________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-3-401. Tue 12 May 1992. Lines: 49 Subject: 3.401 Job: Salk Institute Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 6 May 92 10:15 PST From: Subject: Salk Insitute job -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 6 May 92 10:15 PST From: Subject: Salk Insitute job NEW RESEARCH POSITION SALK INSTITUTE FOR BIOLOGICAL STUDIES A new research position has become available for studying the development of sign language and spatial cognition in deaf and hearing children. The candidate will work with a team of deaf and hearing researchers and must be fluent (or nearly fluent) in American Sign Language; the candidate should have an interest in language acquisition and psycholinguistics. A degree (BA, MA, or PhD) in linguistics, psychology, or cognitive science is desirable but not mandatory. Both deaf and hearing researchers are encouraged to apply. The position can begin as early as June 1st. Please send a vita and a letter describing your interests to: Dr. Ursula Bellugi Laboratory for Language and Cognitive Studies The Salk Institute 10010 North Torrey Pines Rd. La Jolla, CA 92037 For more information, you can contact Dr. Karen Emmorey at voice: (619) 453 - 4100, ext. 417, or TDD: (619) 453 - 5470, or e-mail: emmorey@salk.bitnet -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-401. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-3-402. Tue 12 May 1992. Lines: 95 Subject: 3.402 Queries: Language-Speakers, Syntax, Texts Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: 09 May 92 16:09:17 EDT From: Michael Sikillian/Annotext <76264.1323@compuserve.com> Subject: Who SPEAKS languages? 2) Date: Tue, 12 May 92 10:36:58 EDT From: Michael Newman Subject: Syntax query 3) Date: Tue, 12 May 92 13:58:35 -0400 From: gb661@csc.albany.edu (BROADWELL GEORGE AARON) Subject: syntax textbooks -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: 09 May 92 16:09:17 EDT From: Michael Sikillian/Annotext <76264.1323@compuserve.com> Subject: Who SPEAKS languages? >>From: Vicki Fromkin >>A much better response than being asked "How many languages do you speak?" >> While that may still be the layperson's view of our >>field, it is no longer the view among scientists and academicians across >>the board. Vicki Fromkin This raises an interesting issue: if linguists do not focus on learning many different languages, then are there any academics who do? Or are they mostly translators? Is it correct to assume that linguiists concerned with formalized grammars and symbol systems, rather than actually using language? (The analogy couls be made between a statistician and raw data) Michael Sikillian -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Tue, 12 May 92 10:36:58 EDT From: Michael Newman Subject: Syntax query A member of the TESL-L list asked why it was possible to say I can't remember the first time (that) I played golf but not I can't remember the first time when I played golf Clearly the explanation revolves around the adverbial nature of the WHEN- clause. My response centered around that fact. Yet, I am not certain what exactly the role of THE FIRST TIME is in all this. Obviously it is some kind of modifier. Notionally, it seems to have an adverbial type role. Is it a specifier of some kind though? And why is following perfectly fine? Have you forgotten the first time when we played golf and these antigolf fana- tics invaded the country club, stole all the ball and filled the sand traps with quicksand? Michael Newman -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) Date: Tue, 12 May 92 13:58:35 -0400 From: gb661@csc.albany.edu (BROADWELL GEORGE AARON) Subject: syntax textbooks I need to order a textbook for a 2nd semester undergraduate syntax class. We used Radford for the first semester, and I considering either Cowper or Haegeman for the second semester. Has anyone out there used either of these books? Were you happy with them? Post to me, and I'll summarize if there is interest. Thanks, ****************************************************************************** Aaron Broadwell, Dept. of Linguistics, University at Albany -- SUNY, Albany, NY 12222 gb661@thor.albany.edu ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Linguist List: Vol-3-402. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-3-403. Wed 13 May 1992. Lines: 139 Subject: 3.403 Human Subjects Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Tue, 12 May 92 10:29:49 EDT From: peter@sug.org (Peter Salus) Subject: Re: 3.399 Human Subjects 2) Date: Tue, 12 May 1992 14:34 EDT From: SJS97@ALBNYVMS.bitnet Subject: Re: 3.399 Human Subjects 3) Date: Tue, 12 May 92 21:53:36 EST From: Ronnie Wilbur Subject: human subjects 4) Date: Tue, 12 May 92 22:36 CST From: ASHELDON@vx.acs.umn.edu Subject: Re: 3.399 Human Subjects -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Tue, 12 May 92 10:29:49 EDT From: peter@sug.org (Peter Salus) Subject: Re: 3.399 Human Subjects In 1975/76, the Human Subjects Committee of the University of Toronto required full permission forms for research in which I was the PI which involved (a) a word association test and (b) the videotaping of several ASL signers "telling" the same story. Peter H. Salus peter@sug.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Tue, 12 May 1992 14:34 EDT From: SJS97@ALBNYVMS.bitnet Subject: Re: 3.399 Human Subjects I'd like to say a few words about the need for human subjects approval. I teach courses in ethnographic fieldwork, discourse analysis, and socio- linguistics. Routinely, my students enrolled in the fieldwork course, which requires a semester's long project on an interaction setting of their choosing, must submit a request for approval from the university's human subjects research officer. In actuality, I assemble their applications (a brief description of the context and a signed informed consent form froms omeo someone "in charge" of the setting/institution where interaction will be observed/recorded), answer all the questions on the human subjects form for the class as a whole, and submit a single packet to the research officer. I find that by guaranteeing confidentiality (students are even asked to use pseudonyms when describing their fieldwork experiences in class and in their reports), indicating that no psychological measures will be taken, no stressful manipulations will be made ... etc., I am able to get what is called an "expedited review." The difference between anonymously photographing/videotaping people and using informants for linguistic/ethnographic research is that with the latter the "subjects" are known to the researcher. While I agree that filling out the request forms is an annoyance, it seems a small formality as part of ensuring that students are aware of how they must handle their relationships with informants and the subsequent data collected. One of the problems I've not yet seen addressed is what to do with non-literate peoples. In the case of minors, our university requires that we secure parental permission. But what about research on adults who are unable to read or to understand the concept of informed consent? Stuart J. Sigman Dept. of Communication, and Dept. of Linguistics/Cognitive Science University at Albany, SUNY -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) Date: Tue, 12 May 92 21:53:36 EST From: Ronnie Wilbur Subject: human subjects M. Fleck asks about the difference between a voice recording and a picture. We use videotape, but otherwise do not ask our subjects to "work". Our most recent human subjects review, for nothing more than signing in front of a videocamera, received an expedited review, but with a 'low risk' rating, rather than a 'no risk' rating. my understanding is that the issue here is confidentiality [as a potential risk]. in this regard, our humans subjects review committee, which i have never felt as hassling us, would clearly conside r computer vision recordings without subject consetn as a violation of the intent, if not the letter, of the law. our consent forms now ask if 1) we may show the videotapes to other researchers, 2) we may show the tapes to our students, 3) we may extract still pictures for use in publications, and 4) we may thank the subject by name in the published article. it is my impression that we are looking a review committees that are feeling very defensive about liability in case somebody decides their rights were violated and decides to sue, for whatever reason. while our consent form is ridiculously detailed, and we provide a copy to each subject for their own regards, i can at least have some confidence in the backing of the university should i need to be prote cted, since they have approved my procedures, etc. what price peace of mind!! a blanket project, approved for the faculty member as PI, and taking care to make sure that each student uses the approved consent form and procedure, can eliminate a lot of paperwork and waiting. theses and dissertations, as well as separate funded projects, all still require separate approval. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) Date: Tue, 12 May 92 22:36 CST From: ASHELDON@vx.acs.umn.edu Subject: Re: 3.399 Human Subjects It seems to me to be an exaggeration to say that "linguists are being hassled for tape recording subjects wqithout elaborate permission" or that subjects need to give more than oral permission (Margaret Fleck). It's a good idea to check with your University's Human Subject Committee requirements. They most likely will give you a template permission form, the details of which you can fill in to tailor it to your own study's constraints. The HSC is looking for assurance that the subjects are giving informed consent. For *any* study this is spelled out to mean that the subject can refuse to continue at any time without prejudice, that they know what they are consenting to do, that they know all the uses that the data coollected from them will be, that they have the right to have any recorded data erased, and that they know what will happen to the recorded material after the project is over. This seems pretty fair. The HSC will most likely expedite the review of such a protocol, and allow it to serve for a number of studies over, say a year, before routinely reviewing it again. Amy Sheldon -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-403. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-3-404. Fri 15 May 1992. Lines: 278 Subject: 3.404 Chomsky citations Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 13 May 1992 10:05 EST From: Mark H Aronoff Subject: Re: 3.396 Chomsky Citations 2) Date: Wed, 13 May 1992 19:50 CST From: Leo Obrst Subject: Re: 3.396 Chomsky Citations 3) Date: Wed, 13 May 92 15:29:35 -0600 From: info3@hal.unm.edu (Mahoney) Subject: Chomsky Citations 4) Date: Wed, 13 May 92 12:48:37 -0400 From: dever@pogo.isp.pitt.edu (Dan Everett) Subject: Re: 3.396 Chomsky Citations 5) Date: 13 May 1992 23:20 EDT From: Robert Beard Subject: The "Black Hole" of pre-Chomskyan citations 6) Date: Thu, 14 May 92 16:23:03 CDT From: SLCAMP%LSUVM@RICEVM1.RICE.EDU Subject: Re: 3.396 Chomsky Citations 7) Date: Fri, 15 May 1992 14:41 PDT From: HSLAPOLLA@ccvax.as.edu.tw Subject: Re: 3.396 Chomsky Citations -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 13 May 1992 10:05 EST From: Mark H Aronoff Subject: Re: 3.396 Chomsky Citations SUBJECT: RE: 3.396 Chomsky Citations Linguists have a tendency to think that both they and their field are special. The failure to cite work outside one's time or paradigm is very general and stems from the social nature of academic discourse and society. It's just as common in biology and physics as it is in linguistics, or in deconstructionist theology, for that matter. So, don't worry, be happy. Cite Sapir if you want to, or Baudouin de Courtenay, my current favorite, but stop thinking that we're special or chosen (though some of us clearly are!). -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Wed, 13 May 1992 19:50 CST From: Leo Obrst Subject: Re: 3.396 Chomsky Citations I think that the large number of Chomsky citations in linguistics is unfortunately due largely to the authoritarian nature of the Chomsky-spawned linguistics that gets done: theory is simply not acceptable until it has received the imprimatur of Chomsky, by his penning an essay or book which incorporates a student's or accolyte's idea. This is not so much an impugnment of Chomsky: I personally think he is a great linguist (and political observer); it is rather an impugnment of the Chomsky disciples. I gather that the ship of modern (generative) linguistics is so terribly tossed in the gales of (what counts as) science that every hand looks to the captain for guidance. And so, too often, the captain wears a halo. I think that Chomsky would be cited less if linguistics was either more of a science than it is or at least more than its practitioners seem to believe. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) Date: Wed, 13 May 92 15:29:35 -0600 From: info3@hal.unm.edu (Mahoney) Subject: Chomsky Citations Although I am a faithful reader of the LINGUIST, I rarely contribute. This is a case, however, where I feel I can contribute with confidence, since I am a professional librarian (and a linguist by avocation only at this point). It is clear that the large majority of citations to the work of Chomsky are to his linguistic works, rather than to the more political ones. I looked briefly at the citations to the works of Chomsky published in the 1980's. I used the three databases produced by the Institute for Scientific Information: Arts & Humanities Search, Science Citation Index, and Social SciSearch. These are the primary source for citation counts in all fields. Note that the citation indexes look primarily at journal article references. Also note that I did not delve into things in detail, that I made these counts based on short titles only, and that I am not an expert in the works of Chomsky. Overall, for the three databases, less than 5% of the citations appear to be to Chomsky's nonlinguistic works (remember, these are citations to works published in the 1980's only). The percentages did vary between the three databases: Arts & Humanities-------approx 3% to nonlinguistic works Social SciSearch--------approx 7% to nonlinguistic works Science Citation Index--much <1% to nonlinguistic works Donna Cromer Centennial Science and Engineering Library Univ of New Mexico info3@hal.unm.edu -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) Date: Wed, 13 May 92 12:48:37 -0400 From: dever@pogo.isp.pitt.edu (Dan Everett) Subject: Re: 3.396 Chomsky Citations I agree with Mark Durie that it is less curious that Chomsky is cited so much than that others before him are cited so little, at least by linguists. For example, two of the most important issues in multilinear phonology, one fairly recent, the other around since the 70's, are many-to-one mapping between tones and vowels and *prosodic licensing*, the notion that elements of one linguistic level must belong to units of a higher level (usually the next level up). Both of these notions are EXPLICIT principles of tagmemic phonology (on the first cf. the last two paragraphs of Pike & Pike 1947, then read the first line of the introduction to Goldsmith's 1976 PhD thesis for an interesting contrast; on the second principle, cf. Pike 1967 and his discussion of the `phonemic hierarchy'). One rarely sees Pike quoted in this regard (E. Selkirk has long been an exception to this pattern, though). Geoff Pullum's NLLT column on citation etiquette in linguistics takes up this general problem. This is partially understandable since a lot of Tagmemics' insights take the unappealing form of a disjoint set of ad-hoc commentaries on the last language Pike looked at. Nevertheless, there is no way to deny that Pike is responsible for some brilliant insights into human language. And Pike is just one example. There are plenty of others. It is not that anyone needs Chomsky to make their work respectable. That is clearly false, whether the individual is Saussure or a student. Still, if anyone were to seriously doubt that it is Chomsky, not Saussure, nor Bloomfield, nor Sapir, nor even Jakobson, who `put linguistics on the map' of the intellectual disciplines and who has done more to keep it there than anyone else is in need of some psychiatric help. Moreover, the fact that Chomsky publishes more than any other linguist (if I am wrong, please correct me - that would be interesting) doesn't hurt his citation index. His output is nearly Asimovian. His influence on the field can be seen even at the level of university administration: when a department chairperson wants to convince a university administrator that linguistics has natural intellectual ties to many departments, I do not think that they would drop the names of Saussure or Pike rather than Chomsky. It is worth considering the possibility that many of the citations of Chomsky's work could be due to ignorance - if he said it, or even if we think he did, just cite him and nobody will argue; why look for the *original* source? That's hard work and laziness too often prevails. But it is also true that, like it or not, the source of many of the most interesting ideas in history on human language came from 20D-219, MIT. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) Date: 13 May 1992 23:20 EDT From: Robert Beard Subject: The "Black Hole" of pre-Chomskyan citations Steve Anderson's new book on morphology should contain the follow- ing epigraph (if he didn't change it before publication): "Linguistics will become a science when linguists begin standing on one another's shoulders instead of one another's toes". I think he has a point. We have reached the point where we are redoing some aspects of language more poorly than they were done the first time. The problem may have originated from the fact that little had been done in syntax prior to the work of the generative school; little, that is, in comparison to what has been done since the instigation of that movement. Jakobson's and Halle's work in distinctive features also clearly superceded pre- vious work, making it difficult to find structuralist work relevant to what is going on today. However, Anderson is right in chiding us for carrying this attitude over to morphology, where the current trend in and around Massachusetts has hardly moved beyond Bloomfield, the first to claim that affixes are regular lexical items. First rate morphologi- cal study goes back to the Stoic philosophers, who were the first to tease apart grammatical categories and, on a different track, back to Panini. Not only is most current morphology failing to cite relevant sources, it is failing to take advantage of the discoveries of struc- turalist, neogrammarian, and even classical morphologists. These pre- decessors were particularly adept at finding problems in the theory of the linguistic sign. Varro (47-45) was the first to attempt to define lexical categories in terms of [+/-N, +/-V] as well as lexicalizations. Aristotle noticed that grammatical morphemes differed from lexical ones and the Stoics first used the terms "signifier" and "signified". I am jumping into the middle of this discussion but I think Mark has touched the real issue: it is less that Chomsky and other members of his school are quoted so much than that many others who make contri- butions -- often the same ones -- are quoted to little. The result which I am seeing more and more often is the second, third, fourth reinvention of the wheel. --RBeard -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) Date: Thu, 14 May 92 16:23:03 CDT From: SLCAMP%LSUVM@RICEVM1.RICE.EDU Subject: Re: 3.396 Chomsky Citations I'm neither surprised by the number of Chomsky citations, nor their nature, and I do agree that linguistics owes much of its current status to Chomsky's work. However, I don't think we ought to overemphasize the political citations, since, clearly, the linguistic ones come in droves. And, while Vicki's Nobel-Prize-Winners' citations speak to this point, let us not shun others that also give our profession honor -- one of my favorites is from Woody Allan, "The Whore of Mensa" (1972): I'm on the road a lot. You know how it is -- lonely ... Sure a guy can meet all the bimbos he wants. But really brainy women -- they're not easy to find on short notice." ... "Well, I heard of this young girl ... For a price, she'll come over and discuss any subject ... Symbolism's extra." "Suppose I wanted Noam Chomsky explained to me by two girls?" ... "It'd cost you." I hasten to disassociate myself with the sexism of the citation. Lyle Campbell -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7) Date: Fri, 15 May 1992 14:41 PDT From: HSLAPOLLA@ccvax.as.edu.tw Subject: Re: 3.396 Chomsky Citations I would like to second Mark Durie's concerns with what he calls a "pre-generative black hole in modern citation patterns". It seems a real problem to me that so many of the younger scholars trained in the Chomskian school of linguistics are almost completely ignorant of any work done outside that school. On the other hand it seems those who do have a solid knowledge of the history of ideas in linguistics and have an awareness of typological diversity and have worked seriously with a number of languages tend to produce superior work. A prime example is the work of Michael Silverstein, whose work is grounded on a very thorough knowledge of the work of Sapir, Boas, Saussure, Bloomfield, etc., as well as experience doing detailed work with American Indian and Australian languages, as well as a good knowledge of work done in the philosophy of language. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-404. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-3-405. Fri 15 May 1992. Lines: 182 Subject: 3.405 Languages, citation Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 13 May 1992 07:46 EST From: MORGAN@LOYOLA.EDU Subject: Re: 3.402 Queries: Language-Speakers, Syntax, Texts 2) Date: Wed, 13 May 92 09:11:22 EDT From: Geoffrey Russom Subject: Re: 3.402 Queries: Language-Speakers, Syntax, Texts 3) Date: Wed, 13 May 92 19:52:27 -0500 From: "Michael Kac" Subject: Re: 3.402 Queries: Language-Speakers, Syntax, Texts 4) Date: Tue, 12 May 92 16:00:30 -0700 From: hubbard@garnet.berkeley.edu (Kathleen Hubbard) Subject: Re: 3.402 Queries: Language-Speakers, Syntax, Texts 5) Date: 12 May 1992, 20:28:47 CST From: Margaret.E.Winters.GA3704.at.SIUCVMB@tamvm1.tamu.edu Subject: Citations -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 13 May 1992 07:46 EST From: MORGAN@LOYOLA.EDU Subject: Re: 3.402 Queries: Language-Speakers, Syntax, Texts I would like to address the issue of "Who speaks languages?" It seems to me that this is a big problem. While linguists study structures of various kinds, language teachers study literature, and, if they're lucky, pedagogy (very few graduate schools offer any theoretical orientation to teaching to literature students, which is where most college language teachers come from). Thus many college language teachers must teach without background (and with resentment, for some) while they research in a different area entirely. When some linguists teach languages, they teach structures, not speaking. Thus, when taking an unusually-taught language under the auspices of a linguistics department, all we did was talk about structure, we never learned to speak it. Talking about language was thrown out many years ago as a way to learn to speak! Neither group, unhappy literature teachers nor structure-happy linguists, are likely to improve the image of language learning in this country. Leslie Morgan MORGAN@LOYVAX -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Wed, 13 May 92 09:11:22 EDT From: Geoffrey Russom Subject: Re: 3.402 Queries: Language-Speakers, Syntax, Texts The folks concerned with speaking a lot of languages would include those directing the Mormon missionary effort and those who run the schools for diplomats (etc.) assigned to a variety of foreign postings. Such people are very clever at developing language skills in their students but in part because they are remorselessly practical (i.e. anti-theoretical). It strikes me that the popularity of language instruction by the intuitive method may explain in part why knowledge of grammar (any sort of rudimentary grammar) is no longer very common in the general population. Lots of people get a dose of English grammar in middle school, but I wonder if that sort of thing will stick when it simply seems to tell you (or even to misrepresent) what you know already. If only seventh-grade grammar teachers could convince their students that it is interesting to see how systematically you behave without knowing it! But this is the age at which one's children may raise their voices in protest if you seem to be lecturing them about an area in which they lay claim to adult competence.... -- Rick -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) Date: Wed, 13 May 92 19:52:27 -0500 From: "Michael Kac" Subject: Re: 3.402 Queries: Language-Speakers, Syntax, Texts In answer to Michael Sikillian's query: I like the analogy between linguists/language and statisticians/data. From a somewhat different, though related, point of view, here is another that I think is apt. Many people must do calculations of various kinds now and again (even given the mechanical aids we now have). There is a tendency among the laity to re- gard mathematicians as little more than skilled calculators; but mathema- ticians are not mere calculators -- rather thay are (to a degree) investi- gators of the underlying principles of, e.g., the number system (and hence of the methods of calculation). One particular respect in which I think the analogy is a good one is this. Many mathematicians, though not all, are highly adept at calculation. And many linguists, though not all, are (a) polyglots, and (b) more than routine- ly adept language learners. And the converse holds as well: there are goiod calculators who aren't much good at math and there are good language learners who can't fathom linguistics (I know whereof I speak, believe me!) I suspect, though I am not sure, that you could take this even further. My experience suggests that most linguists get interested in the field as the result of a second language learning experience -- or at least that such an experience has an important influence on them. And I suspect that it's also true that many mathematicians developed their interest in the beginning from thinking about what they were doing when they did addition, subtraction etc. Since this is advanced as an empirical claim (carefully hedged), data bearing on it is/are most welcome. Michael Kac -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) Date: Tue, 12 May 92 16:00:30 -0700 From: hubbard@garnet.berkeley.edu (Kathleen Hubbard) Subject: Re: 3.402 Queries: Language-Speakers, Syntax, Texts About "who speaks languages": on the one hand I'm just as frustrated as most linguists with the question "how many languages do you speak", but on the other hand I think it's vastly incorrect to say "linguists are concerned only with formalized grammars and symbol systems". The fact that some of us *aren't* concerned primarily with these issues is why the recent discussion on rules is for us so baffling. There are still some of us who are concerned with VERY GOOD DESCRIPTION of languages and Language. Not that writing grammars or dictionaries will get us grad students jobs...but there are a good number of us who are both fluent in contemporary theory and comfortable with large amounts of detailed language data. Sometimes we speak one or more of the languages we're studying; often we learn *about* the languages such that we end up with a very different kind of working knowledge than the native speaker has. Many of us for whom careful data-gathering and analysis is a high priority can readily translate bits of the languages we work on, but wouldn't be much good in a conversation. I really feel that the two tasks are different -- I wouldn't make a very good simultaneous interpreter, and someone who would probably can't tell you the structural things that I can about the language in question. Perhaps this is obvious to the more experienced linguists out there...but it's been rattling around in my head after a couple of conferences where I met (1) great theoreticians who control very little data (2) great descrip- tivists who care very little about recent theoretical developments AND (3) a healthy number of people, especially grad students, who cared about both. It seems those in the latter category are trying to be BOTH collectors of raw data AND statisticians, in the analogy that's been offered. Any thoughts on this? Kathleen Hubbard U.C. Berkeley -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) Date: 12 May 1992, 20:28:47 CST From: Margaret.E.Winters.GA3704.at.SIUCVMB@tamvm1.tamu.edu Subject: Citations I'd like to thank Mark Durie for bringing up the `mysterious' silence about linguistic work published before `modern times'. I think the answer lies in something he said himself - students are not being told to (or led to) read anything much these days which dates from before 1981. I am just completing a course in the history of linguistics where MA students are learning for the first time about Saussure, Bloomfield, Prague approaches, all of which might with legitimacy be taken up in so-called core courses in theory without any reduction in the value of these core courses. Margaret -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-405. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-3-406. Fri 15 May 1992. Lines: 115 Subject: 3.406 Queries: fonts, WordPerfect, concordances Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 13 May 92 10:26:46 +0100 (MET) From: garof@sixcom.sixcom.it (Joe Giampapa) Subject: Help needed with X11 Cyrillic Fonts 2) Date: Tue, 12 May 1992 10:40:59 -0400 (EDT) From: SNOWJS@HUGSE1.HARVARD.EDU (Jeff Sokolov) Subject: IPA fonts for WordPerfect 5.1 3) From: josephp@microsoft.com Subject: concordances Date: Thu, 14 May 92 17:58:42 PDT -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- [Reminder: We'd like to remind readers that the responses to certain kinds of queries (lists, bibliographies, etymologies, etc.) are best posted to the individual asking the question. That individual is then strongly encouraged to post a summary to the list. Of course, so much depends on the specific query that we can only ask readers to use their own judgment. But this policy was instituted to help control the huge volume of mail on LINGUIST; so we would appreciate your cooperating with it whenever it seems feasible. Thanks, Anthony & Helen] ______________________________ 1) Date: Wed, 13 May 92 10:26:46 +0100 (MET) From: garof@sixcom.sixcom.it (Joe Giampapa) Subject: Help needed with X11 Cyrillic Fonts Perhaps some LINGUISTs on the list have had this problem, or know someone who might help. Goal: To use cyrillic fonts, 10 to 14 pts. I only have cyrillic 25, 30, and 35 pt. fonts in SNF (server normal format). I Seek: 1. Best case: the cyrillic fonts in 10 to 14 pt. sizes; or 2. Worst case: information and possible assistance in creating the fonts that I need. System configuration: I am using an Olivetti M380/XP4 PC running Interactive Unix System V 3.2, Interactive X11R3, Motif 3.0, BDF (Bitmap Distribution Format) fonts version 2.1, "xfed" (X font editor), "bdftosnf". Existing cyrillic fonts are in 25, 30, and 35 pts. Interactive Unix BDF manual (6 pages, very terse). Description: The "xfed" manual claims that it is possible to edit BDF fonts. I assume that this would include scaling as well. However, I only have the fonts in SNF form. 1. Is there a font decompiler, of the type "snftobdf"? If so, has anyone successfully created a new font by using "snftobdf" --> "xfed" --> "bdftosnf"? 2. I found BDF 2.1 fonts in the MIT X11R5 distribution, copied one to my machine, and attempted to edit it using "xfed". Although the "xfed" should be of version 2.1, it gives me a parse error. I have been unable to find "xfed" on SCO X11R3 Motif 3.0 and with Sun X11R4. Has anyone ever successfully used "xfed"? 3. Using "bdftosnf" on the above X11R5 version 2.1 fonts compiled without any errors. Attempting to load the font does not produce any error messages, but wipes-out all strings on my display. 4. Presently I am attempting to write a font from scratch, hoping to get it in "xfed" compilable form. Has anyone done this? As usual, the need for these fonts was expressed yesterday, with the deadline for last week. To avoid delays, please e-mail responses, and I shall summarize at problem completion. Thank you. Joe Giampapa Olivetti SixTel Milano (Italia) garof@sixcom.it garof%sixcom.it@uunet.uu.net -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Tue, 12 May 1992 10:40:59 -0400 (EDT) From: SNOWJS@HUGSE1.HARVARD.EDU (Jeff Sokolov) Subject: IPA fonts for WordPerfect 5.1 Would someone kindly send me a summary of the discussion on the availability of IPA fonts for WordPerfect 5.1. I apologize in advance for re-asking this question -- I missed the discussion. Thanks, Jeff Sokolov (snowjs@hugse1.[harvard.edu OR bitnet]) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From: josephp@microsoft.com Subject: concordances Date: Thu, 14 May 92 17:58:42 PDT I am looking for leads to concordance software; please send responses to me, and I will summarize for the rest of the audience, time permitting... Joseph Pentheroudakis josephp@microsoft.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-406. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-3-407. Fri 15 May 1992. Lines: 266 Subject: 3.407 Conferences: Prehistoric, Modern Greek Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Mon, 11 May 92 10:15:32 EDT From: Alexis_Manaster_Ramer@MTS.cc.Wayne.edu Subject: Call for Participants: Meeting on Language in Prehistory 2) Date: Wed, 13 May 92 11:11:25 BST From: GOUTSOSD@ibm3090.computer-centre.birmingham.ac.uk Subject: Colloquium on MODERN GREEK LINGUISTICS 3) Date: Thu, 14 May 1992 01:22:23 +0200 From: cgs@mack.uit.no (8th CGS Workshop) Subject: CGS8 Workshop -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Mon, 11 May 92 10:15:32 EDT From: Alexis_Manaster_Ramer@MTS.cc.Wayne.edu Subject: Call for Participants: Meeting on Language in Prehistory Meeting on Language in Prehistory November 7-8, 1992 Ann Arbor/Detroit A series of workshops on topics such as reconstruction, classification, etymology, relation of linguistic to nonlinguistic methods, will be held in an attempt to thrash out some of the burning issues of historical linguistics. We invite potential participants to send in their names together with a brief indication of what topics they would like to contribute to and what specific points they would address. Invited speakers include Eric P. Hamp (Chicago) and Vitaly Shevoroshkin (UMich., Ann Arbor). RSVP before June 30, 1992. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Wed, 13 May 92 11:11:25 BST From: GOUTSOSD@ibm3090.computer-centre.birmingham.ac.uk Subject: Colloquium on MODERN GREEK LINGUISTICS The Centre for Byzantine, Ottoman and Modern Greek Studies of the University of Birmingham in co-operation with the Standing Committee on Modern Greek in the Universities is organizing a COLLOQUIUM ON MODERN GREEK LINGUISTICS 6 JUNE 1992 University of Birmingham Arts Faculty Lecture Room 3 A day dedicated to research students of Modern Greek, aimed at providing a forum for meeting, exchanging ideas, getting feedback from established researchers, and presenting a wide range of work in linguistics with the emphasis on new insights into problems of the Greek language. The Colloquium is sponsored by the London Hellenic Society. COLLOQUIUM ON MODERN GREEK LINGUISTICS 6 JUNE 1992 The Colloquium is sponsored by the London Hellenic Society. Colloquium Convenor: Dimitris Tziovas (BO&MG Centre, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT, tel.:+21-4145769) Organizer: Dionysis Goutsos (Department of English, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT, tel.:+21-4498290 e-mail: GOUTSOSD@UK.AC.BIRMINGHAM) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Registration Form (no fee required): Name: * Undergraduate/ Postgraduate/ Staff/ Other (* delete as applicable) University: Address: If you would like to have lunch please enclose a cheque for 3.50 (payable to the University of Birmingham) Special dietary requirements: Would you like a map of the University Campus? Yes/ No Please complete this form and return it to Dr D. Tziovas no later than 30 May Colloquium on Modern Greek Linguistics, June 6th 1992 Lecture Room 3, Arts Faculty 11.00-11.15: Welcome by the Convenor, Dr Dimitris Tziovas Introductory remarks by the Chairman of SCOMGIU, Professor Roderick Beaton SESSION I: Chaired by Philip King 11.15-11.45: Amalia Arvaniti (University of Oxford): On clashes and lapses in Greek 11.45-12.15: Katerina Nikolaidou (University of Reading): The influence of stress on co-articulation 12.15-12.45: Dionysis Goutsos (University of Birmingham): Discourse conditions on sentential phenomena in Greek 12.45-2.00: BUFFET LUNCH (Mason Lounge, Arts Faculty) SESSION II: Chaired by Dr David Holton 2.00-2.30: Alexandra Georgakopoulou (University of Edinburgh): Tense shift in personal experience narratives in Greek 2.30-3.00: Villy Rouchota (University College London): On the interpretation of na-clauses in Modern Greek: A Relevance Theory approach 3.00-3.30: COFFEE SESSION III: Chaired by Dr David Ricks 3.30-4.00: Nadia Anaxagorou (University of Oxford): Cohesion in Leontios Machairas' 'Chronicle' 4.00-4.30: Chryssoula Karantzi (University of Birmingham): Body- metaphors in G.Seferis' and O.Elytis' poetry 4.30-5.30: DISCUSSION Chaired by Dr Peter Mackridge & Dr Irene Phillipaki-Warburton ABSTRACTS: ANAXAGOROU: In using the 15th-century Cypriot dialect which had hitherto no literary tradition, Leontios Machairas had to be innovative in the composition of his prose narrative. An analysis of the syntactic structures of the 'Chronicle' used to provide cohesion and show the relationship between ideas sheds light on the issue of the text's generic classification and helps decide whether Machairas was a historian, a chronicler or a story-teller. ARVANITI: An acoustic analysis of the speech of Greek speakers has shown that there is no rhythmic stress in Greek and that the rhythm of the language is created by the lexical stresses alone. It is suggested that syllables in Greek form phonological words directly without an intermediate foot level. This is supported by evidence from Greek poetry and folk music, and by psychological findings on the nature of rhythm. GEORGAKOPOULOU: The specific contexts and functions of the Historical Present are identified in a corpus of oral and written Greek personal experience narratives produced for two different audiences (adults vs children). Rapid tense switches and more extended uses of Historical Present are significant for the development of the story and correlate with specific stylistic devices. Audience considerations are found to have a strong impact on the occurrence and use of Historical Present. GOUTSOS: Intra-sentential phenomena such as word order and the presence of non pronominal subjects in Greek clauses have reputedly been related to pragmatic factors; these, however, have never been discussed in any detail. With reference to data from Greek expository texts, a functional justification is proposed in terms of the overall discourse topic, paragraph boundaries and 'rhetorical structure' and a model of sentence patterns in Greek is outlined. KARANTZI: The literal and metaphorical uses of words which name or allude to parts of the human body are comparatively examined in the work of G.Seferis and O.Elytis. A formal and statistical analysis of the body-metaphors but also their position in the poetical oeuvre of the two Greek Nobel laureates as a whole point to the treatment of the human body in their work as a major symbol. NIKOLAIDOU: Some preliminary results on the influence of stress on coarticualtion are presented with regard to VCV sequences in Greek. Electropalatographic and acoustic data are used in the examination of coarticulatory tendencies in word pairs.The results are discussed in the light of recent evidence that suggest a relationship between direction of coarticulatory effects (anticipatory vs carryover) and foot structure. ROUCHOTA: Na-clauses in Modern Greek semantically encode that the state of world. The various intepretations of na-main clauses are better accounted for i n terms of general principles of communication. It is argued that an adequate account of the ways in which na main clauses may be interpreted can be given within Relevance Theory. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) Date: Thu, 14 May 1992 01:22:23 +0200 From: cgs@mack.uit.no (8th CGS Workshop) Subject: CGS8 Workshop Second announcement PLEASE POST 8th Workshop on Comparative Germanic Syntax ------------------------------------------- with a parasession on Comparative Germanic Phonology University of Tromso November 20-22, 1992 The 8th Workshop on Comparative Germanic Syntax, with a parasession on phonology, will be held at the University of Tromso, Norway, November 20-22. (This coincides with the arrival of the murkytide.) Invited speakers: Noam Chomsky Guglielmo Cinque Elisabet Engdahl Those who wish to present a paper (30 min. + discussion) are hereby invited to submit an abstract no longer than 2 pages before August 1, 1992. Preference will be given to presentations on parametric (and other) variation concerning / involving the Germanic languages. We expect to be able to meet travel expenses of the speakers. Abstracts should be sent anonymously in tenfold, accompanied by a camera-ready original with name and address of the author(s), to Tarald Taraldsen and Ove Lorentz ISL, University of Tromso N-9037 Tromso, Norway E-mail: Please send us a message if you want further information. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-407. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-3-408. Fri 15 May 1992. Lines: 109 Subject: 3.408 Adjuncts Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 13 May 92 08:40:46 EDT From: "Bruce E. Nevin" Subject: Re: syntax query 2) Date: Wed, 13 May 92 11:55:58 BST From: Gabrielle Kirby Subject: adjuncts reply -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 13 May 92 08:40:46 EDT From: "Bruce E. Nevin" Subject: Re: syntax query Michael Newman asks about 1. I can't remember the first time (that) I played golf. vs. 2. I can't remember the first time when I played golf. The difference is the elided "that S" which the adverbial "when" clause modifies in (2): 3. I can't remember the first time that S, (which was) when I played golf. However, I believe systematic investigation would find that (2) occurs in the sense of (1)--that is, using "when" in the role of "that"--in informal registers for many speakers of English. This is shown by the difference between (4) and (2) (repeated for comparison): 4. I can't remember the first time, when I played golf. 2. I can't remember the first time when I played golf. The difference is the comma intonation subordinating the "when" clause. Sentence (4) is reduced from (3) by elision of "that S." Note that (3) also requires comma intonation for the "when" clause. The desired sense of sentence (2), synonymous with (1), prohibits comma intonation subordinating the "when" clause. Sentence (5) is just the same as (2): 5. Have you forgotten the first time that/when we played golf and these antigolf fanatics invaded the country club, stole all the balls, and filled the sand traps with quicksand? It's in an informal register, and the piling on of narrative anecdote clauses (with "and" rather than "when") makes it easier to overlook use of "when" where "that" would be required in more formal discourse. See what happens with comma intonation after "first time:" 6. Have you forgotten the first time [that we came to this town], *that/when we played golf and these antigolf fanatics invaded the country club, stole all the balls, and filled the sand traps with quicksand? Another differentiator of (5) from (1-4) is the fact that "I don't remember that S" is pragmatically less plausible than "Have you forgotten that S." True, there is a usage like "I don't remember that you told me X [I remember that you said Y instead]," but there is no rhetoric of rebuttal in these examples. Bruce Nevin bn@bbn.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Wed, 13 May 92 11:55:58 BST From: Gabrielle Kirby Subject: adjuncts reply re: Michael Newman (3.402) Michael Newman asked about the strings: a) I can't remember the first time (that) I played golf b) I can't remember the first time when I played golf the second of which is 'problematic'. Some further thoughts on this: 1. Depends what we mean by b) not being possible - I think it would be easy to find such strings in naturally occurring speech (in exactly the kind of extended context that MN supplied for it, i.e. with WHEN clause being followed by clauses which it modifes) 2. the difference between the strings: THE FIRST TIME is straightforwardly an NP in a) which functions as direct object of REMEMBER, and is then expanded by aCh relative clause which may begin with THAT. In b) the NP is not fully expanded by an adjunct clause - this is its `oddity'. 3. In b), I suggest what shows is the constraint (pragmatic rather than syntactic?) on a WHEN-clause (adjunct/adjectival clause) to modify a full clause (i.e. a proposition-bearing clause): THE FIRST TIME is an NP and not a full clause, hence the need for more context to render b) `possible'. Gabrielle Kirby -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-408. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-3-409. Fri 15 May 1992. Lines: 92 Subject: 3.409 Rules Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Tue, 12 May 92 08:26:12 PDT From: Rick Wojcik Subject: Re: 3.395 Rules 2) Date: Wed, 13 May 92 14:47:11 CST From: Tibor Kiss Subject: Re: 3.387 Rules, Tone Grammar -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Tue, 12 May 92 08:26:12 PDT From: Rick Wojcik Subject: Re: 3.395 Rules Martti Arnold Nyman writes: > Lrules (or norms-of-language qua institutional or cultural facts) > are typically learned or acquired by experience. But some norms are > so deeply rooted in human nature that their violation is more or less > unnatural and requires an extra effort. (This is one of the basic tenets > of Stampean natural phonology, unless I'm mistaken.) For example, > anyone standing on two hands (instead of two legs) in a cocktail party > would certainly violate a norm of socially correct behaviour. In this > case, the 'two-leg' constraint is almost vacuously a norm, because it > would be hard to violate it... As one who likes Stampean Natural Phonology, I find the 'two-leg' constraint an amusing analogy to the way many linguists formulate their analyses. But I wouldn't want people to get the idea that Natural Phonology takes experience to be the sole factor in language acquisition. Quite the opposite, Stampe has always viewed processes as 'innate' in a biological (vs. Cartesian) sense. That is, phonological processes don't exist as ideas in the head of the infant at birth. They develop automatically through exposure to environ- mental triggers. It is conceivable that a human born with a deformed vocal tract develops a somewhat different set of processes than one born with a normal tract. Nevertheless, the vast majority of humans possess the same set of 'innate' processes because they all come to life with the same auditory and vocal equipment. Thus, they all have to suppress or modify the same set of processes to achieve mature pronunciation. Stampe called morphonological Rules 'learned' because they could only be acquired by observing phonemic alternations. What one 'learns' about Processes is how to prevent them from messing up desired pronunciations. One does not need to observe alternations in order to learn how to pronounce things correctly. You just try to say the words. I'm not sure whether this really contradicts what Martti said, but I am a little confused by all his references to 'norms'. I see nothing contradictory in describing linguistic systems from two points of view: social or psychological. I would tend to use terms like 'norm', 'cultural fact', 'institutional', etc., when talking about the role of language in society. I find it more difficult to use those terms when describing rules that control linguistic behavior. Natural Phonology is not a generative theory, but, like generativism, it is grounded in psychological function. Rick Wojcik (rwojcik@atc.boeing.com) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Wed, 13 May 92 14:47:11 CST From: Tibor Kiss Subject: Re: 3.387 Rules, Tone Grammar I agree to Eric Schillers recent posting on rules. I think that many of the problems he addressed (useful but defunct grammars etc.) have to do with the fact that progress in contemporary theoretical linguistics can be compared with progress in modern pop music. There is actually no progress in pop music but instead one fashionable tendency alternates with another (and what's here today may be gone tomorrow, good buy projection principle.) This wouldn't be a real problem for linguistics if all theories were equally good at describing the data, but unfortunately, the parallelism extends to the data as well. Moreover, it is often the case that linguists start to construct a set of fashionable data their theories can comply with. Tibor Kiss -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-409. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-3-410. Fri 15 May 1992. Lines: 43 Subject: 3.410 New Network for Sign Linguistics Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 13 May 92 21:24:12 EST From: christine romano Subject: New E-mail Network -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 13 May 92 21:24:12 EST From: christine romano Subject: New E-mail Network A N N O U N C I N G ASLING-L: the e-mail network for people interested in sign linguistics! This network has been established to discuss linguistic issues related to signed languages. All areas of linguistics will be discussed including syntax, acquisition, phonology, morphology, psycholinguistics, cognition, etc. To subscribe to the network, send a message to the following address: LISTSERV@YALEVM.BITNET The message should include only the following line of text: SUB ASLING-L your real name Questions regarding the network can be sent directly to the listowner at: CROMANO@UCONNVM.BITNET Looking forward to having you on board! Christine Romano, list owner Please pass this on to students or colleagues who may be interested! -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-410. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-3-411. Fri 15 May 1992. Lines: 71 Subject: 3.411 Human Sense Disambiguation: Summary Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 13 May 1992 11:07:54 +0000 From: Mark Sanderson Subject: Human sense disambiguation -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 13 May 1992 11:07:54 +0000 From: Mark Sanderson Subject: Human sense disambiguation Last year I sent out a request to the Linguist List asking the following... > I am doing some research into word sense disambiguation applied to > information retrieval. Recently I was reading a paper that said, > > "a number of researchers in text processing have observed that people can > consistently determine the sense of a word simply by examining the half > dozen or so words just before and after the word in focus." > > But then the paper doesn't seem to directly reference any papers mentioning > this. I would really like to track down these papers, does anyone have a > reference for them ? Someone has just contacted me asking for a summary of the answers. I guess I should've done this ages ago. Still, better late than never. I got many replies but not all that many references that were what I needed. Here are four references that are probably worth a look. The first two I've found and they are spot on. The others I havn't seen. Thanks to everyone who replied, it was a great help. Y. Choueka and S. Luisgnan, "Disambiguation by Short Contexts", "Computers and the Humanities", 19(3), pp147-157,1985 Miller, G. A., "Annual Review of Psychology", Communication, vol 5, pp401-420, 1954 (This contains a summary of work carried out by Abraham Kaplan) Graeme Hirst, "Semantic Interpretation and the resolution of Ambiguity", Studies in Natural Language Processing, Cambridge University Press, 1987, UK Kathleen Dahlgren: "Naive Semantics for Natural Language Understanding", Boston : Kluwer, 1988. +-----------------------------------------------------------+ | Mail : Mark Sanderson, Department of Computing Science, | | The University, Glasgow G12 8QQ, Scotland, UK. | +-----------------------------------------------------------+ | E-mail : sanderso@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk | | Tel : +44 (0)41 339 8855 x6292 <---- ***New Number*** | | Fax : +44 (0)41 330 4913 | +-----------------------------------------------------------+ | "I'm gonna get you in my tent tent tent tent tent | | So we can both experiment ment ment ment ment" | +-----------------------------------------------------------+ -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-411. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-3-412. Sat 16 May 1992. Lines: 245 Subject: 3.412 Conference Announcements Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Thu, 14 May 1992 12:17 IST From: Subject: Meeting of Theoretical Linguists 2) Date: Fri, 15 May 92 16:19:28 BST From: Hyacinth Nwana Subject: AISB Call for workshop/tutorial proposals -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Thu, 14 May 1992 12:17 IST From: Subject: Meeting of Theoretical Linguists PROGRAM The EIGHTH ANNUAL MEETING of the ISRAELI ASSOCIATION OF THEORETICAL LINGUISTICS will take place at: Bar Ilan University in Ramat Gan, Israel on June 9th and 10th 1992. PROGRAM June 9th, the Beck Auditorium 9:15 AM - Registration 9:45 AM - Opening Remarks 10:00-11:10 - Barbara Partee, University of Massachusetts (invited speaker) Focus-Frame Structure and Quantificational Structure 11:10-11:50 - Roger Schwarzschild, Hebrew University Distinguishing Oriented-Adverbs from Secondary Predicates in the Analysis of "together" Coffee Break 12:10-12:50 - Susan Rothstein, Bar-Ilan University Quantification over Events 12:50-13:30 - Karina Wilkinson, Ben-Gurion University One "Even": A Reply to Rooth Lunch 15:00-15:40 - Yael Greenberg, Bar-Ilan University Hebrew Nominal Sentences and the Stage/Individual Level Distinction 15:40-16:20 - Hagit Borer, University of Massachusetts Hebrew Copula Inversion: A Study in Syntactic Optionality Coffee Break 16:50-17:30 - Malka Rappaport Hovav, Bar-Ilan University Unexpected Results 17:30-18:10 - Tanya Reinhart, Tel-Aviv University Lexical Properties of Ergativity June 10th, the Beck Auditorium 10:00-10:40 - Outi Bat-El, Tel-Aviv University The Fate of Modern Hebrew Roots: A Prosodic Approach 10:40-11:20 - Marc van Oostendorp, Werkverband Grammaticamodellen Faculteit der Lettern, KUB The Polish Syllabic Grid Coffee Break 11:50-12:30 - Alexander Grosu, Tel-Aviv University On the Proper Analysis of Missing-P Free Relative Constructions 12:30-13:10 - Norbert Corver, Tilburg University Functional Heads and the Internal Syntax of Adjective Phrases Lunch 14:40-15:20 - David Gil, University of Haifa Syntactic Categories in Universal Grammar 15:20-16:00 - Ellen F. Prince, University of Pennsylvania Left Dislocation in English Discourse: A Case of Syntactic Homonymy Coffee Break 16:30-17:10 - Hanneke van Hoof, CLS/Tilburg University Focus-projection and the Structure of Reconstructed Structure in Dutch 17:10-17:50 - Barbara Grosz, Hebrew University/Harvard University Julia Hirschberg, AT&T Bell Laboratories An Investigation of the Intonational Features of Local and Global Discourse Structure For additional information, you may contact: Roger Schwarzschild or Anita Mittwoch English Department Hebrew University of Jerusalem Mt. Scopus, Jerusalem 91905 e-mail: HCUMA@HUJIVM1.BITNET e-mail: HCURS@HUJIVM1.BITNET -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Fri, 15 May 92 16:19:28 BST From: Hyacinth Nwana Subject: AISB Call for workshop/tutorial proposals Call for Tutorial & Workshop Proposals: AISB-93 9th Biennial Conference on Artificial Intelligence University of Birmingham, England 29th March -- 2nd April 1993 Society for the Study of Artificial Intelligence and Simulation of Behaviour (SSAISB) The AISB-93 Programme Committee invites proposals for the Tutorial & Workshop Programme of the 9th Biennial Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AISB-93) to be held at the University of Birmingham, England, during 29th March - 2nd April 1993. The first day and a half of the Conference are allocated to workshops and tutorials. Proposals for full day or half day tutorials/workshops will be considered. They may be offered both on standard topics and on new and more advanced aspects of Artificial Intelligence or Simulation of Behaviour. The Technical Programme of AISB-93 (Programme Chairman: Aaron Sloman) will include a special theme on: * Prospect for AI as the general science of intelligence Tutorials/Workshops related to this theme would be particularly welcome. Proposals from an individual or pair of presenters will be considered. Anyone interested in presenting a tutorial should submit a proposal to the AISB-93 Tutorial/Workshop Organiser, Dr Hyacinth Nwana, at the address below. Submission: ---------- A tutorial proposal should contain the following information: 1. Tutorial/Workshop Title 2. A brief description of the tutorial/workshop, suitable for inclusion in the conference brochure. 3. A detailed outline of the tutorial/workshop. This should include the necessary background and the potential target audience for the tutorial/workshop. 4. A brief resume of the presenter(s). This should include: background in the tutorial/workshop area, references to published work in the topic area (ideally, a published tutorial-level article on the subject), and teaching experience, including previous conference tutorials or short-courses presented. 5. Administrative information. This should include: name, mailing address, phone number, Fax, and email address if available. In the case of multiple presenters, information for each presenter should be provided, but one presenter should be identified as the principal contact. Dates: ------ Proposals must be received by September 17th, 1992. Decisions about topics and speakers will be made by November 5th, 1992. Speakers should be prepared to submit completed course materials by February 4th, 1993. Proposals should be sent to: Dr. Hyacinth S. Nwana Department of Computer Science University of Keele Keele, Staffordshire ST5 5BG UK Email: JANET: nwanahs@uk.ac.keele.cs BITNET: nwanahs%cs.kl.ac.uk@ukacrl UUCP: ...!ukc!kl-cs!nwanahs OTHER: nwanahs@cs.keele.ac.uk Tel: (+44) (0) 782 583413 Fax: (+44) (0) 782 713082 All other correspondence and queries regarding the conference should be sent to the Local Organiser, Donald Peterson. Dr. Donald Peterson School of Computer Science The University of Birmingham Edgbaston Birmingham B15 2TT UK Email: aisb93-prog@cs.bham.ac.uk (for communications relating to submission of papers) aisb93-delegates@cs.bham.ac.uk (for info. on accomodation, meals, programme, etc) Tel: (+44) (0) 21 414 3711 Fax: (+44) (0) 21 414 4281 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-412. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-3-413. Sat 16 May 1992. Lines: 108 Subject: 3.413 Citations Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 15 May 92 10:05:58 EDT From: Geoffrey Russom Subject: Re: 3.404 Chomsky citations 2) Date: Fri, 15 May 92 11:12:53 -0400 Subject: Re: 3.404 Chomsky citations From: "Ellen F. Prince" 3) Date: Sat, 16 May 92 11:06:12 EST From: bert peeters Subject: 3.404 Chomsky citations -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 15 May 92 10:05:58 EDT From: Geoffrey Russom Subject: Re: 3.404 Chomsky citations In view of the number of Chomsky citations, it is puzzling to note that his ideas are not much USED by the deconstructionists or other current "literary theorists", even when issues of a rather obviously cognitivist nature arise. The major sociolinguists (who surely qualify as radicals) are also neglected. Instead we find lots of Sapir, Saussure, and Levi-Strauss. The view from "intellectual backwaters like Paris" (to add another Chomsky citation) seems somewhat restricted geographically. -- Rick -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Fri, 15 May 92 11:12:53 -0400 Subject: Re: 3.404 Chomsky citations From: "Ellen F. Prince" i would like to place a large bet that chomsky is by far the most cited linguist in the postings to the Linguist List... -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) Date: Sat, 16 May 92 11:06:12 EST From: bert peeters Subject: 3.404 Chomsky citations > Date: Wed, 13 May 92 12:48:37 -0400 > From: dever@pogo.isp.pitt.edu (Dan Everett) > > Moreover, the fact that Chomsky publishes more than > any other linguist (if I am wrong, please correct me - that would be > interesting) doesn't hurt his citation index. His output is nearly > Asimovian. I know of at least two other linguists whose output is as gargantuan as Chomsky's. It would be nice if someone could actually sit down and see who's the real champion (taking into account how long all concerned have been in the job). One is Anna Wierzbicka (Australian National University), the other one is Pierre Swiggers (Katholieke Universiteit Leuven). Now, if both of them are quoted far less often than Chomsky, it is not because they publish less, but because they deal with areas that for some reason or other appear to be less fashionable than "pure autonomous syntax". > His influence on the field can be seen even at the level of university > administration: when a department chairperson wants to convince a > university administrator that linguistics has natural intellectual > ties to many departments, I do not think that they would drop the > names of Saussure or Pike rather than Chomsky. Agreed, by mentioning Wierzbicka or Swiggers, you wouldn't get half as far. But then again, the reason for this is the one mentioned above. > It is worth considering the possibility that many of the citations of > Chomsky's work could be due to ignorance - if he said it, or even if > we think he did, just cite him and nobody will argue; why look for the > *original* source? That's hard work and laziness too often prevails. I've got the distinct impression that the ignorance scenario is indeed a likely one. See for instance Manning/Parker in Language Sciences (1989; their paper on word order hierarchies, with its reference to Lightfoot and Chomsky) and my reply in Language Sciences (1991; "Basic word order frequencies or Manning/Parker contra Tomlin", pp. 79-88). > Date: 13 May 1992 23:20 EDT > From: Robert Beard > > Jakobson's > and Halle's work in distinctive features also clearly superceded pre- > vious work, making it difficult to find structuralist work relevant to > what is going on today. Hold it... In semantics, I clearly feel that structuralist work remains extremely relevant to what is going on today in linguistics. But maybe you guys will all think that what semanticists in general and this semanticist in particular is doing is entirely IRrelevant... :-) --------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-413. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-3-414. Sat 16 May 1992. Lines: 160 Subject: 3.414 Linguists & Linguistics Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 15 May 92 09:38:07 GMT-0600 From: gldsmth@bloomfield.uchicago.edu (John Goldsmith) Subject: Integration and disintegration in phonological theory 2) Date: Fri, 15 May 92 10:10:29 EDT From: jsc@mbeya.research.att.com (John S. Coleman) Subject: 3.405 Languages, citation 3) Date: 15 May 92 14:32:37 EDT From: Michael Sikillian/Annotext <76264.1323@compuserve.com> Subject: 3.405 Languages, citation -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 15 May 92 09:38:07 GMT-0600 From: gldsmth@bloomfield.uchicago.edu (John Goldsmith) Subject: Integration and disintegration in phonological theory Dan Everett's comment on my dissertation (as I've pointed out to him), and by implication on how that work fits into the work of its antecedents, is misleading. Dan was for some reason alluding to the fact that in the MIT version of the dissertation (though not the one that has circulated from the IULC or published by Garland, which are the ones usually cited) I mentioned in the acknowledgements that my interest in tone started with reading Will Leben's 1973 dissertation: a true fact. But the dissertation itself has a chapter, the first, entirely devoted to the proposition that this work was a continuation of a discussion that has been going on in American phonology since the 1940s! Dan, I think, sees Pike as the most important theoretician to cite in that period; in my writing, I've focused more on Bloch, Harris, and (in my 1980 book) on Hockett, rather than Pike, but this is more a matter of style and taste than anything else.[On the same theme, I have a paper coming out (perhaps it has come out already) in the Journal of Linguistics on the genealogical connections between prosodic (firthian) phonology and autosegemmental phonology. ] Dan has also pointed out that some of the major contributors to phonology during this period who are still very much alive and intellectual active have felt slighted by the lack of citation of their work. As I tried to suggest in my paper on firthian phonology, this is more an indictment of normal human expectations of courtesy than it is the result of people actually forgetting about these phonologists' good, published ideas (there is much less of that latter sin than many people wish to believe -- a point that Geoff Huck and I have made in a recent paper on the relation of Generative Semantics to current syntactic theory). However -- and again from a purely human point of view -- I wonder how many people, like myself, who were publishing material on nonlinear phonology in, say, its first ten years (1975 to 1985) ever received a note from one of these contributers to the literature in the 1940s and 1950s? Speaking just for myself, I am sure I would have been galvanized to have been dropped a note by ... any of a number of linguists; in more recent years, I've had the opportunity to discuss the history of the field, in writing and in person, with a number of these linguists. But I would have been absolutely delighted to have received such a comment, a bit of mild reproof perhaps from an established contributor (who, now, I can perceive as feeling left out). I never did. Anyone else? John Goldsmith -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Fri, 15 May 92 10:10:29 EDT From: jsc@mbeya.research.att.com (John S. Coleman) Subject: 3.405 Languages, citation Prompted by Margaret Winters's lament that students aren't being given a good historical appreciation of their subject, I picked Robins's `Short History of Linguistics' from my shelf. Interestingly `Linguistics in the Present Century' is the eighth and final chapter (pp. 198--233). Melville Bell appears on 203, along with Sweet; then comes Trubetzkoy (p. 204), Jespersen, Hjelmslev (206), Boas, Sapir, Bloomfield (207), Harris (210), Hockett (211), "in recent years" Pike (212), Firth and Malinowski (213), Halliday (221), Jakobson (222), N. J. Marr (225) (remember him?), Lamb and Chomsky (226), Katz and Postal (227), and that's it! (The book was first published in 1967). --- John Coleman -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) Date: 15 May 92 14:32:37 EDT From: Michael Sikillian/Annotext <76264.1323@compuserve.com> Subject: 3.405 Languages, citation Let me respond in general to the "Do you speak many languages?" issue. Let's extend the statistician analogy. Let's say we ask our statistician, "Do you care about the individual data points?" S: Yes, as long as they contribute to my model I: But you see yourself as independent of the data? S: Yes, as a statitician, my function is to discover the underlying structure from the data points. If I collect environmental data from Bar Harbor Maine, it is no more important than if I did from Seymour, Indiana. What is significant is the rules, structure and theories which can be made from the individual data points. I: Does the domain (ie. subject area) matter to you? S: Not except for some sentimental reason. Whether it is environmental data or the performance of computer systems, it is all the same. The methodology is what matters. I: would you object to being a special branch of mathematics or computer science? S: No, no. Statistics is quite different. I: Ultimately, aren't you justy applying mathematical methods under a different guise? S: But the environment IS different than anything else. I: Haven't you just contradicted yourself? S: Let me rephrase then: the results have different effects depending on subject matter. I: But you are not concerned with the individuals in Bar Harbor, for whom particulates or acid rain is a large concern. You don't want to understand the data nor make decisions based on it? S: No, that is too remorselessly PRACTICAL. I am a theoretician. I prefer to develop theories about statistics rather than gain any understanding of what, say .001 m vs .005 m particulates means in a given area. I focus on knowing ABOUT rather than knowing. If this (fairly transparent) dialogue did not make the point, let me add this (more topical) reference. If I know that the line: spargens humida mella soporiferumque papaver, and write a paper that says sparg+ e+ ns (present participle marker) humid+ a (neuter plural marker) then develop a rule for the grammar used in this piece, rewite it in the phonetic alphabet, I will know a lot, from the point of whatever linguistic area I am coming from (transformational grammar, phonetics, etc). And I can develop a rather *wonderful* description of the language used. But I think it is ultimately inadequate: for this line (from Virgil's 4th Aeneid) is not the same as a mathematical data point of .005 ppm. There is a vast difference between a formalized description of something, of knowing about language, and knowing a language. * translation: sprinkling moist honey and sleep-bearing poppy . -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-414. ________________________________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-415. Wed 20 May 1992. Lines: 149 Subject: 3.415 Queries: Intuitions, Gender, Lipolalia Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: 14 May 92 11:13:02 +0200 From: Allan Myrvang Subject: Grammar Help 2) Date: Thu, 14 May 92 14:32:38 PDT From: 6500erm%ucsbuxa@hub.ucsb.edu (Elaine R. Miller) Subject: query: Acquisition of Grammatical gender 3) Date: 15 May 1992, 22:48:18 CST From: GA5123.at.SIUCVMB@tamvm1.tamu.edu Subject: Youth-gang lipolalia 4) Date: Tue, 19 May 92 10:16:44 EST From: macaulay@j.cc.purdue.edu (Monica Macaulay) Subject: Query: Sexist Example Sentences -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: 14 May 92 11:13:02 +0200 From: Allan Myrvang Subject: Grammar Help Dear members, My name is Allan Myrvang and I am a teacher of English in what is equivalent to the British grammar school. In Oelen - a small parish 60 kilometres to the east of the town of Haugesund which is located on the western coast of Norway. Since English is a difficult language with all its nuances and since we too seldom can afford to cross the Channel to visit you, I feel the need of asking you to help me on some difficult grammatical points. Hoping you will excuse me and be indulgent, I ask you to send the answers - should there be any - to my personal address, since my questions are of a rather elementary nature. Question 1: | lived John has | in Copenhagen for three years | been living What is the difference between the simple and progressive form of the verb? Do you in a deliberate way choose the simple form when the state is regarded as fairly permanent, whereas you save the expanded form for temporary states and limited durations? Or do you make no such distinc- tions? When using stance verbs, I mean. Likewise : waited I have for this moment for ten years been waiting Of course I know that the two instances given are not by any means completely parallel, but I feel there is something here.... Thanks in advance! Allan PS Do British speakers and American speakers regard the queation in the same way, I wonder.... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> # Private address: Working place: # # Allan Myrvang OELEN Grammar School # # Sildegrend N -5580 OELEN # # N - 5590 ETNE Tel.:04 - 76 82 22 # # Norway Fax :04 - 76 70 41 # # Tel.:04 - 75 64 33 # # Internet # >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Thu, 14 May 92 14:32:38 PDT From: 6500erm%ucsbuxa@hub.ucsb.edu (Elaine R. Miller) Subject: query: Acquisition of Grammatical gender I am beginning research on the acquisition of grammatical gender in children, focusing on monolingual Spanish speakers and bilingual (Spanish/English) speakers. Does anyone have any references on this topic? I'd appreciate any help on this. Respond directly to me, and I will post a summary to the list if there is interest. Another query: does anyone have an E-mail address for Maria Estela Brisk, at Boston University? Thanks in advance. Elaine Miller Spanish Dept. UC-Santa Barbara 6500erm@ucsbuxa.bitnet 6500erm@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) Date: 15 May 1992, 22:48:18 CST From: GA5123.at.SIUCVMB@tamvm1.tamu.edu Subject: Youth-gang lipolalia Pardon the neologism: lipogram = writing without using a designated letter, thus lipolalia would be the corresponding practice in speech. Compare the discussion of English-Prime of a few months ago. Martin Walker of the Manchester Guardian reports from Los Angeles about the youth gangs: "The Bloods, who never use a word beginning with the letter C of their rivals, the Cripps, who in turn never use a word beginning with B for Blood, are perhaps the best known." Urban myth, or linguistic data? Can anyone (dis)corroborate? ---- Lee Hartman, Southern Illinois University -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) Date: Tue, 19 May 92 10:16:44 EST From: macaulay@j.cc.purdue.edu (Monica Macaulay) Subject: Query: Sexist Example Sentences I know that some time in the past (the 70's?) some linguists became aware of the tendency to perpetuate sexist stereotypes in example sentences ("John is a doctor"; "Mary is a nurse"), leading to the use of gender-neutral names in examples (Kim, Sandy, Chris, etc.). My question is: did anyone ever do (and maybe publish) a study of this tendency in actual example sentences in linguistics textbooks or articles? Thanks. Monica Macaulay -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-415. ________________________________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-416. Wed 20 May 1992. Lines: 253 Subject: 3.416 Rules, Adjuncts Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Mon, 18 May 92 15:23 CST From: Joe Stemberger Subject: Re: 3.395 Rules 2) Date: Wed, 20 May 1992 13:20 EET From: Martti Arnold Nyman Subject: Rules, innateness, psychological reality 3) Date: Fri, 15 May 92 10:25:24 EDT From: Geoffrey Russom Subject: Re: 3.408 Adjuncts 4) Date: Sat, 16 May 1992 01:33 GMT+1000 From: "LLOYD HOLLIDAY, LA TROBE UNIV, EDUCATION" Subject: Re: 3.408 Adjuncts 5) Date: Mon, 18 May 92 16:48:01 CDT From: Eric Schiller Subject: Re: 3.408 Adjuncts -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Mon, 18 May 92 15:23 CST From: Joe Stemberger Subject: Re: 3.395 Rules G. Vanden Wyngaerd writes: >3.387 Martti Arnold Nyman writes: > (1) a Is [the man who is tall] __ in the room? > b Is [the man who __ tall] is in the room? > > Why would a more or less random distribution over (1a) and (1b) be > expectable in the acquisition stage, if speakers unfailingly -- and so, > as the only pattern for children to base inductive generalizations on -- > produce (1a)? >The assumption implicit in Nyman's question is that children only >produce what they hear. This is plainly incorrect. Children do not hear >forms like "buyed", "eated", or "goed", yet they all go through a stage >where they produce these forms. This can only be because they make >generalisations (rules, if you like), which go beyond what they hear. Now >given that the main source of evidence on yes-no questions at the child's >disposal will overwhelmingly consist of simple sentences of the form "Is >the man __ in the room", the child could make the generalisation either >in way: in terms of linear precedence ("front the first finite verb", >yielding (1b)) or in terms of hierarchical structure ("front the finite verb >which follows the subject", yielding (1a)). The fact that children do not >make mistakes in this respect (ie do not form (1b)) clearly shows that >the rule is not one learned by experience, the relevant experience not >being rich enough to determine the nature of the rule and not being >able to explain the absence of mistakes. There are a number of interesting things about Wyngaerd's statement here. 1) Forms like "buyed", "goed", and "eated" may occur in child speech, but they are in a minority. The vast majority of attempts at irregular verbs are produced correctly. (Gary Marcus and his colleagues at MIT have a monograph on this that is not yet out.) Children DO tend to produce what they here, at least statistically. 2) The assumption is made, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY DATA, that children rarely hear adults produce sentences like (1a) above. This is an amazing claim, and I doubt that it is true. 3) Even if it were true, Wyngaerd is making generalizations about learning IN THE ABSENCE OF A THEORY OF LEARNING. These last two things are unfortunately very common. Why do we think that it's OK to say, "There's no data on this, but if there were, I'm sure it would be X", and expect people to take it seriously? Or "I have no theory of learning, but I'm sure that it wouldn't predict X"? I'm a phonologist, and I haven't kept up with changes in syntactic theory, and I'm sure that I wouldn't be allowed to get away with statements like "I have no reasonable formal theory of syntax, but if I did, I'm sure that it couldn't accommodate subj-aux inversion, so all theories of formal syntax must be wrong". But this statement is no different in kind from the other ones. One last statement implicit in much work in linguistics: "I have no theory of genetics, ontogeny, or evolutionary biology, but I'm sure that if I did, modern linguistic assumptions about innateness would fit in real well." Maybe we should ask a bit more of ourselves that we often do. ---joe stemberger -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Wed, 20 May 1992 13:20 EET From: Martti Arnold Nyman Subject: Rules, innateness, psychological reality Guido Vanden Wyngaerd (Vol-3-395) claims that the wh-island constraint is innate. If it is innate, there is really nothing to explain. To vindicate his claim, Wyngaerd purports to show that cognitive principles such as analogy make false predictions about how the structure of yes-no questions is acquired: If it were acquired by analogy, one would expect a more or less random distribution over (1a) and (1b): (1) a Is [the man who is tall] __ in the room? b *Is [the man who __ tall] is in the room? As the reason for this distributional expectation Wyngaerd gives this: > given that the main source of evidence on yes-no questions at the child's > disposal will overwhelmingly consist of simple sentences of the form "Is > the man __ in the room", the child could make the generalisation either > in way: in terms of linear precedence ("front the first finite verb", > yielding (1b)) or in terms of hierarchical structure ("front the finite verb > which follows the subject", yielding (1a)). The fact that children do not > make mistakes in this respect (ie do not form (1b)) clearly shows that > the rule is not one learned by experience, the relevant experience not > being rich enough to determine the nature of the rule and not being > able to explain the absence of mistakes. The above passage proves nothing. It would be interesting, indeed, to hear psycholinguists' opinions about this kind of conjectural psycholinguistics. Meanwhile, let me continue conjecturing, for the sake of argument. That "the relevant experience [is not] rich enough to determine the nature of the rule" echoes the well-known 'poverty of stimulus' argument, which has never been proven. In the case at hand, it is easy to conjecture what sort of data/experience is relevant for a child to infer that yes-no questions are formed in terms of hierarchical structure. Consider where-questions: Where is [X]? [X] is in Z. Is [X] in Z? ---------------------- = --------------------- = --------------------- Where is [X who is Y]? [X who is Y] is in Z. Is [X who is Y] in Z? In principle, analogy works here quite well: the where-question displays the hierarchy which can be analogically extended to other cases. But I am not concerned with whether or not analogy works in this particular case. What I am concerned with is, objecting to wholesale innatism. Notice that this does not make me a _tabula_rasa_ proselyte. Certainly children possess innate cognitive principles and abilities, but from this it does not follow that human beings are necessarily endowed with a grammar as a mental organ; nor does it follow that the cognitive principles are linguistic or grammatical in nature. It should be clear from my earlier postings that I do not hold that "children only produce what they hear". So, I concur with Wyngaerd's view that > Children do not hear > forms like "buyed", "eated", or "goed", yet they all go through a stage > where they produce these forms. This can only be because they make > generalizations (rules, if you like), which go beyond what they hear. I expect Wyngaerd to concur with me that forms like "buyed", "eated", or "goed" are due to analogy. > As far as the rest of Nyman's remarks is concerned, I still fail to > see how and why they motivate a distinction between Grules and Lrules: In his _Knowledge_of_Grammar_ (1986), Chomsky speaks of rules as follws: "It might be appropriate to describe the way a sheep dog collects the flock, or the way a spider spins a web, or the way a cockroach walks in terms of rule following, with reference to underlying "competence" consisting of rules of some sort ..." (239). If you think this is analogical to linguistic behavior, you won't need recognize the conceptual distinction between social norms-of-language (L-rules as objects of common knowledge) and theoretical generalizations as formulated by a linguist (G-rules). G(rammatical) rules need not be psychologically real, but if they are supposed to be psychologically valid, this means that G-rules are supposed to describe what the internalized rule must consist in; no one knows how "brain rules" are represented (mentalese?). Martti Nyman Department of Linguistics, University of Helsinki, Finland -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) Date: Fri, 15 May 92 10:25:24 EDT From: Geoffrey Russom Subject: Re: 3.408 Adjuncts On the use of "when" as equivalent to "that" in sentences like "I remember the time when I first played golf" cf. the spatial neighbor "where" in e.g. "I can't see my way clear to where I could do that for you", or the mathematicians' usage ("where x ranges over some entities ...."). -- Rick -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) Date: Sat, 16 May 1992 01:33 GMT+1000 From: "LLOYD HOLLIDAY, LA TROBE UNIV, EDUCATION" Subject: Re: 3.408 Adjuncts re Michael Newman's query and the responses: In my English "when" is permissable as a rel. cl. marker and C.L. Baker. 1989. English Syntax. explicitly says so on p. 238. I don't agree that any kind of elision has taken place or that it is an adverbial clause of time. The problem if there is one is simply the collocation of the two words "time" and "when" which don't sit comfortably together to the English ear. Consider for acceptability: 1) I remember the first occasion when we played golf. The rejection of "when" in the sentence Newman cites: 2) I don't remember the first time when I played golf. is made not on structural or syntactic grounds but purely on the basis I suggest that "time" means "when" and thus sounds awkward. On a scale of acceptability the following sentence might lie twixt the others: 3) I remember the first day when I played golf. Since day is less basically a word like "time" (=meaning when) we may judge this as more acceptable. "That" is also perhaps by choice the strongest marker in English of restrictiveness in rel. cl. and since that is what the function of these rel clauses are to restrict the "day" or "time" we prefer "that" in a "formal" sense. As to the chaining with "and", I suspect that what those kinds of sentences represent are: 4) I remember the first day when we played golf (delete and) that these noisy buggers came along and ruined our game. "and" is effectively introducing an NP THat... not another rel cl. Lloyd Holliday School of Education La Trobe University, Melbourne edulh@lure.latrobe.edu.au -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) Date: Mon, 18 May 92 16:48:01 CDT From: Eric Schiller Subject: Re: 3.408 Adjuncts In a language where many speakers confuse "which" and "that", is it any surprise that there is flexibility regarding "that" and "when"? Can anyone name the first scholar who noted these things? Eric Schiller -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-416. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-3-417. Wed 20 May 1992. Lines: 222 Subject: 3.417 Citations Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sat, 16 May 92 15:02 PDT From: Vicki Fromkin Subject: Re: 3.414 Linguists & Linguistics 2) Date: Mon, 18 May 1992 10:34 PDT From: HSLAPOLLA@ccvax.as.edu.tw Subject: Re: 3.413 Citations 3) Date: Mon, 18 May 92 16:45:14 CDT From: Eric Schiller Subject: Re: 3.405 Languages, citation 4) Date: 19 May 92 8:05 From: Subject: Chomsky citations 5) Date: Sun, 17 May 92 9:39:08 EST From: bert peeters Subject: Chomsky said it... 6) Date: Wed, 20 May 92 09:47:52 +0200 From: "John Nerbonne" Subject: Re: 3.413 Citations -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sat, 16 May 92 15:02 PDT From: Vicki Fromkin Subject: Re: 3.414 Linguists & Linguistics re citations, prechomsky linguists, john goldsmiths comments and other such things. UCLA has been teaching the history of linguistic theory at both the under grad and graduate level. The last time I taught the course was 1991 -- and surveyed from Greeks through Saussure, and then in more depth 20th c fellows like Sapir, Boaz, Bloomfield (and co.), Pike, Firth, Troubetzkoy, etc etc. We also teach 20th century phonology and 20th century theories. Many important books have been published in this area such as Anderson's splendid book on phonology, Eli Fischer Jurgensen's encyclopedic volume on phonology etc. Our students are not all that ignorant but like in other sciences and disciplines students do learn the paradigmatic theories of their period. While it is good for students to have as ann assignment the job of analyzing data according to, say, Bloomfield or Halliday or Sapir or Swadesh or..... this is not crucial for their on going research. What is crucial is that they know tghe importance of looking at what has been done to gain insights and so as not to reinvent the buggy whip. Relating current theory to alternative theory(s) has been going on for a long time. John, I also published on Firth way back in 1964 (and remember that the British School was the theme of Terry Langendoen's dissertation) attempting to show how and why generative phonology could and should incor- porate some of Firthian system-structure prosodic concepts (my very first article in Language). And I wrote the paper when I was already a died-in- the wool generativist. Incidentally, another interesting point about Chomsky and his contributions to our field. His Cartesian Linguistics initiated a renewal of interest in the history of linguistics as the many many excellent volumes now published attest, including the two series of publications of very early works. Conrad Koerner has contributed mightily to this and we should all be grateful for all our historians. But the Chomsky volume did this to a certain extent because of those who disagreed with his views and began to publish rebuttals. Which I think illustrates the fact that sometimes the questions one asks are at least as important as the answers one provides. I love the quote from Steve Anderson about the need for linguists to stand on the shoulders not the toes of the giants who came before us. Sorry to be so wordy. Vicki Fromkin -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Mon, 18 May 1992 10:34 PDT From: HSLAPOLLA@ccvax.as.edu.tw Subject: Re: 3.413 Citations Talmy Givon is also someone who is quite a prolific writer yet not cited as often as Chomsky. I would be good to remember that one reason for Chomsky's influence in other fields is that he has always published two kinds of books: one type for linguists (e.g. Barriers), and one type for a more general audience (e.g. Language and Responsibility). It would be no surprise if those of us who publish only with linguists in mind are not influential outside our field. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) Date: Mon, 18 May 92 16:45:14 CDT From: Eric Schiller Subject: Re: 3.405 Languages, citation Margaret.E.Winters writes: "I am just completing a course in the history of linguistics where MA students are learning for the first time about Saussure, Bloomfield, Prague approaches, .." What about Panini? And has anyone noticed how closely Chomsky's handling of nominative case resembles that of Boethius of Daccia (fl. 1274). In designing a case theory for autolexical syntax I have been deeply influenced by both of these scholars, though I did gain some insights from Fillmore (1968) too. I think that these fellows had far more useful stuff to say about case (or Case, or Kase, or Khase - whatever) than most of the GB literature of the past two decades. Eric Schiller -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) Date: 19 May 92 8:05 From: Subject: Chomsky citations It is curious that someone should have suggested that Chomsky publishes more than any other linguist. I don't have any statistics to offer, but I'm sure that there are scores of linguists that publish more than Chomsky (e.g. Jackendoff, Langacker, Comrie, S. Anderson, Hawkins, Dressler, to mention just a few prominent names, in addition to Wierzbicka and Swiggers). The real difference is of course that not everyone reads (or even notices) what all these people have to say, but everyone reads everything Chomsky ever writes -- so the mistaken impression could arise that he actually publishes more. Even his M.A. thesis became a kind of classic, and his 1992 paper "A minimalist program for linguistic theory", which doesn't look as if it was intended for wider circulation, must be around in thousands of copies by now. My favorite explanation for this unique situation is that many people see Chomsky not as one linguist among others, but as a living legend. (Imagine Marx or Freud were still alive and publishing regularly!) Martin Haspelmath -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) Date: Sun, 17 May 92 9:39:08 EST From: bert peeters Subject: Chomsky said it... > Date: Fri, 15 May 92 10:05:58 EDT > From: Geoffrey Russom > > The view from "intellectual backwaters like Paris" (to > add another Chomsky citation) seems somewhat restricted geographically. I'm getting more and more interested in Chomsky's often rather provocative labels (such as the one above) and statements (such as the one broadcast recently on sci.lang according to which if something exists in English, Italian and French/Japanese (2 different versions) it must be universal). Could anyone provide bibliographic details? Thanks! --------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) Date: Wed, 20 May 92 09:47:52 +0200 From: "John Nerbonne" Subject: Re: 3.413 Citations I've been reading the discussion following the announcement that Chomsky is currently one of the most frequently cited individuals anywhere, ranking near Shakespeare, Cicero and St.Paul, which is a bit surprising---but I'm even a bit more surprised at lots of the remarks. Granted that C's normally quoted without being deeply understood, and often without even being read, but this has to be true of all the biggies--who reads Cicero anymore? And how many Aristotle citations betray an understanding of what's distinctive in his thought? So I suspect the question originally put (by Alexis Manaster-Ramer) was a bit tongue-in-cheek--why should we suspect that Chomsky is understood just because he's cited a lot? I think the answer to why he's cited often is obvious. Chomsky's cited often because his work--over 40 years--very nearly defines the field of contemporary linguistics, not only in its scientific ambitions and content; but even in the way it is viewed as relating to neighboring disciplines (what makes it exciting and important to nonlinguists); and even, most remarkably, in the way the field divides into competing theoretical approaches (was the REAL genius in "Remarks" or "Lectures"?--but this is Fritz Newmeyer's theme). So his work is cited within linguistics as a base on which to explain one's own ideas, and outside linguistics, as a representative of what's been defining and exciting in our field. Chomsky's cited as elegantly arguing for the important of mathematical foundations, and for concisely showing why they are irrelevant (in different intellectual contexts, to be sure). I even think that the undercurrent of animus I detect in some of the replies to Alexis's question is finally attributable to Chomsky's importance. We as linguists define our ideas in part via their relation to Chomsky's--and not only in order to ease their presentation, as suggested above. We do this also because we find it interesting and valuable to engage the ideas of the most important thinker in our field, and to dispute them. The recent very interesting exchange on this list between Helge Dyvik and others on whether linguistic rules should be viewed as norms was in part interesting because it turned up holes in the view of linguistics as an essentially psychological investigation--a view that's certainly inspired a great deal of useful research (even it turns out ultimately to be less than comprehensive), but a view, again, which Chomsky has most forcefully advanced. A metaremark: even if this is the most civilized net-list I've seen, still, it is a net-list, so I'll anticipate the ad hominem replies lot of us find ourselves involved in (like this one, yes). So: I've never met Chomsky, do not work directly in areas involving his current grammatical ideas, and had to go back 10 papers to find my last citation of Chomsky (two fairly tangential ones originating with a coauthor). --John Nerbonne -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-417. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-3-418. Wed 20 May 1992. Lines: 187 Subject: 3.418 FYI: New Journals, Merry Month Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 15 May 92 14:59:31 EDT From: Carl Hostetter Subject: Tolkienian linguistics 2) Date: Mon, 18 May 92 23:18:00 HST From: David Stampe Subject: The merry month 3) Date: 20 May 92 10:58 Subject: new journal: Languages of the World From: -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 15 May 92 14:59:31 EDT From: Carl Hostetter Subject: Tolkienian linguistics I know that the subject of Tolkienian linguistics is not exactly at the forefront of modern linguisitic research, but I also know that many modern linguists were inspired, in whole or in part, by the life and linguistic creations of J.R.R. Tolkien, whose Centenary is being celebrated this year. So, in that spirit, I would like to let everyone here know about "Vinyar Tengwar" (ISSN 1054-7606), a bimonthly journal devoted to formal study of Tolkien's linguistic work, with primary focus on his invented languages, especially Quenya and Sindarin (Noldorin). "Vinyar Tengwar" is refereed, and is now indexed by the MLA. It is published in bulletin format, with a typical issue containing 32 pages. "VT" will enter its fifth year of continuous publication in September. Current areas of discussion include the Indo-European connections of the Eldarin tongues, analyses of the corpus, formal aspects of the various languages, foreign translations, etc. Past issues have featured the Book Quenya Noun Declension chart, and analyses of several otherwise unpublished Quenya samples. Subscriptions to "VT" are for one year (6 issues); the rates are $12 in the United States, $15 Canada and overseas surface mail, and $18 overseas airmail. All payments must be in US dollars: foreign subscribers are encouraged to use an International Postal Money Order. Send all subscriptions, and make all checks payable, to: Carl F. Hostetter Editor, "Vinyar Tengwar" 2509 Ambling Circle Crofton, MD 21114 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Mon, 18 May 92 23:18:00 HST From: David Stampe Subject: The merry month Thanks to Rick Wojcik for remembering to remember these... Jim McCawley DATES IN THE MONTH OF MAY THAT ARE OF INTEREST TO LINGUISTS May 2, 1919. Baudouin de Courtenay concedes defeat in his bid for the presidency of Poland. May 3, 1955. Mouton & Co. discover how American libraries order books and scheme to cash in by starting several series of books on limericks. The person given charge of this project mishears and starts several series of books on linguistics. No one ever notices the mistake. May 5, 1403. The Great English Vowel Shift begins. Giles of Tottenham calls for ale at his favorite pub and is perplexed when the barmaid tells him that the fishmonger is next door. May 6, 1939. The University of Chicago trades Leonard Bloomfield to Yale University for two janitors and an undisclosed number of concrete gargoyles. May 7, 1966. r-less pronunciation is observed in eight kindergarten pupils in Secaucus, N.J. The governor of New Jersey stations national guardsmen along the banks of the Hudson. May 9, 1917. N. Ja. Marr discovers ROSH, the missing link for Japhetic unity. May 11, 1032. Holy Roman Emperor Conrad II orders isoglosses erected across northern Germany as defense against Viking intruders. May 12, 1965. Sydney Lamb announces discovery of the hypersememic stratum, setting off a wave of selling on the NYSE. May 13. Vowel Day. (Public holiday in Kabardian Autonomous Region). The ceremonial vowel is pronounced by all Kabardians as a symbol of brotherhood with all speakers of human languages. May 14, 519 B.C. Birth of Panini. May 15, 1964. J. Katz and J. Fodor are separated in 5-hour surgery from which neither recovers. May 17, 1966. J. R. Ross tells a clean joke. May 18, 1941. Quang Phuc Dong is captured by the Japanese and interned for the duration of hostilities. May 19. Diphthong Day. (Public holiday in Australia) May 20, 473 B.C. Publisher returns to Panini a manuscript entitled _Saptadhyayi_ with a note requesting the addition of a chapter on phonology. Panini begins struggling to meet the publisher's deadline. May 21, 1962. First mention of the _Sound_Pattern_of_English as `in press'. May 23, 38,471 B.C. God creates language. May 26, 1945. Zellig Harris applies his newly formulated discovery procedures and discovers [t]. May 27, 1969. George Lakoff discovers the global rule. Supermarkets in Cambridge, Mass. are struck by frenzied buying of canned goods. May 29, 1962. Angular brackets are discovered. Classes at M.I.T. are dismissed and much Latvian plum brandy is consumed. May 30, 1939. Charles F. Hockett finishes composing the music for the Linguistic Society of America's anthem, `Can You Hear the Difference?' May 31, 1951. Chomsky discovers Affix-hopping and is reprimanded by his father for discovering rules on shabas. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) Date: 20 May 92 10:58 Subject: new journal: Languages of the World From: New journal: LANGUAGES OF THE WORLD issue No. 3 has just appeared Scientific Advisory Board: L.O. Adewole (Ile-Ife) S. Brauner (Leipzig) U. Claudi (Cologne) M. Job (Marburg) A. Kaye (Fullerton) J. J. Song (Singapore) T. Stolz (Bochum) Editor: U. Lueders (Munich) Contents of the third issue: A.K. Maltsukov (St. Petersburg): Distributive constructions and verbal valence in Even (Manchu-Tungusic) U. Lueders (Munich): Ergativity and actant marking in Pazar Laz (Kartvelian) L. O. Adewole (Ile-Ife): Reference in Yoruba pronouns And: the LINGUISTIC NEWS LINES with about 200 pieces of information on the linguistic scene around the world. LANGUAGES OF THE WORLD is published by LINCOM EUROPA. LINCOM EUROPA was founded to offer linguists additional possibilities for publishing their work. Especially the P&E system (pay & earn) enables linguists to publish their work in a fast, uncomplicated and independent manner. To order LANGUAGES OF THE WORLD, please write to LINCOM EUROPA Sportplatzstrasse 6 D-W-8044 Unterschleissheim/Muenchen (10 issues US $140, for individuals $100, for students $68) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-418. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-3-419. Wed 20 May 1992. Lines: 121 Subject: 3.419 Conference Announcement Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Tue, 19 May 92 16:27 EST From: SPEAS@cs.umass.EDU Subject: Athapaskan Language Conference -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Tue, 19 May 92 16:27 EST From: SPEAS@cs.umass.EDU Subject: Athapaskan Language Conference 1992 ATHABASKAN LINGUISTICS CONFERENCE July 4-5, Flagstaff Arizona Preliminary Program Saturday, July 4 9-10 coffee and registration 10:00 Sharon Hargus, University of Washington title TBA 10:30 John Files, University of Texas, Austin AUTOSEGMENTAL ANALYSIS OF TONE IN NAVAJO VERBS coffee 11:30 Martha Wright, Syracuse University ANOTHER LOOK AT WORD-FORMATION WITH CLASSIFIERS IN NAVAJO 12:00 Gloria Emerson ASPECTS OF A NAVAJO LANGUAGE PROGRAM 12:30-2 lunch 2:00 Brian Potter, University of Arizona NAVAJO COMPOUNDING: AN INTERACTION BETWEEN SYNTAX AND MORPHOLOGY 2:30 Peggy Speas, University of Massachusetts MAPPING INDEFINITE NPS IN NAVAJO 3:00 Eloise Jelinek, University of Arizona PRONOUN ATTACHMENT TO THE VERB IN ATHAPASKAN break 4:00 Ann Beck, Northern Arizona University DEVELOPING A TEST OF LANGUAGE DOMINANCE FOR NAVAJO CHILDREN 4:30 Alyce Neundorf, Northern Arizona University FUTURE PROSPECTS FOR NAVAJO LANGUAGE STUDY Sunday, July 5 10:00 Jim Kari, title TBA 10:30 Siri Tuttle, University of Washington NASAL HARMONY IN GALICE ATHABASKAN coffee break 11:30 Chad Thompson, Indiana Univ. and Purdue Univ. at Fort Wayne THE METRICS OF KOYUKON VERB PREFIXES 12:00 Sally Midgette ASPECT AND TRANSITIVITY IN NAVAJO 12:30-2:00 Lunch 2:00 Robert Young, University of New Mexico Title to be announced 2:30 Willem deReuse, University of Arizona TESTING THE DEGREE OF MUTUAL INTELLIGIBILITY BETWEEN NAVAJO AND WESTERN APACHE 3:00 Report on the Workshops at Navajo Community College All talks will be held at the Northern Arizona University Center for Excellence in Education. A block of rooms has been reserved at the Inn at Northern Arizona University, which is a motel located on campus. You may reserve a room by calling (602) 523-9011. Some accommodations in the NAU dormitories will also be available. For information on this, contact Alyse Neundorf at the Center for Excellence in Education, (602) 523-9528. For information by email, contact Peggy Speas. (speas@cs.umass.edu) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-419. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-3-420. Wed 20 May 1992. Lines: 102 Subject: 3.420 FYI: Morphology, Concordance Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sat, 16 May 1992 10:58 CST From: Henry Churchyard Subject: Performance morphological lexicalization 2) Date: Sat, 16 May 92 17:07 PDT From: Pamela Munro Subject: dirtdaubers 3) Date: Fri, 15 May 92 13:04:46 EDT From: Michael Covington Subject: Re: 3.406 Queries: fonts, WordPerfect, concordances 4) Date: Tue, 19 May 1992 12:49:47 +0000 From: Scott.Windeatt@newcastle.ac.uk Subject: Re: Concordance for Mac -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sat, 16 May 1992 10:58 CST From: Henry Churchyard Subject: Perfromance morphological lexicalization Uttered on _Nightline_ (5/14/92) by one Jonathan Turley: "...[it is] interesting from a number of point-of-views..." -- --Henry Churchyard lify436@utxvms.cc.utexas.edu -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Sat, 16 May 92 17:07 PDT From: Pamela Munro Subject: dirtdaubers D. Bedell presents a list of generally very trendy black slang words, but one (at least) of these has a different history, "dirtdobbler", identified as a type of wasp. This is standard southern US (I know it primarily from Chickasaw and Choctaw speakers (using English) in Oklahoma), "dirtdauber" or "muddauber", a type of wasp. I think there are several varieties; the Audubon soc. guide to insects identifies the Black-and-yellow Mud Dauber as Sceliphron caementariu m. Pam Munro -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) Date: Fri, 15 May 92 13:04:46 EDT From: Michael Covington Subject: Re: 3.406 Queries: fonts, WordPerfect, concordances Some phonetic and Cyrillic fonts for Word Perfect 5.1 on the LaserJet are available by ftp from aisun1.ai.uga.edu. ------------------------------------------------------------- - Michael A. Covington internet mcovingt@uga.cc.uga.edu - - Asst. Director / Lab Manager bitnet MCOVINGT@UGA - - Artificial Intelligence Programs phone 706 542-0359 - - The University of Georgia fax 706 542-0349 - - Athens, Georgia 30602 bix, mci mail MCOVINGTON - - U.S.A. amateur radio N4TMI - ------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) Date: Tue, 19 May 1992 12:49:47 +0000 From: Scott.Windeatt@newcastle.ac.uk Subject: Re: Concordance for Mac I've just received and had a brief look at what seems to be a useful concordance program for the Mac. It looks very much like a Mac version of the Longman's Mini-concordancer, though I don't know if it has the same restrictions on the amount of text it can deal with. It's called D'Accord. Details from: MACEYTAY@CCIT.ARIZONA.edu (Macey Taylor) =================================================== Scott Windeatt, Language Centre, Old Library Building, The University, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK e-mail: scott.windeatt@uk.ac.newcastle phone: 091 222 7797 fax: 091 261 1182 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-420. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-3-421. Wed 20 May 1992. Lines: 184 Subject: 3.421 Linguists, Human Subjects Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sat, 16 May 92 11:34 PDT From: Melody Sutton Subject: Re: 3.405 Languages, citation 2) Date: Sun, 17 May 92 20:08:43 +0200 From: volk@brian.uni-koblenz.de (Martin Volk) Subject: Re: 3.405 Languages 3) Date: Tue, 19 May 92 22:58:22 EDT From: Larry Horn Subject: Words to live (and rock) by [Linguists in the Mass Media 4) Date: Thu, 14 May 92 08:55:27 BST From: Cook V J Subject: Re: 3.403 Human Subjects 5) Date: Mon, 18 May 92 11:58:10 EST From: mark Subject: Re: 3.399 Human Subjects -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sat, 16 May 92 11:34 PDT From: Melody Sutton Subject: Re: 3.405 Languages, citation Michael Kac's mathematics analogy is interesting and appropriate. I would extend it even to mathematicians who can't figure the tip on a dinner bill without a calculator, and linguists who are only fluent in their native language. Unfortunately , this analogy is useless for the many people who understand neither field. Like the rest of you, I have had my share of "How many languages do you speak?" Similarly, as an undergraduate math major, a common reaction was "Oh, so you're going to be a CPA like your mother?" Melody Sutton UCLA -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Sun, 17 May 92 20:08:43 +0200 From: volk@brian.uni-koblenz.de (Martin Volk) Subject: Re: 3.405 Languages In the context of "Who speaks languages?" let me comment on how one becomes a linguist. Michael Kac writes: > I suspect, though I am not sure, that you could take this even further. My > experience suggests that most linguists get interested in the field as the > result of a second language learning experience -- or at least that such an > experience has an important influence on them. This might be true for many linguists. I would like to generalize this observation: It seems to me that many linguists have entered the field because at some point in their lives they have had trouble with using language or with communication in general. This could have been while learning a (first or) second language. This could have been because of growing up in a multi-language environment or because of a physical handicap such as stutter. Linguistics then serves as a (formal) tool to compensate for this deficiency. I can vividly remember how I struggled with German punctuation rules in 6th grade and how I felt relieved when I began to understand the structure of sentences and how this knowledge could be applied to find the correct spot for commas, etc. This started my interested in linguistics and that is how I ended up as a (computational) linguist. I'd be very interested to learn if there is more evidence for my hypothesis. Martin Volk ************************************************************************** * Martin Volk * University Koblenz-Landau Tel (+49) 261-9119-469 * Institute of Computational Linguistics * Rheinau 3-4 FAX (+49) 261-37524 * W-5400 Koblenz, Germany Email volk@brian.uni-koblenz.de ************************************************************************** -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) Date: Tue, 19 May 92 22:58:22 EDT From: Larry Horn Subject: Words to live (and rock) by [Linguists in the Mass Media In case you missed it, the following excerpts are taken from the current (April/May 1992) issue of Lingua Franca, p. 5 We've heard of some unusual career trajectories but our favorite has to be that of Robert Leonard, who started his professional life as lead singer of the fifties retread group Sha Na Na (photos show a sullenly handsome guy in Saran Wrap-tight gold lam'e and a pompadour like a fallen souffl'e) and ended up--you guessed it--as a theoretical linguist with a specialization in Swahili...Leonard simply realized he would 'rather be a fifty-year-old linguistics professor than a fifty-year-old rocker'." [And who of us would dispute that sentiment?] The prosaic data: Bob Leonard's Ph.D. was awarded by Columbia U., thesis title "The Semantic System of Deixis in Standard Swahili", and he's teaching at Hofstra U. on Long Island. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) Date: Thu, 14 May 92 08:55:27 BST From: Cook V J Subject: Re: 3.403 Human Subjects I am not clear about the laws outside the UK but surely the problem with using human subjects speaking is copyright? Unless you have clearance fronm them use of theri words in an y 'published' form might contravene their rights. Certaibly authors of 'authetntic' ,aterr/ materials have faced this issue for soime time. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) Date: Mon, 18 May 92 11:58:10 EST From: mark Subject: Re: 3.399 Human Subjects When our graduate seminar in Linguistics of ASL was preparing to videotape deaf native signers, at Berkeley in the late seventies, our "informed consent" forms had to specify what uses we might eventually make of the tapes and data and request the subjects' assent to them. One aspect of that experience bears on the question of adults with low literacy. We all wrote our own forms. One member of the seminar focused on the legal and contractual nature of the document and wrote a very legalese text, in the formal style distinctive of laws and contracts and incorporating many of the obscure and highly formal archaisms often noted therein :-). (Example made up from memory: "... Whereas the party of the first part may at some future time herein unspecified desire to exhibit such tapes..."). Another student, keeping in mind the low English skills of many deaf people, wrote a form that tended to short, conversational statements and questions ("... I may want to show parts of these tapes to other linguists so I can tell them about the things I find out about ASL. Is that OK with you? Please initial: YES____ or NO____....") The consensus of the group was that the second style was much preferable. It's perfectly possible to be precise without being complex or obscure, and a document that your subject can't understand runs a great risk of obtaining consent without providing information. I'm not sure how we handled the issue of subjects unable to understand even a simple-English form, or whether it came up. We may have had a certified interpreter explain it to the prospective subject and discuss it to be sure the subject understood, while videotaping this whole discussion, and having the interpreter start by explaining that we WERE taping and getting the subject's consent to that. This tape would then accompany the signed (="signatured") consent form. Mark A. Mandel Dragon Systems, Inc. : speech recognition : +1 617 965-5200 320 Nevada St. : Newton, Mass. 02160, USA -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-421. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-3-422. Wed 20 May 1992. Lines: 230 Subject: 3.422 Conference & Call For Papers Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sun, 17 May 92 11:58:02 BST Subject: Conference AISB'93 Call for Papers From: Donald Peterson -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sun, 17 May 92 11:58:02 BST Subject: Conference AISB'93 Call for Papers From: Donald Peterson ================================================================ AISB'93 CONFERENCE : ANNOUNCEMENT AND CALL FOR PAPERS Theme: "Prospects for AI as the General Science of Intelligence" 29 March -- 2 April 1993 University of Birmingham ================================================================ 1. Introduction 2. Invited talks 3. Topic areas for submitted papers 4. Timetable for submitted papers 5. Paper lengths and submission details 6. Call for referees 7. Workshops and Tutorials 8. LAGB Conference 9. Email, paper mail, phone and fax. 1. INTRODUCTION The Society for the Study of Artificial Intelligence and the Simulation of Behaviour (one of the oldest AI societies) will hold its ninth bi-annual conference on the dates above at the University of Birmingham. The site is Manor House, a charming and convivial residential hall close to the University. Tutorials and Workshops are planned for Monday 29th March and the morning of Tuesday 30th March, and the main conference will start with lunch on Tuesday 30th March and end on Friday 2nd April. The Programme Chair is Aaron Sloman, and the Local Arrangements Organiser is Donald Peterson, both assisted by Petra Hickey. The conference will be "single track" as usual, with invited speakers and submitted papers, plus a "poster session" to allow larger numbers to report on their work, and the proceedings will be published. The conference will cover the usual topic areas for conferences on AI and Cognitive Science. However, with the turn of the century approaching, and with computer power no longer a major bottleneck in most AI research (apart from connectionism) it seemed appropriate to ask our invited speakers to look forwards rather than backwards, and so the theme of the conference will be "Prospects for AI as the general science of intelligence". Submitted papers exploring this are also welcome, in addition to the normal technical papers. 2. INVITED TALKS So far the following have agreed to give invited talks: Prof David Hogg (Leeds) "Prospects for computer vision" Prof Allan Ramsay (Dublin) "Prospects for natural language processing by machine" Prof Glyn Humphreys (Birmingham) "Prospects for connectionism - science and engineering". Prof Ian Sommerville (Lancaster) "Prospects for AI in systems design" Titles are provisional. 3. TOPIC AREAS for SUBMITTED PAPERS Papers are invited in any of the normal areas represented at AI and Cognitive Science conferences, including: AI in Design, AI in software engineering Teaching AI and Cognitive Science, Analogical and other forms of Reasoning Applications of AI, Automated discovery, Control of actions, Creativity, Distributed intelligence, Expert Systems, Intelligent interfaces Intelligent tutoring systems, Knowledge representation, Learning, Methodology, Modelling affective processes, Music, Natural language, Naive physics, Philosophical foundations, Planning, Problem Solving, Robotics, Tools for AI, Vision, Papers on neural nets or genetic algorithms are welcomed, but should be capable of being judged as contributing to one of the other topic areas. Papers may either be full papers or descriptions of work to be presented in a poster session. 4. TIMETABLE for SUBMITTED PAPERS Submission deadline: 1st September 1992 Date for notification of acceptances: mid October 1992 Date for submission of camera ready final copy: mid December 1992 The conference proceedings will be published. Long papers and invited papers will definitely be included. Selected poster summaries may be included if there is space. 5. PAPER LENGTH and SUBMISSION DETAILS Full papers: 10 pages maximum, A4 or 8.5"x11", no smaller than 12 point print size Times Roman or similar preferred, in letter quality print. Poster submissions 5 pages summary Excessively long papers will be rejected without being reviewed. All submissions should include 1. Full names and addresses of all authors 2. Electronic mail address if available 3. Topic area 4. Label: "Long paper" or "Poster summary" 5. Abstract no longer than 10 lines. 6. Statement certifying that the paper is not being submitted elsewhere for publication. 7. An undertaking that if the paper is accepted at least one of the authors will attend the conference. THREE copies are required. 6. CALL for REFEREES Anyone willing to act as a reviewer during September should write to the Programme Chair, with a summary CV or indication of status and experience, and preferred topic areas. 7. WORKSHOPS and TUTORIALS The first day and a half of the Conference are allocated to workshops and tutorials. These will be organised by Dr Hyacinth S. Nwana, and anyone interested in giving a workshop or tutorial should contact him at: Department of Computer Science, University of Keele, Staffs. ST5 5BG. U.K. phone: +44 782 583413, or +44 782 621111(x 3413) email JANET: nwanahs@uk.ac.keele.cs BITNET: nwanahs%cs.kl.ac.uk@ukacrl UUCP : ...!ukc!kl-cs!nwanahs other : nwanahs@cs.keele.ac.uk 8. LAGB CONFERENCE. Shortly before AISB'93, the Linguistics Association of Great Britain (LAGB) will hold its Spring Meeting at the University of Birmingham from 22-24th March, 1993. For more information, please contact Dr. William Edmondson: postal address as below; phone +44-(0)21-414-4763; email EDMONDSONWH@vax1.bham.ac.uk 9. EMAIL, PAPER MAIL, PHONE and FAX. Email: * aisb93-prog@cs.bham.ac.uk (for communications relating to submission of papers to the programme) * aisb93-delegates@cs.bham.ac.uk (for information on accommodation, meals, programme etc. as it becomes available --- enquirers will be placed on a mailing list) Address: AISB'93 (prog) or AISB'93 (delegates), School of Computer Science, The University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, U.K. Phone: +44-(0)21-414-3711 Fax: +44-(0)21-414-4281 Donald Peterson, April 1992. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-422. ________________________________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-423. Fri 22 May 1992. Lines: 239 Subject: 3.423 Closure of Linguistics at SOAS: Call for Help Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 22 May 92 11:53:00 BST From: "Jonathan Kaye 323-6362" (JK at UKACRL) Subject: Closing Linguistics at SOAS Call for help!!! 2) Date: Wed, 20 May 92 07:51:29 HST From: David Stampe Subject: SOAS ceases all publications and cancels Linguistics! 3) Date: Fri, 22 May 92 0:30 BST From: ANNA MORPURGO DAVIES Subject: Closure of famous department of linguistics -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 22 May 92 11:53:00 BST From: "Jonathan Kaye 323-6362" (JK at UKACRL) Subject: Closing Linguistics at SOAS Call for help!!! SOAS Department of Phonetics and Linguistics to be Closed in October 1992 Dear Colleagues, On tuesday May 19, Dr David Bennett, head of our department, was told that we would cease functioning as of October of this year. We are a department of the School of Oriental and African Studies of the University of London. The members of our department are: Dr David Bennett Prof Thea Bynon Dr Wynn Chao Dr Monik Charette Dr Katrina Hayward Dr Richard Hayward* Dr George Hewitt** Dr Bruce Ingham Prof Jonathan Kaye Prof Ruth Kempson *Cross appointed with the Africa Department **Cross appointed with the Near and Middle East Department Our department offers degrees at the BA, MA, MPhil and PhD level. Approximately 60 students, mostly at the postgraduate level are enrolled. Many other students, particularly from University College, London (UCL) take courses with us. We run an MA-Linguistics and an MA-Phonetics programme jointly with UCL. We also have an MA in English-Arabic Applied Linguistics and Translation together with Birbeck College. All these programmes will of course be affected by this decision. The Department of Phonetics and Linguistics is the oldest linguistic department in the U.K. It was the home of the "London School" which received worldwide attention under the intellectual leadership of Prof JR Firth. His Chair, which I occupy today, was the first Chair of Linguistics in the U.K. Over the years our graduates have distinguished themselves in many areas of linguistics. Later postings will provide a partial list of the more well known SOAS graduates. It is acknowledged, even by the administration of SOAS, that we remain a centre of academic excellence in our field. The decision to close the SOAS Linguistics department was made with no consultation, no advanced warning. It was a result of discussions by the Governing Body of the school, the Finance and General Purposes Committee and the Management Committee. There is no linguistic representation on any of these bodies. The reasons given for closing the department are: (1) Severe budget cuts (2) Our low number of UNDERGRADUATE students (3) The "general perception" that our department is not well integrated into the school. It was stated that, among the options considered closing our department would cause the "least harm" to the school. No one was present to represent the linguistics side of the story. This decision will be presented to the Academic Board of the school on wednesday May 27. The Academic Board has an advisory role only but we are hoping to mobilise school opinion against this decision. Unlike similar cases in other countries, most of the members of our department will not be redeployed elsewhere in the school. Recent legislation has virtually destroyed the notion of tenure in the U.K. Many of us are facing "premature retirement", "redundancy" or some form of "severance" agreement. The Administration of the school seems to feel that we will easily find jobs and that terminating our employment at the school will cause us no undue hardships. Given the administration's figures for the cost of severing their relation with us, the offers that we are likely to receive from the school will not be very attractive. As of now, no statement has been forthcoming about our future at the school but the Director has stated that he will be meeting with us individually next week. We will keep you posted on this aspect. If you would like to do something to try and help us stop the closing of our department, please send (in order of preference) a fax or a letter to me at the address and fax number given below. If possible use your institution's letterhead. Please feel free to make comments about our department as a whole or about individual members with whose work or reputation you are familiar. Pass this message along to your colleagues and encourage them to write as well. If you feel so inclined, departmental resolutions reflecting your opinion of this event would be quite helpful. I hope to be able to arrive at next wednesday's meeting with an armful of your letters (copies of all letters will be sent to our Director) and your support will do a lot to improve our spirits. This will be a long and difficult struggle both for our department and for our jobs and careers. Thank you in advance for listening and for your support. Jonathan Kaye Professor of General Linguistics Department of Phonetics & Linguistics School of Oriental and African Studies Thornhaugh Street, Russell Square London, WC1H 0XG U.K. e-mail: JK@UKACRL.EARN JK@UK.AC.RL.IB (JANET) fax number: (44)+71-436-3844 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Wed, 20 May 92 07:51:29 HST From: David Stampe Subject: SOAS ceases all publications and cancels Linguistics! Forwarded from INDOLOGY: Date: Wed, 20 May 92 14:25:06 +0100 Reply-To: Indology discussion list Sender: Owner of INDOLOGY From: Dominik Wujastyk On Monday this week the management committee of SOAS decided to close the SOAS Publications' department, and also the Department of Linguistics. Later the same day, all staff members connected with these departments were given notice that their contracts would terminate in September 1992. This means that the Bulletin of SOAS, a pillar of Indological publication, will disappear, along with all other book series etc. Discussions will be initiated with publishers like Blackwells and OUP to see if they want to take over BSOAS, China Forum, etc. But it is hard to see how any publishing company will be able to provide the specialized editorial functions which have until now been supported by SOAS. The loss of the complete Linguistics department is equally horrific. The background to this -- as far as I can gather -- is further cause for alarm. Apparently SOAS has always received an annual special funding supplement because the Department of Education recognised that Oriental and African languages are needed by the nation, but will never get the student numbers of other mainstream subjects. This enabled SOAS to have a higher staff:student ratio than other colleges of London University. This year, the University Funding Council (UFC) forgot to pay the special funding supplement, leaving SOAS with a financial shortfall of 650,000 pounds this year. But when the clerical error was discovered, the UFC refused to make good the amount, and furthermore decided that it would not reinstate the special funding in the future. SOAS's response to this is to save money on the most expensive part of their budget, namely staff salaries. I think INDOLOGY members will agree that the whole story is incredible for many reasons, but nevertheless it is true. It is hard to avoid the impression of farcical mismanagement by the UFC and a devastatingly inadequate response from SOAS itself. Perhaps there are mitigating facts that have not yet come to light, but if so, they are not known to the staff members at SOAS who have been sacked, nor to other staff members. Letters of protest should be addressed to Mr. Michael McWilliam, Director, School of Oriental and African Studies, Thornhaugh Street, Russell Square, London WC1H 0XG England. Dominik -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) Date: Fri, 22 May 92 0:30 BST From: ANNA MORPURGO DAVIES Subject: Closure of famous department of linguistics We have just heard that the department of linguistics of the School of Oriental and African Studies in London is threatened with closure. Members of the department heard of it this week; there has been no previous consultation. The School has had its funds cut and decided to cut down on all its publications programme and on its linguistics activities. The department threatened has an illustrious history; the first ever chair of linguistics in Britain was held in SOAS by Firth. At present the members of the department include Dr David Bennett, Prof. Theodora Bynon, Dr Wynn Chao, Dr Monik Charette, Dr Katrina Haywood, Dr Dick Haywood FBA, Dr Hewitt, Dr Bruce Ingham, Prof. Jonathan Kaye, Prof Ruth Kempson FBA, Prof. Emeritus R.H. Robins FBA. It is useless to stress how distinguished the department is and how much a school which has primary responsibility for the study of Oriental and African Languages needs to have a department of linguistics and phonetics. Letters of protest should be addressed to the Director, School of Oriental and African Studies, Thornhaugh Street, Russell Square, London WC1, England. It would be useful to send copies to the Chairman of the Department (Dr D. Bennett) at the same address and to the Vice-Chancellor of the University of London, Senate House, Malet Street, London WC1, England. The Fax number of SOAS is44-71-436-3844. Anna Morpurgo Davies -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-423. ________________________________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-424. Fri 22 May 1992. Lines: 83 Subject: 3.424 Closures at San Diego State Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 20 May 92 14:15:54 -0700 From: jkaplan@sciences.sdsu.edu Subject: Closings of academic depts and layoffs at san diego state -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 20 May 92 14:15:54 -0700 From: jkaplan@sciences.sdsu.edu Subject: Closings of academic depts and layoffs at san diego state On May 13, San Diego State University, facing a probable 8.5% budget cut from state funding, amounting to about an $11 million shortfall, announced major eliminations of, and cuts in, academic programs. These cuts entail layoffs of tenured faculty. Due to be shut down, with layoff of all faculty, are the departments of anthropology, German&Russian, religious studies, natural sciences (trains high school science teachers), family studies & consumer sciences, aerospace engineering, health sciences, and industrial studies. Scheduled for cuts of faculty, of varying scale, in within-dept reverse order of seniority, are the departments of French&Italian (3 of 11), sociology (8 of 27), math (8 of 60 or so), and chemistry (14 of 23). The policy is to cut "narrowly and deeply." Although discussion has been going on all year in the Senate about the potential for serious funding cuts and ways this university might respond to them, including program cuts, these cuts were announced suddenly, with no prior consultation with the affected departments. Official notice to individual faculty members of layoff is scheduled for "mid-June." >From that time laid-off faculty will have 120 days remaining on the payroll. The athletic department is eliminating golf, track and field, and one or two other minor sports, a cut of about $200-$250K. The football and basketball programs are untouched; the baseball program has lost a number of scholarships (according to this morning's sports section of the San Diego Union-Tribune). At this point there is no word of cuts in administration. Cuts in the school of business have apparently been trivial in comparison with those suffered by the College of Arts and Letters, the College of Sciences, and other colleges. Some affected faculty are contemplating legal action, and other remedies are being discussed. Three administrative moves may have some potential for reversing the layoffs: cutting (or eliminating) intercollegiate athletics, instituting a golden handshake program, and instituting a university-wide salary reduction of up to 10%. Although the union is currently negotiating a golden handshake program, we don't know how far along the negotiations are and whether it will be possible to put it in place quickly enough to have an effect on the current crisis. There are legal and adminstrative problems with the salary cut. We don't know whether they're surmountable or not. The whole California State University system--20 campuses, including the new one at San Marcos in northern San Diego County--face the same funding shortfall, but apparently (we have at this point hardly any information) campus responses vary a good deal. We ask that you consider writing to Pres. Thomas B. Day, San Diego State University, San Diego, CA 92182, expressing outrage at this unprecedented frontal assault on tenure and the centrality of academics to the university. If the attack is allowed to stand, the consequences for higher education within California and everywhere are incalculable. More importantly, we ask that you write to California state legislators and state senators. We will provide names and addresses if you contact us. We would be grateful for copies of any correspondence sent in connection with this crisis. We are sending this information out now, incomplete though it is, in order that linguists may be informed as early as possible in this developing crisis. Jeff Kaplan Charlotte Webb (Chair, Linguistics and Oriental Languages Dept) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-424. ________________________________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-425. Fri 22 May 1992. Lines: 80 Subject: 3.425 Queries: What Language; Address; Chomsky '92 Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 20 May 92 11:04:25 EDT From: Ron Smyth Subject: What language is this? 2) Date: Thu, 21 May 92 07:39 PDT From: Melody Sutton Subject: e-mail address 3) Date: Thu, 21 May 92 10:23:21 EDT From: maxwell@jaars.sil.org Subject: Chomsky '92 article -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 20 May 92 11:04:25 EDT From: Ron Smyth Subject: What language is this? The Toronto police have contacted our department for help in identifying the language of the label on a ball of wool in the purse of an elderly woman accused of shoplifting. She does not speak English and the police wish to obtain an interpreter for her. The following was dictate to me over the telephone (so may not be 100% accurate): ata lucru de myna din bumbac cardat.... Please send replies directly to me. There is some urgency in this, as the woman is being held until they can question her. Ron Smyth smyth@lake.scar.utoronto.ca -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Thu, 21 May 92 07:39 PDT From: Melody Sutton Subject: e-mail address Does anyone have, or know how I can get, an e-mail address for Barney Pell (last seen working on AI at Cambridge)? Thanks! -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) Date: Thu, 21 May 92 10:23:21 EDT From: maxwell@jaars.sil.org Subject: Chomsky '92 article I was about to send the following request to Martin Haspelmath (the author of the quoted lines below), but on second thought I decided that asking someone in Germany where I could get a copy of an unpublished paper by an American scholar was a little odd. So can someone nearby help me? Martin wrote: > ...and his 1992 paper "A minimalist program for > linguistic theory", which doesn't look as if it was > intended for wider circulation, must be around in > thousands of copies by now. I'll bite, where can I get a copy? Thanks! -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-425. ________________________________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-426. Fri 22 May 1992. Lines: 78 Subject: 3.426 Queries: OULIPO; Relative Markers; Reflexives Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: 21 May 92 13:34:25 EDT From: Michael Sikillian/Annotext <76264.1323@compuserve.com> Subject: OULIPO 2) Date: Thu, 21 May 1992 11:27 EDT From: Cathy Ball Subject: Relative Markers over Time 3) Date: Fri, 22 May 92 14:37:24 BST From: Sue Blackwell Subject: Acquisition of Reflexive Verbs -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: 21 May 92 13:34:25 EDT From: Michael Sikillian/Annotext <76264.1323@compuserve.com> Subject: OULIPO I am looking for information on OULIPO, an experimental language group which flourished in the '60s in Paris. Members have included R. Queneau, H. Matthews, I Calvino, and G. Perec. The group applied mathematical methods to writing literature. There is scant information available in English, and a small amount in French. I am particularly interested in whether their ideas have been embodied in software or literaty theory. Thank you Michael Sikillian Annotext -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Thu, 21 May 1992 11:27 EDT From: Cathy Ball Subject: Relative Markers over Time I am working on the history of relative markers in the spoken language from 1500 onwards, in British and American English. Although there are plenty of studies of written data, I'm having trouble finding diachronic studies of spoken data (trial transcripts, etc.). I'm particularly interested in the development of the standard & non-standard variants for personal subject restrictive relatives: who, what, which, zero, that, at, as (as in 'I know a chap as'll do it for you'). Any references will be greatly appreciated, including quantitative synchronic studies of non-standard varieties. Thanks! -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) Date: Fri, 22 May 92 14:37:24 BST From: Sue Blackwell Subject: Acquisition of Reflexive Verbs This is an enquiry on behalf of an MA student. Can anyone provide me with references concerning the acquisition of reflexive verbs in either English or French? The student herself is bilingual, so publications in either language will be useful. All suggestions gratefully received. Sue Blackwell School of English, University of Birmingham, U.K. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-426. ________________________________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-427. Fri 22 May 1992. Lines: 131 Subject: 3.427 Innateness Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: 20 May 92 17:22 +0100 From: Carl Alphonce Subject: 3.416 Rules, Adjuncts 2) Date: Wed, 20 May 92 14:38 CST From: Joe Stemberger Subject: innateness -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: 20 May 92 17:22 +0100 From: Carl Alphonce Subject: 3.416 Rules, Adjuncts Joe Stemberger writes > . > . > . > > One last statement implicit in much work in linguistics: "I have no theory > of genetics, ontogeny, or evolutionary biology, but I'm sure that if I did, > modern linguistic assumptions about innateness would fit in real well." > > Maybe we should ask a bit more of ourselves that we often do. I agree, but would hasten to add, lest someone is left with the impression that theories of "genetics, ontogeny, or evolutionary biology" are somehow more correct than theories about the innateness of language, that researchers in those (and other) fields must also ask a bit more of themselves than they often do. More than likely all these theories are wrong in one way or another, and need to be revised, yet they are (more or less) consistent with the data available to us now - whatever led to the proposal that language is innate must be accounted for by these other theories also. Carl Alphonce Department of Computer Science (alphonce@cs.ubc.ca) University of British Columbia ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 2) Date: Wed, 20 May 92 14:38 CST From: Joe Stemberger Subject: innateness The topic of the innateness of language has been coming up again lately in LINGUIST, with regard to rules and such. Debates on innateness are usually of the form: A: "There's no such thing." B: "Of course there is!" I'd like to hear a different aspect of innateness addressed. I've never understood why it makes any difference at all to linguistic theory whether highly language-specific information is innate or not. Yes, it makes a lot of difference for e.g. language acquisition, but that's beyond the scope of what most linguists do. It's not considered essential to study the acquisition of Warlpiri before you study the adult grammar, most linguists study only adult grammar, and the main principles of grammar have come from studies of adult grammar. (Have ANY of the main principles come from the study of acquisition? None in phonology, for sure.) Innateness is usually used as a explanation for universals, or for constraints on variation (parameters). But it has always seemed to me that what is important is that something is universal or that variation is limited to a few options. What possible difference TO LINGUISTIC THEORY could it make whether the observed patterns are due to language-specific innateness, or due to some more general feature of cognitive processing, or (for that matter) due to guidance from guardian angels or aliens from another dimension. The observed patterns are real under any explanation of where they come from, and languages seem to abide by them. We can still rule out some potential explanations because they might violate a universal, and still provide explanations where two phenomena are linked because they are due to the same parameter. So, why all this stuff about innateness? I've never understood why we care. Oh, yes, I DO understand why it's been posited. To paraphrase it in a completely uncharitable way (always useful for emphasizing that we are being kind to ourselves in the way we phrase it to ourselves), Chomsky reasoned in the following way: "Hmm. There are fundamental aspects of this theory that are based on some pretty weird data. The crucial sentences are always the sort of thing that no native speaker of a language would utter in natural speech, so no child would ever hear them; so no child could ever LEARN these aspects of grammar from input. So, the theory is unlearnable. Either (a) the theory is completely wrong (and the methodology that led me to it is worthless), or (b) it's not learned, but innate. OK, innateness is the only plausible answer." There are more charitable ways to phrase it, but that's the essence of it, and that's why so many non-linguists have trouble with it. (And linguists, too --- my graduate education at UCSD included expressions of extreme skepticism about innateness.) This seems to be one way to justify the idea that linguistic theory has any relevance to anything at all, GIVEN a judgment that it can't be learned. Personally, I think that people have been too hasty on that point; learnability work has not been grounded in human learning, but has attacked just the "logical problem" of learning, and some pretty weird assumptions are made. But, really, all that stuff is really beyond the scope of linguistic theory, and relates to how we might be viewed by psychologists, etc. Does innateness buy us anything FOR LINGUISTIC THEORY ITSELF? NOTE: I've tried to be as flippant as possible here, in order to be provocative. Please don't express displeasure with the tone of the comments. ---joe stemberger -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-427. ________________________________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-428. Fri 22 May 1992. Lines: 101 Subject: 3.428 Tone and SPE Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 20 May 92 11:29:40 -0400 From: dever@pogo.isp.pitt.edu (Dan Everett) Subject: Some recent phonological history 2) Date: Wed, 20 May 92 11:21:11 -0400 From: dever@pogo.isp.pitt.edu (Dan Everett) Subject: `Exotic' -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 20 May 92 11:29:40 -0400 From: dever@pogo.isp.pitt.edu (Dan Everett) Subject: Some recent phonological history In referring to their analysis of `pitch'/tone, Chomsky & Halle note on page 300 of SPE that their `prosodic features' have `little theoretical basis at present'. This is unproblematic. After all, one cannot reasonably expect a single work, even one so detailed and ambitious as SPE, to address every issue. It is completely reasonable to leave such things for future work by oneself or one's students. Later work did emerge on this important issue, the two most influential (arguably) initial works being Leben and Goldsmith (although Woo's was certainly a very important work, leading to these). Should early autosegmental studies have been responsible for noticing that an SPE feature-based analysis of tone could not possibly handle the facts Pike analysed in various indigenous languages of Mexico and elsewhere? It is true that C&H do not cite Pike at all in SPE. Perhaps it is unfair then to expect their subsequent students to have made much of an effort to incorporate work like his into their theories of tone or to have been aware of its fuller theoretical implications. But I do not think it is unreasonable; in fact I think it is very puzzling that this work was not noticed at first. No American linguist's work on tone was as detailed or influential (outside of generative circles) as Pike's. (Pike presented his work on tone for the first time to a small meeting, one of the earlier LSA meetings. There were only about a dozen people in the audience, including Hockett, Bloomfield, Sapir, and Fries. Bloomfield, Fries, and Sapir all tried to get Pike to study with them (at the time he developed much of his tone analysis, he wanted to enroll at in a PhD program and had had little formal graduate training) at their respective institutions. While Pike was more inclined to work with Sapir, and in fact maintained an active correspondence with him for several years, he in the end opted for Fries and Michigan. But Pike's work on tone influenced all at that original audience significantly.) Now, as Vicki Fromkin notes, one can never expect that students know the entire history of the discipline. This may in fact have a negative impact on students: in other countries, where history of a discipline is arguably given more prominence in graduate training than it is here, students tend to dwell more on epistemology and less on actual research, something I take to be an unfortunate side effect (I refer to my years teaching in Latin America). However, once an earlier study is rediscovered, then acknowledgment should be made. Chomsky's example is instructive: his initial work on universal grammar echoed work by 17th century French philosophers, although he was not aware of that at first. However, when he discovered that these ideas preceded his own by three centuries, he dedicated an entire book to making this earlier work well-known and acknowledging his intellectual debt. Exemplary behavior. I take it that the relevance of Pike's work to tone studies has been subsequently recognized and I certainly did not intend to take so much time here on it, not do I mean to suggest that he was deliberately ignored. I have no money riding on this, so it ain't that big a deal anymore. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Wed, 20 May 92 11:21:11 -0400 From: dever@pogo.isp.pitt.edu (Dan Everett) Subject: `Exotic' In an earlier posting, I said that in SPE tone-languages were referred to as `exotic'. However, as I reread the relevant sections of Chomsky & Halle (1968), I cannot find any reference to tone languages as `exotic', so I apologize for misstating this. -- Dan Everett -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-428. ________________________________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-429. Fri 22 May 1992. Lines: 138 Subject: 3.429 How did we end up linguists? Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 20 May 92 14:06:03 EDT Subject: 3.421 Linguists, Human Subjects From: Stavros Macrakis 2) Date: Wed, 20 May 1992 16:22:24 -0400 From: zgilbert@epas.utoronto.ca (Zvi Gilbert) Subject: Re: 3.421 Linguists 3) Date: Thu, 21 May 1992 10:14:20 +0800 (SST) From: A_DENCH@FENNEL.CC.UWA.EDU.AU Subject: RE: 3.421 Linguists, Human Subjects 4) Date: 21 May 1992, 14:23:54 CST From: Margaret.E.Winters.GA3704.at.SIUCVMB@tamvm1.tamu.edu Subject: On becoming a linguist -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 20 May 92 14:06:03 EDT Subject: 3.421 Linguists, Human Subjects From: Stavros Macrakis volk@brian.uni-koblenz.de (Martin Volk) says: It seems to me that many linguists have entered the field because at some point in their lives they have had trouble with using language or with communication in general. Folklore in the M.I.T. Artificial Intelligence Lab was that graduate students often worked on problems where they had personal difficulties. For instance, there was the clumsy student interested in robotics, the student working on recognition of faces who didn't recognize his wife at the airport, the student working on navigating city streets who regularly got lost, etc. Thus, the story goes, the department was particularly leery of candidates who said that their area of interest was ``general intelligence''. -s -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Wed, 20 May 1992 16:22:24 -0400 From: zgilbert@epas.utoronto.ca (Zvi Gilbert) Subject: Re: 3.421 Linguists In response to Martin Volk's hypothesis that trouble with language early in life could be a reason why some people end up as linguists: I would disagree with this, at least in my case... and I would like to advance another hypothesis in its place. Many of the people that I know who are studying linguistics at the graduate level or are linguistics professionals have strong interests in both the sciences and the humanities. In my case, I did English Literature as an undergrad, yet in High School, I was a sciences-type person. Many people I know have similar stories. Linguistics, of course, is "the most scientific of the the humanities, and the most human of the sciences"; it's right in between, and so seems an appropriate place for those of us who like to do both. This seems to correlate with an interest in Science Fiction, a literary genre that shares with linguistics the property of being on the borderline between the arts and sciences. --Zvi Gilbert zgilbert@epas.utoronto.ca @epas.toronto.edu -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) Date: Thu, 21 May 1992 10:14:20 +0800 (SST) From: A_DENCH@FENNEL.CC.UWA.EDU.AU Subject: RE: 3.421 Linguists, Human Subjects Well, for one, I didn't get into linguistics through a speech impediment or a joyous 2nd language learning experience. A friend said an A in Linguistics was easy and I was bored with the rats and stats of Psych 100. But in retrospect, I carved out my career path quite early. As a precocious 8 year old I reinforced my baby brother's beginning phonology and morphology and then left for boarding school before he could learn real English. I then communicated via ciphers by letter, for another year or so. As a result, he couldn't spell his name until he was eleven and is now a hot-shot graphics programmer doing research for Rolls-Royce aviation. No doubt the human subjects committee would be down on me like a ton of bricks. Today, I make up Aboriginal languages just before the alleged last speaker disappears. Nothing has changed much. Alan Dench Centre for Linguistics University of WA Nedlands, WA 6009 A_DENCH@fennel.cc.uwa.oz.au -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) Date: 21 May 1992, 14:23:54 CST From: Margaret.E.Winters.GA3704.at.SIUCVMB@tamvm1.tamu.edu Subject: On becoming a linguist I too have a theory on why linguistics attracted many of us. As a field it ranges from the humanities to the hard sciences, with the majority of its subdisciplines falling into the general area of social sciences. I have spoken with many linguists who started their scholarly lives as scientists (chem- istry, physics ...) and wanted something which seemed more like a humanities discipline (often in the more European sense of `sciences humaines', disciplines which deal with people), while many others (including myself) started in foreign languages and literatures and found we wanted something more scientific than literary analysis. I think the second-language learning component of it is important, as suggested in a posting I read today, but not always because of *difficulty* with learning a language; but rather a desire to keep working with language in some form without doing literature. On a personal note, I can clearly remember my relief, as an undergraduate, to discover linguistics through a comparative Romance course. It meant that majoring in French made sense even if Sartre didn't! Margaret -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-429. ________________________________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-430. Fri 22 May 1992. Lines: 80 Subject: 3.430 Syntax Texts: Summary Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Mon, 18 May 92 15:48:16 -0400 From: gb661@csc.albany.edu (BROADWELL GEORGE AARON) Subject: syntax textbooks -- a summary -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Mon, 18 May 92 15:48:16 -0400 From: gb661@csc.albany.edu (BROADWELL GEORGE AARON) Subject: syntax textbooks -- a summary About a week ago, I asked readers to share experiences with the Cowper and Haegeman syntax textbooks. Here's what they said. ======================================================================= Here's a summary of responses about syntax textbooks: It was clear from the responses that Cowper's book is a bit too new to have been used by many people. I got one favorable evaluation from a respondant who had read the text in manuscript, but I did not hear from anyone who has used it in a class so far. Responses on Haegeman's textbook were mixed. I have excerpted/paraphrased comments below. There were five generally positive evaluations: "... better than most texts.. well-received by the students, but it is full of annoying mistakes and misprints" "... quite happy with it ... there were no complaints from the students" "... it was harder than Radford, but most students preferred Haegeman to Radford, which they found long-winded, condescending, or just plain moronic" "... students found it lucid, funny, and well-organized" "... relatively happy with it... generally understandable and well- organized. Criticisms: tends to introduce theoretical concepts first and the justification for them later..." And three mostly negative evaluations: "... tended to digress ... chooses to focus on unclear examples, e.g. the theta-criterion and implicit arguments early on in the book;... case-marking is frequently exemplified with ECM verbs, which the students found unconvinc- ing" "students unanimously despised it... incredibly unclear ... poorly organized ... I recommend against it." "... on the positive side, it is well-organized and has good references. On the negative side, there is poor argumentation and data that doesn't support the claims made in the text... there is also no mention of any non-GB syntax. ...I found it useful for teaching students how to identify poor argumentation." As a generalization, it seemed that GB practictioners tended to be significantly happier with the book than others. (There were also votes for Lasnik and Uriagereka's *A Course in GB Syntax* and for Chomsky's *Managua Lectures*.) Thanks to all who wrote. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-430. ________________________________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-431. Fri 22 May 1992. Lines: 170 Subject: 3.431 Adjuncts Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 20 May 92 12:28:37 -0400 From: "Ellen F. Prince" Subject: Re: 3.416 Rules, Adjuncts 2) Date: Fri, 22 May 92 01:15:02 BST From: WAB2@phx.cam.ac.uk Subject: rules for adjuncts? -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 20 May 92 12:28:37 -0400 From: "Ellen F. Prince" Subject: Re: 3.416 Rules, Adjuncts >Date: Sat, 16 May 1992 01:33 GMT+1000 >From: "LLOYD HOLLIDAY, LA TROBE UNIV, EDUCATION" >Subject: Re: 3.408 Adjuncts > >re Michael Newman's query and the responses: > >In my English "when" is permissable as a rel. cl. marker and C.L. Baker. 1989. >English Syntax. explicitly says so on p. 238. I don't agree that any kind >of elision has taken place or that it is an adverbial clause of time. >The problem if there is one is simply the collocation of the two words >"time" and "when" which don't sit comfortably together to the English ear. >Consider for acceptability: >1) I remember the first occasion when we played golf. >The rejection of "when" in the sentence Newman cites: >2) I don't remember the first time when I played golf. >is made not on structural or syntactic grounds but purely on the basis I >suggest that "time" means "when" and thus sounds awkward.... for me, _when_ requires that the activity in the subordinate clause have (relevant) duration. i have no problem with 'the collocation of _time_ and _when_', so long as the duration (rather than, say, the enumeration) of the activity is relevant. thus, 1 above is a little strange for me, as it stands. it would be better if it continued in such a way as to make the duration relevant, e.g.: 2'. i remember the first occasion when we played golf and we had that big fight with that bunch of loud-mouthed people ahead of us and... compare: 3. do you remember the day she was born? (possible answer: yes, it was may 4.) 4. do you remember the day when she was born? (possible answer: yes, everybody was hysterical and mary wound up driving herself to the hospital and bill brought along champagne...) the answer to 4 could also be an answer to 3 but the answer to 3 could not, for me, be a felicitous answer to 4. the same for _time_: 5. that was the time when/?that/?0 roosevelt was president. 6. that was the time *when/that/0 roosevelt died. since _nth time_ is always an enumeration, it's weird, for me, with _when_: 7. that was the first time *when/that/0 roosevelt was president. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Fri, 22 May 92 01:15:02 BST From: WAB2@phx.cam.ac.uk Subject: rules for adjuncts? Lloyd Holliday (3048/4) is right in saying that what makes the grammaticality of I remember the first time when we played golf suspicious is the contiguity of "time" and "when". But it is strange that Lloyd Holliday claims that the problem is that "time" and "when" >sound awkward It is not a phonetic problem. The problem is one of semantic overlap, as also between "place" and "where" in I remember the first place where we played golf. This colligational weakness of such pairs should come as no surprise to lexical semanticists, who will be aware of the number of shared lexical features. I assume that Eric Schiller (3048/5) really was grinning when he thought of the >flexibility< of English speakers in >confusing< "which"/"that" and "that"/"when". I wonder he didn't ally himself in spirit with Saussure's marvelling at the English omission of such words completely. Consider I remember the first time *which/that we played golf and I remember the first time [e] we played golf. No confusion allowed there in English, unless it is the preference for parataxis anyway. By the way, does this make English a peasant language? Lloyd Holliday is also right to conclude that "day" >is less basically a word like "time" concluding that this made it easier to assign unquestioning grammaticality to I remember the first day when I played golf. What about a formal anlysis, lexical semanticists? A look at French data suggests the difference we might hypothesize for English "when" and "that". Consider Je me rappelle la premiEre fois oU nous avons jouE au golf ("I remember the first time when we played golf") where there is a clear indication of the adjunction of an adverbial clause beginning with the fronted adverb "oU" (literally ="where", by the way). When we look at the French alternative Je me rappelle la premiEre fois que nous avons jouE au golf ("I remember the first time that we played golf") it becomes obvious that we are not dealing with anything other than a subordinate clause, introduced by the all-purpose subordinator "que". Thus the difference between "when" and "that", as between also "where" and "that", is that between an explicit adverbial clause complementizer and no more than a subordinate clause complementizer. I wish here to add some further contrasts and similarities between French and English. In doing so, I hope to throw more light on the fronted item which introduces the adverbial clause. In English it is possible to say John came to where they were playing golf. Here the preposition "to" can govern the adverbial clause. In French it cannot *Jean est venu A oU on jouait au golf ("John came to where they were playing golf") In French a preposition must govern a noun, to which a clause may then be adjoined. A grammatical sentence in French is possible only if the noun implicit in "oU" is overt Jean est venu A l'endroit oU on jouait au golf ("John came to the place where they were playing golf") A preposition in French must govern a noun, and such a noun must be overt in a finite clause. Yet, like English, a preposition can govern a clause, without the intercession of a noun, if that clause is non-finite Jean est venu A [retrouver son ami] John managed [to find his friend] When Lloyd Holliday calls "that" >perhaps...the strongest marker in English of restrictiveness I think he must be reflecting a sense of the "ordinariness" of "that" or (French) "que" , neither of which takes from the lexical content of the time or place word to which a clause is adjoined. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-431. ________________________________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-432. Fri 22 May 1992. Lines: 274 Subject: 3.432 Conference: European ACL; WECOL92 Call for Papers Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 22 May 92 11:18:05 +0200 From: Joke Dorrepaal Subject: European Chapter of the Ass. for Computational Linguistics 2) Date: Thu, 21 May 92 12:39:13 MST From: Terry Langendoen Subject: WECOL92 call for papers 3) -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 22 May 92 11:18:05 +0200 From: Joke Dorrepaal Subject: European Chapter of the Ass. for Computational Linguistics FIRST NOTIFICATION AND CALL FOR PAPERS Sixth Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics 21-23 April 1993 Onderzoeksinstituut voor Taal en Spraak (OTS) Research Institute for Language and Speech University of Utrecht, The Netherlands Purpose: This conference is the sixth in a series of biennial conferences on computational linguistics sponsored by the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics. Previous conferences were held in Pisa (September 1983), Geneva (March 1985), Copenhagen (April 1987), Manchester (April 1989) and Berlin (April 1991). Although hosted by a regional chapter, these conferences are global in scope and participation. The European Chapter represents a major subset of the ACL. The conference is open to both members and nonmembers of the Association. Scope: Papers are invited on all aspects of computational linguistics, including, but not limited to: morphology, syntax, semantics, discourse analysis, pragmatics, grammar formalisms, formal languages, software tools, knowledge representation, AI-methods in computational linguistics, analysis and generation of language, computational lexicography and lexicology, lexical databases, machine translation, computational aids to translation, speech analysis and synthesis, natural language interfaces, dialogue, computer-assisted language learning, corpus analysis and corpus-based language modelling, and information retrieval and message understanding. Special Sessions/Tutorials: The Programme Committee plans special sessions around the following themes: - logic and computational linguistics - data-oriented methods in computational linguistics This thematic orientation will be further developed in a tutorial programme to be held the day preceding the conference (20 April 1993). Details will be provided in the circular of October 1992. Submission: Authors should submit an extended abstract of their papers, or in case of hardcopy 6 copies, to the Programme Committee at the following address: EACL-93 Programme Committee OTS Trans 10 NL-3512 JK Utrecht The Netherlands Phone: (+31) 30-392531 Fax: (+31) 30-333380 Email: eacl93@let.ruu.nl The first page should include the title, the name(s) of the author(s), complete addresses (including e-mail), a specification of the topic area (one or two keywords, preferably from the list above), and an indication of whether the paper addresses one of the themes of the Special Sessions. The extended abstract should not exceed 5 pages A4. It should contain sufficient information to allow the referees and the Programme Committee to determine the scope of the work and its relation to relevant literature. Contributions should report on original research that has not been presented elsewhere. Electronic submission is preferred, using standard LaTeX or plain ASCII. In case of problems with this, contact the organizers at the above address. For future final versions, hardcopy or LaTeX files will be accepted. Schedule: The deadline for submission is 1 December 1992. Authors will be notified of acceptance by 1 February 1993. Camera-ready copies of the final papers must be postmarked before 5 March 1993, and received by 12 March 1993, along with a signed copyright release statement. Papers not received by the due date will not be included in the conference proceedings, which will be published in time for distribution to everyone attending the conference. Programme Committee: The Programme Committee will be co-chaired by Louis des Tombe, Steven Krauwer and Michael Moortgat (OTS, Utrecht). Local Arrangements: Contact Nadine Buenen or Joke Dorrepaal at the above address. More information on local arrangements will be provided in the next circular. Other Activities: A programme of demonstrations and exhibits is planned. For information, contact the EACL address above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Thu, 21 May 92 12:39:13 MST From: Terry Langendoen Subject: WECOL92 call for papers ************************************************************************ CALL FOR PAPERS 1992 Meeting of the Western Conference on Linguistics (WECOL92) held in conjunction with the Linguistic Association of the Southwest (LASSO) October 16, 17 & 18, 1992 Doubletree Hotel Tucson Featured Speakers: David Perlmutter, UC San Diego, and one other to be announced. ************************************************************************ Papers on all topics in linguistics will be considered. ABSTRACT SPECIFICATIONS: Abstracts should be 1000 words maximum (shorter if you can make your point). In addition, please provide up to three keywords for use by the Program Committee for use in organizing the sessions. ABSTRACT SUBMISSION: ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION PREFERRED to WECOL92@ccit.arizona.edu or WECOL92@arizvms (bitnet). Include author name(s) and affiliation(s). These (along with electronic address) will be removed prior to review. Otherwise, send 8 copies of the abstract plus a separate sheet listing author name(s), address(es) and affiliation(s) to: WECOL92 Department of Linguistics Douglass 200E University of Arizona Tucson, Arizona 85721 Abstracts must be received by August 17, 1992. ADDITIONAL CONFERENCE INFORMATION The conference will convene at 8 am Friday, and all sessions will be completed by 12 noon on Sunday. The conference is being held at the Doubletree Hotel Tucson, located at 445 S. ALvernon Way, Tucson. A block of rooms has been secured for conference participants. Please print out the hotel room reservation form below and return directly to the hotel. Be sure that your affiliation to the LASSO-WECOL conference is clearly indicated. Please do not return this form to the conference address. A number of the rooms available are non-smoking rooms. If you would prefer a non-smoking room, write this on your room reservation form. We have been told that these rooms will be assigned until they run out. Some student "crash-space" is available. Please inquire early if you would like to take advantage of this alternative. On Saturday there will be a luncheon held at the hotel. The cost is $13 including tax and gratuity. You can sign up for this event on the registration form below or at the conference registration desk when you arrive. ************************************************************************ WECOL92 REGISTRATION FORM Registration Fees ____ $20 Faculty (and other employed persons) ____ $10 Student Name ______________________________ Address ______________________________ ______________________________ ______________________________ ______________________________ Phone (___) ________________________ E-mail ______________________________ Please check here if you would like to attend the lunch on Saturday and indicate your choice of meal. ___ $13 Lunch My lunch selection is: ___ Southwest Chicken Primavera ___ Enchilada Casserole ___ Beef ___ Chicken ___ Vegetarian Total enclosed: $_______ Make checks payable to: University of Arizona Please return completed form with appropriate payment to: WECOL92 Department of Linguistics Douglass 200E University of Arizona Tucson, Arizona 85721 For more information write to this address or send e-mail to WECOL92@ccit.arizona.edu or WECOL92@arizvms (bitnet). ************************************************************************* LASSO-WECOL October 16-18, 1992 CONFERENCE HOTEL REGISTRATION FORM Print and return completed form to: DOUBLETREE HOTEL TUCSON 445 S. Alvernon Way Tucson, AZ 85711 (602) 881-4200 Name: ______________________________________ Name(s) of Additional Person(s) sharing room: ____________________________________________ ____________________________________________ ____________________________________________ Mailing Address: ____________________________________________ ____________________________________________ ____________________________________________ ____________________________________________ Phone: (___)________________________________ Date of Arrival: ____________ Time of Arrival:_______________ Departure Date: ____________ Credit Card AMEX VISA MASTER DISC DINERS/CB Credit Card #: _____________________________ Exp: __________ Name on Card: _____________________________ Deposit enclosed: $ ________________________ 3) # of People: _____________ # of Rooms: _____ RATES ____ Single $71 ____ Double $71 ____ Triple $81 ____ Quad. $81 Additional Person/Rollaway Bed: $10 ____ Suite: 1 Bedroom: _____ 2 Bedrooms: _____ ____ Non-smoking room preferred THE ABOVE SPECIAL GROUP RATES WILL APPLY 3 DAYS BEFORE AND 3 DAYS AFTER THE OFFICIAL CONFERENCE DATES FOR ALL CONFERENCE ATTENDEES. Rates subject to applicable taxes. Reservations must be received by 9/21/92. RESERVATIONS ACCEPTED AFTER THIS DATE BASED ON SPACE AVAILABILITY. TO SECURE YOUR ROOM RESERVATION YOU MUST INCLUDE FIRST NIGHT'S ROOM DEPOSIT OR COMPLETE CREDIT CARD INFORMATION. Deposit refundable if cancellation notice received 48 hours prior to arrival date. (Check-in time is after 3 pm. Check-out time is 12 Noon). -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-432. ________________________________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-433. Fri 22 May 1992. Lines: 103 Subject: 3.433 Chomsky Citations Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 20 May 1992 17:28:53 +0200 From: Swann Philip Subject: 3.417 Citations 2) Date: Thu, 21 May 1992 02:42 EET From: Martti Arnold Nyman Subject: Chomsky citations and Mandeville's Paradox 3) Date: Wed, 20 May 92 07:48:05 EST From: talmage@luvthang.aquin.ori-cal.com (David W. Talmage) Subject: Re: 3.413 Citations -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 20 May 1992 17:28:53 +0200 From: Swann Philip Subject: 3.417 Citations I can't resist putting in my tuppence worth on Chomsky's citation record. Here are my very informal observations of how he is treated by non (theoretical) linguists. (1) Mathematical theory of formal languages. Chomsky still gets cited almost automatically for his pioneering work on hierarchies of languages. (2) Philosophy of Language. C gets cited a lot for his nativist claims: his arguments are usually rejected. Fodor's much more radical nativism gets even more attention and even more rejection. C also gets cited a lot in discussions of Wittgenstein, usually as an example of the sort of narrow formalist, rule-based view a language that Wittgenstein consistently argued against. (3) Psychology. C has frequently claimed that what he is doing is scientific psychology, but this has failed to impress psychologists. The competence/performance distinction, the autonomous language faculty assumption and the concern with UG all put C's theoretical constructs beyond the ken of most experimental or empirical psychologists. (4) Biology. It would interesting to know if *any* evolutionary biologists have taken up C's views or tried to explain how they could be investigated. Again, his views often get mentioned in general introductions ... but only to be rejected. (5) Cognitive Science. As Gardner showed in "The Mind's New Science", C was a source of inspiration. Consequently he is cited very frequently in cognitive science literature. Again, however, it is his formal, comptuational approach - not his genuinely linguistic work - that are referred to. So, although C is viewed as a founder of cognitive science, his current theory of grammar has had no real impact on the field. In general, It seems that most people outside of linguistics know of Chomsky as he appears in "Aspects" and in the non-technical parts of "Knowledge of Language". It's surely a safe bet that almost no non-linguist followed him into "Government and Binding". - philip swann -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Thu, 21 May 1992 02:42 EET From: Martti Arnold Nyman Subject: Chomsky citations and Mandeville's Paradox In his 'Fable of the Bees: or, private vices, public benefits' (1732), Bernard de Mandeville argued that the wealth of a nation results from private vices of the citizens. This is Mandeville's Paradox: intentional actions of individuals may bring about social phenomena intended by no one. Part of the persistent Chomsky-boom exemplifies Mandeville's Paradox: a great deal of people citing Chomsky do so in order to show that he's wrong -- and, with the implication that he doesn't deserve being cited so frequently! (I owe Mandeville's Paradox to Rudi Keller (1990) Sprachwandel. Francke Verlag: Tuebingen.) Martti Nyman Department of General Linguistics, University of Helsinki, Finland -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) Date: Wed, 20 May 92 07:48:05 EST From: talmage@luvthang.aquin.ori-cal.com (David W. Talmage) Subject: Re: 3.413 Citations Hm! Linguists agree with Oscar Wilde: the only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about. ;-) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-433. ________________________________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-434. Sat 23 May 1992. Lines: 77 Subject: 3.434 Tone Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 22 May 92 18:57:43 -0400 From: dever@pogo.isp.pitt.edu (Dan Everett) Subject: Tone 2) Date: Sat, 23 May 1992 10:25 CDT From: PETER GINGISS Subject: Tone Languages -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 22 May 92 18:57:43 -0400 From: dever@pogo.isp.pitt.edu (Dan Everett) Subject: Tone I appreciate John Goldsmith's concern that I might have been citing him or referring to his work out of context. However, from the very first time that I read his thesis, shortly after it was written, the following quote puzzled me: 'The idea behind this thesis began with a reading of Will Leben's thesis on suprasegmental phonology, in which he argued that in some languages, even short vowels could bear two successive tones. Impossible.' Now cf. Pike & Pike 1947: `It will not do to attempt to correlate each vowel with one and only one tone, or each tone with one and only one vowel... In summary, the number of vowels is independent of the number of tones, and the number of tones is independent of the number of vowels, while the nucleus remains - within perceptual limits - nearly constant.' I do not think that Pike is necessarily the most important theorist of his era, just that his work on tone was perhaps the most relevant to autosegmental/multilinear phonology, in light of quotes like the above. One wonders how much sooner multilinear work would have been done had people paid more attention to Pike and less to the model of tone in SPE, which referred to such languages as 'exotic'. One searches in vain in the early work on autosegmental phonology for consideration of this type of work (although Pike's and others' contributions are addressed in the volume edited by V Fromkin, especially in the article by S Anderson). So, this is what I was referring to in my earlier posting. Dan Everett -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Sat, 23 May 1992 10:25 CDT From: PETER GINGISS Subject: Tone Languages For the record, around 1967 or so, Richard Spears of Northwestern was doing generative work in tone in Maninka and Mende. Will Leben studied briefly with him before doing his doctoral work. I have never seen Spears cited, probably because the journals in African linguistics were obscure then and gone now. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-434. ________________________________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-435. Tue 26 May 1992. Lines: 26 Subject: 3.435 Zellig Harris Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sun, 24 May 92 19:15:05 -0400 From: "Ellen F. Prince" Subject: Zellig S. Harris -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sun, 24 May 92 19:15:05 -0400 From: "Ellen F. Prince" Subject: Zellig S. Harris Zellig S. Harris died in his sleep at his home in New York on Friday, May 22, 1992, at the age of 82. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-435. ________________________________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-436. Tue 26 May 1992. Lines: 170 Subject: 3.436 Innateness Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sat, 23 May 92 12:22:03 CDT From: Eric Schiller Subject: Re: 3.427 Innateness 2) Date: Mon, 25 May 92 15:35:28 EDT From: pesetsk@Athena.MIT.EDU Subject: Re: 3.427 Innateness 3) Date: Tue, 26 May 92 10:13:56 EDT From: maxwell@jaars.sil.org Subject: Innateness -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sat, 23 May 92 12:22:03 CDT From: Eric Schiller Subject: Re: 3.427 Innateness Time for me to leap to the other side of the fence for a change. Innateness does have a significance for linguistic theory itselt, if only in that the limitations of our inate abilities, mathematical, linguistic or what have you, limit the types of linguistic theories which can be plausibly constructed. Processing of grammatical structures in real time is one example. Of course, we know almost nothing about the capacity of human beings in this regard, which is slightly more or less than we know about universals of language, if any. . Still, to the extent we have or can acquire information about our inate capacity for language (assuming it to exist), it can help direct our energies in the proper direction. Of course before we start talking about the limits of this capacity, we ought to have a clear picture of what sorts of linguistic phenomena are involved in spoken language, but that is the dreaded Descriptivism again... Eric Schiller, Department of Linguistics, Univ. of Chicago -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Mon, 25 May 92 15:35:28 EDT From: pesetsk@Athena.MIT.EDU Subject: Re: 3.427 Innateness Joe Stemberger writes: >I've never understood why it makes any difference at all to linguistic >theory whether highly language-specific information is innate or not. >[...] >Innateness is usually used as a explanation for universals, or for >constraints on variation (parameters). But it has always seemed to me that >what is important is that something is universal or that variation is >limited to a few options. What possible difference TO LINGUISTIC THEORY >could it make whether the observed patterns are due to language-specific >innateness, or due to some more general feature of cognitive processing, or >(for that matter) due to guidance from guardian angels or aliens from >another dimension. The observed >patterns are real under any explanation of where they come from, and >languages seem to abide by them. We can still rule out some potential >explanations because they might violate a universal, and still provide >explanations where two phenomena are linked because they are due to the >same parameter. > >So, why all this stuff about innateness? I've never understood why we care. >[...] > >Does innateness buy us anything FOR LINGUISTIC THEORY ITSELF? Innateness is a *conclusion* from linguistics, not a premise. If one looks on it as a premise, one indeed gets into a logico/scientific muddle like the one you outline. But since it a conclusion, not a premise, linguistic theory buys us innateness, not the other way around. We care because its an interesting conclusion, and because the more one learns about how language works in the child and adult, the more it looks like the only plausible conclusion (at least to me). It gives neurophysiology/genetics some work to do, work which is beginning to get done. In this respect it is superior to an appeal to guardian angels and aliens, although in some other century, past or future, this judgment might be different. Furthermore, language-specificity looks more plausible than a "general feature of cognitive processing", for reasons that were hashed out during the flamefest on modularity early in the life of LINGUIST. However, a negative can never be proved. Thus, reduction to general cognitive principles of the ECP, the OCP, or categorial perception of point of articulation for stop consonants in neonates remains a possibility. And once again, we are dealing with a conclusion, not a premise. -David Pesetsky -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) Date: Tue, 26 May 92 10:13:56 EDT From: maxwell@jaars.sil.org Subject: Innateness I shouldn't get involved, but here goes: Joe Stemberger writes > > One last statement implicit in much work in linguistics: "I have no theory > of genetics, ontogeny, or evolutionary biology, but I'm sure that if I did, > modern linguistic assumptions about innateness would fit in real well." I don't have my copy of "The Origin of Species" here, so I can't give a real quote, but the above lines remind me forcefully of a problem early evolutionary biologists faced, one which Darwin was painfully aware of. Darwin had no "theory of genetics," and in fact the then current ideas of genetics made precisely the wrong predictions for evolution. (It was thought that a new trait would simply be blended in with already existing traits, instead of remaining a discreet inheritable trait.) It wasn't until Mendel's work on heredity was rediscovered (in the 1930's, if I recall correctly) that the theory of evolution had a way of explaining why newly developed traits were not lost in a population like a single water drop would be lost in the ocean. The history of science is full of new theories that appear to have fatal flaws, but the theories are accepted anyway, in faith that an explanation will turn up later. (Another example is the idea that the planets revolve around the sun in space, rather than being attached to crystal spheres that rotate around the earth. What on earth :-) holds them in their orbits?) Stemberger also writes: >I've never understood why it makes any difference at all to linguistic >theory whether highly language-specific information is innate or not. > >Yes, it makes a lot of difference for e.g. language acquisition, but that's >beyond the scope of what most linguists do. It's not considered essential >to study the acquisition of Warlpiri before you study the adult grammar, >most linguists study only adult grammar, and the main principles of grammar >have come from studies of adult grammar. It makes no difference if you're simply writing grammars that attempt to be descriptively adequate (in the sense of "descriptive adequacy" that Chomsky writes about in Aspects). But it's not clear to me that that is really a theory of anything. If, on the other hand, you want an explanatorily adequate theory of linguistics, you need to worry about how the learner comes up with the right rules. After all, no linguist, even the most brilliant, has ever come up with a descriptively adequate grammar of any language; whereas every child (down to some limit at the level of retarded children, I guess) comes up with a way of producing and understanding his/her language in a descriptively adequate way. Regardless of what you believe as to whether the child produces a descriptively adequate grammar, there is a great mystery here. If linguists haven't studied child acquisition (they have, but Stemberger is using a slight hyperbole here), it's simply because they have made a decision about how to investigate the problem, not because they don't thing that's the real problem. ******************************************************** Mike Maxwell Phone: (704) 843-6369 JAARS Internet:maxwell@jaars.sil.org Box 248 Waxhaw, NC 28173 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-436. ________________________________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-437. Tue 26 May 1992. Lines: 164 Subject: 3.437 How did we end up linguists? Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 22 May 92 16:25 PDT From: Vicki Fromkin Subject: Re: 3.429 How did we end up linguists? 2) Date: Fri, 22 May 1992 17:12 CST From: Mark Hansell/ Mai Hansheng Subject: Re: 3.421 Linguists, Human Subjects 3) Date: Sun, 24 May 92 07:05 PDT From: "Robert S. Kirsner" Subject: Becoming a linguist 4) Date: Tue, 26 May 92 07:15:55 MDT From: mnu@inel.gov (Rick Morneau) Subject: Re: 3.429 How did we end up linguists? 5) Date: Tue, 26 May 92 10:54:12 EDT From: "Nancy Frishberg" Subject: 3.429 How did we end up linguists? -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 22 May 92 16:25 PDT From: Vicki Fromkin Subject: Re: 3.429 How did we end up linguists? Becoming a linguist -- I am sure there are as many reasons as there are linguists or more. Me? 17 years after my BA, tired of being a diletant and having felt betrayed by the revolution and also guilty about giving the president of my son's PTA a headache every time I raised my hand (or so it was reported to me) I decided I really wanted to go back to school but didn't want to do more economics (my BA) and one evening at dinner in San Francisco at a friends where I met Harvey Pitkin who was working on Wintu (and his PhD at Berkeley) I moaned that I didn't know what I wanted to be when I grew up and he said You should be a linguist and I said I couldn't even speak English and he said that doesn't matter if I liked to do cross word puzzles and made up secret languages when I wa was a little girl and then he talked about phonemes and morphemes and American Indian languages and we finished a bottle of Brandy and I decided, why not? so I applied to the Linguistic Dept at ucla and was sure they would reject me not knowing any linguistics and having only A's and F's on my undergraduate transcript and low and behold they said yes which I am sure was a mistake but that was 1961 and in 1962 I entered th graduate program and in 1965 got a PhD and will be eternally grateful to Harvey and brandy and ucla and all this is to show how there is no longest sentence. Vicki Fromkin -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Fri, 22 May 1992 17:12 CST From: Mark Hansell/ Mai Hansheng Subject: Re: 3.421 Linguists, Human Subjects I had the same reaction as Martin Volk to Michael Kac's idea that linguists become linguists because they're superior language learners. My gut reaction was that it must be wrong, that we become linguists because we have a hard time learning language, that effortless polyglots pay no conscious attention at all to grammar or any other systems of rules. I was about to offer myself as an example when I realized that I _am_ a pretty good language learner, but I've always found the process frustrating. I hated learning languages because it seemed so dreary and inefficient until I discovered some shortcuts, namely syntax, phonology, morphology, etc. If my case is at all generalizable, then (happily) Messrs Volk and Kac are both right-- we become linguists because we have some skill at language learning, but we are also the rational sort that thinks there MUST be a better, more efficient way to go about it (and therefore perceive ourselves as having "trouble" with it). Am I weird, or did it happen this way for other people? Let's hear more. Mark Hansell Asian Lang. & Lit. Carleton College Northfield, MN USA -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) Date: Sun, 24 May 92 07:05 PDT From: "Robert S. Kirsner" Subject: Becoming a linguist I support Gilbert's thesis. To be sure, one stimulus was growing up on a university campus where there were lots of foreign-born faculty, so one heard and saw a lot of different languages in people's houses, bookcases, and refrigerators (like the pickle jar I once saw labelled in Polish). But another was certainly the movie THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL, where Michael Rennie, playing Klaatu, has to communicate with the robot Gort in his home language and, indeed, where Patricia Neal, playing Mrs. Benson, has to memorize a sentence in that language and repeat it to Gort to save the world toward the film's end. A third stimulus was majoring in a science in college (chemistry) which had a strong focus on concepts of "structure". Finally, one had to actually discover linguistics, which wasn't the kind of thing one heard about in college before the 60s. It was nice one could do something with language(s) without having to be exclusively historically oriented and without having to worry about, say, the KIND of apple hurled into the thorax of Gregor Samsa (Now class, on the basis of textual evidence, was it a Golden Delicious or not? Or did the Apple represent the Disapproval of Franz the K's dad?????) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) Date: Tue, 26 May 92 07:15:55 MDT From: mnu@inel.gov (Rick Morneau) Subject: Re: 3.429 How did we end up linguists? I have to admit that I'm leery of complex arguments and self- psychoanalysis that try to explain why one becomes a linguist. Is it at all possible that people become linguists simply because they're fascinated by language? As the old saying goes: "There's no accounting for taste". Regards, Rick -- *=*= Disclaimer: The INEL does not speak for me and vice versa =*=* = Rick Morneau Idaho National Engineering Laboratory = * mnu@inel.gov Idaho Falls, Idaho 83415, USA * =*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*= NeXT Mail accepted here! *=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*= -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) Date: Tue, 26 May 92 10:54:12 EDT From: "Nancy Frishberg" Subject: 3.429 How did we end up linguists? I'll put myself in the foot-in-the-humanities & foot-in-the-sciences camp. I remember, from my senior year of high school, doing the dishes with my father (a sci-fi fan and long-time reader of 'Scientific American') and having a discussion about what I would study in college. I told him I liked English but mostly grammar, not lit-crit, and I tested well in math. He said, "Sounds like linguistics to me." And, right he was! And the half&half story still holds: now here I am, remaking myself (again) in private industry, from a Humanities specialist (that's how I got hired into IBM) to a Multimedia researcher in a computer science group and now to a Usability engineer. When I pinch myself, it's still me. Nancy Frishberg (nancyf@watson.ibm.com) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-437. ________________________________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-438. Tue 26 May 1992. Lines: 135 Subject: 3.438 Adjuncts Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 22 May 92 18:25:29 CDT From: Eric Schiller Subject: Re: 3.431 Adjuncts 2) Date: Sat, 23 May 92 10:40:19 EST From: bert peeters Subject: French prepositions governing non-finite clauses -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 22 May 92 18:25:29 CDT From: Eric Schiller Subject: Re: 3.431 Adjuncts Yes, the anonymous Englishman (or at least UK dweller) was correct, in his/her/its post of Vol-3-431. My tongue was firmly in cheek, and I agree completely with the lexical semantic links between time expressions and use of 'when' as a complementizer, similarly locational phrases and 'where', etc. I do take these links very seriously, even though in an unpublished 1985 paper I referred to these properties of time and space as TARDIS features (and still do). The question that arises is whether these facts are grammaticalized to the point where the features should participate in the formal syntactic and semantic analyses. Similar questions arise with regard to animacy hierachies and other features which seem to bridge the chasm between real world semantics and grammatical theory. Exactly how to link such notions to descriptive and analytical frameworks means dirtying one's hands in the data, something which some members of our community seem to object to. Within the Autolexical community, such questions of grammaticality can be asked and answered, and perhaps soon one of us will do so. Eric Schiller University of Chicago schiller@sapir.uchicago.edu -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Sat, 23 May 92 10:40:19 EST From: bert peeters Subject: French prepositions governing non-finite clauses > Date: Fri, 22 May 92 01:15:02 BST > From: WAB2@phx.cam.ac.uk > Lloyd Holliday (3048/4) is right in saying that what makes the grammaticality > of > I remember the first time when we played golf > > suspicious is the contiguity of "time" and "when". > It is not a phonetic problem. The problem is one of semantic overlap, as also > between "place" and "where" in > > I remember the first place where we played golf. If the first sample sentence is "suspicious" (I must confess it doesn't shock my non-native ears - or eyes, and I wonder whether for native speakers it could be something they say quite often in careless speech), the second sample sentence is definitely far better (if not entirely acceptable - how else could one express the idea?). This leads me to the assumption that semantic overlap is not the entire story either. Nicolas Ruwet has a delightful study in his recent *Syntax and Human Experience* about meteorological expressions such as "la pluie tombe"/"rain is falling" or "le vent souffle"/"the wind is blowing". Now, these are OK, yet there is a significant semantic overlap. What else is rain, he argues, but a downward movement of water particles? What else is wind, one could add, but a blow or displacement of air? Not that I have any answer to the English problem at hand - I just wanted to point out that semantic overlap is not necessarily the reason behind the "suspiciousness" of the first of Lloyd Holliday's sample sentences. > Lloyd Holliday is also right to conclude that "day" > >is less basically a word like "time" > concluding that this made it easier to assign unquestioning grammaticality to > > I remember the first day when I played golf. What are the criteria permitting to distinguish between less and more basic words? What makes "day" less basically a word like "time"? "Place" and "time" seem to be at the same level of generality (at least in Indo-European based languages). Does this mean that when "place" is being replaced with something "less basic" (proceeding by analogy, I suggest as a working example "univers- ity campus"), the second sample sentence becomes better? Is I remember the first university campus where I played golf any better than I remember the first place where I played golf ? I'm finally getting to what I wanted to talk about in the first place... > A preposition in French must govern a noun, and such a noun must be overt in a > finite clause. Yet, like English, a preposition can govern a clause, without > the intercession of a noun, if that clause is non-finite > > Jean est venu A [retrouver son ami] > John managed [to find his friend] A word of warning is necessary: not all prepositions in French can govern a clause (even a non-finite one). The most common ones are "de" and "a`". On the other hand, not all instances of "de" introducing a clause preceded by a verb are prepositions. If "de" were a preposition in Je vous propose de me suivre I suggest you follow me pronominalization of the non-finite clause would result in *Je vous en propose whereas the only correct way of pronominalization is Je vous le propose I you it suggest This is my suggestion to you --------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-438. ________________________________________________________________ 5/23/92 [Moderators' note: The following message describes how to do things on LINGUIST, and with the LINGUISTS Nameserver. 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 "NO NAME" 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: The address for retrieving files is different from the address for posting a message to LINGUIST. Most of our files are kept on listserv@tamvm1.tamu.edu, but a few are kept elsewhere. So be sure to use the address given in the announcement. Usually it will tell you to send a message consisting of the following line: get linguist Ex: get lsa lst linguist (This will retrieve the list of e-mail addresses for LSA members.) If the listserv tells you that the file is unknown to it, you may just have the wrong name. Get a listing of all the files it has by sending the listserv the message: index linguist 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 A BACK ISSUE OF LINGUIST: If the issue you want is one from the last year or so, these are still available on line from the listserv. Since these are kept in archive files, you'll need to send a database query to the listserv asking for an index of all back issues. You get such a listing by sending the following to the listserv: //SEARCH JOB ECHO=NO DATABASE SEARCH DD=RULES //RULES DD * SEARCH * IN LINGUIST INDEX and it will return the listing of all issue numbers, with their headers. To retrieve an issue, send the message: //SEARCH JOB ECHO=NO DATABASE SEARCH DD=RULES //RULES DD * SEARCH * IN LINGUIST PRINT Issue-Number to the address: listserv@tamvm1.tamu.edu (Internet) listserv@tamvm1 (Bitnet) More than one issue can be retrived at once. For more help on how to use the database, see (12) below. 12) GET ISSUES RELEVANT TO A PARTICULAR DISCUSSION: You remember that there was a discussion a while back about Acehnese, but can't remember exactly when. You need to use the database functions of Listserv, so that you can get it to track down the issues for you. You send the following to the listserv: //SEARCH JOB ECHO=NO DATABASE SEARCH DD=RULES //RULES DD * SEARCH ACEHNESE IN LINGUIST INDEX and it returns a listing of issues which mention Acehnese. But how do you retrieve the issues you want? You need to find out more on how to use Listserv's database. So you send the message: get database help linguist to the address: listserv@tamvm1.tamu.edu (Internet) listserv@tamvm1 (Bitnet) 13) 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.) 14) 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 ------------------------------------- HOW TO USE THE LINGUISTS NAMESERVER The LINGUISTS NAMESERVER is a program which allows linguists to find the e-mail addresses of other linguists. ALL SUBSCRIBERS TO LINGUIST SHOULD SEND THEIR OWN LISTING TO THE NAMESERVER WHEN THEY FIRST SUBSCRIBE, in the way described below. NB: The LINGUIST Nameserver is administered independently from the LINGUIST mailing list. All ENQUIRIES about the server should be sent to the administrator of the nameserver, Norval Smith, at the address NSMITH@ALF.LET.UVA.NL. DO NOT SEND ANY NAMESERVER MESSAGES TO LINGUIST@TAMSUN.TAMU.EDU OR TO LINGUIST@TAMVM1. These addresses will not be able to deal with nameserver messages. * * * * All nameserver messages using the commands below should be sent by e-mail to: linguists@alf.let.uva.nl (linguist@alf.let.uva.nl works too) 1) To get a listing of (an) address(es): list SURNAME 2) To add an address to the Nameserver list: add SURNAME, FIRSTNAME: USERNAME@ADDRESS 3) To remove an address from the Nameserver list: remove SURNAME, FIRSTNAME: USERNAME@ADDRESS 4) To receive the whole list (230 Kb) list * 5) To get a complete HELP message: help Some Do's and Don'ts. NB-1: All capitalized portions of the above commands are variables. Replace with the relevant names. NB-2: Please use only lower-case letters. NB-3: Start all commands at the left margin. NB-4: Start each command on a new line. As many commands as you like in one message. NB-5: It's just a dumb computer. No message other than the above commands will have any effect at all. NB-6: Please don't attempt to reach us with a TELL message. You will only get a NO SUCH NODE message back. ________________________________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-439. Tue 26 May 1992. Lines: 221 Subject: 3.439 Requests for Commentators Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Mon, 25 May 92 20:45:11 EDT From: "Stevan Harnad" Subject: Landau/Jackendoff/Byrne on Spatial Cognition: BBS & PSYC Calls for -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Mon, 25 May 92 20:45:11 EDT From: "Stevan Harnad" Subject: Landau/Jackendoff/Byrne on Spatial Cognition: BBS & PSYC Calls for Below are two announcements. One is a Call for Commentators on a target article to appear in BBS, the other is a Call for Commentators on a target article that has just appeared in BBS's electronic counterpart, PSYCOLOQUY. The articles happen to be on the same topic (spatial cognition) but the two Calls (and journals) are independent; please respond to the separately. -------------------------------------------------------------- (1) Landau & Jackendoff on Spatial Cognition in BBS Below is the abstract of a forthcoming target article on spatial cognition by Landau & Jackendoff. It has been accepted for publication in Behavioral and Brain Sciences (BBS), an international, interdisciplinary journal that provides Open Peer Commentary on important and controversial current research in the biobehavioral and cognitive sciences. Commentators must be current BBS Associates or nominated by a current BBS Associate. To be considered as a commentator on this article, to suggest other appropriate commentators, or for information about how to become a BBS Associate, please send email to: harnad@clarity.princeton.edu or harnad@pucc.bitnet or write to: BBS, 20 Nassau Street, #240, Princeton NJ 08542 [tel: 609-921-7771] To help us put together a balanced list of commentators, please give some indication of the aspects of the topic on which you would bring your areas of expertise to bear if you were selected as a commentator. An electronic draft of the full text is available for inspection by anonymous ftp according to the instructions that follow after the abstract. ____________________________________________________________________ "What" and "Where" in Spatial Language and Spatial Cognition Barbara Landau University of California, Irvine blandau@orion.oac.uci.edu Ray Jackendoff Brandeis University jackendoff@brandeis.bitnet Fundamental to spatial knowledge in all species are the representations underlying object recognition, object search, and navigation through space. What sets humans apart from other species is our ability to express spatial experience through language. In this target article, we explore the language of objects and places, asking what geometric properties are preserved in the representations underlying object nouns and spatial prepositions in English. Evidence from these two aspects of language suggests there are significant differences in the geometric richness with which objects and places are encoded. When objects are named as objects (i.e. with count nouns), detailed geometric properties of the object -- principally its shape (axes, solid and hollow volumes, surfaces, and parts) -- are represented. In contrast, when objects play the role of either "figure" (located object) or "ground" (reference object) in a locational expression, only very coarse geometric object properties are represented, primarily the object's main axes. In addition, the spatial functions encoded by spatial prepositions tend to be nonmetric and relatively coarse, for example, "containment," "contact," "relative distance," and "relative direction." These properties are representative of other languages as well. The striking differences in the way that language encodes objects vs. places lead us to suggest two explanations: First, a tendency for languages to level out geometric detail from both object and place representations; second, a nonlinguistic disparity between the representations of "what" and "where" that underlies the representation of objects and places in language. As a whole, the language of objects and places is shown to converge with and enrich our understanding of the corresponding spatial representations. -------------------------------------------------------------- To help you decide whether you would be an appropriate commentator for this article, an electronic draft is retrievable by anonymous ftp from princeton.edu according to the instructions below (the filename is bbs.landau.jackendoff). Please do not prepare a commentary on this draft. Just let us know, after having inspected it, what relevant expertise you feel you would bring to bear on what aspect of the article. --------------------------------------------------------------- To retrieve a file by ftp from a Unix/Internet site, type either: ftp princeton.edu or ftp 128.112.128.1 When you are asked for your login, type: anonymous For your password, type: your-own-login-name@your-system's-name (make sure the "@" sign gets through, it's important!) then change directories with: cd pub/harnad To show the available files, type: ls Next, retrieve the file you want with (for example): get bbs.landau.jackendoff When you have the file(s) you want, type: quit JANET users can use the Internet file transfer utility at JANET node UK.AC.FT-RELAY to get BBS files. Use standard file transfer, setting the site to be UK.AC.FT-RELAY, the userid as anonymous@edu.princeton, the password as your own userid, and the remote filename to be the filename according to Unix conventions (e.g. pub/harnad/bbs.article). Lower case should be used where indicated, using quotes if necessary to avoid automatic translation into upper case. --------------------------------------------------------------- The above cannot be done interactively from Bitnet or other networks directly, but there are two fileservers -- ftpmail@decwrl.dec.com and bitftp@pucc.bitnet -- that will do it for you. Send either on the one line message: help for instructions (which will be similar to the above, but will be in the form of a series of lines in an email message that ftpmail or bitftp will then execute for you). ------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------- (2) Bryant on Spatial Representation in PSYCOLOQUY (electronic only) The target article whose abstract appears below has just been published in PSYCOLOQUY, BBS's electronic counterpart. It can be retrieved by anonymous ftp from the same host and directory as described above; its filename is: psyc.92.3.16.space.1.bryant or by sending the following one-line message to listserv@pucc.bitnet or to listserv@pucc.princeton.edu : get psyc 92-00049 Electronic commentary is now invited on this target article. A commentary should not exceed 200 lines. It should have a keyword-indexable title and the commentator's full name and affiliation. All paragraphs should be numbered and reference citation style should be as in the target article. Please submit commentaries to: psyc@pucc.bitnet or psyc@pucc.princeton.edu ------------------------------------------------------------------ psycoloquy.92.3.16.space.1.bryant Saturday May 23 1992 Copyright 1992 David J. Bryant ISSN 1055-0143 (32 paragraphs, 48 references, 724 lines) A SPATIAL REPRESENTATION SYSTEM IN HUMANS David J. Bryant Department of Psychology 125 NI Boston, MA 02115 bryant@northeastern.edu 0.0 ABSTRACT: This target article reviews evidence for the functional equivalence of spatial representations of observed environments and environments described in discourse. It is argued that people possess a spatial representation system that constructs mental spatial models on the basis of perceptual and linguistic information. Evidence for a distinct spatial system is reviewed. ------------------------------------------------------------ PSYCOLOQUY is a refereed electronic journal (ISSN 1044-0143) sponsored on an experimental basis by the American Psychological Association and currently estimated to reach a readership of 20,000. PSYCOLOQUY publishes brief reports of ideas and findings on which the author wishes to solicit rapid peer feedback, international and interdisciplinary ("Scholarly Skywriting"), in all areas of psychology and its related fields (biobehavioral, cognitive, neural, social, etc.) All contributions are refereed by members of PSYCOLOQUY's Editorial Board. Target articles should normally not exceed 500 lines in length, commentaries and responses should not exceed 200 lines. All target articles must have (1) a short abstract (<100 words), (2) an indexable title, (3) 6-8 indexable keywords, and the (4) author's full name and institutional address. The submission should be accompanied by (5) a rationale for soliciting commentary (e.g., why would commentary be useful and of interest to the field? what kind of commentary do you expect to elicit?) and (6) a list of potential commentators (with their email addresses). Commentaries must have indexable titles and the commentator's full name and institutional address (abstract is optional). PSYCOLOQUY also publishes reviews of books in any of the obove fields; these should normally be the same length as commentaries, but longer reviews will be considered as well. Authors of accepted manuscripts assign to PSYCOLOQUY the right to distribute their text electronically and to archive and make it permanently retrievable electronically. However, they retain the copyright, and after it has appeared in PSYCOLOQUY authors may republish their text any way they wish -- electronic or print -- as long as they clearly acknowledge PSYCOLOQUY as its original locus of publication. However, except in very special cases, agreed upon in advance, contributions that have already been published or are being considered for publication elsewhere are not eligible to be considered for publication in PSYCOLOQUY, Please submit all material to psyc@pucc.bitnet or psyc@pucc.princeton.edu -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-439. ________________________________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-440. Tue 26 May 1992. Lines: 170 Subject: 3.440 Queries: Telugu, Mandarin, Voice Projection, Dictionaries Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sat, 23 May 1992 15:37:13 -0400 From: zgilbert@epas.utoronto.ca (Zvi Gilbert) Subject: Phonology of Telugu 2) Date: Tue, 26 May 92 00:24:13 BST From: S Wang Subject: Retroflex Suffix in Mandarin Chinese 3) Date: Mon, 25 May 1992 10:40:00 +1200 From: Laurie Bauer Subject: Query: voice projection 4) Date: Mon, 25 May 92 21:26:57 EST From: raskin@j.cc.purdue.edu (Victor Raskin) Subject: Brief E-Dictionaries -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sat, 23 May 1992 15:37:13 -0400 From: zgilbert@epas.utoronto.ca (Zvi Gilbert) Subject: Phonology of Telugu Hi: I am a master's student writing my thesis this summer in the phonology of sandhi processes in Telugu. I have dug around a lot in the references to Telugu in the linguistics literature, but it is certain that I have missed some. If you have any references to the phonology of Telugu, could you please mail them to me? I will of course acknowlege any assistance. I have the two basic references for Telugu consonantal sandhi: Krishnamurti, 1957 and Bhaskararao, 1982, as well as the work in Language by Wilkinson, 1974. Did he ever publish again on this topic? Thanks in advance to all. --Zvi Gilbert zgilbert@epas.utoronto.ca @epas.toronto.edu -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Tue, 26 May 92 00:24:13 BST From: S Wang Subject: Retroflex Suffix in Mandarin Chinese A little while ago I put in a mail asking for ideas about experiments in Mandarin Chinese for my Masters Thesis. Thanks very much for all the replies I recieved, there were lots of great ideas and suggestions. What I've decided to do is as comprehensive a study as I can of the retroflex suffix in Beijing Mandarin (this is the -r suffix added to words often as a dimintive or to show affection). I'm going to be working on it full time over the next three months, here in the linguistics department of Edinburgh Univeristy. Some of the aspects I will be considering will be: 1) Phonetics: What are its acoustic and tonal characteristics? How does it relate to stress? 2) Phonology: What are the phonological rules governing how it interacts with the preceding syllable? 3) Syntax: Which syntactic categories can it go on? Can it ever affect the syntax of the word it is attached to? (I doubt it!) 4) Semantics: Which semantic categories is it most at home on? Can it ever change the meaning? (I doubt this too) 5) Pragmatics: When is it used, and what does it signify? Idealy I would like to find a computerised corpus and search it for sentences with the suffix in. Then I'll get native speakers to record them onto DAT, so that I can make acoustic measurements and also work out the phonological rules. I will do an analysis of the syntactic and semantic categories of the words the suffix is attached to, and find out, as far as I can, the pragmatic situations in which it is used. If I can't find a computerised corpus, then I'll have to extract the data by hand from a selection of books, newspapers etc. If anyone knows where I could find a corpus of Mandarin Chinese, or has any ideas, comments, or references about the retroflex suffix, then please do let me know. Anything you can say would be very useful. Thanks very much, Sophia Wang. Sophia Wang Department of Linguistics Adam Furgeson Building Edinburgh University Scotland E-Mail: As header, or sophia@ed.ling or sophia@ling.edinburgh.ac.uk -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) Date: Mon, 25 May 1992 10:40:00 +1200 From: Laurie Bauer Subject: Query: voice projection The other day I was speaking to a (non-linguist) colleague about the (lack of) ability of university lecturers to project their voices. He said (and I quote as nearly as I can recall) 'The main problem is that they speak down here [indicating the ventral pharyngeal wall] rather than in the front of their mouths'. This person has successfully taught voice production, but I could not interpret what he meant. Clearly raised larynx or general palatalization -- both of which seemed possible interpretations -- were not what was meant. Can anyone interpret this expression? More generally, is there any source which interprets in phonetic terms the weird but apparently effective instructions of speech and singing teachers, such as 'sing with your forehead'? Laurie Bauer BauerL@matai.vuw.ac.nz -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) Date: Mon, 25 May 92 21:26:57 EST From: raskin@j.cc.purdue.edu (Victor Raskin) Subject: Brief E-Dictionaries I am posting it for a friend in Russia. She has a limited e-mail connection, so please direct your responses to me. I will summarize them for her and, if appropriate, for the list. This is just a query, not at all a commercial. This is her unedited message: "My firm produces electronic dictionaries - two of them, Engish-Russian and Russian-English general dictionaries, are in the process of development now, and one terminoligical dictionary (business and commerce, 6.700 entries) is already in sale. We intend to develope several series of terminological dictionaries of small volume - from 1000 to 5000 entries each. I'd like to know, are there any electronic terminological dictionaries into US software market? I saw in price-lists only thesauruses, synonim dictionaries and two (and more)-language general lexics dictionaries. May be Americans use modem-link with big terminological databases instead of standalone programes? I'll be very grateful to you for any information on US electronic terminological dictionaries and their sales prices." -- Victor Raskin raskin@j.cc.purdue.edu Professor of English and Linguistics (317) 494-3782 Chair, Interdepartmental Program in Linguistics 494-3780 fax Coordinator, Natural Language Processing Laboratory Purdue University W. Lafayette, IN 47907 U.S.A. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-440. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-3-441. Wed 27 May 1992. Lines: 181 Subject: 3.441 Rules, Innateness Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Thu, 21 May 1992 00:58 EET From: Martti Arnold Nyman Subject: Rules, (in)correct actions 2) Date: Tue, 26 May 92 10:01:23 PDT From: andrews@Csli.Stanford.EDU (Avery Andrews) Subject: 3.427 Innateness 3) Date: Tue, 26 May 1992 12:20 MST From: CAROLG@CC.UTAH.EDU Subject: Re: 3.436 Innateness 4) Date: Tue, 26 May 92 18:18 PDT From: Vicki Fromkin Subject: Re: 3.436 Innateness -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Thu, 21 May 1992 00:58 EET From: Martti Arnold Nyman Subject: Rules, (in)correct actions In Vol-3-371, Alexis Manaster Ramer made a powerful comment on > Subject: Thrainsson/Andrews/Itkonen on Rules So far, no one has responded. While I agree with Alexis in many respects, I feel uneasy about his conclusion: > In conclusion, I think that linguists should be prepared to > make claims about observable facts, even if these claims are > not always correct and even if we are forced to make such > vague distinctions as that between "normal" and "jocular" > or "normal" and "erroneous (i.e., unintentional)" utterances. The problem with your proposal is that the notion of incorrect action (by mistake, by joke) presupposes the notion of correct action. Classically, comic effects are due to violations of rule/norm-based expectations. As far as grammatical description is concerned, only correctly formed NP's can be enumerated. This is so because mistakes and other incorrect actions are innumerable and non-enumerable. +++ In Vol-3-409, Rick Wojcik writes: >As one who likes Stampean Natural Phonology, I find the 'two-leg' constraint >an amusing analogy to the way many linguists formulate their analyses. But >I wouldn't want people to get the idea that Natural Phonology takes experience >to be the sole factor in language acquisition. I don't think there's disagreement between Rick and me here. I also think high of Stampean Natural Phonology. What I find particularly enlightening in it is its approach to language acquisition: The acquisition of the phonological structure of one's first language consists in suppressing and constraining innate & universal natural processes to the effect of adapting one's innate & universal processes to socially shared rules/norms of correct pronunciation. (NB: 'to pronounce correctly' = 'to pronounce like the others (who know how to pronounce)'.) This is _eruditio_ in the etymological sense of this Latin noun: 'release from the natural state'. > I'm not sure whether this really contradicts what Martti said, but >I am a little confused by all his references to 'norms'. I see nothing >contradictory in describing linguistic systems from two points of view: >social or psychological. I would tend to use terms like 'norm', 'cultural >fact', 'institutional', etc., when talking about the role of language in >society. I find it more difficult to use those terms when describing rules >that control linguistic behavior. Well, it depends on what you mean by "rules that control linguistic behavior". It is your knowledge of socially shared rules of chess that controls your "chess behavior". If you accept this, you might also accept the view that your knowledge of socially shared rules/norms of language controls your linguistic behavior (to the effect that you may choose to speak correctly or -- perhaps by joke -- incorrectly). Norms are social facts, whereas internalizations of norms are psychological facts. The latter I don't call norms. Martti Nyman Department of General Linguistics, University of Helsinki, Finland -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Tue, 26 May 92 10:01:23 PDT From: andrews@Csli.Stanford.EDU (Avery Andrews) Subject: 3.427 Innateness Re Stemberger on inntates (Linguist 3 427) >I've never understood why it makes any difference at all to linguistic >theory whether highly language-specific information is innate or not. > ... On my view, it makes no difference at all, and linguistic investigations can only address the issue via highly unconvincing arguments from lack of imagination (`The constraints on clitic-climbing are so wierd! How could anything but a language-specific innate universal explain them?'). I think that it is quite unfortunate that people of tended to make a supposed fundamental principle out of what is at best a rickety conjecture, as far as purely linguistic evidence is concerned (there are of course other substantial arguments for language-specific innateness, such as the ones Vicky Fromkin has been telling us about, but that's another matter). Avery.Andrews@anu.edu.au -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) Date: Tue, 26 May 1992 12:20 MST From: CAROLG@CC.UTAH.EDU Subject: Re: 3.436 Innateness The fact is that we don't need universals (in the sense of the elements of a theoretical UG) in order to argue for innate- ness. Creoles, first language acquisition, aphasia, certain processing facts, etc. do it for us. Universals give us a framework within which to talk about those more concrete facts. And innateness is a theory about universals. If linguistic theory is a theory about the human language faculty, and language is an undeniable property of humans (which I suppose not many linguists will argue with, quite independently of the animal-language issue), then innateness is a theory about this one very important property of being human. It's what makes linguistic theory simultaneously a theory within the humanities and a theory within the sciences. In sum, innateness theory sums up what (many) linguists have concluded about the nature of language and hence about this aspect of human nature. Two suggestions: (1) that we all make an effort to distinguish remarks about the mind from remarks about biology -- i.e., the brain. I don't suggest we all become dualists (because that's not in fact the only conclusion). But claims and theories about what the brain DOES (mental functions) should be methodologically distinct from claims and theories about what the brain IS (how it works in physical terms). We certainly don't know a whole lot about the brain, but there is no reason why we should not continue to pursue theories about the mind. I consider claims/theories about the innateness of language to be about the mind, and not about physical realities of the brain. (2) read Pinker and Bloom, 'Natural Language and Natural Selection' in a recent (1990?) issue of BBS, and all the peer commentary that accompanies it. Reading in current works about consciousness also make compelling reading. E.g., Dennett, 'Consciousness Explained', work of Edelman, etc. etc. Carol Georgopoulos -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) Date: Tue, 26 May 92 18:18 PDT From: Vicki Fromkin Subject: Re: 3.436 Innateness Would like to second the Pesetsky position (which is probably no surprise to anyone) but would also like to publicly wonder why the question of of the innateness of specific bird species' songs is not questioned b by those who question are argue against built in hard-wired genetic language specifics. One would think that the more neurologically complex the species the more one would have to have such geneticallyj determined capabilities. Vicki Fromkin -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-441. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-3-442. Wed 27 May 1992. Lines: 124 Subject: 3.442 FYI: Fonts, Summer Program Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 20 May 92 08:47 PDT From: Vicki Fromkin Subject: Re: 3.420 FYI: Morphology, Concordance 2) Date: Fri, 22 May 1992 10:58:46 +0000 From: Mark Sanderson Subject: Human Sense Disambiguation Correction 3) Date: 26 May 92 11:01 From: Subject: Goettingen Summer School: Language development -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 20 May 92 08:47 PDT From: Vicki Fromkin Subject: Re: 3.420 FYI: Morphology, Concordance many thanks to Henry Churchyard for the speech error. Any others sent either directly to me (iyo1vaf@uclamvs) would be much appreciated. Please give target (if you know it), error, who said it, under what circumstances, (e.g. on radio, tv, seminar, personal talk, lecture etc), who heard it. We do hope to have a data bank of errors available some time in the future. -------------------------- on IPA fonts. Have just installed ATECH software ipIPA FONTS to use with Wordstar and with Word for Windows and they are terrific! One has to first get the Atech Stoftware Powerpak font package which costs $59 or something and IPA is additional $89 I think but if you can spare the money or get someone to fund the purchase it works like a dream. Vicki Fromkin -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Fri, 22 May 1992 10:58:46 +0000 From: Mark Sanderson Subject: Human Sense Disambiguation Correction Oh dear, first of all I send a summary very late and then I discover the summary has an error. The second reference should've read... G. A. Miller (1954) "Communication" Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 5, Pages 401-420 Sorry. +-----------------------------------------------------------+ | Mail : Mark Sanderson, Department of Computing Science, | | The University, Glasgow G12 8QQ, Scotland, UK. | +-----------------------------------------------------------+ | E-mail : sanderso@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk | | Tel : +44 (0)41 339 8855 x6292 <---- ***New Number*** | | Fax : +44 (0)41 330 4913 | +-----------------------------------------------------------+ | "I'm gonna get you in my tent tent tent tent tent | | So we can both experiment ment ment ment ment" | +-----------------------------------------------------------+ -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) Date: 26 May 92 11:01 From: Subject: Goettingen Summer School: Language development The German Linguistics Society (DGfS) is offering a SUMMER SCHOOL ON LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT (language change and acquisition) Goettingen, 31 August - 14 September 1992 Courses: Roger Lass (Capetown): Phonological change Elizabeth C. Traugott (Stanford): Grammaticalization Raimo Anttila (UCLA): Semiotic foundation of linguistic change Ans van Kemenade (Amsterdam): Generative approaches to language change Suzanne Romaine (Oxford): Pidgin and Creole languages Ruth Berman (Tel Aviv) Form and function in first language development Melissa Bwerman/(MPI Nijmegen) & Dan Slobin (Berkeley): Cross-linguistic perspectives on language development BBrigitte Nerlich (Nottingham): Theories of language origins (in German) Wolfgang U. Wurzel (Berlin): Natural grammatical change (in German) Hartmut Schmidt (Berlin): German language history (in German) KKlaus Mattheier (Heidelber}g): Historical sociolinguistics of German (in Germa) Dieter Stein (Duesseldorf): Internal and external factors of language change Rosemarie Tracy (Tuebingen): Theories of syntactic change (in German) Harald Clahsen (Duesseldorf): Acquisition of grammar (in German) Wolfgang Klein (MPI Nijmegen) Second language acquisition (in German) Ino addition, there will be two lecture series. tuition: for students: DM 240.00 for university affiliates: DM 480.00 for others DM 960.00 For more information, contact: Hero Janssen Department of English University of Goettingen Humboldtallee 13 D-3400 Goettingen, Federal rRpu}blic of G. Tel. +49-551-397575, -397546 Fax: +49-551-397685 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-442. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-3-443. Wed 27 May 1992. Lines: 153 Subject: 3.443 Tone, RelativMarkers, Human Subjects Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sat, 23 May 92 15:09:00 -0700 From: Bill Poser Subject: reference to pre-autosegmental work on tone 2) Date: Mon, 25 May 92 11:35:27 BST From: Sue Blackwell Subject: Re: 3.433 Chomsky Citations 3) Date: Sat, 23 May 1992 21:23 EST From: CARTER@ACFcluster.NYU.EDU Subject: Re: 3.426 Queries: OULIPO; Relative Markers; Reflexives 4) Date: Wed, 20 May 92 11:44:21 EDT From: "Nancy Frishberg" Subject: 3.421 Linguists, Human Subjects -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sat, 23 May 92 15:09:00 -0700 From: Bill Poser Subject: reference to pre-autosegmental work on tone While I think it is true that some earlier work on tone, especially by Pike and by various Africanists, was not adequately credited by early workers on autosegmental phonology, it is not quite true that people at MIT were unaware of this work and did not credit it. Will Leben's 1973 thesis, which provided the impetus to Goldsmith, contains very explicit reference to this work. Inspection of p.10, for example, reveals references to Edmondson & Bendor-Samuel (1966), Rowlands (1959), Welmers (1962) and Pike (1948). Nor was this tradition lost sight of. I reproduce here footnote 3 (p.156) of Poser (1982), published when I was an MIT graduate student: Although the theory was formalized by Goldsmith (1976) many of the basic observations had been known to Africanists for some time. See for example Welmers (1959), who says: "If sequences of two or three tonemes can be crowded into sumultaneity with a single vowel, it is equally true that, in some languages, the domain of a toneme may be more than one `syllable'." (p.6) References Edmondson, T. & J.T. Bendor-Samuel (1966) "Tone Patterns of Etung," Journal of African Languages 5.1-6. Leben, William (1973) _Suprasegmental Phonology_. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT. Pike, K. L. (1948) _Tone Languages_. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Poser, William J. (1982) "Phonological Representation and Action-at-a-Distance", in Harry van der Hulst and Norval Smith (eds.) _The Structure of Phonological Representations_ (Part II)_ (Dordrecht: Foris) pp. 121-158. Rowlands, E.C. (1959) _A Grammar of Gambian Mandinka_. London: SOAS. Welmers, William (1959) "Tonemics, Morphotonemics, and Tonal Morphemes," General Linguistics 4.1-9. Welmers, William (1962) "The Phonology of Kpelle," Journal of African Languages 1.69-93. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Mon, 25 May 92 11:35:27 BST From: Sue Blackwell Subject: Re: 3.433 Chomsky Citations If Chomsky is really so prolific, how come he's not contributing to this discussion? :-) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) Date: Sat, 23 May 1992 21:23 EST From: CARTER@ACFcluster.NYU.EDU Subject: Re: 3.426 Queries: OULIPO; Relative Markers; Reflexives Re relative markers over time: Cathy Ball could start with The Oxford Book of English Talk, ed. James Sutherland, Oxford U.P. 1953, which gives extracts from English dialogues starting in 1417 and ending in 1949. As far as possible they are genuine (from transcripts of trials, diaries etc.) with occasional literary sources used. The texts themselves may not supply all the material required but each one is properly attributed and should enable more copious texts to be traced. Mike Carter -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) Date: Wed, 20 May 92 11:44:21 EDT From: "Nancy Frishberg" Subject: 3.421 Linguists, Human Subjects Thanks, Mark Mandel...your description of the UC Berkeley ASL seminar reminded me of another similar occasion. I videotaped two deaf men in conversation in front of my ASL Structure class at LaGuardia Community College (New York) in the early '80s. They hadn't seen each other in 6-8 years and didn't realize that they both were living in NY City. One man is a practicing attorney (with another grad degree besides the law degree), deaf from infancy, but best classified as a native speaker of English. His sign language acquisition started about age 21, while in grad school. The other is a professional dancer, also deaf from birth or infancy, who reports that his high school diploma was granted just to get him out of school, since he was the right age and still illiterate. (The school has since been closed for educational malpractice or whatever the state ended up calling it.) He was nearly alingual when the three of us met in 1976 - communicative but using highly idiosyncratic gestural behavior. He now uses a mix of ASL signs and idiosyncratic gestures in a wonderfully inventive way, after having been immersed as an adult into an enriched ASL-signing environment. He's still basically illiterate. His is an amazing story for another occasion. I had, of course, described the videotaping when inviting them to the class. I presented them each with a written consent form, somewhere between the formality of the two Mark described (3.421) (legalistic & conversational). I had the lawyer interpret the informed consent form for the dancer while the camera was running. I don't know whether this procedure conformed to the college's policy (was there one?) or accepted practice. Nancy Frishberg (nancyf@watson.ibm.com) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-443. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-3-444. Sat 30 May 1992. Lines: 222 Subject: 3.444 Jobs Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Tue, 26 May 92 15:53 PDT From: PBRUTHI@MVSA.USC.EDU Subject: 2 Jobs: New Zealand 2) Date: Wed, 27 May 92 12:37 EDT From: MLAOD@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu Subject: MLA Bibliography 3) Date: Thu, 28 May 92 11:22:15 -0400 From: gb661@csc.albany.edu (BROADWELL GEORGE AARON) Subject: Job at SUNY-Albany 4) Date: Fri, 29 May 1992 09:35:54 +0100 From: gburnage@natcorp.ox.ac.uk (Gavin Burnage) Subject: Job with British National Corpus 5) Date: Fri, 29 May 92 16:35:14 EST From: Greg Stump Subject: French and Linguistics -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Tue, 26 May 92 15:53 PDT From: PBRUTHI@MVSA.USC.EDU Subject: 2 Jobs: New Zealand University of Otago, New Zealand: Department of English LECTURESHIP/SENIOR LECTURESHIP IN ENGLISH (LINGUISTICS) Applications are invited for a linguist of broad general competence with a part icular interest in one or more of the following fields: (a) sociolinguistics, ( b) semantics, (c) pragmatics. The successful applicant will be expected to teac h at first-year level in an applied fashion, and to contribute to courses in li nguistics in his or her speciality at advanced levels. Candidates should have a completed PhD and teaching experience, and in addition to their teaching duties will be expected to pursue, stimulate, and supervise research in their field(s) of expertise. The current salary range is NZ$37,440-$49,088 pa with a bar at NZ$45,448 (Lecur ers), and NZ$52,000-$67,080 pa with a bar at NZ$60,944 (Senior Lecturers). (NZ$ 1 = US$0.54). The position is available from 1 September 1992, and it is hoped that the succe ssful applicant can assume duties as close as possible to that date. Further information and method of application are available from: The Registrar University of Otago PO Box 56 Dunedin New Zealand fax: 64-3-474-1607 Quote reference number: A92/23 Closing date for applications: 30 June 1992. 2) LECTURESHIP/SENIOR LECTURESHIP IN ENGLISH (RHETORIC AND COMPOSITION) Applications are invited for a Lectureship/Senior Lectureship in the field of R hetoric/Composition, or a related field. Applicants should also have expertise in a second field relating toEnglish language or literature in English, such as literary stylistics, the history of the language, or American literature. The successful applicant will be expected to teach at first-year level in an ap plied fashion, and also to contribute to courses in his or her speciality in an applied fashion at advanced levels. Candidates should have a completed PhD and teaching experience, and in addition to their teaching duties will be expected to pursue,stimulate, and supervise r esearch in their field(s) or expertise. The current salary range is NZ$37,440-$49,088 pa with a bar at NZ$45,448 (Lectu rers), and NZ$52,000-$67,080 pa with a bar at NZ$60,944. ((NZ$1 = US$0.54). The position is available from 1 September 1992, and it is hoped that the succe ssful applicant can assume duties as close as possible to that date. Applications quoting reference number A92/24 close on 30 June 1992: The Registrar University of Otago PO Box 56 Dunedin New Zealand Equal opportunity in employment is University policy. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Wed, 27 May 92 12:37 EDT From: MLAOD@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu Subject: MLA Bibliography Position at MLA International Bibliography: Assistant Index Editor This entry-level position involves indexing scholarly writings in general linguistics and slavic linguistics. Applicants must have M.A. in linguistics, with a specialization in slavic languages; an excellent command of English; editing and proofreading experience; and excellent organization and typing skills. Send resume and letter of application (by mail) to: Box ETF, Modern Language Association, 10 Astor Place, New York, NY 10003. The MLA is an equal opportunity employer. x -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) Date: Thu, 28 May 92 11:22:15 -0400 From: gb661@csc.albany.edu (BROADWELL GEORGE AARON) Subject: Job at SUNY-Albany Please distribute this job listing to anyone you think might be interested. ========================================================================== The University at Albany, State University of New York (SUNY- Albany) seeks a visiting assistant professor for the Fall semester, 1992, to teach advanced syntax and two sections of introduction to linguistics. Requirements: Ph.D. or A.B.D. and teaching experi- ence. Please send letter of application and curriculum vitae to Rose-Marie Weber, Chair Dept. of Linguistics and Cognitive Science Hu 376 University at Albany, SUNY Albany, NY 12222 Fax (518) - 442-4188 For further information contact Aaron Broadwell (518-442-4706, gb661@thor.albany.edu) or Lee Bickmore (518-442-4161, lb527@albnyvms.bitnet). Priority will be given to applications received by June 10, 1992. ========================================================================== Thanks, ****************************************************************************** Aaron Broadwell, Dept. of Linguistics, University at Albany -- SUNY, Albany, NY 12222 gb661@thor.albany.edu ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 4) Date: Fri, 29 May 1992 09:35:54 +0100 From: gburnage@natcorp.ox.ac.uk (Gavin Burnage) Subject: Job with British National Corpus OXFORD UNIVERSITY COMPUTING SERVICES BRITISH NATIONAL CORPUS Editorial Assistant - RS1A Applications are invited for this one-year post within OUCS to assist with the encoding, storage and distribution of the British National Corpus. This is a major DTI/SERC funded collaborative venture, the goal of which is the creation and distribution of a 100 million word on-line corpus of English text, for use in linguistics research. Incorporating both written and spoken material, the corpus breaks new ground in terms of its size, variety of sources, consistency of format, and availability to users. An Editorial Assistant is required to take responsibility for quality control of texts going into the Corpus. This will involve automatic validation of SGML markup, some proof-reading and some correction of texts. You should have significant experience of computer-based text manipulation systems, preferably in a Unix environment. You should be able to undertake repetitious and routine work without much supervision, and to a high level of accuracy. Knowledge of UNIX tools and some experience of SGML is desirable. An interest in linguistics, text processing, proof-reading or editorial skills would be a great advantage. The salary will be on grade RS1A in the salary range #12,129-#19,328. Further details and application forms may be obtained from Judith Thompson, OUCS, 13 Banbury Rd, Oxford OX2 6NN (tel: 0865-273230; e-mail JUDITH@UK.AC.OXFORD.VAX) The closing date for applications is 24 June Interviews will be held during week beginning 13 July -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) Date: Fri, 29 May 92 16:35:14 EST From: Greg Stump Subject: French and Linguistics One-year Visiting Assistant Professor of French and Linguistics. Qualifications: (i) competency to teach French literature, preferably contemporary, with a native or near-native proficiency in French; (ii) ability to direct the instructional program in beginning and intermediate French; (iii) ability to teach lower- and upper-division undergraduate courses in contemporary linguistics. Have vita, place- ment dossier, and three letters of recommendation forwarded to: Chair, Dept. of French, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40506-0027. (Phone: (606) 257-5721.) Deadline for submission of dossiers: July 1, 1992. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-444. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-3-445. Sat 30 May 1992. Lines: 380 Subject: 3.445 A Tribute to Zellig Harris Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 29 May 92 12:25:08 EDT From: "Bruce E. Nevin" Subject: Zellig Harris -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Fri, 29 May 92 12:25:08 EDT From: "Bruce E. Nevin" Subject: Zellig Harris Last Thursday night, May 21, Zellig Harris died in his sleep after a pleasant working day. He was 88 years old. He was born in 1904 in Byelorussia. I am told that he chose the name Zellig Sabbettai when his family immigrated to the United states when he was four. I like to think that the semantics of happiness and steadfastness were on his mind. Certainly they were keynotes of his life. I would guess that his parents chose the name Harris. When he died, he was just finishing a book on politics that he had been planning for most of his life. With the 1992 publication of his book _A Theory of Language and Information_ (Oxford), he had wrapped up his life's work on language, at least for the time being. He seems to have felt at liberty to take up this other unfinished business. I understand from Paul Mattick, Jr., who was Harris's friend and neighbor for many years in New York, that this last book describes how to get from capitalism to socialism. This is surely not a conventional take on either capitalism or socialism, Harris was an anarchist. Oxford was interested in publishing it, and he had also talked with Cambridge. There is no memorial planned, beyond something very private for his family. However, there is some discussion beginning of a public meeting with scientific content. I would hope that the festschrift that Haj Ross called for in the LSA meetings some years ago might at last come into being. Harris described himself as a methodologist rather than a linguist. This could be misleading. He always said that his work was not part of linguistics as it is institutionally defined, and that linguists would not be interested in his work, though people interested in language would be. Nonetheless, he was surely a linguist by most of the operational definitions one might come up with. He had done extensive fieldwork on a variety of language. When he was doing the final revision of the 1992 Oxford book, he undertook to test the theory of language against every language of which he had some control, 44 languages. He spent months reading grammars from morning to night, and evaluating whether his theory had a reasonable account for what he found there. He was clear that no scientific conclusions were warranted, and so no particular notice of this check is given in the book, but he wanted to feel reasonably secure that his conclusions were not idiosyncratic to English, French, German, Korean, and the few other languages that had been the primary bases for their development. He was pleased with the results. His contributions to the field were numerous and weighty. He founded the first linguistics department in the U.S. He introduced the algebraic representations and abstract mathematical treatment which have become so much norms of the field that it is difficult now to appreciate how much he did so over the kicking and screaming protests of his peers. He invented X-bar notation for immediate constituent analysis, though of course not by that name, to cope with the well known weakness of IC analysis with the head-of relation. He developed ways to accomodate discontinuous morphemes into grammatical analysis. He charted a way out of difficulties experienced by Bloch and others in phonology, by saying that contrast rather than phonetic identity is the basis for setting up phonemes, a ghost that has risen to haunt generative phonology more than once. He invented string analysis as a complement (not rival) to immediate constituent analysis. Their complementarity with respect to the head-of problem is the basis of Joshi's Tree-Adjoining Grammars (TAGs). He invented transformational analysis in context of developing discourse analysis to get at the information content of texts. Other contributions await recognition and exploitation in the field of linguistics as institutionalized today, and in other fields. Obvious examples include sublanguage analysis and sublanguage grammar, operator grammar based on word dependency, discourse analysis for information content, and his theory of information as an account of a central aspect of semantics. For example, string grammar and its natural extension into transformational grammar is the basis of the very successful work of Naomi Sager and others at NYU in information formatting of sublanguage texts, applied there mainly to medical informatics. Stephen Johnson has implemented a system for representing the information content of texts, based on operator grammar. Successes of this sort are little noticed within linguistics. It is characteristic of Harris that there was no vanity or self importance in him. He knew that his work was of lasting importance, and treated it as such, but he was no guru or empire builder seeking followers, and would not accept any such role being projected onto him. Those students who sought entree to linguistics as a social institution in academia were bound to be disappointed. However, he could scarcely be blamed for their disappointment. He did not provide such entree, nor did he pretend to, and in my hearing actively discouraged students who imagined work with him would further their ambitions in the field. Once, in my role as TA for John Fought, I prepared a lecture on Harris's approach to syntax and semantics. As we were setting out for the lecture hall, we encountered Harris, and I blurted out "I'm about to give a lecture on your theory to John's class." (John, with characteristic wry humor, asked if he wanted to take anything back.) Harris bemusedly questioned whether anyone would be interested in what he was doing. Nonetheless, when he gave a public lecture on "The two structures of language: report and paraphrase" in 1969 or 1970, the large auditorium (I think it was in the Furness building) was filled to capacity, and the critique by John Corcoran, published later in the volume _Transformationelle Analyse_ edited by Senta Ploetz, was also well attended. Broad attendance on and acclaim for his work could easily have been his, had he chosen it. That is simply not where his ambitions lay. A clue as to the basis of this choice against fame and influence may perhaps be found in his advice to a student starting out in his first teaching position, many years ago. Don't invite anybody over for dinner, he said, and don't accept any invitations. If you get involved in the social life of an academic, you won't be able to get any work done. The work came first. Harris was always an intensely loyal man to his friends and family. The consequences, when combined with his laissez-faire anarchism, were not always happy. His friend and close colleague of many years, Henry Hiz, was much more concerned with building a Formal Linguistics Program as an institution. The disparity of character could be devastating to students. I studied with Harris from 1966 through 1970. I was an undergraduate much of that time, but that did not matter to him. He had a sink-or-swim approach like that attributed to Sapir (Darnell 1990), except that his seminars were of course focussed on theory rather than the data of, say, Athabaskan. He would come in to his seminar and just start talking about what he was working on. When I started with him, this was the work that resulted in his 1968 book, _Mathematical Structures of Language_ (Wiley). The process was not a lecture or monologue, but a continuing conversation with his students, trying out alternatives, posing and working out problems for a mathematical characterization of language. After a while, with intensive reading outside, one began to catch on and to participate. I recall telling him at the end of one seminar meeting in my first year that I would try to disprove his theory. This troubled him not a bit. I worked up a problem in Modern Greek that I thought might be troublesome for his approach. (I had lived in Greece for a couple of years, and spoke the language, but I worked with an informant for this project.) When my results turned out actually to corroborate the point I had intended to challenge, he merely thanked me for the data on Greek. A year or two later, I had come up with a proposal to analyze definitions in a dictionary to extract semantic primitives by a form of componential analysis, much as Martha Evens and now others have done. Although the notion of semantic features seems inimical in concept and method to his work, he said (and this is an exact quote) "Others have tried this and have failed, but you are welcome to try." I offer this in refutation of the sometimes heard view that Harris was dictatorial. I ran into conflicts in such matters with Hiz, never with Harris. I have also heard it asked why he never retorted to attacks on his work. I think it did not matter to him. He did not expect his methods and results to be understood and taken up by everyone in the field of linguistics. Maybe his attitude differed in the 1940s, when he wrote the structural restatements and the manuscript eventually published as _Methods in Structural Linguistics_. (BTW, the title was to have said "Descriptive" but the publisher substituted the buzzword "Structural." I recall him saying, amusedly, "I don't remember whether they asked me or not.") Maybe his expectations of the field changed after some of Chomsky's followers began making him out to be the bad guy. I don't think so, based on his writings and on the testimony of some who were his students then. I never heard him comment on the commonplace attribution to Chomsky of the discovery of transformational grammar and the "transformational revolution." There is a passage in _The State of the Art_ (1968) in which Hockett attributes to Harris "nothing, or a long silence, after 1957," showing ignorance not only of things like string analysis, for which he might be excused, but even ignoring the 1965 paper Transformational Theory prominently published in _Language_. I showed this passage to Harris, and he shrugged. It did not matter. In particular, I never saw any evidence that Harris opposed or blocked Chomsky's ambitions. In my experience it would have been entirely out of character for him. For example, it was Harris who proposed Chomsky to speak in his stead to the 1962 International Congress. A similar canard regarding Bernard Bloch has recently been laid to rest in an editorial in Language. One must I think be alert to the social psychology that leads some people to rewrite history so that their avatar is depicted as an embattled hero. Now, an old Indian friend once told me that one cannot point a finger without having three other fingers of the same hand pointing back, so I hasten to add that this is not the picture I intend to paint here of Harris. He accomplished what he intended to quite well, thank you very much, and seems to have been quite happy in the process. The point is precisely that he seemed in no way embattled by attacks and uncomprehending misconstruals of his work. And uncomprehending misconstruals abound. Frawley's review of _A Grammar of English on Mathematical Principles_ (GEMP) is a good example. He identifies Harris's operator grammar with predicate calculus, though Harris is at pains to delineate critical differences between language (a fortiori operator grammar) and language-like mathematical systems, including predicate calculus. Frawley can see in this comprehensive grammar only an attempt to do 1960s generative grammar in 1980, because he is unable to step out of the Generativist paradigm so as to understand Harris's work on its own terms. Another review (Eric Wheeler, 1984 in _Computers in the Humanities_) asserted that Harris's grammar was unable to account for certain familiar semantic problems--middle voice, the semantics of find vs. seek, and quantifier scope in examples like "someone was opposed by everyone." In my review (_Computational Linguistics_ in 1984) I showed how Harris did in fact account of each of these problems in the book. Michael Kac, in his review of Harris's selected writings, asked "why bother?" And indeed, from within the Generativist paradigm that must be the only plausible question. It is only in setting aside paradigmatic blinkers that one can see, having these writings in one place, how consistent and self coherent Harris's program has been over the years. Transformational grammar was not a revolutionary break but part of a continuous evolution. I will mention only one other misconception about Harris's work, not because it is in any way fundamental but because it is so commonplace. I probably will be greeted with disbelief when I say that discovery procedures were not his aim. (Jim McCawley's witticism about Harris and discovery procedures in the collection traditionally circulated in May really reverses the roles of the teller and the butt of the joke.) It is not hard to see how linguists have come to this mistaken belief. Discovery procedures are an abiding fixture for linguistics as institutionally defined. When _Methods_ was published, linguists sought an aid to fieldwork and writing of linguistic descriptions. Now, discovery procedures are institutionalized as a whipping boy. This has colored perceptions of Harris's intentions and results. For Harris, it was certainly of interest and value when redundancy on one level of linguistic representation could be used in a practical way to determine boundaries of objects on the next, but this was a corroborative byproduct, not an aim. The "constructional procedure" described in the 1955 paper From Phoneme to Morpheme was implemented in FORTRAN in the early 1960s and proven to work, and Ralph Grishman has had some preliminary success in implementing programs to discover word classes and rules of sublanguage grammar from sublanguage texts. But in general Harris did not think that discovery procedures were feasible. In particular, he told me he thought that grammatical analysis could not be done solely with a corpus or by asking informants, one had to control the language oneself. And then one had to work over the data to tease out pattern and wrestle it into coherent form, a lengthy and demanding process, as probably most of us know from experience. So much for the popularized image of feeding in a corpus, turning a crank, and having a grammar reel out the other end. In the introduction to _Methods in Structural Linguistics_, Harris states clearly that these methods are not discovery procedures. He accepts that one uses many means to come up with proposals for describing what is going on in a language--hunches, guesses, heuristic rules of thumb, typological generalizations, proposed universals, comparison with related languages or earlier stages of the language, and so on, more art than science (or rather, more art than engineering). Harris was acutely aware of the danger of swamping one's control of the language by growing familiarity with marginal examples. Language is after all a social institution, continuously in change as it is constantly recreated in the crucible of use. The aim of the methods was not to substitute for these informal ways of coming up with possible analyses, but to verify, for any given result, whether the result had a valid relation to the data of the language. Of those who have actually read the book, how many have said (and some have in fact said to me) "he didn't really mean that." But if nothing else, Harris was always careful to say exactly what he meant. This concern for verification arises out of a deeper concern which becomes more explicit in Harris's later work. This is a critical point for linguistics. For any other science, there is a standpoint external to the science domain for its metascience. In particular, practitioners in physics, chemistry, even in mathematics, rely on the "background vernacular" of language to ensure communication about shared meanings and ultimately to validate the relation of conclusions, however reached, to the observations on which they are based. Not so for a science of language. Harris recognized and accepted that there is no vantage point outside of language from which to describe language. And, observably, each language contains its own metalanguage. I'll repeat that, because it is I think a key to understanding what Harris was about, and because it is easy to overlook its importance. There is no vantage point outside of language from which to describe language. By contrast, Generativist theory postulates a universal metalanguage, external to language, that is part of one's biological endowment. (I personally do not find this biologicist, neophrenologist doctrine of mental organs credible, but the issue rests not on opinion but on facts yet to be determined.) This stance seems to me perfectly consonant with the argument made by Stephen Anderson in "Why phonology isn't natural." One cannot derive linguistic structure from the findings of some study bearing a metascience relation to linguistics. Harris was interested in how language can carry or transmit information, and this is the thread that underlies the really remarkable consistency in his work over more than 50 years. Intuitively, we know that differences in form correlate with differences in meaning, but the correlation is messy and inconsistent in the observed data of language (say, in a body of writings or of phonemic transcriptions, including whatever utterances the investigator may come up with in the ad hoc search for examples). What Harris found was how this messy, inconsistent stream of words can be the product of two concurrent systems: a system of word dependencies that correlates with perceptions in a subject-matter domain such as a science subfield, and a system of reductions that changes word shapes (often to zero), motivated in part by issues of redundancy and efficiency and in part by historically contingent social convention. The reductions introduce degeneracies such as ambiguity and paraphrase, and otherwise obscure the correlation of form with meaning, but without destroying that correlation. Given that structure (differences of form) correlates with meaning, it is of critical importance that the machinery of description not import any structure extraneous to that found in language. Harris's endeavor was always, then, to determine a "least grammar," a description that required an absolute minimum of primitive objects and relations. Any additional objects or relations in the description introduce extrinsic structure that obscures the informational structure in language. This could be the basis for a telling critique of various other theories of language. Harris chose not to make such a critique. When I asked him once about certain aspects of Generativist theory, he would only comment, with evidence of mild amusement, that it did seem to be over-structured. Like his teacher, Sapir, Harris had an interest in problems of international communication and an international auxiliary language. (A paper on this appeared in a 1962 volume on avoiding World War III. Remember WWIII, everyone?) And like Sapir and Bloomfield he had in particular a long standing interest in international cooperation and communication in science. This culminated in _The Form of Information in Science: analysis of an immunology sublanguage_ (with Michael Gottfried, Tom Ryckman, and others, 1989, John Benjamins). This book describes the grammar of the sublanguage of immunology during a specific period in the development of that field, based on discourse analysis of sublanguage texts from that period and adequate for making explicit the information structures in arbitrary other texts in that sublanguage. The analysis shows how the structure of the sublanguage changed concurrently with a change in immunologists' perceptions in the domain of their science. A difference in informational structure correlates with a difference in meaning. The informational structures that are clearly represented in the binary array resulting from discourse analysis are still present in the actual form of the source texts as written albeit obscured under reductions in word shape, some motivated by considerations of informational efficiency and avoidance of redundancy, some dictated by conventions of language use as a human social institution. Harris arranged his life so as to enhance the autonomy of his work. I understand that his kibbutz in Israel is a wealthy one, to which members give their assets and income, and which in turn supports them in their needs. I believe that the kibbutz purchased his apartment building on Charles Street. Until his retirement, he held an endowed chair at Penn, the Benjamin Franklin Professorship in linguistics. He was Principal Investigator for a long series of grants from the NSF, NIMH, and other agencies whose committees and referees found his work of continuing value. Throughout his life he was involved with scientists and science. His wife was a physicist at the University of Jerusalem, and had been Albert Einstein's assistant at Princeton. A brother was an immunologist (he is an author of some of the work analyzed in the 1989 book). He felt that the rough and tumble of polemic attack and retort was inappropriate for science, and would not participate in it. That too would be a distraction from the work. After one of the Bampton Lectures at Columbia in 1986, a young member of the audience approached him and asked what he would take up if he had another lifetime before him. He mentioned poetry, especially the longer works of 19th century poets like Browning. He mentioned music. And he mentioned sign language. He had a long and very productive life. He had brought his life's work to a successful culmination. With the completion of his book on politics, I imagine Death coming to him, as to the chess playing knight in The Seventh Seal, and him saying "OK, I'm ready now." It was a privilege to know him and to learn from him. He is an abiding inspiration. Bruce Nevin bn@bbn.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-445. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-3-446. Mon 01 Jun 1992. Lines: 213 Subject: 3.446 Queries: Lists, Adjectives, Comma, Unhappier, Gopnik Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: 26 May 92 13:40:02 EDT From: Michael Sikillian/Annotext <76264.1323@compuserve.com> Subject: Lists on text processing 2) Date: Wed, 27 May 92 02:05:49 EDT From: pisces@binkley.cs.mcgill.ca (L. M. P. McPherson) Subject: Query: Adjectives versus Verbs; Attribution versus Predication 3) Date: Wed, 27 May 92 15:44:12 CST From: (Dennis Baron) Subject: comma-tose 4) Date: Fri, 29 May 92 16:33:39 EST From: Greg Stump Subject: the _unhappier_ paradox 5) Date: Fri, 29 May 92 19:02:05 SET From: Pier Marco Bertinetto Subject: Gopnik -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: 26 May 92 13:40:02 EDT From: Michael Sikillian/Annotext <76264.1323@compuserve.com> Subject: Lists on text processing Does anyone know whether there are any listserv or bitnet lists for text processing or linguistic software? Thank you. Michael Sikillian Annotext 76264.1323@compuserve.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Wed, 27 May 92 02:05:49 EDT From: pisces@binkley.cs.mcgill.ca (L. M. P. McPherson) Subject: Query: Adjectives versus Verbs; Attribution versus Predication Can anyone provide examples of languages that do not appear to have a distinction between verbs and adjectives? I realise that the definitions of the categories "verb" and "adjective" are not universal and no accepted standards are available, so please describe the criteria that underly your identification of verbs and adjectives in a given language. In languages that have adjectives, is there always a distinction between attributive and predicative adjectives? Or do some languages lack this distinction? If some do not distinguish these two types of adjectives, do adjectives in those languages appear within a noun phrase (i.e., attributively) or after a copula (i.e., predicatively)? Or does their use fall in neither of these categories? Dixon (1982) claims that some languages with adjectives do not have an open/ major class of adjectives, but just a small, closed/minor class containing words that most often describe relative dimension (small, long, wide, etc.), relative age (e.g., new, young, old), value (good, bad), and colour (red, black, etc.). Are adjectives belonging to a closed/minor class used differently than adjectives from an open/major class? For example, is the attributive/ predicative distinction missing for languages that have a small, closed class of adjectives? (Examples he gives of languages with a closed/minor class of adjectives are Igbo from the Kwa subgroup of the Niger-Congo family, the Chadic language Hausa, Bantu languages, the North Australian Malak Malak, Southern Paiute, the Dravidian Pengo, the Central African Creole Sango, the Guianese language Carib, and the Nilo-Saharan language Acooli.) I am also interested in examples of concepts that are expressed adjectivally in one or more languages and verbally in other languages. In English, some concepts are expressed both ways; for example, the verb "to like" and the adjectival expression "to be fond of" express the same concept. Are there concepts that are routinely expressed with a verb in some languages but which are habitually expressed with an adjective in other languages? Perhaps "to like," "to need," "to want," "to sit" or other English verbs are synonymous with adjectives in some other language? Perhaps the English adjectives "fuzzy," "short," "blue," "lovely," "ardent," "difficult," or others have verbal counterparts in other languages? Nominal expressions for concepts expressed adjectivally in some languages are also of interest to me. Reference: Dixon, R. M. W. (1982). Where have all the adjectives gone? Berlin: Mouton. L.M.P. McPherson pisces@binkley.cs.mcgill.ca -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) Date: Wed, 27 May 92 15:44:12 CST From: (Dennis Baron) Subject: comma-tose As the sole linguist in our English department, I get to answer the language questions that come in from the outside. One Dr. J. Holler of Paris, IL, writes to ask "What, is the word, that means, the over- use, of commas?" On the off-chance he means something other than commatose, perhaps one of you could help me compose a reply. I've already considered virgulitis, which in its more virulent form, becomes virgulosis. I find nothing in Fowler (sv _stops_). Should I send Dr. Holler a bill? I'm sure he'd send me one if I asked him a medical question. I doubt very much that he has any language insurance, so I may have to consider this pro bono. I am, after all, a state employee. Dennis Baron debaron@uiuc.edu Dept. of English office: 217-244-0568 University of Illinois messages: 217-333-2392 608 S. Wright St fax: 217-333-4321 Urbana IL 61801 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) Date: Fri, 29 May 92 16:33:39 EST From: Greg Stump Subject: the _unhappier_ paradox In his squib `_Unhappier_ Is Not a "Bracketing Paradox"' (LI 23 (1992), 347-352), Richard Sproat argues that _unhappier_ can be assumed to have the structure [ un [ happi er ]] for both phonological and semantic purposes. His reasoning is this. Although _un-_ is interpreted as merely contradictory negation when it combines with nonscalar adjec- tives (e.g. _uncompiled_ `not compiled'), it is interpreted as contrary negation when it combines with scalar adjectives (e.g. _unhappy_ `the opposite of happy' and not merely `not happy'). So, `[o]n analogy with the behavior of _un-_ with scalar adjectives like _happy_, ..., it follows that [ un [ happi er ]] must be interpreted as being at the opposite end of the range from _happier_' (pp.349- 350); and this, he points out, is the desired interpretation for _unhappier_. Sproat acknowledges that if _un-_ is interpreted as contrary rather than contradictory negation, then [[ un happi ] er ] (= his (1b)) would also yield the right interpretation for _unhappier_; `the point is that it is not _necessary_ to assume the structure in (1b) in order to get the right interpretation' (p.350n). He also ack- nowledges that _unrulier_ must be regarded as genuinely paradoxical, since *_ruly_ and *_rulier_ do not exist alongside _unruly_; thus, while the phonological structure must be [ un [ ruli er ]], the semantic structure must instead be [[ un ruli ] er ]. So his argu- ment is that _unhappier_ isn't as certain an exemplar of the _un-ADJ-er_ paradox as cases like _unrulier_. I have doubts about this conclusion, though: (i) Is it necessarily the case that the comparative form of a scalar adjective is itself scalar? Assuming that environ- ments like `very _____', `less _____', and `as _____ as Sandy' are diagnostic of scalar adjectives, _happy_ seems to be scalar, but _happier_ does not. The possibility of _much happier_ might at first seem to constitute evidence that _happier_ is scalar, but it isn't clear that _much_ isn't in fact modifying the comparative functor rather than the comparative adjective as a whole; cf. *_much happy_; _Are they much more happy?_/_Yes, much more_. (ii) When it combines with scalar adjectives having an inherently comparative meaning (e.g. _inferior_, _superior_), _un-_ is interpreted as contradictory rather than contrary negation. For instance, _Sandy wants to find someone uninferior to her at chess_ doesn't mean `Sandy wants to find someone superior to her at chess'. (iii) In many cases, even when ADJ and _un-ADJ_ coexist, distinct phonological and semantic structures must apparently be assumed; for instance, _uneasier_ must be [ un [ easi er ]] phonologically, but [[ un easi ] er ] semantically. (iv) Finally, as I have shown elsewhere (`A Paradigm-based Theory of Morphosemantic Mismatches', _Language_ 67 (1991), 675-725), the _unhappier_ paradox becomes completely unparadoxical when viewed as an instance of the H-application Default, a widely-motivated principle regulating the interaction of inflectional morphology with category-preserving derivation. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) Date: Fri, 29 May 92 19:02:05 SET From: Pier Marco Bertinetto Subject: Gopnik Some time ago there was a debate on recent work by Gopnik. Could anybody give m e her email? (private answer please) ====================================================== PIER MARCO BERTINETTO SCUOLA NORMALE SUPERIORE TEL. +39/(0)50/597111 PIAZZA DEI CAVALIERI 7 FAX +39/(0)50/563513 I 56100 PISA, ITALIA ====================================================== -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-446. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-3-447. Mon 01 Jun 1992. Lines: 79 Subject: 3.447 The LINGUISTS Nameserver Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sun, 31 May 92 15:43 MET From: "Norval Smith (UVAALF::NSMITH)" Subject: FAX numbers of Linguistics Depts wanted for the Linguists Nameserver 2) Date: Mon, 1 Jun 92 13:55 MET From: "Norval Smith (UVAALF::NSMITH)" Subject: Nameserver changes -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sun, 31 May 92 15:43 MET From: "Norval Smith (UVAALF::NSMITH)" Subject: FAX numbers of Linguistics Depts wanted for the Linguists Nameserver I would like to extend the present list of linguists' (etc.) e-mail addresses available via the Nameserver at LINGUISTS@ALF.LET.UVA.NL (send help if you don't know how to use this yet) with the FAX numbers of Linguistics Depts and similar institutions (Phonetics Depts etc. welcome too). Please send these numbers to linguists@alf.let.uva.nl in the following form: add wherever (university) linguistics dept - fax: (intl code) national number Please replace WHEREVER by the most significant element of your University's name - i.e. South Carolina linguistics dept, rather than University of South Carolina linguistics dept. This makes it easier to query the list. A list of all FAX numbers will be available with: list fax Norval Smith -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Mon, 1 Jun 92 13:55 MET From: "Norval Smith (UVAALF::NSMITH)" Subject: Nameserver changes News from the LINGUISTS Nameserver We have just completed a significant revision of the Nameserver entries. 1100 changes were made, resulting in an increase of the list to nearly 6000 lines - about 750 new entries in all. Most of the members of the LINGUIST list have now been included. Inasmuch as such a revision will inevitably have introduced errors, although we hope that the list is now more up to date, we would like to suggest to LINGUIST readers that they check their entry. The address you receive LINGUIST at may not be the one you would most want to advertise, for example. So there may be various cosmetic changes that are desirable. If anyone still does not know how to use the Nameserver, then brief instructions may be found at the end of the regularly posted Linguist-how-to's on this list. A more extensive HELP message may be received by sending the message HELP to linguists@alf.let.uva.nl WARNING. Stylistics experts have found our HELP-message pretty dense stuff. Reading it all may cause stylitis, the only known cure for which is a cold hankerchief applied to the brow. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-447. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-3-448. Tue 02 Jun 1992. Lines: 307 Subject: 3.448 FYI: Yazyko-Znaniye in Moscow Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Mon, 18 May 92 14:13:58 +0200 (MSD) From: psy-pub@comlab.vega.msk.su (psy-pub) Subject: Yazyko - Znaniye -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Mon, 18 May 92 14:13:58 +0200 (MSD) From: psy-pub@comlab.vega.msk.su (psy-pub) Subject: Yazyko - Znaniye G U M A N I T A R N O Y E Z N A N I Y E Humanities Knowledge Association Y A Z Y K O - Z N A N I Y E INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR RESEARCH IN L I N G U I S T I C K N O W L E D G E -------------------------------------------------------- Proyezd Karamzina, 9-1-122 Phone: 423.10.00 Moscow 117463 Russia Fax: 939.08.77 (for Polikarpov) E-Mail: psy-pub@comlab.vega.msk.su (subject line: Polikarpov) -------------------------------------------------------- Scope of activities 1. I N T R O D U C T I O N Since 1980 the Group of Theoretical and Applied Lexicology (as a division of the Laboratory for Applied Linguistics of the Moscow University ( Philological Faculty)), has been involved with research in the field of theoretical study and computerized processing of natural language data. Since November 1990 the work has been continued on a greater scale within the framework of the YAZYKO-ZNANIYE International Center for Research in Linguistic Knowledge headed by A.A.Polikarpov, a member organization of the 'Gumanitarnoye Znaniye' Humanitarian Knowledge Association which was set up by the Moscow University and other humanitarian institutions for cooperation in the above field. At present YAZYKO-ZNANIYE is staffed by a dozen of qualified employees - linguists and specialists in the field of programming and knowledge engineering. Besides, when addressing various problems YAZYKO-ZNANIYE invites for cooperation and integrates the efforts of non-staff linguists, mathematicians, psychologists, musicologists, and specialists in the field of artificial intelligence from several other educational and research institutions of Russia and other neighboring republics (Faculty of Computa- tional Mathematics and Cybernetics of the Moscow University, Institute of the Russian Language of Russian Academy of Sciences, Institute of Linguistics of the Academy of Sciences of the Ukraine, Tartu University, Tbilisi State Conservatoire, etc). Structural units of YAZYKO-ZNANIYE include 2 laboratories (Computer Linguistics Laboratory and Systemic Linguistics Laboratory) and several problem groups. YAZYKO-ZNANIYE and researchers cooperating with it take part in the activity of the Intercollege Problem Group called "Text as an Object of Interdisciplinary Investigations". The publishing organ of the Problem Group is the "Quantitative Linguistics and Automatic Text Analysis" year-book (Tartu, Tartu University Press, 1985-1992) (See Suppl. for KLAAT). The head of the Inter-College Problem Group and the editor-in-chief of 'Quantitative Linguistics and Automatic Text Analysis' is Professor J.A.Tuldava (Tartu University). At present the Group is preparing to hold International Colloquium on "Linguistics and Synergetics" which is to focus on systemic aspects of human language organization (Moscow, Sept.'92). The Problem Group held several Conferences and Seminars, e.g. [KASOT-1986; PLAAT-1988; APKL-1990; EVKMI-1991]. Reviews of some of them see in [Boroda, Dolinskiy, 1986; Boroda, Polikarpov, 1988b; Polikarpov, Tuldava, 1990a; Polikarpov, Tuldava, 1990b]. The Problem Group actively cooperates with the "Linguistic Synergetics" research group of the Ruhr University in Bochum, Germany, headed by Prof.Gabriel Altmann. As a main result of the cooperation, a collection of papers of Soviet linguists called "Quantitative Linguistics in the USSR" (Eds. M.G.Boroda, A.A.Polikarpov, J.A.Tuldava) has been prepared for print as a separate issue of the "Quantitative Linguistics" series. (See also, [Boroda, Polikarpov, 1988a; Tuldava, 1990]). Apart from that, the "Musicometrica" series, also published at the Ruhr University is edited by the Soviet musicologist, a member of the Inter-College Problem Group, Dr. M.G.Boroda, at present a visiting researcher at the Ruhr University. YAZYKO-ZNANIYE took an active part in organizing and holding the All-Union Scientific Conference on "Current Problems of Computer Linguistics" (Tartu, May 1990, Co- chairmen of the Organizing Committee J.A. Tuldava and A.A.Polikarpov) [APKL-90]. Members of YAZYKO-ZNANIYE presented several reports at the Conference (see APKL-90 presentations listed in the Supplement to this letter). A.A.Polikarpov and L.I.Kolodyazhnaya, members of YAZYKO- ZNANIYE submitted a report on "A System for Compilation and Analysis of Automatic Philological Dictionaries Using PCs" at the Second International Congress on "Terminology and Knowledge Engineering - Applications" (TKE'90) (section on "Electronic Dictionaries") held in October 1990 in Trier, Germany [Kolodyazhnaya, Polikarpov, 1990b]. Yu.K.Krylov and A.A.Polikarpov, members of YAZYKO- ZNANIYE, submitted reports to the First Quantitative Linguistics Conference (QUALICO) held by the University of Trier, Germany, and the German Society for Linguistic Computing, September 23-27, 1991) [Krylov, 1991c; Polikarpov, 1991]. A.A.Polikarpov attended the conference. YAZYKO-ZNANIYE made an important contribution to the All-Union Seminar on "Heuristic Potential of Quantitative Methods in Linguistic Research" (11-13 September 1991, Smolensk) (See, e.g., [Kustova, Polikarpov, 1991; Kurlov, Polikarpov, 1991]). 2. C U R R E N T L I N E O F A C T I V I T I E S a) FUNDAMENTAL AND APPLIED RESEARCH as a basis for producing science-intensive software in the field of natural language data processing (mainly using Russian and English language data): - construction of models of the natural language evolution and communication process, including cognitive mechanisms and conditions for resolution of lexical, morphemic and syntactic polysemanticity and sense interpretation of messages [Andreevskaya,Polikarpov, 1992; Boroda,Polikarpov, 1988a; Boroda, Polikarpov, 1989; Dolinskiy, 1988; 1990; Karimova, 1989; Karimova, Polikarpov, 1989; Krylov,1990b; Krylov, Yakubovskaya, 1977; Krylov, Polikarpov, 1990; Kurlov, Polikarpov, 1991; 1992; Malov, 1988; Mel'nikov, 1978; 1988; Polikarpov, 1979; 1987; 1988a; 1988b; 1988c; 1989a; 1990; 1991; 1992; Polikarpov, Bushuyeva, 1988a, 1988b; Polikarpov, Karimova, 1988; Polikarpov, Kryukova, 1989; Polikarpov, Saprykin P.M., Silnitskaya, 1990; Polikarpov, Tuldava, 1989; 1990a; Tuldava, Boroda, Polikarpov, 1988; Zlatoustova, Korolyov., Marchuk, Polikarpov, 1989]. - theoretical analysis of some fundamental problems of systemic organization of natural language vocabulary and particularities of its representation in philological, special and electronic dictionaries [Kolodyazhnaya, Polikarpov, 1990a; 1990b; 1992; Kolodyazhnaya, Polikarpov, Shumarina, 1990; Kurlov, Polikarpov, 1992; Malov, 1988; Obukhova , 1986; Polikarpov, 1987; Polikarpov, 1988b; 1989a; Polikarpov, Bushuyeva, 1985; 1988a; 1988b; Polikarpov, Kryukova, 1989; Safronova, 1986]; - research and development of algorithms and software for automatic morphological, syntactic and lexico-semantical analysis of texts in Russian and English [Akhmedzhanov et al., 1989; Gryaznukhina et al., 1990; Karimova, 1989; Karimova, Polikarpov, 1989; 1990a; Kolodyazhnaya, Polikarpov, Shumarina, 1990; Maksimenko, Polikarpov, Troynova, 1988; Polikarpov, 1989a]; - comparative analysis of Russian, English, French, German and other languages at all levels of their organization; construction of the model of the bilingual individual, investigation of regularities of interference in speech in a foreign language, development of typology of errors [Krauklis, Kukushkina, Polikarpov, 1990]; - construction of the model of interlanguage idiomaticity in machine translation from English into Russian and from Russian into English; b) DEVELOPMENT OF APPLIED SYSTEMS (text editors, linguistic (text) processors, dictionary processors and so on) [Anisimov, Surkis, Yablonskiy, 1990; Belyayev, Kazakov, Surkis, Yablonskiy, 1990; Danilchenko, Moskalenko, Polikarpov, 1990; Yablonskiy, 1990; Kazakov, Yablonskiy, 1990; Kolodyazhnaya, 1987; Kolodyazhnaya, Polikarpov, 1990a; 1990b; Korolyov, Polikarpov, Shershova, 1990; Krauklis, Kukushkina, Polikarpov, 1990; Polikarpov, Sherhova, 1989]; c) PRODUCTION AND ANALYSIS OF TEXTUAL AND DICTIONARY DATA BASES [Kolodyazhnaya, Polikarpov, 1990a; 1990b; Korolyov, Polikarpov, Shershova, 1990; Krylov, Polikarpov, 1990; Polikarpov, Saprykin, Silnitskaya, 1990]. 3. M A I N A P P L I C A T I O N R E S U L T S A C H I E V E D BY Y A Z Y K O - Z N A N I Y E SO FAR a) A DICTIONARY PROCESSOR, i.e. Automated system for preparation, keeping and analysis of dictionaries has been developed and is operated in the experimental mode [Danilchenko, Moskalenko, Polikarpov, 1990; Kolodyazhnaya, 1987; Kolodyazhnaya, Polikarpov,1990a; 1990b; Kolodyazhnaya, Polikarpov, Shumarina, 1990]; b) An ELECTRONIC VERSION OF WNDS - "Webster's New Dictionary of Synonyms" - has been produced, linguistic analysis of its parameters is being carried out [Kolodyazhnaya, Polikarpov, 1990a; 1990b; 1992; Kolodyazhnaya, Polikarpov, Khotko, 1986]; c) The first version of the ELECTRONIC MULTI-ASPECT RUSSIAN DICTIONARY comprising 1000 entries for operation within a linguistic text processor as well as a system for maintaining and checking it have been produced [Korolyov, Polikarpov, Shershova, 1990]; d) The LES TEXT EDITOR has been implemented as a carrier for various applied systems. e) An AUTOMATED RESEARCH SYSTEM for multi-aspect statistical analysis of lexical units has been developed and is being operated [Krylov, Polikarpov, 1990; Polikarpov, Saprykin, Silnitskaya, 1990]. f) A COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY FOR MODELING AND PROCESSING OF PRINCIPAL SENSE CATEGORIES OF RUSSIAN LAW TEXTS along the lines of expert systems ideology. 4. C U R R E N T P R O J E C T S a) Construction of theoretical and applied models of regularities of natural language evolution and text/vocabulary organization b) Compilation of electronic versions of the following dictionaries: - "Dictionary of Antonyms of the Russian Language"; - "Dictionary of Russian Synonyms" (Ed. by A.P.Yevgenyeva, Russian Language Publishers, Moscow, 1975); and some other dictionaries (see the above list). c) Compilation of an original electronic version of Russian-English dictionary of synonyms comprising around 50,000 words and development of a control system to allow the use of the dictionary in various applications. d) Preparatory work on the "Thesaurus of the Russian Language". e) Expansion and streamlining of the above multi-aspect dictionary for the linguistic (text) processor. f) Further development of a linguistic processor for a natural language interface with full-text data bases to be used as an input component of machine translation systems, content analysis and other intellectual information systems. g) Preparatory work on an intellectual publisher's editor of Russian texts for control of orthography, vocabulary, grammar, stylistics, punctuation and other text features. 5. P R O S P E C T I V E D E V E L O P M E N T S a) Development of evolutionary model of Human Language in Human History; b) Research on intellectual tools for Russian-English/English- Russian translation; c) Research on intellectual tools for information analyst dealing with Russian texts; d) Construction of an intellectual editor for Russian texts; e) Compilation and investigation of various corpora of Russian and English texts; f) Construction of a linguistically oriented software package for statistical analysis of natural language texts; g) Construction of teaching linguistic systems (based on original data bases of Russian and English texts; h) Construction of a computerized system for preparation, control and publishing of electronic dictionaries; i) Compilation of various dictionary bases (mainly for the Russian and English languages); j) Setting up a dictionary publishing house (original dictionaries and electronic versions of formerly published dictionaries in the book form - mono- and multilingual, general and specialized); k) Setting up an information/consulting service on Russian developments in the field of computer linguistics. l) Setting up a scientific periodical on computer linguistics. YAZYKO-ZNANIYE Director Prof. A.A.Polikarpov -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-448. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-3-449. Tue 02 Jun 1992. Lines: 321 Subject: 3.449 Innateness, rules Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 27 May 92 16:13:20 EDT From: Guido=Vanden=Wijngaerd%DIA%CC3@cc3.kuleuven.ac.be Subject: Rules 2) Date: Thu, 28 May 92 13:26:59 +0100 From: "R.Hudson" Subject: Innateness 3) Date: Fri, 29 May 92 11:32:55 EDT From: kaufmann@acsu.buffalo.edu (Kean Kaufmann) Subject: Re: 3.436 Innateness 4) Date: Sat, 30 May 92 08:22:14 EDT From: Alexis_Manaster_Ramer@MTS.cc.Wayne.edu Subject: Rules -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Wed, 27 May 92 16:13:20 EDT From: Guido=Vanden=Wijngaerd%DIA%CC3@cc3.kuleuven.ac.be Subject: Rules Joe Stemberger writes: > 1) Forms like "buyed", "goed", and "eated" may occur in child speech, but > they are in a minority. The vast majority of attempts at irregular verbs > are produced correctly. (Gary Marcus and his colleagues at MIT have a > monograph on this that is not yet out.) Children DO tend to produce what > they here, at least statistically. This in fact confirms my claim that children follow rules. > 2) The assumption is made, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY DATA, that children rarely > hear adults produce sentences like (1b) above. This is an amazing claim, > and I doubt that it is true. I myself find it a very plausible claim. I suggest you try and substantiate your doubts by providing some attested examples. The burden of proof is clearly on those claiming that sentences like "Is the man who __ tall is in the room?" do occur in child speech. > 3) Even if it were true, Wyngaerd is making generalizations about learning > IN THE ABSENCE OF A THEORY OF LEARNING. My theory of learning is that children have recourse to innate principles; these principles determine that sentences have hierarchical structure and that grammatical rules refer to hierarchical structure. Rules that would refer to linear precedence are inaccessible as a matter of principle. This explains the absence of the ungrammatical (1b) sentences in child speech. Martti Arnold Nyman writes: > That "the relevant experience [is not] rich enough to > determine the nature of the rule" echoes the well-known > 'poverty of stimulus' argument, which has never been proven. Has it been disconfirmed, then? Please inform me! > In the case at hand, it is easy to conjecture what sort of > data/experience is relevant for a child to infer that yes-no > questions are formed in terms of hierarchical structure. > Consider where-questions: > > Where is [X]? [X] is in Z. Is [X] in Z? > ---------------------- = --------------------- = --------------------- > Where is [X who is Y]? [X who is Y] is in Z. Is [X who is Y] in Z? > > In principle, analogy works here quite well: the where-question > displays the hierarchy which can be analogically extended to other > cases. I fail to see how this case is different from the one not involving 'where'. Available evidence mainly consists of simple sentences (the ones over the line in Nyman's schema); the complex cases (those below the line) could be formed by fronting the first occurrence of 'is' or the first occurrence following the subject (eg '*Where is [X who __ Y] is?'). The second possibility does not occur, however. Nyman suggests analogy to explain this: but how does the child know what (s)he has to form an analogy with? > But I am not concerned with whether or not analogy works > in this particular case. What I am concerned with is, objecting to > wholesale innatism. In the absence of particular cases, any discussion over innatism is bound to be sterile. The position Nyman advocates is uninteresting, as nobody, including me, would even care to disagree with it. Guido J. Vanden Wyngaerd -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Thu, 28 May 92 13:26:59 +0100 From: "R.Hudson" Subject: Innateness Does it really matter whether we believe in innate UG or not? I think it does. Like Avery Andrews, I think that a belief in innate UG can be positively harmful in writing grammars, because it makes the linguist's life too easy. For those of us who are sceptical about innateness, it's really worrying if we have to postulate some very abstract and complicated principle in our theory. Sometimes you have to admit defeat, but you at least recognise it as defeat, and a sign that something is badly wrong with your general theory. But if you believe in innateness, there's no problem - on the contrary, you can be pleased to have discovered yet more evidence that language is weird (i.e. unique) and unlearnable. Reversing the question, can grammarians say anything about whether there is an innate UG or not? I agree with Avery Andrews that purely linguistic work on language structure can't prove that there is an innate UG (i.e. innate knowledge specific to language structure). However I think one can go further than that: purely linguistic work on language structure can show the difficulty of defining the boundary around language structure (e.g. the uncertainty of the distinction between linguistic and encyclopedic `meaning', the close connections between words and other aspects of our behaviour in conversation, etc.). That in itself casts doubt on the claim of innateness, because the whole point of this claim is that knowledge of `language' is unique, built on a unique innate framework of principles and parameters. If borderline cases are so hard to decide on, this is presumably because they're so similar both to the centre of language and also to things beyond language - which suggests that language isn't after all so different from everything else in our minds. There may be good evidence for innateness from other kinds of research (as Carol Georgopoulos and Avery Andrews suggest), though I think it's still too early to decide. Until we've got much clearer independent evidence for innate UG, and a clearer idea of what that UG actually comprises, all theories of language structure should be judged by the same standards. 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: Fri, 29 May 92 11:32:55 EDT From: kaufmann@acsu.buffalo.edu (Kean Kaufmann) Subject: Re: 3.436 Innateness Vicki Fromkin writes: >...would also like to publicly wonder why the question of >of the innateness of specific bird species' songs is not questioned b >by those who question are argue against built in hard-wired genetic >language specifics. One would think that the more neurologically >complex the species the more one would have to have such geneticallyj >determined capabilities. One wouldn't necessarily think so, if one viewed neurological complexity as a necessary correlate of learning capacity: The more you're able to learn, the less you're born knowing -- and vice versa. The fact that humans are born more helpless than any other species, and take longer (by orders of magnitude) to mature, would seem to indicate a tradeoff between instinct and intelligence. From this perspective, one might see Homo sapiens NOT as the language-acquiring animal, but as the learning animal par excellence, the general-purpose animal; and one would want to derive as much language function as possible from more general cognitive abilities. Kean Kaufmann (kaufmann@acsu.buffalo.edu) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) Date: Sat, 30 May 92 08:22:14 EDT From: Alexis_Manaster_Ramer@MTS.cc.Wayne.edu Subject: Rules In Vol-3-441, Martti Arnold Nyman replies to my earlier reply to him in Vol-3-371 (and not just to him, but to Thrainsson and Andrews as well) on the question of normativeness. As I tried to indicate there, it seems to me that much of the discussion on the subject, while enlightening in itself, has not addressed the crux of the problem that Itkonen raises. And, while I dissent from Itkonen's conclusion, he has, I think, correctly identified the weakest point in the armor of linguistics. Specifically, all normal claims about language that linguists make are about "normal" utterances. By mistake or as a joke, people can say all sort of things. This is why, of course, many people have pointed out that the usual form of statements and queries re: grammaticality judgements (e.g., "Can you say X?") makes no sense. If water could in some cases accidentally or as a joke boil at 110 degrees C, then physics would be in the same boat. It is precisely because this is not so, that people like Itkonen can, as far as I can see, argue that linguistic claims (English NPs begin with articles, whatever) are normative where physical ones (water boils at 100 degrees C) are not. This it seems to me is the crucial problem of linguistics and this is what must answered if we are to accept that linguistics is a natural science. My brief remarks in Vol-3-371 were intended to suggest that, even if we do not know enough about these matters, we can, nevertheless make defend ourselves. That is, our claims about "normal" utterances are not, I maintain, to be interpreted as referring to utterances which SHOULD be used (that's normative) but rather about utterances which ARE used UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES. The problem is that we cannot precisely define these circumstances, but I think we make a reasonable case for this anyway. Thus, whereas a phycisist can say precisely under what conditions of atmospheric pressure and such water will boil at an "abnormal" temperature, we cannot say with the same precision which utterances will constitute "jokes" or "speech errors". However, the fact that we have discovered all sorts of constraints even on speech errors, and that people have discovered ways of making subjects make more than the usual quota of errors (by making them read while performing some distracting task), both of these things suggest that we can in principle specify more precisely what a "speech error" is. The situation with jokes and other deliberate manipulation of language is analogous, though perhaps even harder. However, I think I could safely maintain that the jokes that people are capable of producing resp. understanding themselves are subject to constraints which only linguists can explain. Thus, one would probably want to say that a speaker of English (WHO HAS NEVER BEEN EXPOSED TO LANGUAGES WITH FOR EXAMPLE A BREATHY SERIES OF CONSONANTS) can be predicted with some high degree of probability to be unlikely to produce a jocular utterance with one of these. Whereas, of course, having been exposed to them, I can make fun of Indian English, for example, by say 'Oh Ghod', when an Indian speakers says, as millions of them do, 'ghost' (with a breath 'gh'). The reason I put the relative clause in the previou para in caps is that this is the crucial point. A linguistics which wants to be a natural science and make predictions about human behavior must always make these kinds of qualification. I think this point is really Chomsky's (although it makes especially good sense if you accept my interpretation of Chomsky as holding that a grammar is a transducer which takes in what it hears as input, but I digress): Linguistics cannot predict the behavior of people based on such classifications as English speaker vs. French speaker. Rather, we must know what the speaker has been exposed to in the way of "primary linguistic data" and other data, too. Of course, Chomsky then goes to still make the competence (grammar) vs. performance (behavior) distinction, and as soon as he does that, Itkonen is home free. Linguistics then IS normative. Rather (as I argue in another paper), we must regard "competence" as a linguist's idealized, oversimplified idea of the system that generates linguistic behavior. There is nothing wrong with idealizations, of course, but we must take the theory of behavior ("performance", if you must) as primary in order to get around Itkonen's objection. Thus, to summarize, to answer the claim that linguistics is normative, we must (a) seek to define the conditions under which "jokes", "errors", etc., are possible and the constraints on these, (b) we cannot make statements about English, only about speakers who have never been exposed to any language other than English (or have to such-and-such a specified extent, and so on) (c) we must take behavior ("performance") as what linguistics studies, reducing grammar ("competence") to the status of a useful but ultimately misleading idealization. Then and only then can we answer people like Itkonen, who, of course, will probably reply, and will be right, that the kind of linguistics THEY were describing as normative was the traditional linguistics of Dionysius, Bloomfield, and Chomsky, which indeed does look normative (in the relevant sense). P.S. This, if correct, also has a bearing on the raging innateness issue. I think that if you accept the view I am advocating (or even just point (b), which is Chomsky's), then linguistics becomes the study of individual people, not of languages, and it becomes essential to assume innateness in the way Chomsky did. Of course, this is not to say that any PARTICULAR feature of language is ASSUMED to be innate. That, obviously, is, or should be, a factual question (I always try to use 'factual' for the overused 'empirical'). What IS assumed is that, having accepted this view, one is committed to being more interested in what is innate than anything else. For the simple reason that THAT is what is shared by all the objects of study (i.e., individual persons). -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-449. ________________________________________________________________ Linguist List: Vol-3-450. Tue 02 Jun 1992. Lines: 99 Subject: 3.450 OULIPO Moderators: Anthony Aristar: Texas A&M University Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan University Assistant Editor: Brian Wallace: bwallace@emunix.emich.edu -------------------------Directory------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sat, 23 May 92 19:38:30 EST From: "j.a.rea" Subject: OULIPO 2) Date: Mon, 25 May 1992 09:21 EDT From: "NAME MICHEL (MGRIMAUD@LUCY.WELLESLEY.EDU) GRIMAUD" Subject: OULIPO -------------------------Messages-------------------------------------- 1) Date: Sat, 23 May 92 19:38:30 EST From: "j.a.rea" Subject: OULIPO OU.LI.PO is (was) a (real? virtual? imaginary?) organization, the acronym standing for Ouvroir de la Litterature Potencielle, 'Workshop of Potential Literature.' One place for more information is a paper presented by Raymond Queneau at the 'Seminar on quantitative linguistics' on 29 January 1964, and reprinted in the collection of Queneau's essays _Batons, Chiffres et lettres_, pp317-45 (Paris: Gallimard 1965). "Potential" literature is created by "rules" or, if you will, "processes". Write a novel without using the letter 'e' (sound familiar?), as did Ernest Wright (_Gadsby_, 1939 (267pp)). Take a poem, keep all the vowel phonemes intact, but rewrite it with different consonants (hence different words, of course). Write a story, and then replace every noun in it by going to the dictionary and substituting the seventh noun listed after the noun in question in that dictionary for every noun of the story (or do this with the verbs instead, etc.) One of Queneau's works (_Exercices de style) takes an imaginary (or real) incident (a quite banal one) and writes it up in about a page and a half The "processes" then (transmogrified to what one would do in English) are to rewrite this using only the simple past. Rewrite it again using the conditional. Again using no verbs. Again using only dialogue (like a playlet). Again in underworld slang. Again in high Shakespearean style. Etc., for, say, fifty versions. Another (Cent mille milliards de poemes) consistes of about 100 pages, each containing a sonnet, all having exactly the same rhyme scheme. These are bound into a small book, each page, of course, on top of the next -- but the pages are 'sliced' between each line so that you can, say lift up line 3 of poem 1 and find line 3 of poem 7, or poem 9, etc., which line now seems to be line 3 of poem 1. (I shall let the mathematically inclined calculate how many different poems you get by substituting 100 different versions of each line of a 14 liner for all possible combinations. Queneau also liked mathematically determined fixed forms, such as the sestina, which consists of six stanzas of six lines each, but no stanza internal rhyme. The successive stanzas use the same rhyme words as stanza 1, but in a different, and mathematically determined order. (Invented by Arnaut Daniel in the 13th century, used by Petrarch, Swinburne, Kipling and many others) Queneau did an article on the formula in the "journal" _Subsidia Pataphysica_, which will remind one of Ou.Li.Po (and Queneau)'s debt to Jarry, and of course to Surrealism. Queneau also likes to write "phonetically" (On lrekone' pudutou, lfranse'), (or for those innocent of French, "apibeursede' touillou" -- get a friend who knows French to pronounce it). One reads Queneau (say _Zazie dans le m'etro, for starters) at some cost, or as he has said, (in French) "Knockout"! Much though this thread is into literature, Queneau, a quite competent linguist and dialectologist, is busy doing things to language. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) Date: Mon, 25 May 1992 09:21 EDT From: "NAME MICHEL (MGRIMAUD@LUCY.WELLESLEY.EDU) GRIMAUD" Subject: OULIPO The best way to get a feel for what OULIPO did is to read their two books still in print: --La litterature potentielle, Gallimard (Idees), 1973 --La litterature potentielle: creations, re-creations, recreations Gallimard (Folio), 1988 The most interesting work, aside from what is in those books, is probably Georges Perec's "La Disparition" -- a 300-page novel from which the letter "e" was absent... and which Perec published without telling people that was the case... and no one noticed. [Early publisher Denoel; now Gallimard.] Although this is apparently unique, linguist Raimo Anttila mentions (in Statistical Methods in Linguistics, 5, 1969, 46) that a speaker of the Savo dialect of Finnish did not use any words containing "r" because she was unable to trill it in the standard way and was laughed at. Michel Grimaud -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Linguist List: Vol-3-450.