From HBarker at IIE.ORG Thu May 2 15:01:16 2002 From: HBarker at IIE.ORG (Barker, Heather) Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 11:01:16 -0400 Subject: FULBRIGHT SCHOLAR GRANTS, 2003-2004 Message-ID: FULBRIGHT SCHOLAR GRANTS, 2003-2004 The Fulbright Scholar Program is offering lecturing, research, and lecturing/research awards for the 2003-2004 academic year: 30 in Linguistics and 38 in TEFL/Applied Linguistics. Awards for both faculty and professionals range from two months to an academic year. While many awards specify project and host institution, there are a number of open "Any Field" awards that allow candidates to propose their own project and determine their host institution affiliation. Foreign language skills are needed in some countries, but most Fulbright lecturing assignments are in English. Application deadline for 2003-2004 awards is: * August 1 for Fulbright traditional lecturing and research grants worldwide For information, visit our Web site at www.cies.org . Or contact: The Council for International Exchange of Scholars 3007 Tilden Street, N.W. - Suite 5L Washington, D.C. 20008 Phone: 202-686-7877 E-mail: apprequest at cies.iie.org From rmontes at SIU.BUAP.MX Sat May 4 16:13:45 2002 From: rmontes at SIU.BUAP.MX (Rosa Graciela Montes) Date: Sat, 4 May 2002 11:13:45 -0500 Subject: reversal of 1st and second person Message-ID: On Fri, 26 Apr 2002, A. Katz wrote: > Does anyone know of any case studies in first language > acquisition where a child reverses first and second > person, referring to himself in second > person and to his interlocutor in first person? You might want to post this question on the CHILDES list (info-childes at psy.cmu.edu) since this is a topic widely studied by those working on children's language development. IN the case I studied (child-mother interactions) over a period of a year and a half approximately (Child: 1:8-3:00). There was a period up to around age 2, where both participants referred to themselves in the third person, thus avoiding the deictic switch. This continued into the time that the child started using first person forms to refer to herself. I have one or two instances recorded of the child using a *correct* first-person form for herself and repairing it to a third person: CHI: no puedo. (I can´t) CHI: no puede cerrarlo. (She can´t close it) This is not the use of "you" for "I", but it does provide a stable for for self and addressee-reference, apparently because of the difficulties of the deictic switch. This stage did not last for very long in the child although the mother seemed to continue it long after the child had started using first person forms consistently. I also have anecdotal observation from a 14 year-old with some kind of not-just-linguistic impairment who consistently uses "tu" and second person verb forms to refer to himself. He addresses a teacher with forms like: Quieres ayuda. ((You) want help) Ese no te gusta. (You don't like that) referring to himself. A psychologist I talked to mentioned that this type of reversal was fairly common in some forms of autism. Hope this is of some use. Rosa Graciela Montes, UAP (MEXICO) From funkadmn at RUF.RICE.EDU Mon May 6 17:59:15 2002 From: funkadmn at RUF.RICE.EDU (Funknet List Admin) Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 12:59:15 -0500 Subject: CSDL 6: final call Message-ID: LAST CALL FOR PAPERS 6th CONFERENCE ON CONCEPTUAL STRUCTURE, DISCOURSE AND LANGUAGE RICE UNIVERSITY Houston, Texas OCTOBER 12-14, 2002 KEYNOTE SPEAKERS: JOHN LUCY, University of Chicago RONALD LANGACKER, University of Californa, San Diego SUSANNA CUMMING, University of California, Santa Barbara CSDL 6 welcomes papers in the fields of Cognitive Linguistics, Discourse, Functional Linguistics, and Speech and Language Processing, dealing with all aspects of language (structure, acquisition, variation, change) and all levels of language (phonology, morphosyntax, lexicon, discourse, and neural processing). There will be a general session and a poster session. ABSTRACTS DEADLINE: May 10, 2002 (see abstract guidelines). The abstracts will be accepted until May 12. ACCEPTANCE NOTIFICATION DATE: June 15, 2002 PREREGISTRATION DEADLINE: September 1, 2002 CONTACT INFO: Michel Achard (achard at rice.edu) and Suzanne Kemmer (kemmer at rice.edu) From jaw300t at SMSU.EDU Fri May 17 19:32:24 2002 From: jaw300t at SMSU.EDU (jaw300t) Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 14:32:24 -0500 Subject: senses in the present progressive Message-ID: I've been reading a lot lately about the simple present tense, but I may have missed relevant stuff on the present progressive, so maybe somebody has said something like this before, and I've just missed it. I'm aware of discussion about verbs of senses (feel, see, smell) in the present progressive being used specifically to express "temporariness". I have a hunch that speakers do this not so much to avail themselves of what the present progressive implies but to avoid what the simple present might imply. Bolinger says that the present tense is "timeless", not that it expresses eternalness, but that it is uncommitted about time. While it may not express eternalness, it's the tense of choice if you do want to express eternalness. The thing is, it doesn't exclude past time or future time. What I'm saying is, if you use the past tense and say: He was tall. then people understand you to mean he's not tall anymore. You exclude the present, you exclude the future. If you use the future tense and say: He will be tall. then people understand you to mean he isn't tall yet and he definitely wasn't tall yesterday or last year. But if you say: He is tall. people assume he was probably tall yesterday and he'll probably be tall tomorrow too. The simple present tense just does not exclude the past & future from the scope of a stative predicate. So if you say: I feel blue. people assume you might well have been blue yesterday and you may expect to feel blue tomorrow. If, on the other hand, you say: I'm feeling blue. you avoid the timelessness inherent in the simple present tense. I know there has to be a lot of literature out there on sensory or stative verbs and the present progressive; can somebody clue me in? Janet Wilson From Zylogy at AOL.COM Fri May 17 21:32:40 2002 From: Zylogy at AOL.COM (Jess Tauber) Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 17:32:40 EDT Subject: control and body Message-ID: Hi, folks. I wanted to run something by the lurkers to find out if anything is known about the following: In Mongolian there are large numbers of expressive, phonosemantically transparent forms dealing with body posture and also with material consistency, as if they dealt with the same underlying domain. Korean has many forms like this as well, as well as some dealing with facial shapes and expressions. The interesting thing about these is that they deal with parts of the body near to the trunk or central axis, and with relatively low articulatory complexities. Note also that low control seems to be implied. Yahgan, on the other hand, has an extensive list of forms dealing with the distribution of arms and legs about the body (an almost semaphoric metaphor), absent from the above language types- this articulatory scheme which may be high in control sense. And Yahgan has posture forms grammaticalized. A connection? Yahgan also is bipartite, and has a big list of bodypart/instrument prefixes. So I'm wondering whether the equivalence of body part with instrument itself has something to do with the way Yahgan deals with proximal versus distal body parts in expressive formulations here. It would be interesting to know what Korean and Mongolian do with body parts (are they primarily more like locations?). Is there any way that these languages mirror Yahgan in that terms dealing with limbs or manipulation grammaticalize? Those expressives in the above two languages which deal with material consistency/texture seem to do so with focus on the mass, or larger whole such materials are part of, while in Yahgan equivalent forms are about individuated masses primarily if masses are implied at all. Another connection? Limbs as subdivided extensions of the body versus the mass of the body itself sans limbs? Any thoughts out there? Thanks, Jess Tauber zylogy at aol.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hdls at UNM.EDU Fri May 17 21:59:53 2002 From: hdls at UNM.EDU (hdls) Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 15:59:53 -0600 Subject: HDLS V, 2002 First Call for Papers Message-ID: The fifth annual High Desert Linguistics Conference will be held at the University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, November 1 - 2, 2002. (http://www.unm.edu/~hdls/conf/2002/index.htm) We invite you to submit proposals for 20-minute talks with 10 minute discussion sessions in any area of linguistics from any theoretical perspective. Papers in the following areas are especially welcome: Evolution of language, Language change & variation, Grammaticization, Applied linguistics, Sociolinguistics, Researching Metaphor & Metonymy, Signed languages, Native American languages, and Computational linguistics. The Call for Papers can be found at http://www.unm.edu/~hdls/conf/2002/call.htm In addition, the guidelines for abstracts can be found at http://www.unm.edu/~hdls/conf/2002/abstract.htm The deadline for submitting abstracts is August 2nd, 2002 and the acceptance & notification date will be August 19th, 2002 If you have any questions or need for further information please contact either Christopher Shank (chrc at unm.edu) or Gabe Waters at (watersg at unm.edu) From Nino.Amiridze at LET.UU.NL Tue May 28 08:47:38 2002 From: Nino.Amiridze at LET.UU.NL (Amiridze, Nino) Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 10:47:38 +0200 Subject: control and body Message-ID: Dear colleagues, Last year I posted a query about subject appearences of reflexives. You have been very kind and helpful to provide me with references and comments. This time I would like to ask you another question. I would really appreciate it if you could help me with data and/or references on subject occurances of reciprocal expressions. I will remind you that some languages allow reflexives to appear as subjects. For instance, Basque (cf. (1), Xabier Artiagoitia (p.c.)), Nepali (Bickel&Yadava 2000), Greek (Anagnostopoulou&Everaert 1999), Dargwa (Kibrik 1997), Georgian (cf. (2))...: (1) neure buruak hilko nau my head-DET-ERG it.kills.me aux Lit.: Myself kills me "Something like my personality, the things I do and worry about... that is going to kill me" (2) shen-ma tav-ma gatsama shen your-ERG head-ERG (s)he-tortured-you you(NOM) Lit.: Yourself tortured you "Something related to you made you suffer" (the only reading available is with non-physical torture)) Georgian also allows reciprocals as subjects (cf. (3) and also Tuite 1998): (3) ertmanet-i k'lavt ivane-s da meri-s each.other-nom it.kills.them John-dat and Mary-dat Lit.: Each other kill John and Mary "Something related to each other makes John and Mary suffer" It would be very helpful if anyone could point me out any other language having reciprocals as subjects. If something like (3) is allowed in some language then what are the verb classes / verb readings allowing the phenomenon? Thank you very much. Sincerely, Nino Amiridze Utrecht Institute of Linguistics, Utrecht University References: Anagnostopoulou, Elena. and Martin Everaert. 1999. Towards a More Complete Typlogy of Anaphoric Expressions. Linguistic Inquiry 30:97-119 Bickel, B. & Y.P.Yadava. 2000. A fresh look at grammatical relations in Indo-Aryan. Lingua 110:343-373. Kibrik A.E. 1997. Beyond subject and object: Toward a comprehensive relational typology. Linguistic Typology 1-3, 279-346. Tuite, K. 1998. Kartvelian Morphosyntax: Number Agreement and Morphosyntactic Orientation in the South Caucasian Languages. München: LINCOM Europa. From Nino.Amiridze at LET.UU.NL Tue May 28 08:52:20 2002 From: Nino.Amiridze at LET.UU.NL (Amiridze, Nino) Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 10:52:20 +0200 Subject: reciprocals as subjects Message-ID: Excuses for additional posting. The previous message was by mistake sent under the subject 'control and body') ************** Dear colleagues, Last year I posted a query about subject appearences of reflexives. You have been very kind and helpful to provide me with references and comments. This time I would like to ask you another question. I would really appreciate it if you could help me with data and/or references on subject occurances of reciprocal expressions. I will remind you that some languages allow reflexives to appear as subjects. For instance, Basque (cf. (1), Xabier Artiagoitia (p.c.)), Nepali (Bickel&Yadava 2000), Greek (Anagnostopoulou&Everaert 1999), Dargwa (Kibrik 1997), Georgian (cf. (2))...: (1) neure buruak hilko nau my head-DET-ERG it.kills.me aux Lit.: Myself kills me "Something like my personality, the things I do and worry about... that is going to kill me" (2) shen-ma tav-ma gatsama shen your-ERG head-ERG (s)he-tortured-you you(NOM) Lit.: Yourself tortured you "Something related to you made you suffer" (the only reading available is with non-physical torture)) Georgian also allows reciprocals as subjects (cf. (3) and also Tuite 1998): (3) ertmanet-i k'lavt ivane-s da meri-s each.other-nom it.kills.them John-dat and Mary-dat Lit.: Each other kill John and Mary "Something related to each other makes John and Mary suffer" It would be very helpful if anyone could point me out any other language having reciprocals as subjects. If something like (3) is allowed in some language then what are the verb classes / verb readings allowing the phenomenon? Thank you very much. Sincerely, Nino Amiridze Utrecht Institute of Linguistics, Utrecht University References: Anagnostopoulou, Elena. and Martin Everaert. 1999. Towards a More Complete Typlogy of Anaphoric Expressions. Linguistic Inquiry 30:97-119 Bickel, B. & Y.P.Yadava. 2000. A fresh look at grammatical relations in Indo-Aryan. Lingua 110:343-373. Kibrik A.E. 1997. Beyond subject and object: Toward a comprehensive relational typology. Linguistic Typology 1-3, 279-346. Tuite, K. 1998. Kartvelian Morphosyntax: Number Agreement and Morphosyntactic Orientation in the South Caucasian Languages. München: LINCOM Europa. From jaske at salemstate.edu Tue May 28 12:29:40 2002 From: jaske at salemstate.edu (Jon Aske) Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 08:29:40 -0400 Subject: reciprocals as subjects In-Reply-To: <609113EFF2AD824C9C823F0DFF3AA9AF01C0C5EA@tyger.let.uu.nl> Message-ID: > I will remind you that some languages allow reflexives to appear as > subjects. For instance, > Basque (cf. (1), Xabier Artiagoitia (p.c.)), Nepali (Bickel&Yadava > 2000), Greek (Anagnostopoulou&Everaert 1999), Dargwa (Kibrik 1997), > Georgian (cf. (2))...: > > (1) neure buruak hilko nau > my head-DET-ERG it.kills.me aux > Lit.: Myself kills me > > "Something like my personality, the things I do and worry > about... that is going to kill me" I don't know about the other examples but, interesting as it is, the Basque one doesn't strike me as one with a reflexive subject. The "reflexive" ergative 'neure buruak' (lit. my head) here would seem to be very different from the reflexive (absolutive) neure burua in a reflexive sentence (cf. I'm going to kill myself; example (1) is also future, by the way). Much like the fact that not every example of 'myself' is a reflexive. -Jon From Nino.Amiridze at LET.UU.NL Wed May 29 09:06:11 2002 From: Nino.Amiridze at LET.UU.NL (Amiridze, Nino) Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 11:06:11 +0200 Subject: reciprocals as subjects Message-ID: Dear Jon Aske, thank you for your message. I agree with you that the reflexive as a subject in (1) and the same reflexive as an object are different by interpretation. But I also think that what is crucial in the subject use of burua as well as Georgian reflexive tav- is that the interpretation of both is dependent on the co-argument object phrase. Sure it is not an antecedent but whatever we call it (postcedent/etc) there is an anaphoric relation between the subject reflexives and the co-argument object phrase. In (1) the object pronoun is dropped but anyway the interpretation of neure buruak in (1) is dependent on the interpretation of the pro-dropped 1st person singular personal pronoun. As the translation shows neure buruak in (1) refers to the things related to the referent of the pro-dropped phrase. We could say that the reflexive as a subject does not refer to the whole but only to the part/aspect/property of the referent of its post-cedent. But I don't think this makes any harm to the anaphoric relation between the co-arguments. There can be the same partial interpretation also in 'normal' cases with reflexives as objects (cf. (2)). However it will be very hard to say that there is no anaphoric relation between the reflexive and its antecedent in (2): (2) John hit himself. I agree that not every example of 'myself' is reflexive. It can be an intensifier, for instance. But I don't think the subject uses of burua and tav- are the cases of intensifiers. They are arguments of the verb not adjuncts. I would be interested in your view on my judgements. Many thanks for your reaction. Sincerely, Nino Amiridze > I will remind you that some languages allow reflexives to appear as > subjects. For instance, > Basque (cf. (1), Xabier Artiagoitia (p.c.)), Nepali (Bickel&Yadava > 2000), Greek (Anagnostopoulou&Everaert 1999), Dargwa (Kibrik 1997), > Georgian (cf. (2))...: > > (1) neure buruak hilko nau > my head-DET-ERG it.kills.me aux > Lit.: Myself kills me > > "Something like my personality, the things I do and worry > about... that is going to kill me" I don't know about the other examples but, interesting as it is, the Basque one doesn't strike me as one with a reflexive subject. The "reflexive" ergative 'neure buruak' (lit. my head) here would seem to be very different from the reflexive (absolutive) neure burua in a reflexive sentence (cf. I'm going to kill myself; example (1) is also future, by the way). Much like the fact that not every example of 'myself' is a reflexive. -Jon From jlmendi at POSTA.UNIZAR.ES Wed May 29 11:00:43 2002 From: jlmendi at POSTA.UNIZAR.ES (Jose-Luis Mendivil) Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 13:00:43 +0200 Subject: reciprocals as subjects Message-ID: Dear Nino: Although far from being an expert in Basque, I agree with Jon Aske: I can't see the example in (1) as an instance of a 'reflexive subject': > > (1) neure buruak hilko nau > my head-DET-ERG it.kills.me aux > Lit.: Myself kills me Of course there is an anaphoric relation between subject and object, as in the following Spanish examples: (2) Me golpeo a mi mismo (I) hit myself (3) Yo mismo me golpeo I myself hit(me) In (2) we have a pro-dropped nominative subject (yo) and a dative reflexive, but in (3), with the same propositional meaning, we have not a subject reflexive but a nominative argument subject with an intensifier 'myself' and a pro-dropped (co-referential with the clitic 'me', as in (2)) dative object. In spite of that, in (3) the reflexive is the object, not the subject. Best regards, Jose-Luis Mendivil. From diessel at EVA.MPG.DE Wed May 29 16:03:50 2002 From: diessel at EVA.MPG.DE (Holger Diessel) Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 18:03:50 +0200 Subject: Doctoral fellowship in linguistics Message-ID: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology Doctoral fellowship in linguistics The Department of Linguistics of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology (Leipzig) seeks candidates for four doctoral fellowships in linguistics. The fellowships are for two years, with the possibility of one or two six-month extensions. The Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology studies human diversity and human origins in a multidisciplinary perspective. The contribution of linguistics to this goal lies in the study of the history and prehistory of languages (and peoples) around the world (especially non-European languages), as well as the current diversity of human languages (linguistic fieldwork on little-described and endangered languages and language typology). The Department of Linguistics also collaborates with the Department of Evolutionary Genetics to compare the evidence from both fields for the prehistory of human populations. More information on the department and its research projects is available on the institute's website (see below). The fellows should already have an MA in Linguistics or an equivalent qualification, and be either registered or qualified to register in a recognized doctoral program at a university or equivalent degree-awarding institution. The doctoral fellows are expected to propose a thesis/dissertation research topic that fits into the department's current foci. Regular participation in the department's talks, seminars and workshops is expected. Except for approved absences (e.g. fieldwork, conferences, vacation), the place of work is Leipzig. The fellowships are available from 1 September 2002, but a later starting date may be negotiated. Good knowledge of English is required. Applicants are requested to send a C.V., statement of research interests, two letters of recommendation, and a sample of written work on a relevant topic to: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology Personnel Administration Prof. Dr. Bernard Comrie - Doctoral fellow position - Inselstrasse 22 D-01403 Leipzig Germany fax: +49 341 99 52 119 e_mail: comrie at eva.mpg.de Deadline for receipt of applications: 30 June 2002 The Institute's URL is: http://www.eva.mpg.de/ From llshuang at READING.AC.UK Thu May 30 12:34:22 2002 From: llshuang at READING.AC.UK (Yan Huang) Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 13:34:22 +0100 Subject: reciprocals as subjects In-Reply-To: <609113EFF2AD824C9C823F0DFF3AA9AF01C0C604@tyger.let.uu.nl> Message-ID: Dear Nino - Occasionally reciprocals can occur in the subject position in Chinese. See my 'The syntax and pragmatics of anaphora' (Cambridge UP 1994) p 277 (vi) for an example. Also my new book 'Aanaphora: a cross-linguistic study' (Oxford UP 2000) might be of interest to you. Thanks. From Nino.Amiridze at LET.UU.NL Thu May 30 21:52:27 2002 From: Nino.Amiridze at LET.UU.NL (Amiridze, Nino) Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 23:52:27 +0200 Subject: reciprocals as subjects Message-ID: Dear Jose-Luis Mendivil, thank you so much for your message and the Spanish sentences. They are an excellent example how misleading can the form be: >(2) Me golpeo a mi mismo > (I) hit myself >(3) Yo mismo me golpeo > I myself hit(me) Spanish is like many other languages having reflexives and intensifiers of the same form. So we have to be careful when discussing the subject status of 'mismo', as I understood, in (3). But I do not see how Spanish is related to the Basque case where the phrase 'bere burua' is a subject argument (cf. (1)). The head of the phrase 'burua' is marked by ERG. And I think (please correct me if I am mistaken) reflexives do not resemble intensifiers in Basque. So there is no way to consider 'bere buruak' in (1) as an intensifier. It is a reflexive phrase and it is an argument of the verb unlike the Spanish intensifier in (3) being an adjunct: > (1) neure buruak hilko nau > my head-DET-ERG it.kills.me aux > Lit.: Myself kills me Basque looks very much like Georgian not only by having a grammaticalized body-part for "head" for reflexives but also by allowing the reflexives to appear as subjects (cf. (7)). Georgian is a very transparent case since there reflexives and intensifiers are distinct by form (although both originating from the same body-part tav- "head"). So there is absolutely no way to mix reflexives and intensifiers by form in Georgian as it is possible for instance, in English or Spanish. As example (4) and its pro-dropped version in (5) make it clear in Georgian it is ungrammatical to have a reflexive instead of the intensifier: (4) tavad / *[tavis-i tav-i] p'rezident'-i daesc'ro shexvedra-s INTENSIFIER / REFLEXIVE president-NOM he.attended.it meeting-DAT "The president himself attended the meeting" (5) tavad / *[tavis-i tav-i] daesc'ro shexvedra-s INTENSIFIER / REFLEXIVE he.attended.it meeting-DAT "He himself attended the meeting" Just like it is ungrammatical to have an intensifier instead of the reflexive (cf. (6)): (6) p'rezident'-ma ixsna tavis-i tav-i / *tavad president-ERG he.saved.him REFLEXIVE/INTENSIFIER "The president saved himself" There is no way to consider the reflexive phrase as an intensifier either in (7): (7) [tavis-ma tav-ma]/ *tavad ixsna p'rezident'-i [REFLEXIVE(ERG)] / INTENSIFIER he.saved.him president-NOM Lit: Himself saved the president "Something related to the president saved him" The reflexive in (7) is a subject argument of the verb just like the phrase "tavis-ma mcvel-ma" in (8): (8) [tavis-ma mcvel-ma] ixsna p'rezident'-i self's-ERG bodyguard-ERG he.saved.him president-NOM Lit: His.own bodyguard saved the president "The president was saved by his own bodyguard" If we try to substitute the intensifier for the reflexive in (7) we get a different sentence (compare the translations of (7) and (9)): (9) tavad ixsna p'rezident'-i INTENSIFIER he.saved.him president-NOM "(He) himself saved the president" The reflexive phrase 'tavis-ma tav-ma' in (7) is in an anaphoric relation with the object of the verb - prezident-i. While the intensifier 'tavad' in (9) is an adjunct to the pro-dropped pronominal serving as a subject of the verb: (9') tavad man ixsna p'rezident'-i INTENSIFIER he(ERG) he.saved.him president-NOM "He himself saved the president" Therefore, it is not possible to consider the subject uses of reflexives as intensifiers in Georgian and thus put them away as not truely reflexive. Anyway this will not help us with the subject uses of reciprocals where it is very hard to find some other label for the reciprocals for explaning their behaviour (cf. (10) or the sentence from my very first message given here as (11)): (10) ertmanet-i gvaopcebs chven RECIPROCAL-NOM it.surprises.us we(DAT) Lit.: Each other surprise us "We are surprised by something related to each other" (11) ertmanet-i k'lavt ivane-s da meri-s each.other-nom it.kills.them John-dat and Mary-dat Lit.: Each other kill John and Mary "Something related to each other makes John and Mary suffer" Thank you. Sincerely, nino amiridze Jose-Luis Mendivil [SMTP:jlmendi at POSTA.UNIZAR.ES] -----Original Message----- From: Jose-Luis Mendivil To: FUNKNET at LISTSERV.RICE.EDU Sent: 5/29/2002 1:00 PM Subject: Re: reciprocals as subjects Dear Nino: Although far from being an expert in Basque, I agree with Jon Aske: I can't see the example in (1) as an instance of a 'reflexive subject': > > (1) neure buruak hilko nau > my head-DET-ERG it.kills.me aux > Lit.: Myself kills me Of course there is an anaphoric relation between subject and object, as in the following Spanish examples: (2) Me golpeo a mi mismo (I) hit myself (3) Yo mismo me golpeo I myself hit(me) In (2) we have a pro-dropped nominative subject (yo) and a dative reflexive, but in (3), with the same propositional meaning, we have not a subject reflexive but a nominative argument subject with an intensifier 'myself' and a pro-dropped (co-referential with the clitic 'me', as in (2)) dative object. In spite of that, in (3) the reflexive is the object, not the subject. Best regards, Jose-Luis Mendivil. From Nino.Amiridze at LET.UU.NL Thu May 30 22:52:27 2002 From: Nino.Amiridze at LET.UU.NL (Amiridze, Nino) Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 00:52:27 +0200 Subject: reciprocals as subjects Message-ID: Dear Yan Huang, thank you for your message and for the reference. I will check the example. Sincerely, Nino Amiridze Dear Nino - Occasionally reciprocals can occur in the subject position in Chinese. See my 'The syntax and pragmatics of anaphora' (Cambridge UP 1994) p 277 (vi) for an example. Also my new book 'Aanaphora: a cross-linguistic study' (Oxford UP 2000) might be of interest to you. Thanks. From stefan.grondelaers at ARTS.KULEUVEN.AC.BE Fri May 31 07:55:47 2002 From: stefan.grondelaers at ARTS.KULEUVEN.AC.BE (Stefan Grondelaers) Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 09:55:47 +0200 Subject: Sociolexicology Abstracts Reminder Message-ID: We would like to remind all interested linguists that abstracts for the symposium MEASURING LEXICAL VARIATION AND CHANGE A Symposium on Quantitative Sociolexicology University of Leuven, Belgium October 24-25, 2002 http://wwwling.arts.kuleuven.ac.be/sociolex/ are expected by June 1. Please send your submissions (or any queries you may have) to: sociolex at listserv.cc.kuleuven.ac.be -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jlmendi at POSTA.UNIZAR.ES Fri May 31 12:26:07 2002 From: jlmendi at POSTA.UNIZAR.ES (Jose-Luis Mendivil) Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 14:26:07 +0200 Subject: reciprocals as subjects In-Reply-To: <609113EFF2AD824C9C823F0DFF3AA9AF01C0C624@tyger.let.uu.nl> Message-ID: Dear Nino, thank you very much for your patient and detailed explanation. I see now what you mean. I haven't anything to add but that you have convinced me that these reflexives are subjects. Best regards, Jose-Luis. >Dear Jose-Luis Mendivil, > >thank you so much for your message and the Spanish sentences. They are >an excellent example how misleading can the form be: > >>(2) Me golpeo a mi mismo >> (I) hit myself >>(3) Yo mismo me golpeo >> I myself hit(me) > >Spanish is like many other languages having reflexives and intensifiers >of the same form. So we have to be careful when discussing the subject >status of 'mismo', as I understood, in (3). > >But I do not see how Spanish is related to the Basque case where the >phrase 'bere burua' is a subject argument (cf. (1)). The head of the >phrase 'burua' is marked by ERG. And I think (please correct me if I am >mistaken) reflexives do not resemble intensifiers in Basque. So there is >no way to consider 'bere buruak' in (1) as an intensifier. It is a >reflexive phrase and it is an argument of the verb unlike the Spanish >intensifier in (3) being an adjunct: > >> (1) neure buruak hilko nau >> my head-DET-ERG it.kills.me aux >> Lit.: Myself kills me > >Basque looks very much like Georgian not only by having a >grammaticalized body-part for "head" for reflexives but also by allowing >the reflexives to appear as subjects (cf. (7)). > >Georgian is a very transparent case since there reflexives and >intensifiers are distinct by form (although both originating from the >same body-part tav- "head"). So there is absolutely no way to mix >reflexives and intensifiers by form in Georgian as it is possible for >instance, in English or Spanish. > >As example (4) and its pro-dropped version in (5) make it clear in >Georgian it is ungrammatical to have a reflexive instead of the >intensifier: > >(4) tavad / *[tavis-i tav-i] p'rezident'-i daesc'ro shexvedra-s > INTENSIFIER / REFLEXIVE president-NOM he.attended.it meeting-DAT > "The president himself attended the meeting" > >(5) tavad / *[tavis-i tav-i] daesc'ro shexvedra-s > INTENSIFIER / REFLEXIVE he.attended.it meeting-DAT > "He himself attended the meeting" > >Just like it is ungrammatical to have an intensifier instead of the >reflexive (cf. (6)): > >(6) p'rezident'-ma ixsna tavis-i tav-i / *tavad > president-ERG he.saved.him REFLEXIVE/INTENSIFIER > "The president saved himself" > >There is no way to consider the reflexive phrase as an intensifier >either in (7): > >(7) [tavis-ma tav-ma]/ *tavad ixsna p'rezident'-i > [REFLEXIVE(ERG)] / INTENSIFIER he.saved.him president-NOM > Lit: Himself saved the president > "Something related to the president saved him" > >The reflexive in (7) is a subject argument of the verb just like the >phrase "tavis-ma mcvel-ma" in (8): >(8) [tavis-ma mcvel-ma] ixsna p'rezident'-i > self's-ERG bodyguard-ERG he.saved.him president-NOM > Lit: His.own bodyguard saved the president > "The president was saved by his own bodyguard" > >If we try to substitute the intensifier for the reflexive in (7) we get >a different sentence (compare the translations of (7) and (9)): > >(9) tavad ixsna p'rezident'-i > INTENSIFIER he.saved.him president-NOM > "(He) himself saved the president" > >The reflexive phrase 'tavis-ma tav-ma' in (7) is in an anaphoric >relation with the object of the verb - prezident-i. While the >intensifier 'tavad' in (9) is an adjunct to the pro-dropped pronominal >serving as a subject of the verb: > >(9') tavad man ixsna p'rezident'-i > INTENSIFIER he(ERG) he.saved.him president-NOM > "He himself saved the president" > >Therefore, it is not possible to consider the subject uses of reflexives >as intensifiers in Georgian and thus put them away as not truely >reflexive. Anyway this will not help us with the subject uses of >reciprocals where it is very hard to find some other label for the >reciprocals for explaning their behaviour (cf. (10) or the sentence >from my very first message given here as (11)): > >(10) ertmanet-i gvaopcebs chven > RECIPROCAL-NOM it.surprises.us we(DAT) > Lit.: Each other surprise us > "We are surprised by something related to each other" > >(11) ertmanet-i k'lavt ivane-s da meri-s > each.other-nom it.kills.them John-dat and Mary-dat > Lit.: Each other kill John and Mary > "Something related to each other makes John and Mary suffer" > >Thank you. > >Sincerely, > >nino amiridze From HBarker at IIE.ORG Thu May 2 15:01:16 2002 From: HBarker at IIE.ORG (Barker, Heather) Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 11:01:16 -0400 Subject: FULBRIGHT SCHOLAR GRANTS, 2003-2004 Message-ID: FULBRIGHT SCHOLAR GRANTS, 2003-2004 The Fulbright Scholar Program is offering lecturing, research, and lecturing/research awards for the 2003-2004 academic year: 30 in Linguistics and 38 in TEFL/Applied Linguistics. Awards for both faculty and professionals range from two months to an academic year. While many awards specify project and host institution, there are a number of open "Any Field" awards that allow candidates to propose their own project and determine their host institution affiliation. Foreign language skills are needed in some countries, but most Fulbright lecturing assignments are in English. Application deadline for 2003-2004 awards is: * August 1 for Fulbright traditional lecturing and research grants worldwide For information, visit our Web site at www.cies.org . Or contact: The Council for International Exchange of Scholars 3007 Tilden Street, N.W. - Suite 5L Washington, D.C. 20008 Phone: 202-686-7877 E-mail: apprequest at cies.iie.org From rmontes at SIU.BUAP.MX Sat May 4 16:13:45 2002 From: rmontes at SIU.BUAP.MX (Rosa Graciela Montes) Date: Sat, 4 May 2002 11:13:45 -0500 Subject: reversal of 1st and second person Message-ID: On Fri, 26 Apr 2002, A. Katz wrote: > Does anyone know of any case studies in first language > acquisition where a child reverses first and second > person, referring to himself in second > person and to his interlocutor in first person? You might want to post this question on the CHILDES list (info-childes at psy.cmu.edu) since this is a topic widely studied by those working on children's language development. IN the case I studied (child-mother interactions) over a period of a year and a half approximately (Child: 1:8-3:00). There was a period up to around age 2, where both participants referred to themselves in the third person, thus avoiding the deictic switch. This continued into the time that the child started using first person forms to refer to herself. I have one or two instances recorded of the child using a *correct* first-person form for herself and repairing it to a third person: CHI: no puedo. (I can?t) CHI: no puede cerrarlo. (She can?t close it) This is not the use of "you" for "I", but it does provide a stable for for self and addressee-reference, apparently because of the difficulties of the deictic switch. This stage did not last for very long in the child although the mother seemed to continue it long after the child had started using first person forms consistently. I also have anecdotal observation from a 14 year-old with some kind of not-just-linguistic impairment who consistently uses "tu" and second person verb forms to refer to himself. He addresses a teacher with forms like: Quieres ayuda. ((You) want help) Ese no te gusta. (You don't like that) referring to himself. A psychologist I talked to mentioned that this type of reversal was fairly common in some forms of autism. Hope this is of some use. Rosa Graciela Montes, UAP (MEXICO) From funkadmn at RUF.RICE.EDU Mon May 6 17:59:15 2002 From: funkadmn at RUF.RICE.EDU (Funknet List Admin) Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 12:59:15 -0500 Subject: CSDL 6: final call Message-ID: LAST CALL FOR PAPERS 6th CONFERENCE ON CONCEPTUAL STRUCTURE, DISCOURSE AND LANGUAGE RICE UNIVERSITY Houston, Texas OCTOBER 12-14, 2002 KEYNOTE SPEAKERS: JOHN LUCY, University of Chicago RONALD LANGACKER, University of Californa, San Diego SUSANNA CUMMING, University of California, Santa Barbara CSDL 6 welcomes papers in the fields of Cognitive Linguistics, Discourse, Functional Linguistics, and Speech and Language Processing, dealing with all aspects of language (structure, acquisition, variation, change) and all levels of language (phonology, morphosyntax, lexicon, discourse, and neural processing). There will be a general session and a poster session. ABSTRACTS DEADLINE: May 10, 2002 (see abstract guidelines). The abstracts will be accepted until May 12. ACCEPTANCE NOTIFICATION DATE: June 15, 2002 PREREGISTRATION DEADLINE: September 1, 2002 CONTACT INFO: Michel Achard (achard at rice.edu) and Suzanne Kemmer (kemmer at rice.edu) From jaw300t at SMSU.EDU Fri May 17 19:32:24 2002 From: jaw300t at SMSU.EDU (jaw300t) Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 14:32:24 -0500 Subject: senses in the present progressive Message-ID: I've been reading a lot lately about the simple present tense, but I may have missed relevant stuff on the present progressive, so maybe somebody has said something like this before, and I've just missed it. I'm aware of discussion about verbs of senses (feel, see, smell) in the present progressive being used specifically to express "temporariness". I have a hunch that speakers do this not so much to avail themselves of what the present progressive implies but to avoid what the simple present might imply. Bolinger says that the present tense is "timeless", not that it expresses eternalness, but that it is uncommitted about time. While it may not express eternalness, it's the tense of choice if you do want to express eternalness. The thing is, it doesn't exclude past time or future time. What I'm saying is, if you use the past tense and say: He was tall. then people understand you to mean he's not tall anymore. You exclude the present, you exclude the future. If you use the future tense and say: He will be tall. then people understand you to mean he isn't tall yet and he definitely wasn't tall yesterday or last year. But if you say: He is tall. people assume he was probably tall yesterday and he'll probably be tall tomorrow too. The simple present tense just does not exclude the past & future from the scope of a stative predicate. So if you say: I feel blue. people assume you might well have been blue yesterday and you may expect to feel blue tomorrow. If, on the other hand, you say: I'm feeling blue. you avoid the timelessness inherent in the simple present tense. I know there has to be a lot of literature out there on sensory or stative verbs and the present progressive; can somebody clue me in? Janet Wilson From Zylogy at AOL.COM Fri May 17 21:32:40 2002 From: Zylogy at AOL.COM (Jess Tauber) Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 17:32:40 EDT Subject: control and body Message-ID: Hi, folks. I wanted to run something by the lurkers to find out if anything is known about the following: In Mongolian there are large numbers of expressive, phonosemantically transparent forms dealing with body posture and also with material consistency, as if they dealt with the same underlying domain. Korean has many forms like this as well, as well as some dealing with facial shapes and expressions. The interesting thing about these is that they deal with parts of the body near to the trunk or central axis, and with relatively low articulatory complexities. Note also that low control seems to be implied. Yahgan, on the other hand, has an extensive list of forms dealing with the distribution of arms and legs about the body (an almost semaphoric metaphor), absent from the above language types- this articulatory scheme which may be high in control sense. And Yahgan has posture forms grammaticalized. A connection? Yahgan also is bipartite, and has a big list of bodypart/instrument prefixes. So I'm wondering whether the equivalence of body part with instrument itself has something to do with the way Yahgan deals with proximal versus distal body parts in expressive formulations here. It would be interesting to know what Korean and Mongolian do with body parts (are they primarily more like locations?). Is there any way that these languages mirror Yahgan in that terms dealing with limbs or manipulation grammaticalize? Those expressives in the above two languages which deal with material consistency/texture seem to do so with focus on the mass, or larger whole such materials are part of, while in Yahgan equivalent forms are about individuated masses primarily if masses are implied at all. Another connection? Limbs as subdivided extensions of the body versus the mass of the body itself sans limbs? Any thoughts out there? Thanks, Jess Tauber zylogy at aol.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hdls at UNM.EDU Fri May 17 21:59:53 2002 From: hdls at UNM.EDU (hdls) Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 15:59:53 -0600 Subject: HDLS V, 2002 First Call for Papers Message-ID: The fifth annual High Desert Linguistics Conference will be held at the University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, November 1 - 2, 2002. (http://www.unm.edu/~hdls/conf/2002/index.htm) We invite you to submit proposals for 20-minute talks with 10 minute discussion sessions in any area of linguistics from any theoretical perspective. Papers in the following areas are especially welcome: Evolution of language, Language change & variation, Grammaticization, Applied linguistics, Sociolinguistics, Researching Metaphor & Metonymy, Signed languages, Native American languages, and Computational linguistics. The Call for Papers can be found at http://www.unm.edu/~hdls/conf/2002/call.htm In addition, the guidelines for abstracts can be found at http://www.unm.edu/~hdls/conf/2002/abstract.htm The deadline for submitting abstracts is August 2nd, 2002 and the acceptance & notification date will be August 19th, 2002 If you have any questions or need for further information please contact either Christopher Shank (chrc at unm.edu) or Gabe Waters at (watersg at unm.edu) From Nino.Amiridze at LET.UU.NL Tue May 28 08:47:38 2002 From: Nino.Amiridze at LET.UU.NL (Amiridze, Nino) Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 10:47:38 +0200 Subject: control and body Message-ID: Dear colleagues, Last year I posted a query about subject appearences of reflexives. You have been very kind and helpful to provide me with references and comments. This time I would like to ask you another question. I would really appreciate it if you could help me with data and/or references on subject occurances of reciprocal expressions. I will remind you that some languages allow reflexives to appear as subjects. For instance, Basque (cf. (1), Xabier Artiagoitia (p.c.)), Nepali (Bickel&Yadava 2000), Greek (Anagnostopoulou&Everaert 1999), Dargwa (Kibrik 1997), Georgian (cf. (2))...: (1) neure buruak hilko nau my head-DET-ERG it.kills.me aux Lit.: Myself kills me "Something like my personality, the things I do and worry about... that is going to kill me" (2) shen-ma tav-ma gatsama shen your-ERG head-ERG (s)he-tortured-you you(NOM) Lit.: Yourself tortured you "Something related to you made you suffer" (the only reading available is with non-physical torture)) Georgian also allows reciprocals as subjects (cf. (3) and also Tuite 1998): (3) ertmanet-i k'lavt ivane-s da meri-s each.other-nom it.kills.them John-dat and Mary-dat Lit.: Each other kill John and Mary "Something related to each other makes John and Mary suffer" It would be very helpful if anyone could point me out any other language having reciprocals as subjects. If something like (3) is allowed in some language then what are the verb classes / verb readings allowing the phenomenon? Thank you very much. Sincerely, Nino Amiridze Utrecht Institute of Linguistics, Utrecht University References: Anagnostopoulou, Elena. and Martin Everaert. 1999. Towards a More Complete Typlogy of Anaphoric Expressions. Linguistic Inquiry 30:97-119 Bickel, B. & Y.P.Yadava. 2000. A fresh look at grammatical relations in Indo-Aryan. Lingua 110:343-373. Kibrik A.E. 1997. Beyond subject and object: Toward a comprehensive relational typology. Linguistic Typology 1-3, 279-346. Tuite, K. 1998. Kartvelian Morphosyntax: Number Agreement and Morphosyntactic Orientation in the South Caucasian Languages. M??nchen: LINCOM Europa. From Nino.Amiridze at LET.UU.NL Tue May 28 08:52:20 2002 From: Nino.Amiridze at LET.UU.NL (Amiridze, Nino) Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 10:52:20 +0200 Subject: reciprocals as subjects Message-ID: Excuses for additional posting. The previous message was by mistake sent under the subject 'control and body') ************** Dear colleagues, Last year I posted a query about subject appearences of reflexives. You have been very kind and helpful to provide me with references and comments. This time I would like to ask you another question. I would really appreciate it if you could help me with data and/or references on subject occurances of reciprocal expressions. I will remind you that some languages allow reflexives to appear as subjects. For instance, Basque (cf. (1), Xabier Artiagoitia (p.c.)), Nepali (Bickel&Yadava 2000), Greek (Anagnostopoulou&Everaert 1999), Dargwa (Kibrik 1997), Georgian (cf. (2))...: (1) neure buruak hilko nau my head-DET-ERG it.kills.me aux Lit.: Myself kills me "Something like my personality, the things I do and worry about... that is going to kill me" (2) shen-ma tav-ma gatsama shen your-ERG head-ERG (s)he-tortured-you you(NOM) Lit.: Yourself tortured you "Something related to you made you suffer" (the only reading available is with non-physical torture)) Georgian also allows reciprocals as subjects (cf. (3) and also Tuite 1998): (3) ertmanet-i k'lavt ivane-s da meri-s each.other-nom it.kills.them John-dat and Mary-dat Lit.: Each other kill John and Mary "Something related to each other makes John and Mary suffer" It would be very helpful if anyone could point me out any other language having reciprocals as subjects. If something like (3) is allowed in some language then what are the verb classes / verb readings allowing the phenomenon? Thank you very much. Sincerely, Nino Amiridze Utrecht Institute of Linguistics, Utrecht University References: Anagnostopoulou, Elena. and Martin Everaert. 1999. Towards a More Complete Typlogy of Anaphoric Expressions. Linguistic Inquiry 30:97-119 Bickel, B. & Y.P.Yadava. 2000. A fresh look at grammatical relations in Indo-Aryan. Lingua 110:343-373. Kibrik A.E. 1997. Beyond subject and object: Toward a comprehensive relational typology. Linguistic Typology 1-3, 279-346. Tuite, K. 1998. Kartvelian Morphosyntax: Number Agreement and Morphosyntactic Orientation in the South Caucasian Languages. M??nchen: LINCOM Europa. From jaske at salemstate.edu Tue May 28 12:29:40 2002 From: jaske at salemstate.edu (Jon Aske) Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 08:29:40 -0400 Subject: reciprocals as subjects In-Reply-To: <609113EFF2AD824C9C823F0DFF3AA9AF01C0C5EA@tyger.let.uu.nl> Message-ID: > I will remind you that some languages allow reflexives to appear as > subjects. For instance, > Basque (cf. (1), Xabier Artiagoitia (p.c.)), Nepali (Bickel&Yadava > 2000), Greek (Anagnostopoulou&Everaert 1999), Dargwa (Kibrik 1997), > Georgian (cf. (2))...: > > (1) neure buruak hilko nau > my head-DET-ERG it.kills.me aux > Lit.: Myself kills me > > "Something like my personality, the things I do and worry > about... that is going to kill me" I don't know about the other examples but, interesting as it is, the Basque one doesn't strike me as one with a reflexive subject. The "reflexive" ergative 'neure buruak' (lit. my head) here would seem to be very different from the reflexive (absolutive) neure burua in a reflexive sentence (cf. I'm going to kill myself; example (1) is also future, by the way). Much like the fact that not every example of 'myself' is a reflexive. -Jon From Nino.Amiridze at LET.UU.NL Wed May 29 09:06:11 2002 From: Nino.Amiridze at LET.UU.NL (Amiridze, Nino) Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 11:06:11 +0200 Subject: reciprocals as subjects Message-ID: Dear Jon Aske, thank you for your message. I agree with you that the reflexive as a subject in (1) and the same reflexive as an object are different by interpretation. But I also think that what is crucial in the subject use of burua as well as Georgian reflexive tav- is that the interpretation of both is dependent on the co-argument object phrase. Sure it is not an antecedent but whatever we call it (postcedent/etc) there is an anaphoric relation between the subject reflexives and the co-argument object phrase. In (1) the object pronoun is dropped but anyway the interpretation of neure buruak in (1) is dependent on the interpretation of the pro-dropped 1st person singular personal pronoun. As the translation shows neure buruak in (1) refers to the things related to the referent of the pro-dropped phrase. We could say that the reflexive as a subject does not refer to the whole but only to the part/aspect/property of the referent of its post-cedent. But I don't think this makes any harm to the anaphoric relation between the co-arguments. There can be the same partial interpretation also in 'normal' cases with reflexives as objects (cf. (2)). However it will be very hard to say that there is no anaphoric relation between the reflexive and its antecedent in (2): (2) John hit himself. I agree that not every example of 'myself' is reflexive. It can be an intensifier, for instance. But I don't think the subject uses of burua and tav- are the cases of intensifiers. They are arguments of the verb not adjuncts. I would be interested in your view on my judgements. Many thanks for your reaction. Sincerely, Nino Amiridze > I will remind you that some languages allow reflexives to appear as > subjects. For instance, > Basque (cf. (1), Xabier Artiagoitia (p.c.)), Nepali (Bickel&Yadava > 2000), Greek (Anagnostopoulou&Everaert 1999), Dargwa (Kibrik 1997), > Georgian (cf. (2))...: > > (1) neure buruak hilko nau > my head-DET-ERG it.kills.me aux > Lit.: Myself kills me > > "Something like my personality, the things I do and worry > about... that is going to kill me" I don't know about the other examples but, interesting as it is, the Basque one doesn't strike me as one with a reflexive subject. The "reflexive" ergative 'neure buruak' (lit. my head) here would seem to be very different from the reflexive (absolutive) neure burua in a reflexive sentence (cf. I'm going to kill myself; example (1) is also future, by the way). Much like the fact that not every example of 'myself' is a reflexive. -Jon From jlmendi at POSTA.UNIZAR.ES Wed May 29 11:00:43 2002 From: jlmendi at POSTA.UNIZAR.ES (Jose-Luis Mendivil) Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 13:00:43 +0200 Subject: reciprocals as subjects Message-ID: Dear Nino: Although far from being an expert in Basque, I agree with Jon Aske: I can't see the example in (1) as an instance of a 'reflexive subject': > > (1) neure buruak hilko nau > my head-DET-ERG it.kills.me aux > Lit.: Myself kills me Of course there is an anaphoric relation between subject and object, as in the following Spanish examples: (2) Me golpeo a mi mismo (I) hit myself (3) Yo mismo me golpeo I myself hit(me) In (2) we have a pro-dropped nominative subject (yo) and a dative reflexive, but in (3), with the same propositional meaning, we have not a subject reflexive but a nominative argument subject with an intensifier 'myself' and a pro-dropped (co-referential with the clitic 'me', as in (2)) dative object. In spite of that, in (3) the reflexive is the object, not the subject. Best regards, Jose-Luis Mendivil. From diessel at EVA.MPG.DE Wed May 29 16:03:50 2002 From: diessel at EVA.MPG.DE (Holger Diessel) Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 18:03:50 +0200 Subject: Doctoral fellowship in linguistics Message-ID: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology Doctoral fellowship in linguistics The Department of Linguistics of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology (Leipzig) seeks candidates for four doctoral fellowships in linguistics. The fellowships are for two years, with the possibility of one or two six-month extensions. The Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology studies human diversity and human origins in a multidisciplinary perspective. The contribution of linguistics to this goal lies in the study of the history and prehistory of languages (and peoples) around the world (especially non-European languages), as well as the current diversity of human languages (linguistic fieldwork on little-described and endangered languages and language typology). The Department of Linguistics also collaborates with the Department of Evolutionary Genetics to compare the evidence from both fields for the prehistory of human populations. More information on the department and its research projects is available on the institute's website (see below). The fellows should already have an MA in Linguistics or an equivalent qualification, and be either registered or qualified to register in a recognized doctoral program at a university or equivalent degree-awarding institution. The doctoral fellows are expected to propose a thesis/dissertation research topic that fits into the department's current foci. Regular participation in the department's talks, seminars and workshops is expected. Except for approved absences (e.g. fieldwork, conferences, vacation), the place of work is Leipzig. The fellowships are available from 1 September 2002, but a later starting date may be negotiated. Good knowledge of English is required. Applicants are requested to send a C.V., statement of research interests, two letters of recommendation, and a sample of written work on a relevant topic to: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology Personnel Administration Prof. Dr. Bernard Comrie - Doctoral fellow position - Inselstrasse 22 D-01403 Leipzig Germany fax: +49 341 99 52 119 e_mail: comrie at eva.mpg.de Deadline for receipt of applications: 30 June 2002 The Institute's URL is: http://www.eva.mpg.de/ From llshuang at READING.AC.UK Thu May 30 12:34:22 2002 From: llshuang at READING.AC.UK (Yan Huang) Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 13:34:22 +0100 Subject: reciprocals as subjects In-Reply-To: <609113EFF2AD824C9C823F0DFF3AA9AF01C0C604@tyger.let.uu.nl> Message-ID: Dear Nino - Occasionally reciprocals can occur in the subject position in Chinese. See my 'The syntax and pragmatics of anaphora' (Cambridge UP 1994) p 277 (vi) for an example. Also my new book 'Aanaphora: a cross-linguistic study' (Oxford UP 2000) might be of interest to you. Thanks. From Nino.Amiridze at LET.UU.NL Thu May 30 21:52:27 2002 From: Nino.Amiridze at LET.UU.NL (Amiridze, Nino) Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 23:52:27 +0200 Subject: reciprocals as subjects Message-ID: Dear Jose-Luis Mendivil, thank you so much for your message and the Spanish sentences. They are an excellent example how misleading can the form be: >(2) Me golpeo a mi mismo > (I) hit myself >(3) Yo mismo me golpeo > I myself hit(me) Spanish is like many other languages having reflexives and intensifiers of the same form. So we have to be careful when discussing the subject status of 'mismo', as I understood, in (3). But I do not see how Spanish is related to the Basque case where the phrase 'bere burua' is a subject argument (cf. (1)). The head of the phrase 'burua' is marked by ERG. And I think (please correct me if I am mistaken) reflexives do not resemble intensifiers in Basque. So there is no way to consider 'bere buruak' in (1) as an intensifier. It is a reflexive phrase and it is an argument of the verb unlike the Spanish intensifier in (3) being an adjunct: > (1) neure buruak hilko nau > my head-DET-ERG it.kills.me aux > Lit.: Myself kills me Basque looks very much like Georgian not only by having a grammaticalized body-part for "head" for reflexives but also by allowing the reflexives to appear as subjects (cf. (7)). Georgian is a very transparent case since there reflexives and intensifiers are distinct by form (although both originating from the same body-part tav- "head"). So there is absolutely no way to mix reflexives and intensifiers by form in Georgian as it is possible for instance, in English or Spanish. As example (4) and its pro-dropped version in (5) make it clear in Georgian it is ungrammatical to have a reflexive instead of the intensifier: (4) tavad / *[tavis-i tav-i] p'rezident'-i daesc'ro shexvedra-s INTENSIFIER / REFLEXIVE president-NOM he.attended.it meeting-DAT "The president himself attended the meeting" (5) tavad / *[tavis-i tav-i] daesc'ro shexvedra-s INTENSIFIER / REFLEXIVE he.attended.it meeting-DAT "He himself attended the meeting" Just like it is ungrammatical to have an intensifier instead of the reflexive (cf. (6)): (6) p'rezident'-ma ixsna tavis-i tav-i / *tavad president-ERG he.saved.him REFLEXIVE/INTENSIFIER "The president saved himself" There is no way to consider the reflexive phrase as an intensifier either in (7): (7) [tavis-ma tav-ma]/ *tavad ixsna p'rezident'-i [REFLEXIVE(ERG)] / INTENSIFIER he.saved.him president-NOM Lit: Himself saved the president "Something related to the president saved him" The reflexive in (7) is a subject argument of the verb just like the phrase "tavis-ma mcvel-ma" in (8): (8) [tavis-ma mcvel-ma] ixsna p'rezident'-i self's-ERG bodyguard-ERG he.saved.him president-NOM Lit: His.own bodyguard saved the president "The president was saved by his own bodyguard" If we try to substitute the intensifier for the reflexive in (7) we get a different sentence (compare the translations of (7) and (9)): (9) tavad ixsna p'rezident'-i INTENSIFIER he.saved.him president-NOM "(He) himself saved the president" The reflexive phrase 'tavis-ma tav-ma' in (7) is in an anaphoric relation with the object of the verb - prezident-i. While the intensifier 'tavad' in (9) is an adjunct to the pro-dropped pronominal serving as a subject of the verb: (9') tavad man ixsna p'rezident'-i INTENSIFIER he(ERG) he.saved.him president-NOM "He himself saved the president" Therefore, it is not possible to consider the subject uses of reflexives as intensifiers in Georgian and thus put them away as not truely reflexive. Anyway this will not help us with the subject uses of reciprocals where it is very hard to find some other label for the reciprocals for explaning their behaviour (cf. (10) or the sentence from my very first message given here as (11)): (10) ertmanet-i gvaopcebs chven RECIPROCAL-NOM it.surprises.us we(DAT) Lit.: Each other surprise us "We are surprised by something related to each other" (11) ertmanet-i k'lavt ivane-s da meri-s each.other-nom it.kills.them John-dat and Mary-dat Lit.: Each other kill John and Mary "Something related to each other makes John and Mary suffer" Thank you. Sincerely, nino amiridze Jose-Luis Mendivil [SMTP:jlmendi at POSTA.UNIZAR.ES] -----Original Message----- From: Jose-Luis Mendivil To: FUNKNET at LISTSERV.RICE.EDU Sent: 5/29/2002 1:00 PM Subject: Re: reciprocals as subjects Dear Nino: Although far from being an expert in Basque, I agree with Jon Aske: I can't see the example in (1) as an instance of a 'reflexive subject': > > (1) neure buruak hilko nau > my head-DET-ERG it.kills.me aux > Lit.: Myself kills me Of course there is an anaphoric relation between subject and object, as in the following Spanish examples: (2) Me golpeo a mi mismo (I) hit myself (3) Yo mismo me golpeo I myself hit(me) In (2) we have a pro-dropped nominative subject (yo) and a dative reflexive, but in (3), with the same propositional meaning, we have not a subject reflexive but a nominative argument subject with an intensifier 'myself' and a pro-dropped (co-referential with the clitic 'me', as in (2)) dative object. In spite of that, in (3) the reflexive is the object, not the subject. Best regards, Jose-Luis Mendivil. From Nino.Amiridze at LET.UU.NL Thu May 30 22:52:27 2002 From: Nino.Amiridze at LET.UU.NL (Amiridze, Nino) Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 00:52:27 +0200 Subject: reciprocals as subjects Message-ID: Dear Yan Huang, thank you for your message and for the reference. I will check the example. Sincerely, Nino Amiridze Dear Nino - Occasionally reciprocals can occur in the subject position in Chinese. See my 'The syntax and pragmatics of anaphora' (Cambridge UP 1994) p 277 (vi) for an example. Also my new book 'Aanaphora: a cross-linguistic study' (Oxford UP 2000) might be of interest to you. Thanks. From stefan.grondelaers at ARTS.KULEUVEN.AC.BE Fri May 31 07:55:47 2002 From: stefan.grondelaers at ARTS.KULEUVEN.AC.BE (Stefan Grondelaers) Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 09:55:47 +0200 Subject: Sociolexicology Abstracts Reminder Message-ID: We would like to remind all interested linguists that abstracts for the symposium MEASURING LEXICAL VARIATION AND CHANGE A Symposium on Quantitative Sociolexicology University of Leuven, Belgium October 24-25, 2002 http://wwwling.arts.kuleuven.ac.be/sociolex/ are expected by June 1. Please send your submissions (or any queries you may have) to: sociolex at listserv.cc.kuleuven.ac.be -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jlmendi at POSTA.UNIZAR.ES Fri May 31 12:26:07 2002 From: jlmendi at POSTA.UNIZAR.ES (Jose-Luis Mendivil) Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 14:26:07 +0200 Subject: reciprocals as subjects In-Reply-To: <609113EFF2AD824C9C823F0DFF3AA9AF01C0C624@tyger.let.uu.nl> Message-ID: Dear Nino, thank you very much for your patient and detailed explanation. I see now what you mean. I haven't anything to add but that you have convinced me that these reflexives are subjects. Best regards, Jose-Luis. >Dear Jose-Luis Mendivil, > >thank you so much for your message and the Spanish sentences. They are >an excellent example how misleading can the form be: > >>(2) Me golpeo a mi mismo >> (I) hit myself >>(3) Yo mismo me golpeo >> I myself hit(me) > >Spanish is like many other languages having reflexives and intensifiers >of the same form. So we have to be careful when discussing the subject >status of 'mismo', as I understood, in (3). > >But I do not see how Spanish is related to the Basque case where the >phrase 'bere burua' is a subject argument (cf. (1)). The head of the >phrase 'burua' is marked by ERG. And I think (please correct me if I am >mistaken) reflexives do not resemble intensifiers in Basque. So there is >no way to consider 'bere buruak' in (1) as an intensifier. It is a >reflexive phrase and it is an argument of the verb unlike the Spanish >intensifier in (3) being an adjunct: > >> (1) neure buruak hilko nau >> my head-DET-ERG it.kills.me aux >> Lit.: Myself kills me > >Basque looks very much like Georgian not only by having a >grammaticalized body-part for "head" for reflexives but also by allowing >the reflexives to appear as subjects (cf. (7)). > >Georgian is a very transparent case since there reflexives and >intensifiers are distinct by form (although both originating from the >same body-part tav- "head"). So there is absolutely no way to mix >reflexives and intensifiers by form in Georgian as it is possible for >instance, in English or Spanish. > >As example (4) and its pro-dropped version in (5) make it clear in >Georgian it is ungrammatical to have a reflexive instead of the >intensifier: > >(4) tavad / *[tavis-i tav-i] p'rezident'-i daesc'ro shexvedra-s > INTENSIFIER / REFLEXIVE president-NOM he.attended.it meeting-DAT > "The president himself attended the meeting" > >(5) tavad / *[tavis-i tav-i] daesc'ro shexvedra-s > INTENSIFIER / REFLEXIVE he.attended.it meeting-DAT > "He himself attended the meeting" > >Just like it is ungrammatical to have an intensifier instead of the >reflexive (cf. (6)): > >(6) p'rezident'-ma ixsna tavis-i tav-i / *tavad > president-ERG he.saved.him REFLEXIVE/INTENSIFIER > "The president saved himself" > >There is no way to consider the reflexive phrase as an intensifier >either in (7): > >(7) [tavis-ma tav-ma]/ *tavad ixsna p'rezident'-i > [REFLEXIVE(ERG)] / INTENSIFIER he.saved.him president-NOM > Lit: Himself saved the president > "Something related to the president saved him" > >The reflexive in (7) is a subject argument of the verb just like the >phrase "tavis-ma mcvel-ma" in (8): >(8) [tavis-ma mcvel-ma] ixsna p'rezident'-i > self's-ERG bodyguard-ERG he.saved.him president-NOM > Lit: His.own bodyguard saved the president > "The president was saved by his own bodyguard" > >If we try to substitute the intensifier for the reflexive in (7) we get >a different sentence (compare the translations of (7) and (9)): > >(9) tavad ixsna p'rezident'-i > INTENSIFIER he.saved.him president-NOM > "(He) himself saved the president" > >The reflexive phrase 'tavis-ma tav-ma' in (7) is in an anaphoric >relation with the object of the verb - prezident-i. While the >intensifier 'tavad' in (9) is an adjunct to the pro-dropped pronominal >serving as a subject of the verb: > >(9') tavad man ixsna p'rezident'-i > INTENSIFIER he(ERG) he.saved.him president-NOM > "He himself saved the president" > >Therefore, it is not possible to consider the subject uses of reflexives >as intensifiers in Georgian and thus put them away as not truely >reflexive. Anyway this will not help us with the subject uses of >reciprocals where it is very hard to find some other label for the >reciprocals for explaning their behaviour (cf. (10) or the sentence >from my very first message given here as (11)): > >(10) ertmanet-i gvaopcebs chven > RECIPROCAL-NOM it.surprises.us we(DAT) > Lit.: Each other surprise us > "We are surprised by something related to each other" > >(11) ertmanet-i k'lavt ivane-s da meri-s > each.other-nom it.kills.them John-dat and Mary-dat > Lit.: Each other kill John and Mary > "Something related to each other makes John and Mary suffer" > >Thank you. > >Sincerely, > >nino amiridze