinction made between the computational linguists who are linguists (e.g., Carl Pollard) and those are computer scientists, logicians, or what have you (e.g., Stu Shieber). And, as far as I can tell, people usually have no trouble identifying themselves. __________________________________________________________________________ 4) Date: Sat, 21 Sep 91 14:48:25 EDT From: Geoffrey Russom Subject: Re: 2.545 Linguist Michael Kak asserts that "Einstein wasn't a linguist" counts as a totally uncontroversial and therefore uninteresting statement. But I read somewhere that the theory of relativity was inspired in part by Einstein's contacts with a Swiss scholar who introduced him to the concept of dialectal variation. Maybe not so uninteresting ... __________________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-2-550.