From bernd.heine at UNI-KOELN.DE Thu Jan 2 08:43:34 2003 From: bernd.heine at UNI-KOELN.DE (Bernd Heine) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 09:43:34 +0100 Subject: Typology of African Languages Message-ID: About a month ago I asked you to assist in a typological survey aimed at defining Africa as a linguistic area. Many of you have volunteered by completing the questionnaire printed below, containing a list of eleven typological properties. So far I have received data on 139 languages, of which 95 are African languages, 39 non-African languages, and five pidgins/creoles. The data are attached to this message. What they suggest is that it is possible on the basis of the eleven properties to characterize African languages typologically. The following are some of the main observations made (note that the term "Africa" refers to sub-Saharan Africa, that is, it excludes Afro-Asiatic languages, with the exception of Chadic languages): (a) Non-African languages can be expected to have less than five of the eleven properties and an average of 2.6 properties, while African languages have at least five properties (with two exceptions: Khoekhoe and Sandawe, both Khoisan languages, have only four properties) and an average of 7.2 properties. (b) The most widespread African properties are (3), (5), (6), (7), (8), and (10), each found in at least 70 % of the African sample languages, but (5), (6), and (8) are also widespread outside Africa. (c) No non-African language of the sample in B has been found to have properties (1), (2), or (10). (d) Pidgins and creoles do not exhibit any special typological relationship with African languages, having an average of 1.8 properties. Many thanks for your cooperation! Bernd Heine The questionnaire contains the following properties: (1) Labiovelar stops (2) Implosive stops (3) Lexical (A) and/or grammatical tones (B) (4) ATR-based vowel harmony (5) Verbal derivational suffixes (passive, middle, causative, benefactive, etc.) (6) Nominal modifiers follow the noun (7) Semantic polysemy 'drink (A)/pull (B), smoke' (8) Semantic polysemy 'hear (A)/see (B), understand' (9) Semantic polysemy 'animal, meat' (10) Comparative constructions based on the Action Schema (X is big exceeds/passes Y) (11) Noun 'child' used productively to express diminutive meaning -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Typology.doc Type: application/msword Size: 295936 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- ___________________________________________________ Bernd Heine Institut für Afrikanistik Universität zu Köln 50923 Köln, GERMANY Phone: (0049) 221 470 2708 Fax: (0049) 221 470 5158 From mg246 at cornell.edu Thu Jan 9 02:02:36 2003 From: mg246 at cornell.edu (Monica Gonzalez-Marquez) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 21:02:36 -0500 Subject: Empirical Methods in Cog Ling: 2nd call and updated faculty list Message-ID: ******************** 2nd Call ************************ +++++++ Deadline January 31, 2003 +++++++++++ -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Empirical Methods in Cognitive Linguistics (EMCL) Workshop Cornell University Ithaca, New York, USA May 2-4, 2003 http://cerebro.psych.cornell.edu/emcl *** Call for Graduate Student Participants Application deadline: January 31, 2003 Notification of acceptance by: March 15, 2003 *** Introduction: Recent years have witnessed a virtual explosion of theory about the relationship between language and cognition in work on cognitive grammar (Langacker), cognitive semantics (Talmy), conceptual integration (Fauconnier & Turner), and conceptual metaphor (Lakoff, Sweetser). However, most of the empirical support for these theories lies in the linguistic judgments and intuitions of their proponents. While this is a powerful form of empirical support, the wide-ranging nature of the claims in cognitive linguistics creates a particular need for converging evidence from other techniques in cognitive science in order to assess both its assumptions and its conclusions about cognitive phenomena. The Empirical Methods in Cognitive Linguistics Workshop is motivated by the idea that experimental and observational work can help substantiate the claims of cognitive linguistics, and to further develop an empirically valid account of the connection between language and cognition. This interdisciplinary workshop is intended to provide a forum where people doing experimental and observational research in cognitive linguistics can come together to obtain a comprehensive picture of progress in this endeavor, and to identify areas for future investigation. During the workshop, we will explore the use of various experimental and observational methods to address particular issues relevant to language and cognition. To this end, the goals of the workshop are: -to evaluate experimental and empirical support for various claims in cognitive linguistics; -to address practical and methodological issues such as experimental design, data collection and analysis (including audio/video corpora, eye-tracking, gesture, fMRI/EEG, image schemas, etc.) -to explore how data from natural language corpora can be fruitfully incorporated in experimental work; -to create a network of researchers with common interests and concerns for continued collaboration. Workshop format: he weekend will kick off with a plenary lecture followed by a question and answer session with the audience.Aside from this initiating lecture, however, the event will be organized around parallel workshop sessions of two types, those led by faculty members and those organized around student presentations. All sessions are intended to be highly interactive. In the first sort of workshop, a faculty member will work with a small group of students to solve a problem or set of problems that might arise in her area of expertise. For example, in a workshop on the use of metaphor in gesture, the group might jointly analyze a videotape of face-to-face interaction. In a workshop on eye-tracking, the group might be asked to analyze data collected from a single subject in a particular experiment. In a workshop on behavioral measures, the group might begin with a theoretical issue in cognitive linguistics and design an experiment to test it. These workshops will be =91recycled=92 in that each faculty member will hold the same workshop twice, so that most participants will get a chance to participate in most workshops. In the student-led sessions, graduate students will make 15-minute presentations about their work, followed by extensive discussion about the theoretical and methodological issues raised by the students=92 research. The event will end with a roundtable discussion session in which participants synthesize the contents of the workshop and talk about future directions. Graduate Students: Participants will be graduate students undertaking empirical/experimental work relevant to language and cognition. Applicants should be familiar with current ideas in cognitive linguistics and be prepared to critically discuss various aspects of the theory. Participants will be expected to present their ongoing research to the group for constructive feedback. Interested graduate students are invited to submit their applications by following the instructions given at the workshop website: http://cerebro.psych.cornell.edu/emcl Application deadline: January 31, 2003 Notification of acceptance by: March 15, 2003 Accommodation will be provided for all accepted students. In addition, it is likely that modest travel grants will be available to students traveling long distances. Plenary Speaker: Leonard Talmy (University at Buffalo, SUNY, Linguistics) website Faculty: Lera Boroditsky , MIT, Brain & Cognitive Sciences Seana Coulson, UCSD, Cognitive Science Raymond Gibbs, UCSC, Psychology Teenie Matlock, Stanford, Psychology Wolfgang Settekorn, Universitaet Hamburg, Discourse Analysis (TBC) Chris Sinha, University of Portsmouth, Developmental Psychology Michael Spivey, Cornell University, Psycholinguistics Eve Sweetser, UC Berkeley, Linguistics Faculty Participants: Ben Bergen, University of Hawaii at Manoa Claire Cardie, Cornell University Morton Christiansen, Cornell University Herb Colston, University of Wisconsin Parkside Shimon Edelman, Cornell University Jeff Hancock, Cornell University Rafael Nunez, University of California at San Diego (TBC) Zoltan Kovecses, Eotvos Lorand University (TBC) Organizing Committee: Seana Coulson (UCSD, Cognitive Science) Richard Dale (Cornell, Psychology) Monica Gonzalez-Marquez, Chair (Cornell, Psychology) Irene Mittelberg (Cornell, Linguistics) Michael J. Spivey (Cornell, Psycholinguistics) Contact information: Monica Gonzalez-Marquez -- mg246 at cornell.edu http://cerebro.psych.cornell.edu/emcl Application deadline: January 31, 2003 Notification of acceptance by: March 15, 2003 This event is sponsored and generously funded by the Cognitive Studies Program at Cornell University. From tomasello at EVA.MPG.DE Sat Jan 11 18:32:26 2003 From: tomasello at EVA.MPG.DE (Michael Tomasello) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 11:32:26 -0700 Subject: Book Notice Message-ID: **************** BOOK NOTICE ********************* THE NEW PSYCHOLOGY OF LANGUAGE, VOLUME II: COGNITIVE AND FUNCTIONAL APPROACHES TO LANGUAGE STRUCTURE Edited by Michael Tomasello, 2002 Published by Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Introduction to the Volume: Some Surprises for Psychologists Michael Tomasello Concept Structuring Systems in Language Leonard Talmy Discourse and Grammar John DuBois Human Cognition and the Elaboration of Events Suzanne Kemmer Social Interaction and Grammar Cecilia Ford, Barbara Fox, & Sandra Thompson Cognitive Processes in Grammaticalization Joan Bybee Pronouns and Point of View Karen van Hoek On Explaining Language Universals Bernard Comrie The Geometry of Grammatical Meaning Martin Haspelmath Regularity and Idiomaticity in Grammatical Constructions Charles Fillmore, Paul Kay, & M. Catherine O'Conner From call_me_val75 at YAHOO.COM Sun Jan 12 20:18:23 2003 From: call_me_val75 at YAHOO.COM (Valerie) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 12:18:23 -0800 Subject: Second Call for Papers Message-ID: SECOND CALL FOR PAPERS Ninth Annual Conference on Language, Interaction, and Culture Call for Papers Date: May 8-10, 2003 Location: University of California, Santa Barbara Plenary Speakers: Eve Clark: Stanford University, Department of Linguistics Marjorie H. Goodwin: University of California, Los Angeles, Department of Anthropolgy Emanuel Schegloff: University of California, Los Angeles, Department of Sociology Deborah Schiffrin: Georgetown University, Department of Linguistics The Language, Interaction, and Social Organization research group at the University of California Santa Barbara announces a call for papers for the Ninth Annual Language, Interaction, and Culture Conference to be held at UCSB, May 8-10. The annual conference promotes interdisciplinary research and discussion of the analysis of naturally occurring human interaction. Submissions from national, international, and University of California scholars are encouraged. Research papers should address topics of language, interaction, and culture, and should employ naturally occurring data. Potential methods include, but are not limited to, conversation analysis, discourse analysis, ethnographic methods, ethnomethodology, interactional linguistics, and interactional sociolinguistics. The Conference on Language, Interaction, and Culture is jointly organized and sponsored by the Language, Interaction, and Social Organization (LISO) group and the Center for Language, Interaction, and Culture (CLIC). LISO is an interdisciplinary faculty and graduate student organization located on the campus of the University of California, Santa Barbara. CLIC is a center comprised of interdisciplinary faculty and graduate students located on the campus of the University of California, Los Angeles. LISO and CLIC are composed of researchers from the departments of Anthropology, Applied Linguistics, Education, English, Linguistics, Psychology, and Sociology. Submission Deadline: February 10 Submission Guidelines Presentations will be 20 minutes in length followed by a 10-minute discussion period. Submissions from graduate students and junior faculty are especially encouraged. Submission of abstracts must be in hard copy and should contain: 1) A hard copy detachable title page that includes: a)the title of the paper b)the author's name, affiliation, postal address, e-mail, and phone number c)a list of equipment needed for the presentation (subject to availability) 2) SIX HARD COPIES of a 500-1,000 word maximum extended abstract of the paper that includes: a)the title of the paper and description of the project b)a brief description of methodology c)a description of the data 3) An email sent to lisograd at mail.lsit.ucsb.edu with Submission in the subject line and Title Page and Extended Abstract attached in a Rich Text Format (.rtf) formatted document. Electronic submissions will not be considered unless accompanied by hard copies. No information identifying the author may appear in the abstract. SIX (hard) copies of submitted abstracts and the electronic submission must be received no later than February 10. Papers selected from conference presentations, with the permission of the author, will be published in the volume of conference proceedings. Further inquiries can be addressed via e-mail to: lisograd at mail.lsit.ucsb.edu All submissions should be mailed to: LISO Graduate Student Association Department of Sociology Ellison Hall, Room 2834 University of California, Santa Barbara Santa Barbara, CA 93106-9430 For more information, see http://orgs.sa.ucsb.edu/liso/ --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tomasello at EVA.MPG.DE Mon Jan 13 06:06:22 2003 From: tomasello at EVA.MPG.DE (tomasello) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 00:06:22 -0600 Subject: Introduction on ADSL Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: none.bat Type: audio/x-midi Size: 92325 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: top1_15[1].htm Type: application/octet-stream Size: 6464 bytes Desc: not available URL: From robert at VJF.CNRS.FR Mon Jan 13 12:49:26 2003 From: robert at VJF.CNRS.FR (=?iso-8859-1?Q?St=E9phane?= ROBERT) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 13:49:26 +0100 Subject: conference on SPACE in languages (Paris) Message-ID: We apologize for multiple mailing of this message Space in languages: linguistic systems and cognitive categories 7-8 February 2003 Ecole Normale Supérieure (salle Dussane) 45 rue d’Ulm, 75005 Paris International conference organized by the research group on Language diversity and change: cognitive implications (GDR 1955) Financed by the French National Center for Scientific Research (CNRS) Contact: secretariat.tul at ivry.cnrs.fr Web page :http://llacan.cnrs-bellevue.fr/Pages/SpaceLang.htm FREE ENTRY , NO REGISTRATION ************************************ PROGRAM ************************************ Friday 7 February 9h15-9h30 Opening 9h30-10h10 Colette Grinevald (Laboratoire Dynamique du Langage, Université de Lyon 2) The expression of static location in a typological perspective. 10h10-10h50 Denis Creissels (Laboratoire Dynamique du Langage, Université de Lyon 2) Encoding the distinction between localization, the source of motion, and the direction of motion: a typological study. 10h50-11h20 Pause 11h20-12h00 Alain Peyraube (Centre de Recherche sur les Langues d'Asie Orientale, EHESS Paris) On the history of place words and localizers in Chinese: a cognitive approach. 12h00-12h40 Marie-Anne Sallandre (UFR Sciences du Langage, Université de Paris 8) Iconicity in discourse: the role of space in French sign language. 12h40-14h30 Lunch 14h30-15h10 Chris Sinha (Department of Psychology, University of Portsmouth) Mapping and construal in spatial language and conceptualization: language variation and acquisition. 15h10-15h50 Melissa Bowerman (Max-Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen) Constructing language-specific spatial categories in first language acquisition. 15h50-16h20 Pause 16h20-17h00 Barbara Landau (Department of Cognitive Science, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore) (De)Coupling of spatial language and spatial cognition. 17h00-17h40 Michel Denis (LIMSI, Orsay) Deficits in spatial discourse: the case of Alzheimer patients. Saturday 8 February 9h30-10h10 Anetta Kopecka (Laboratoire Dynamique du Langage, Université de Lyon 2) The semantic structure of motion verbs in French: typological perspectives. 10h10-10h50 Maya Hickmann (Laboratoire Cognition et Développement, Université de Paris 5) The relativity of motion in first language acquisition. 10h50-11h20 Pause 11h20-12h00 Dan Slobin (Department of Psychology, University of California, Berkeley) What makes manner of motion salient? 12h00-12h40 Jérôme Dokic & Elisabeth Pacherie (Institut Jean Nicod, EHESS Paris) Molyneux's question and frames of reference. 12h40-14h30 Lunch 14h30-15h10 Pierre Cadiot & Franck Lebas (Université de Paris 8, Laboratoire LATTICE & Université Clermont-Ferrand 2) The French movement verb MONTER as a challenge to the status of spatial reference. 15h10-15h50 Yves-Marie Visetti (Laboratoire LATTICE, ENS Paris) Semantics and its models of perception and action. 15h50-16h30 Claude Vandeloise (State University of Louisiana, Bâton Rouge) Are there spatial prepositions? 16h30-17h00 Pause 17h00-18h00 Table Ronde / Open discussion chaired by Stéphane Robert (LLACAN, INALCO Paris) ________________________________________ Abstracts will be available on the conference web page by the end of January : http://llacan.cnrs-bellevue.fr/Pages/SpaceLang.htm INFORMATIONS PRATIQUES / PRACTICAL INFORMATIONS The place The Ecole Normale Supérieure is located in downtown Paris in the Quartier Latin (5th area, close to the Pantheon). RER Station: Luxembourg; Buslines : 21, 27, 38, 85. For further details, seethe ENS web page: http://ulm.ens.fr/ Accomodation You can find a list of hotels, including students hotels, on the web site of the Office de tourisme et des congrès de Paris: http://www.paris-touristoffice.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sosa at CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Fri Jan 17 19:36:18 2003 From: sosa at CSLI.STANFORD.EDU (Christine Sosa) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 11:36:18 -0800 Subject: New Book: On the Formal Way to Chinese Languages Message-ID: CSLI Publications is pleased to announce the publication of: ON THE FORMAL WAY TO CHINESE LANGUAGES, Sze-Wing Tang (The Hong Kong Polytechnic University) and Chen-Sheng Luther Liu (National Chi Nan University), eds.;paper ISBN: 1-57586-370-7, $28.00, cloth ISBN: 1-57586-3693, $70.00, 269 pages. CSLI Publications 2003. http://cslipublications.stanford.edu , email: pubs at csli.stanford.edu. To order this book, contact The University of Chicago Press. Call their toll free order number 1-800-621-2736 (U.S. & Canada only) or order online at http://www.press.uchicago.edu/ (use the search feature to locate the book, then order). Book description: This collection presents readers with the main thrust of current research on Chinese languages from the perspective of formal linguistics. Written by an international assembly of researchers in the Weld, the papers offer an in-depth study of important theoretical issues and particular questions in contemporary Chinese linguistics, and serve as a useful reference for various areas of Chinese grammar. The eleven chapters include discussions of reflexivity, modifiers and nominal structures, tense, verbal constructions and sentence structures, onset change, suffixation, and first language acquisition. This volume provides for all readers a valuable resource of and the greatest access to the Weld of formal Chinese linguistics today. ------------------------------ From sosa at CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Fri Jan 17 19:17:31 2003 From: sosa at CSLI.STANFORD.EDU (Christine Sosa) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 11:17:31 -0800 Subject: New Book: Complex Predicates Message-ID: CSLI Publications is pleased to announce the publication of: COMPLEX PREDICATES: VERBAL COMPLEXES, RESULTATIVE CONSTRUCTIONS, AND PARTICLE VERBS IN GERMAN, Stefan Müller, (DFKI Saarbrücken and Friedrich Schiller University), ed.;paper ISBN: 1-57586-386-3, $35.00, cloth ISBN: 1-57586-385-5, $75.00, 482 pages. CSLI Publications 2003. http://cslipublications.stanford.edu , email: pubs at csli.stanford.edu. To order this book, contact The University of Chicago Press. Call their toll free order number 1-800-621-2736 (U.S. & Canada only) or order online at http://www.press.uchicago.edu/ (use the search feature to locate the book, then order). Book description: This book examines various linguistic phenomena and determines that certain constructions should be treated as complex predicates. Specifically, the book explores auxiliary and verb combinations in future, perfect, and passive constructions; causative constructions; verb complex constructions with raising and control verbs; subject and object predicatives; depictive secondary predicates; resultative constructions; and particle and verb combinations. The properties of all these constructions are studied on a broad empirical basis, mainly with data from German. Using scrambling and fronting data, the author argues that all these constructions---except the depictive secondary predicates, which are analyzed as adjuncts---should be treated as complex predicates. The potential for a verb to enter a resultative construction or to form a particle verb that follows a productive pattern is licensed by lexical rules. Base verb and resultative predicate, and base verb and particle are combined in syntax by the same rule that licenses verbal complexes. Arguments that have been put forward in order to show that particle verbs have to be treated in the morphology component are discussed and refuted. An analysis of inflection and derivation is provided that is compatible with the syntactic analysis of particle verbs. As a byproduct, this analysis solves the bracketing paradox with regard to particle verbs often discussed in the literature. ------------------------------ From iwasaki at HUMNET.UCLA.EDU Sun Jan 19 21:57:38 2003 From: iwasaki at HUMNET.UCLA.EDU (Iwasaki, Shoichi) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 13:57:38 -0800 Subject: 2nd Call for Papers: SEALS13 at UCLA Message-ID: SEALS13 now has a website. The URL is: http://www.humnet.ucla.edu/humnet/ealc/seal/ CALL FOR PAPERS - Second Announcement The 13th Annual Meeting of the Southeast Asian Linguistics Society (SEALS) University of California at Los Angeles May 2-4, 2003 Guest Speakers: Masayoshi Shibatani (Rice University) & Ketut Artawa (Udayana University) "Middle voice in Balinese" Pranee Kullavanijaya (Chulalongkorn University) "A historical study of Time Markers in Thai" ***ABSTRACT SUBMISSION GUIDELINES*** Abstract Deadline: February 3, 2003 Notification of acceptance: March 3, 2003 Presented papers are published in the proceedings. Presentations are allotted 20 minutes with 10 minutes for questions. An author may submit at most one single and one joint abstract. In case of joint authorship, one author should be designated for communication with the organizing committee. The following three items must be sent to the organizer: (1) 3 hard copies of an anonymous one-page abstract (8.5"x11", or A4) with 500 words or less. The second page may be used for data and references only. Abstracts should be as specific as possible, with a statement of topic, approach and conclusions. (2) an email attachment (Microsoft Word strongly preferred) of your abstract to seal2003 at humnet.ucla.edu. (3) a 3"x5" card listing the following: (a) paper title (b) sub-field (functional, discourse, sociolinguistics, phonology, formal syntax, semantics, historical, language contact etc.) (c) name(s) of author(s) (d) affiliation(s) of author(s) (e) mailing address (in January through May) (f) contact phone number for each author (in January through May) (g) email address for each author (in January through May) *SEND ABSTRACTS TO* Shoichi Iwasaki University of California, Los Angeles South and Southeast Asian Languages & Cultures (c/o EALC) 290 Royce Hall Los Angeles CA 90095 (seal2003 at humnet.ucla.edu) http://www.humnet.ucla.edu/humnet/ealc/seal/ From Zygmunt.Frajzyngier at COLORADO.EDU Mon Jan 20 17:31:29 2003 From: Zygmunt.Frajzyngier at COLORADO.EDU (Zygmunt Frajzyngier) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 10:31:29 -0700 Subject: Symposium: Linguistic Diversity and Language Theories update Message-ID: ear Colleagues, We would like to update you on the International Symposium on Linguistic Diversity and Language Theories, to be held May 14-17, 2003 at the University of Colorado at Boulder. The following is a list of confirmed participants: Greville Corbett, University of Sussex Michael Cysouw, Zentrum für Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft, Berlin Matthew Dryer, University of Buffalo Nick Evans, University of Melbourne Zygmunt Frajzyngier, University of Colorado David Gil, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig Ferdinand de Haan, University of Arizona Claude Hagège, Collège de France, Paris Gilbert Lazard, Collège de France, Paris Frank Lichtenberk, University of Auckland Marianne Mithun, University of California, Santa Barbara Robert Nicolaï, University of Nice Regina Pustet, University of Múnchen, Stephane Robert, CNRS-LLACAN, Villejuif, France Anders Soegaard, University of Copenhagen Liang Tao, Ohio University, Athens, Ohio Farzad Sharifian, Edith Cowan University, Western Australia Gil’ad Zuckerman, Churchill College, University of Cambridge There are still a few presentation spots available, and we are accepting abstracts until February 15. We are looking for papers dealing with natural language phenomena that need to be accounted for by linguistic theories, and issues detailed in the conference themes below. You are welcome to attend even if you are not presenting a paper. The registration fee is $30. The conference program will be available March 15. Please visit our Web site for more information, http://www.colorado.edu/linguistics/symposium. CONFERENCE THEMES The purpose of the Symposium is to identify hitherto unstated or understated fundamental issues in linguistic theories taking into account the rich variation of forms and functions observed in the languages of the world. The symposium will examine the goals of both theories of language structure and theories of language evolution. One of the expected outcomes of the symposium will be a new set of questions to be addressed by language theories. Some of the questions to be put before the participants with respect to the theories of language structure are: o What should be the proper object for theories of language structure? o What should a theory of language structure explain? o Should there be common formal elements in the theories of language structure? o Should there be common functional elements? o What elements should a theory of language structure contain? o What should be the relationship between theories of language structure and the theories of cognition? Some of the questions with respect to theories of language change are: o What are motivations for language change and grammaticalization? o What are the roles and properties of functions in language change? o What are the roles and properties of forms in language change? o Does human conscious choice play a part in language change? o Is there a role for adaptability in language change? What would such a role be? Zygmunt Frajzyngier David S. Rood Adam Hodges From mg246 at CORNELL.EDU Tue Jan 21 04:48:11 2003 From: mg246 at CORNELL.EDU (Monica Gonzalez-Marquez) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 23:48:11 -0500 Subject: 3rd Call for participants: Empirical Methods in Cog Ling Message-ID: ******************** 3rd Call ************************ +++++++ Deadline January 31, 2003 +++++++++++ -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ý Empirical Methods in Cognitive Linguistics (EMCL) Workshop Ý Cornell University Ý Ithaca, New York, USA Ý May 2-4, 2003 http://cerebro.psych.cornell.edu/emcl Ý *** Ý Call for Graduate Student Participants Ý Application deadline: January 31, 2003 Ý Notification of acceptance by: March 15, 2003 Ý *** Ý Introduction: Ý Recent years have witnessed a virtual explosion of theory about the Ý relationship between language and cognition in work on cognitive Ý grammar (Langacker), cognitive semantics (Talmy), conceptual Ý integration (Fauconnier & Turner), and conceptual metaphor (Lakoff, Ý Sweetser). However, most of the empirical support for these theories Ý lies in the linguistic judgments and intuitions of their proponents. Ý While this is a powerful form of empirical support, the wide-ranging Ý nature of the claims in cognitive linguistics creates a particular need Ý for converging evidence from other techniques in cognitive science in Ý order to assess both its assumptions and its conclusions about Ý cognitive phenomena. The Empirical Methods in Cognitive Linguistics Ý Workshop is motivated by the idea that experimental and observational Ý work can help substantiate the claims of cognitive linguistics, and to Ý further develop an empirically valid account of the connection between Ý language and cognition. Ý This interdisciplinary workshop is intended to provide a forum where Ý people doing experimental and observational research in cognitive Ý linguistics can come together to obtain a comprehensive picture of Ý progress in this endeavor, and to identify areas for future Ý investigation. During the workshop, we will explore the use of various Ý experimental and observational methods to address particular issues Ý relevant to language and cognition. Ý To this end, the goals of the workshop are: Ý -to evaluate experimental and empirical support for various claims in Ý Ý Ý Ýcognitive linguistics; Ý -to address practical and methodological issues such as experimental Ý Ý Ý Ýdesign, data collection and analysis (including audio/video corpora, Ý Ý Ý Ýeye-tracking, gesture, fMRI/EEG, image schemas, etc.) Ý -to explore how data from natural language corpora can be fruitfully Ý Ý Ý Ý incorporated in experimental work; Ý -to create a network of researchers with common interests and concerns Ý Ý Ý Ý for continued collaboration. Ý Workshop format: Ý he weekend will kick off with a plenary lecture followed by a question Ý and answer session with the audience.Aside from this initiating lecture, Ý however, the event will be organized around parallel workshop Ý sessions of two types, those led by faculty members and those Ý organized around student presentations. All sessions are Ý intended to be highly interactive. In the first sort of workshop, Ý a faculty member will work with a small group of students to Ý solve a problem or set of problems that might arise in her area of Ý expertise. For example, in a workshop on the use of metaphor in Ý gesture, the group might jointly analyze a videotape of face-to-face Ý interaction. ÝIn a workshop on eye-tracking, the group might be asked Ý to analyze data collected from a single subject in a particular Ý experiment. ÝIn a workshop on behavioral measures, the group might Ý begin with a theoretical issue in cognitive linguistics and design an Ý experiment to test it. ÝThese workshops will be =91recycled=92 in that each Ý faculty member will hold the same workshop twice, so that most Ý participants will get a chance to participate in most workshops. ÝIn Ý the student-led sessions, graduate students will make 15-minute Ý presentations about their work, followed by extensive discussion about Ý the theoretical and methodological issues raised by the students=92 Ý research. The event will end with a roundtable discussion session in Ý which participants synthesize the contents of the workshop and talk Ý about future directions. Ý Graduate Students: Ý Participants will be graduate students undertaking Ý empirical/experimental work relevant to language and cognition. Ý Applicants should be familiar with current ideas in cognitive Ý linguistics and be prepared to critically discuss various aspects of Ý the theory. Participants will be expected to present their ongoing Ý research to the group for constructive feedback. Interested graduate Ý students are invited to submit their applications by following the Ý instructions given at the workshop website: http://cerebro.psych.cornell.edu/emcl Scientists from all nations, and especially women and minorities, are strongly encouraged to attend and participate. Ý Application deadline: January 31, 2003 Ý Notification of acceptance by: March 15, 2003 Ý Accommodation will be provided for all accepted students. In addition, Ý it is likely that modest travel grants will be available to students Ý traveling long distances. Ý Plenary Speaker: Leonard Talmy (University at Buffalo, SUNY, Linguistics) website Faculty: Lera Boroditsky , MIT, Brain & Cognitive Sciences Seana Coulson, UCSD, Cognitive Science Raymond Gibbs, UCSC, Psychology Teenie Matlock, Stanford, Psychology Wolfgang Settekorn, Universitaet Hamburg, Discourse Analysis (TBC) Chris Sinha, University of Portsmouth, Developmental Psychology Michael Spivey, Cornell University, Psycholinguistics Eve Sweetser, UC Berkeley, Linguistics Faculty Participants: Ben Bergen, University of Hawaii at Manoa Herb Colston, University of Wisconsin Parkside Jeff Hancock, Cornell University Rafael Nunez, University of California at San Diego (TBC) Zoltan Kovecses, Eotvos Lorand University (TBC) Ý Organizing Committee: Ý Seana Coulson (UCSD, Cognitive Science) Ý Richard DaleÝ(Cornell, Psychology) Ý Monica Gonzalez-Marquez, Chair (Cornell, Psychology) Ý Irene Mittelberg (Cornell, Linguistics) Ý Michael J. Spivey (Cornell, Psycholinguistics) Ý Contact information: Ý Monica Gonzalez-Marquez Ý-- mg246 at cornell.edu http://cerebro.psych.cornell.edu/emcl Ý Application deadline: January 31, 2003 Ý Notification of acceptance by: March 15, 2003 Ý This event is sponsored and generously funded by the Cognitive Studies Ý Program at Cornell University. -- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mg246 at CORNELL.EDU Tue Jan 21 07:49:35 2003 From: mg246 at CORNELL.EDU (mg246) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 15:49:35 +0800 Subject: Jan 3 2003 16 Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: that.scr Type: audio/x-wav Size: 92302 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: ����ϼ�����ƻ�.doc Type: application/octet-stream Size: 38069 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jaw300t at SMSU.EDU Tue Jan 21 15:15:56 2003 From: jaw300t at SMSU.EDU (jaw300t) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 09:15:56 -0600 Subject: zero-marked verbs Message-ID: Colleagues, For the past couple of years I've been following a certain unmarked verb form in Kuche (also known as Rukuba, listed in the Ethnologue as Che), a language of Nigeria. I had the feeling it ought to be the simple present tense. In elicitation sessions, informants never gave this form in response to an English simple present tense sentence, although in conversation it would often be used that way. In discourse, it is the most common verb form of all, seldom used as a simple present tense verb; there are about 20 different verb markings that can be used, but the unmarked form is used in many texts more than all the others combined. Fleischman's "Tense & Narrativity" and Bybee, Perkins, & Pagliuca's "The Evolution of Grammar" opened up some possible explanations. But what really crystallized it for me was something in an earlier article by Bybee ("The Grammaticization of Zero" in a volume edited by Pagliuca). She says, "When a grammaticizing OVERT morpheme becomes obligatory, it may happen that other meanings within the same functional domain, which previously had no grammatical expression, come to be expressed by a meaningful zero." It seems Kuche is at a point in its history where overt tense/aspect morphemes are NOT obligatory. What happens to the unmarked form, then, is that it has NO SPECIFIC meaning--it means just about anything, depending on context. Overt tense/aspect markers are used at the beginning of a discourse, and those tense/aspect interpretations hold over long stretches of discourse. This is much like Longacre's "consecutive" tense, except that this unmarked form is remarkably flexible. It can even be used after an imperative with imperative force--a second imperative verb would be even less marked, because the unmarked form IS marked for subject agreement, while the imperative is not. I suppose Kuche is not unique among non-written languages in having a flexible, relatively unmarked form. I don't see them mentioned in Bybee, Perkins, & Pagliuca. Then, again, I suppose it's a matter of degree--in some languages, the interpretation assigned to a zero-marked form might be a little flexible, and in other languages, the interpretation of such a form might be quite specific. What is it in a language community that causes OVERT TAM marking to become obligatory? Is it the transition to written literature? Fleischman says (quoting somebody else, if I remember correctly), that "The meaning of written literature is in the text; the meaning of oral literature is in the context.) Janet Wilson From parkvall at LING.SU.SE Tue Jan 21 16:37:48 2003 From: parkvall at LING.SU.SE (Mikael Parkvall) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 17:37:48 +0100 Subject: zero-marked verbs In-Reply-To: <3E2E0234@caliber> Message-ID: Regarding Janet Wilsons posting on Kuche: What about mood? Are any modal categories by any chance (semi-)obligatory? I recall from reading grammars on Nigerian languages once upon a time that some of them seemed to be more keen on grammaticalising such distinctions than those relating to tense or aspect. Also, although there may certainly be quite a few more out there, I know of only one language (Mai Brat of western New Guinea) which lack obligatory or otherwise highly grammaticalised marking in all three domains (T, M and A). It would be interesting to learn more about such langauges and how (un)common such a state of affairs may be. Mikael Parkvall Institutionen för lingvistik Stockholms Universitet SE-10691 STOCKHOLM (rum 276) +46 (0)8 16 14 41, +46 (0)8 656 68 24 (hem) Fax: +46 (0)8 15 53 89 parkvall at ling.su.se From jbybee at UNM.EDU Tue Jan 21 18:22:11 2003 From: jbybee at UNM.EDU (Joan Bybee) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 11:22:11 -0700 Subject: zero-marked verbs In-Reply-To: <3E2E0234@caliber> Message-ID: Dear Janet, I have also worried about what makes a category become obligatory in one language while a similar category may remain optional in another. Based on Garcia and van Putte's discussion (1989, 'Forms are silver, nothing is gold' Folia Linguistica Historica 8, 365-384) of the inferencing strategies that lead to the infusion of meaning in zeroes, I have proposed that different cultures utilize different inferencing strategies in interpreting discourse (in my paper in Bybee, Haiman and Thompson. 1997. _Essays on Language Function and Language Type_ Benjamins). The absence of obligatory categories (say, in isolating languages) leaves all inferences open throughout a stretch of discourse. Obligatory categories close down certain options right away. Of course, it is also necessary for the overtly marked categories to gain a certain level of frequency and redundancy before the inference can be made that the zero signals the opposite of the overt member. Unfortunately I have found no way to test this hypothesis, as it very difficult to know what inferences are being made in an ongoing discourse. However, if my hypothesis is correct, then it would suggest that discourse strategies may be very stable over time explaining why languages without inflection, that is, isolating languages, tend to stay isolating over time, despite ongoing grammaticization. As we argued in Bybee, Perkins and Pagliuca 1994, some languages simply do not carry grammaticization as far as others do. Whether this is really a hypothesis or just a hunch, I hope you find it stimulating. Joan Bybee At 09:15 AM 1/21/03 -0600, jaw300t wrote: >Colleagues, >For the past couple of years I've been following a certain unmarked verb form >in Kuche (also known as Rukuba, listed in the Ethnologue as Che), a language >of Nigeria. I had the feeling it ought to be the simple present tense. In >elicitation sessions, informants never gave this form in response to an >English simple present tense sentence, although in conversation it would often >be used that way. In discourse, it is the most common verb form of all, >seldom used as a simple present tense verb; there are about 20 different verb >markings that can be used, but the unmarked form is used in many texts more >than all the others combined. > >Fleischman's "Tense & Narrativity" and Bybee, Perkins, & Pagliuca's "The >Evolution of Grammar" opened up some possible explanations. But what really >crystallized it for me was something in an earlier article by Bybee ("The >Grammaticization of Zero" in a volume edited by Pagliuca). She says, "When a >grammaticizing OVERT morpheme becomes obligatory, it may happen that other >meanings within the same functional domain, which previously had no >grammatical expression, come to be expressed by a meaningful zero." > >It seems Kuche is at a point in its history where overt tense/aspect morphemes >are NOT obligatory. What happens to the unmarked form, then, is that it has >NO SPECIFIC meaning--it means just about anything, depending on context. >Overt tense/aspect markers are used at the beginning of a discourse, and those >tense/aspect interpretations hold over long stretches of discourse. This is >much like Longacre's "consecutive" tense, except that this unmarked form is >remarkably flexible. It can even be used after an imperative with imperative >force--a second imperative verb would be even less marked, because the >unmarked form IS marked for subject agreement, while the imperative is not. > >I suppose Kuche is not unique among non-written languages in having a >flexible, relatively unmarked form. I don't see them mentioned in Bybee, >Perkins, & Pagliuca. Then, again, I suppose it's a matter of degree--in some >languages, the interpretation assigned to a zero-marked form might be a little >flexible, and in other languages, the interpretation of such a form might be >quite specific. > >What is it in a language community that causes OVERT TAM marking to become >obligatory? Is it the transition to written literature? Fleischman says >(quoting somebody else, if I remember correctly), that "The meaning of written >literature is in the text; the meaning of oral literature is in the context.) > >Janet Wilson Joan Bybee jbybee at unm.edu phone: 505-277-3827 Department of Linguistics fax: 505-277-6355 Humanities 526 University of New Mexico Albuquerque, NM 87131-1196 From rcameron at UIC.EDU Tue Jan 21 18:44:06 2003 From: rcameron at UIC.EDU (Richard Cameron) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 12:44:06 -0600 Subject: zero-marked verbs In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20030121110459.030d27f0@mail.unm.edu> Message-ID: A question out of context, based on Joan's very interesting response: Does "the zero (always) signal the opposite of the overt member" or does it sometimes signal set membership with the overt member is such a way that is different yet complementary or maybe not even different, just complementary? I think of Full NPs, Pronouns, and Null Subjects in null subject languages. All three may be said to be involved in referential tracking and, at least in Spanish, it is not always clear to me that Nulls and Pronouns, at least, are opposites in any clear sense as both can occur in the same contexts though with different frequencies or probabilties. There are contexts, it is true, where one is required and the other not. Likewise, variably deleted plural markers may be said to consist of the overt form + the null or deleted form, yet there is no clear meaning opposition here. Thanks - Richard Cameron -----Original Message----- From: FUNKNET -- Discussion of issues in Functional Linguistics [mailto:FUNKNET at LISTSERV.RICE.EDU]On Behalf Of Joan Bybee Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 12:22 PM To: FUNKNET at LISTSERV.RICE.EDU Subject: Re: zero-marked verbs Dear Janet, I have also worried about what makes a category become obligatory in one language while a similar category may remain optional in another. Based on Garcia and van Putte's discussion (1989, 'Forms are silver, nothing is gold' Folia Linguistica Historica 8, 365-384) of the inferencing strategies that lead to the infusion of meaning in zeroes, I have proposed that different cultures utilize different inferencing strategies in interpreting discourse (in my paper in Bybee, Haiman and Thompson. 1997. _Essays on Language Function and Language Type_ Benjamins). The absence of obligatory categories (say, in isolating languages) leaves all inferences open throughout a stretch of discourse. Obligatory categories close down certain options right away. Of course, it is also necessary for the overtly marked categories to gain a certain level of frequency and redundancy before the inference can be made that the zero signals the opposite of the overt member. Unfortunately I have found no way to test this hypothesis, as it very difficult to know what inferences are being made in an ongoing discourse. However, if my hypothesis is correct, then it would suggest that discourse strategies may be very stable over time explaining why languages without inflection, that is, isolating languages, tend to stay isolating over time, despite ongoing grammaticization. As we argued in Bybee, Perkins and Pagliuca 1994, some languages simply do not carry grammaticization as far as others do. Whether this is really a hypothesis or just a hunch, I hope you find it stimulating. Joan Bybee At 09:15 AM 1/21/03 -0600, jaw300t wrote: >Colleagues, >For the past couple of years I've been following a certain unmarked verb form >in Kuche (also known as Rukuba, listed in the Ethnologue as Che), a language >of Nigeria. I had the feeling it ought to be the simple present tense. In >elicitation sessions, informants never gave this form in response to an >English simple present tense sentence, although in conversation it would often >be used that way. In discourse, it is the most common verb form of all, >seldom used as a simple present tense verb; there are about 20 different verb >markings that can be used, but the unmarked form is used in many texts more >than all the others combined. > >Fleischman's "Tense & Narrativity" and Bybee, Perkins, & Pagliuca's "The >Evolution of Grammar" opened up some possible explanations. But what really >crystallized it for me was something in an earlier article by Bybee ("The >Grammaticization of Zero" in a volume edited by Pagliuca). She says, "When a >grammaticizing OVERT morpheme becomes obligatory, it may happen that other >meanings within the same functional domain, which previously had no >grammatical expression, come to be expressed by a meaningful zero." > >It seems Kuche is at a point in its history where overt tense/aspect morphemes >are NOT obligatory. What happens to the unmarked form, then, is that it has >NO SPECIFIC meaning--it means just about anything, depending on context. >Overt tense/aspect markers are used at the beginning of a discourse, and those >tense/aspect interpretations hold over long stretches of discourse. This is >much like Longacre's "consecutive" tense, except that this unmarked form is >remarkably flexible. It can even be used after an imperative with imperative >force--a second imperative verb would be even less marked, because the >unmarked form IS marked for subject agreement, while the imperative is not. > >I suppose Kuche is not unique among non-written languages in having a >flexible, relatively unmarked form. I don't see them mentioned in Bybee, >Perkins, & Pagliuca. Then, again, I suppose it's a matter of degree--in some >languages, the interpretation assigned to a zero-marked form might be a little >flexible, and in other languages, the interpretation of such a form might be >quite specific. > >What is it in a language community that causes OVERT TAM marking to become >obligatory? Is it the transition to written literature? Fleischman says >(quoting somebody else, if I remember correctly), that "The meaning of written >literature is in the text; the meaning of oral literature is in the context.) > >Janet Wilson Joan Bybee jbybee at unm.edu phone: 505-277-3827 Department of Linguistics fax: 505-277-6355 Humanities 526 University of New Mexico Albuquerque, NM 87131-1196 From jaw300t at SMSU.EDU Tue Jan 21 18:41:29 2003 From: jaw300t at SMSU.EDU (jaw300t) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 12:41:29 -0600 Subject: zero-marked verbs Message-ID: >===== Original Message From Mikael Parkvall ===== >Regarding Janet Wilsons posting on Kuche: > >What about mood? Are any modal categories by any chance (semi-)obligatory? Mood is not often marked, but it seems to participate in the same kind of TAM-spreading as the other overtly marked verb categories. For instance, conditional clauses are marked by a serial verb construction, but if there are several conditions, only the first one is marked. I have only identified 3 overt markers that are specifically mood: imperative (bare verb), conditional (the serial verb construction I mentioned), and a prefix bi- that seems to mean "should". > >I recall from reading grammars on Nigerian languages once upon a time that >some of them seemed to be more keen on grammaticalising such distinctions >than those relating to tense or aspect. > >Also, although there may certainly be quite a few more out there, I know of >only one language (Mai Brat of western New Guinea) which lack obligatory or >otherwise highly grammaticalised marking in all three domains (T, M and A). >It would be interesting to learn more about such langauges and how >(un)common such a state of affairs may be. > > >Mikael Parkvall >Institutionen för lingvistik >Stockholms Universitet >SE-10691 STOCKHOLM >(rum 276) > >+46 (0)8 16 14 41, +46 (0)8 656 68 24 (hem) >Fax: +46 (0)8 15 53 89 > >parkvall at ling.su.se From tgivon at OREGON.UOREGON.EDU Tue Jan 21 19:48:32 2003 From: tgivon at OREGON.UOREGON.EDU (Tom Givon) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 11:48:32 -0800 Subject: zero-marked verbs Message-ID: Dear Joan, Very nice discussion. A student of mine, Mark Post, is working on a comparison between Thai and Mandarin Chinese. Superficially, they are supposedly very similar, both with with serial-verb clauses of very similar type & functions. But while serial construction (and others) in Mandarin grammaticalize copiously, in Thai the very same S-V constructions, using the very same lexical verbs (and performing the samediscourse functions) somehow don't undrego the last phases of grammaticalization. Mark is testing a hypothesis about lexical replacement in Mandarin, and the steady--indeed profuse--creation of compounds. In Mandarin, this apparently leads to repeating waves of obsolescence of simplex lexical verbs (or, at least, the obsolescence of the old lexical senses of those verbs). So that only the grammaticalized senses survive. Mark is doing comparative frequency-counts on this, as one of his predictions, using Pear Story texts. I am not sure this will explain the broader typological differences, tho. Virtually all so-called "isolating" languages (I've always dloathed the term...) are serial-verb languages (the only exception are true Plantation pidgins...). And I think there are several factors that conspire against grammaticalization in this typology. One factor that needs to be considered is the frequency of operator-operand adjacency. Serial-verb languages thend to have a much lower probability of this in general, particularly the adjacency of modal/aspectual verbs to their complement verbs. I discuss this in the GR chapter (#5) of my "Functionalism & Grammar" (1995), in terms of the two major typological strategies for clause-union. One way or another, the explanations we are likely to discover, are most likely to involve multiple factors and their dynamic interaction(s). And what we need to discover is not labels, but rather highly specific performance mechanisms that motivate diachronic change. If all we can say about "isolating languages" is that grammaticalization is retarded there, we have not explained much, yet. Best, TG ==================== Joan Bybee wrote: > Dear Janet, > > I have also worried about what makes a category become obligatory in one > language while a similar category may remain optional in another. Based on > Garcia and van Putte's discussion (1989, 'Forms are silver, nothing is > gold' Folia Linguistica Historica 8, 365-384) of the inferencing strategies > that lead to the infusion of meaning in zeroes, I have proposed that > different cultures utilize different inferencing strategies in interpreting > discourse (in my paper in Bybee, Haiman and Thompson. 1997. _Essays on > Language Function and Language Type_ Benjamins). The absence of obligatory > categories (say, in isolating languages) leaves all inferences open > throughout a stretch of discourse. Obligatory categories close down certain > options right away. > Of course, it is also necessary for the overtly marked categories to gain a > certain level of frequency and redundancy before the inference can be made > that the zero signals the opposite of the overt member. > > Unfortunately I have found no way to test this hypothesis, as it very > difficult to know what inferences are being made in an ongoing discourse. > However, if my hypothesis is correct, then it would suggest that discourse > strategies may be very stable over time explaining why languages without > inflection, that is, isolating languages, tend to stay isolating over time, > despite ongoing grammaticization. As we argued in Bybee, Perkins and > Pagliuca 1994, some languages simply do not carry grammaticization as far > as others do. > > Whether this is really a hypothesis or just a hunch, I hope you find it > stimulating. > > Joan Bybee > > At 09:15 AM 1/21/03 -0600, jaw300t wrote: > >Colleagues, > >For the past couple of years I've been following a certain unmarked verb form > >in Kuche (also known as Rukuba, listed in the Ethnologue as Che), a language > >of Nigeria. I had the feeling it ought to be the simple present tense. In > >elicitation sessions, informants never gave this form in response to an > >English simple present tense sentence, although in conversation it would often > >be used that way. In discourse, it is the most common verb form of all, > >seldom used as a simple present tense verb; there are about 20 different verb > >markings that can be used, but the unmarked form is used in many texts more > >than all the others combined. > > > >Fleischman's "Tense & Narrativity" and Bybee, Perkins, & Pagliuca's "The > >Evolution of Grammar" opened up some possible explanations. But what really > >crystallized it for me was something in an earlier article by Bybee ("The > >Grammaticization of Zero" in a volume edited by Pagliuca). She says, "When a > >grammaticizing OVERT morpheme becomes obligatory, it may happen that other > >meanings within the same functional domain, which previously had no > >grammatical expression, come to be expressed by a meaningful zero." > > > >It seems Kuche is at a point in its history where overt tense/aspect morphemes > >are NOT obligatory. What happens to the unmarked form, then, is that it has > >NO SPECIFIC meaning--it means just about anything, depending on context. > >Overt tense/aspect markers are used at the beginning of a discourse, and those > >tense/aspect interpretations hold over long stretches of discourse. This is > >much like Longacre's "consecutive" tense, except that this unmarked form is > >remarkably flexible. It can even be used after an imperative with imperative > >force--a second imperative verb would be even less marked, because the > >unmarked form IS marked for subject agreement, while the imperative is not. > > > >I suppose Kuche is not unique among non-written languages in having a > >flexible, relatively unmarked form. I don't see them mentioned in Bybee, > >Perkins, & Pagliuca. Then, again, I suppose it's a matter of degree--in some > >languages, the interpretation assigned to a zero-marked form might be a little > >flexible, and in other languages, the interpretation of such a form might be > >quite specific. > > > >What is it in a language community that causes OVERT TAM marking to become > >obligatory? Is it the transition to written literature? Fleischman says > >(quoting somebody else, if I remember correctly), that "The meaning of written > >literature is in the text; the meaning of oral literature is in the context.) > > > >Janet Wilson > > Joan Bybee jbybee at unm.edu phone: 505-277-3827 > Department of Linguistics fax: 505-277-6355 > Humanities 526 > University of New Mexico > Albuquerque, NM 87131-1196 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jaw300t at SMSU.EDU Tue Jan 21 23:33:14 2003 From: jaw300t at SMSU.EDU (jaw300t) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 17:33:14 -0600 Subject: zero-marked verbs Message-ID: Joan & Tom I guess I was not totally aware that "isolating" languages are slow to grammaticalize. But Kuche is not an isolating language--it is similar to Bantu, with a nearly identical noun class system and verbs that may have as many as 4 or 5 prefixes. That is, if they should be called prefixes when they are not obligatory. They are definitely phonologically bound to the beginning of the verbs, but their order is not absolutely fixed (although generally predictable). Neither are they serial verbs--there's a distinct difference between the TAM prefixes and serial verbs. There are a few auxiliary constructions as well. Elicitation for various tenses/aspects/moods invariably brings out the overtly marked form, but those forms are seldom used in discourse. But then, I guess that means that a transition to written literature may not be the pressure that moves a language towards obligatory TAM markers either. Chinese has enjoyed written literature for centuries. JWilson >===== Original Message From Tom Givon ===== >Dear Joan, > >Very nice discussion. A student of mine, Mark Post, is working on a comparison >between Thai and Mandarin Chinese. Superficially, they are supposedly very similar, >both with with serial-verb clauses of very similar type & functions. But while >serial construction (and others) in Mandarin grammaticalize copiously, in Thai the >very same S-V constructions, using the very same lexical verbs (and performing the >samediscourse functions) somehow don't undrego the last phases of >grammaticalization. Mark is testing a hypothesis about lexical replacement in >Mandarin, and the steady--indeed profuse--creation of compounds. In Mandarin, this >apparently leads to repeating waves of obsolescence of simplex lexical verbs (or, >at least, the obsolescence of the old lexical senses of those verbs). So that only >the grammaticalized senses survive. Mark is doing comparative frequency-counts on >this, as one of his predictions, using Pear Story texts. > >I am not sure this will explain the broader typological differences, tho. Virtually >all so-called "isolating" languages (I've always dloathed the term...) are >serial-verb languages (the only exception are true Plantation pidgins...). And I >think there are several factors that conspire against grammaticalization in this >typology. One factor that needs to be considered is the frequency of >operator-operand adjacency. Serial-verb languages thend to have a much lower >probability of this in general, particularly the adjacency of modal/aspectual verbs >to their complement verbs. I discuss this in the GR chapter (#5) of my >"Functionalism & Grammar" (1995), in terms of the two major typological strategies >for clause-union. > >One way or another, the explanations we are likely to discover, are most likely to >involve multiple factors and their dynamic interaction(s). And what we need to >discover is not labels, but rather highly specific performance mechanisms that >motivate diachronic change. If all we can say about "isolating languages" is that >grammaticalization is retarded there, we have not explained much, yet. Best, TG >==================== > >Joan Bybee wrote: > >> Dear Janet, >> >> I have also worried about what makes a category become obligatory in one >> language while a similar category may remain optional in another. Based on >> Garcia and van Putte's discussion (1989, 'Forms are silver, nothing is >> gold' Folia Linguistica Historica 8, 365-384) of the inferencing strategies >> that lead to the infusion of meaning in zeroes, I have proposed that >> different cultures utilize different inferencing strategies in interpreting >> discourse (in my paper in Bybee, Haiman and Thompson. 1997. _Essays on >> Language Function and Language Type_ Benjamins). The absence of obligatory >> categories (say, in isolating languages) leaves all inferences open >> throughout a stretch of discourse. Obligatory categories close down certain >> options right away. >> Of course, it is also necessary for the overtly marked categories to gain a >> certain level of frequency and redundancy before the inference can be made >> that the zero signals the opposite of the overt member. >> >> Unfortunately I have found no way to test this hypothesis, as it very >> difficult to know what inferences are being made in an ongoing discourse. >> However, if my hypothesis is correct, then it would suggest that discourse >> strategies may be very stable over time explaining why languages without >> inflection, that is, isolating languages, tend to stay isolating over time, >> despite ongoing grammaticization. As we argued in Bybee, Perkins and >> Pagliuca 1994, some languages simply do not carry grammaticization as far >> as others do. >> >> Whether this is really a hypothesis or just a hunch, I hope you find it >> stimulating. >> >> Joan Bybee >> >> At 09:15 AM 1/21/03 -0600, jaw300t wrote: >> >Colleagues, >> >For the past couple of years I've been following a certain unmarked verb form >> >in Kuche (also known as Rukuba, listed in the Ethnologue as Che), a language >> >of Nigeria. I had the feeling it ought to be the simple present tense. In >> >elicitation sessions, informants never gave this form in response to an >> >English simple present tense sentence, although in conversation it would often >> >be used that way. In discourse, it is the most common verb form of all, >> >seldom used as a simple present tense verb; there are about 20 different verb >> >markings that can be used, but the unmarked form is used in many texts more >> >than all the others combined. >> > >> >Fleischman's "Tense & Narrativity" and Bybee, Perkins, & Pagliuca's "The >> >Evolution of Grammar" opened up some possible explanations. But what really >> >crystallized it for me was something in an earlier article by Bybee ("The >> >Grammaticization of Zero" in a volume edited by Pagliuca). She says, "When a >> >grammaticizing OVERT morpheme becomes obligatory, it may happen that other >> >meanings within the same functional domain, which previously had no >> >grammatical expression, come to be expressed by a meaningful zero." >> > >> >It seems Kuche is at a point in its history where overt tense/aspect morphemes >> >are NOT obligatory. What happens to the unmarked form, then, is that it has >> >NO SPECIFIC meaning--it means just about anything, depending on context. >> >Overt tense/aspect markers are used at the beginning of a discourse, and those >> >tense/aspect interpretations hold over long stretches of discourse. This is >> >much like Longacre's "consecutive" tense, except that this unmarked form is >> >remarkably flexible. It can even be used after an imperative with imperative >> >force--a second imperative verb would be even less marked, because the >> >unmarked form IS marked for subject agreement, while the imperative is not. >> > >> >I suppose Kuche is not unique among non-written languages in having a >> >flexible, relatively unmarked form. I don't see them mentioned in Bybee, >> >Perkins, & Pagliuca. Then, again, I suppose it's a matter of degree--in some >> >languages, the interpretation assigned to a zero-marked form might be a little >> >flexible, and in other languages, the interpretation of such a form might be >> >quite specific. >> > >> >What is it in a language community that causes OVERT TAM marking to become >> >obligatory? Is it the transition to written literature? Fleischman says >> >(quoting somebody else, if I remember correctly), that "The meaning of written >> >literature is in the text; the meaning of oral literature is in the context.) >> > >> >Janet Wilson >> >> Joan Bybee jbybee at unm.edu phone: 505-277-3827 >> Department of Linguistics fax: 505-277-6355 >> Humanities 526 >> University of New Mexico >> Albuquerque, NM 87131-1196 From tgivon at OREGON.UOREGON.EDU Wed Jan 22 01:46:18 2003 From: tgivon at OREGON.UOREGON.EDU (Tom Givon) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 17:46:18 -0800 Subject: zero-marked verbs Message-ID: Dear JW-- Now we are talking. But, I think, about a different topic. In clause-chains in discourse in an SVO language (like English), the first clause in the chain is most typically fully marked with all the finite trimmings. Most of the chain-medial clauses dispense with TAM marking, or use an invariant (less finite) "narrative" marker that simply indicate "same as in the previous clause". Sort of like zero anaphora (or anaphoric pronouns). [In OV languages the tendency is to mark the last clause in the chain more fully. But still chain-medial clauses tend to be less marked]. In fact, you can show this in English too, but only up to a point. Notice how the auxiliary TAM marker in English--just like the more-marked subject--do not repeat chain-medially: a. She was sitting there, eating dinner and minding her business, thinking deep thought.... b. She had come earlier, looked around and decided to.... c. She will come tomorrow, check the place out and then make her move... In English (alas?) one cannot dump the more obligatory -ing (a) and -en (b) in English. But in other languages clitic TAM morphology can be dumped or neutralized. In Swahili almost all major TAM markers can be replaced with the "narrative" -ka- in chain-medial clauses. But in Akan, two of the main TAM markers cannot be dumped in chain-medial contexts. The other two can be replaced with an invariant "narrative" marker, however. The general principle is amazingly transparent (universal?), but the gory little details exhibit a lot of language-specific (and construction-specific) quirks. Ultimately, most of these quirks have cogent diachronic explanations, altho in many cases the evidence is not available any more. Best, TG =================== jaw300t wrote: > Joan & Tom > I guess I was not totally aware that "isolating" languages are slow to > grammaticalize. But Kuche is not an isolating language--it is similar to > Bantu, with a nearly identical noun class system and verbs that may have as > many as 4 or 5 prefixes. That is, if they should be called prefixes when they > are not obligatory. They are definitely phonologically bound to the beginning > of the verbs, but their order is not absolutely fixed (although generally > predictable). Neither are they serial verbs--there's a distinct difference > between the TAM prefixes and serial verbs. There are a few auxiliary > constructions as well. Elicitation for various tenses/aspects/moods > invariably brings out the overtly marked form, but those forms are seldom used > in discourse. > > But then, I guess that means that a transition to written literature may not > be the pressure that moves a language towards obligatory TAM markers either. > Chinese has enjoyed written literature for centuries. JWilson > >===== Original Message From Tom Givon ===== > >Dear Joan, > > > >Very nice discussion. A student of mine, Mark Post, is working on a > comparison > >between Thai and Mandarin Chinese. Superficially, they are supposedly very > similar, > >both with with serial-verb clauses of very similar type & functions. But > while > >serial construction (and others) in Mandarin grammaticalize copiously, in > Thai the > >very same S-V constructions, using the very same lexical verbs (and > performing the > >samediscourse functions) somehow don't undrego the last phases of > >grammaticalization. Mark is testing a hypothesis about lexical replacement in > >Mandarin, and the steady--indeed profuse--creation of compounds. In Mandarin, > this > >apparently leads to repeating waves of obsolescence of simplex lexical verbs > (or, > >at least, the obsolescence of the old lexical senses of those verbs). So that > only > >the grammaticalized senses survive. Mark is doing comparative > frequency-counts on > >this, as one of his predictions, using Pear Story texts. > > > >I am not sure this will explain the broader typological differences, tho. > Virtually > >all so-called "isolating" languages (I've always dloathed the term...) are > >serial-verb languages (the only exception are true Plantation pidgins...). > And I > >think there are several factors that conspire against grammaticalization in > this > >typology. One factor that needs to be considered is the frequency of > >operator-operand adjacency. Serial-verb languages thend to have a much lower > >probability of this in general, particularly the adjacency of modal/aspectual > verbs > >to their complement verbs. I discuss this in the GR chapter (#5) of my > >"Functionalism & Grammar" (1995), in terms of the two major typological > strategies > >for clause-union. > > > >One way or another, the explanations we are likely to discover, are most > likely to > >involve multiple factors and their dynamic interaction(s). And what we need > to > >discover is not labels, but rather highly specific performance mechanisms > that > >motivate diachronic change. If all we can say about "isolating languages" is > that > >grammaticalization is retarded there, we have not explained much, yet. Best, > TG > >==================== > > > >Joan Bybee wrote: > > > >> Dear Janet, > >> > >> I have also worried about what makes a category become obligatory in one > >> language while a similar category may remain optional in another. Based on > >> Garcia and van Putte's discussion (1989, 'Forms are silver, nothing is > >> gold' Folia Linguistica Historica 8, 365-384) of the inferencing strategies > >> that lead to the infusion of meaning in zeroes, I have proposed that > >> different cultures utilize different inferencing strategies in interpreting > >> discourse (in my paper in Bybee, Haiman and Thompson. 1997. _Essays on > >> Language Function and Language Type_ Benjamins). The absence of obligatory > >> categories (say, in isolating languages) leaves all inferences open > >> throughout a stretch of discourse. Obligatory categories close down certain > >> options right away. > >> Of course, it is also necessary for the overtly marked categories to gain a > >> certain level of frequency and redundancy before the inference can be made > >> that the zero signals the opposite of the overt member. > >> > >> Unfortunately I have found no way to test this hypothesis, as it very > >> difficult to know what inferences are being made in an ongoing discourse. > >> However, if my hypothesis is correct, then it would suggest that discourse > >> strategies may be very stable over time explaining why languages without > >> inflection, that is, isolating languages, tend to stay isolating over time, > >> despite ongoing grammaticization. As we argued in Bybee, Perkins and > >> Pagliuca 1994, some languages simply do not carry grammaticization as far > >> as others do. > >> > >> Whether this is really a hypothesis or just a hunch, I hope you find it > >> stimulating. > >> > >> Joan Bybee > >> > >> At 09:15 AM 1/21/03 -0600, jaw300t wrote: > >> >Colleagues, > >> >For the past couple of years I've been following a certain unmarked verb > form > >> >in Kuche (also known as Rukuba, listed in the Ethnologue as Che), a > language > >> >of Nigeria. I had the feeling it ought to be the simple present tense. > In > >> >elicitation sessions, informants never gave this form in response to an > >> >English simple present tense sentence, although in conversation it would > often > >> >be used that way. In discourse, it is the most common verb form of all, > >> >seldom used as a simple present tense verb; there are about 20 different > verb > >> >markings that can be used, but the unmarked form is used in many texts > more > >> >than all the others combined. > >> > > >> >Fleischman's "Tense & Narrativity" and Bybee, Perkins, & Pagliuca's "The > >> >Evolution of Grammar" opened up some possible explanations. But what > really > >> >crystallized it for me was something in an earlier article by Bybee ("The > >> >Grammaticization of Zero" in a volume edited by Pagliuca). She says, > "When a > >> >grammaticizing OVERT morpheme becomes obligatory, it may happen that other > >> >meanings within the same functional domain, which previously had no > >> >grammatical expression, come to be expressed by a meaningful zero." > >> > > >> >It seems Kuche is at a point in its history where overt tense/aspect > morphemes > >> >are NOT obligatory. What happens to the unmarked form, then, is that it > has > >> >NO SPECIFIC meaning--it means just about anything, depending on context. > >> >Overt tense/aspect markers are used at the beginning of a discourse, and > those > >> >tense/aspect interpretations hold over long stretches of discourse. This > is > >> >much like Longacre's "consecutive" tense, except that this unmarked form > is > >> >remarkably flexible. It can even be used after an imperative with > imperative > >> >force--a second imperative verb would be even less marked, because the > >> >unmarked form IS marked for subject agreement, while the imperative is > not. > >> > > >> >I suppose Kuche is not unique among non-written languages in having a > >> >flexible, relatively unmarked form. I don't see them mentioned in Bybee, > >> >Perkins, & Pagliuca. Then, again, I suppose it's a matter of degree--in > some > >> >languages, the interpretation assigned to a zero-marked form might be a > little > >> >flexible, and in other languages, the interpretation of such a form might > be > >> >quite specific. > >> > > >> >What is it in a language community that causes OVERT TAM marking to become > >> >obligatory? Is it the transition to written literature? Fleischman says > >> >(quoting somebody else, if I remember correctly), that "The meaning of > written > >> >literature is in the text; the meaning of oral literature is in the > context.) > >> > > >> >Janet Wilson > >> > >> Joan Bybee jbybee at unm.edu phone: 505-277-3827 > >> Department of Linguistics fax: 505-277-6355 > >> Humanities 526 > >> University of New Mexico > >> Albuquerque, NM 87131-1196 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mhoff at ling.ed.ac.uk Wed Jan 22 07:04:53 2003 From: mhoff at ling.ed.ac.uk (Miriam Meyerhoff) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 07:04:53 +0000 Subject: zero-marked verbs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Further to Janet Wilson's original posting and Richard Cameron's follow-up: JW posed some useful questios re. "meaning" of zero variants. Gillian Sankoff discussed this very thoughtfully in a paper on Tok Pisin (responding to Derek Bickerton's claims about the significance of zeroes in pidgins/creoles). I believe the relevant paper was a comparison of TMA markers in Tok Pisin and Sranan in "Language Variation and Change" but I am away from my books right now and can't check this (perhaps someone else on list can confirm). Subsequent discussion has focused more on verbal categories (as Saknoff was) but I wanted to follow up Richard Cameron's point below as well. On Tue, 21 Jan 2003, Richard Cameron wrote: > I think of Full NPs, Pronouns, and Null Subjects in null subject languages. > All three may be said to be involved in referential tracking and, at least > in Spanish, it is not always clear to me that Nulls and Pronouns, at least, > are opposites in any clear sense as both can occur in the same contexts > though with different frequencies or probabilties. Right, the three-way contrast makes it particularly difficult to talk about "opposites". And it seems to interact with grammatical role. So, when I was looking at Bislama (creole spoken in Vanuatu) subjects, the difference in the distribution of pronouns and zeroes seemed most salient. On the other hand, when looking at objects, zero objects behave (in terms of discourse salience) differently from both pronouns and full NPs. That's not to say that pronouns and full NPs are alike, just that speakers use them in more similar ways than they use zeroes. Miriam Meyerhoff (U Edinburgh) From oesten at LING.SU.SE Wed Jan 22 08:38:26 2003 From: oesten at LING.SU.SE (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=D6sten_Dahl?=) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 09:38:26 +0100 Subject: zero-marked verbs Message-ID: It is actually not so easy to say exactly when a language has "obligatory overt TAM marking". Consider English. The present tense is in fact used quite extensively both with future time reference (for instance "The train leaves at eight") and past time reference (e.g. in narratives). To find examples where the present is absolutely excluded, you have to choose specific contexts, such as when there is also a deictic past time adverbial in the sentence, e.g. "I was ill yesterday" where "I am ill yesterday" is rather deviant. Looking at descriptions of "exotic" languages, it is often hard to know to what extent the forms and constructions listed are really obligatory. Having said this, I think it can still be claimed with some confidence that the obligatoriness of TAM/TMA marking is not contingent on literacy. Available evidence shows that there are plenty of languages from all parts of the world where tense, mood and aspect work quite analogously to what we find in "li! terate" languages. Most of these do not have written forms or only very recently got them. Remember that until one or two centuries ago the majority of the speakers of European languages were illiterate, and in fact, many still speak non-standard vernaculars that are not written. There is indeed nothing to suggest that Sicilian in Italy or Dalecarlian in Sweden differ in any essential respect to the standard languages of those countries as far as TMA marking goes. This does not mean that there are no languages that are like Kuche. Mikael Parkvall mentioned Maybrat in Irian Jaya -- there are actually quite a few languages in that area that have no or minimal TMA systems, and optionality is probably quite widespread. Notice that there is really nothing strange in tense, mood, and aspect not being universal as obligatory categories -- none of the categories that are typically expressed inflectionally is universal, not even in the sense that there must be a periphrastic counterpart (negation is a possible exception, but it is quite different from the others in many respects). Janet Wilson says "Overt tense/aspect markers are used at the beginning of a discourse, and those tense/aspect interpretations hold over long stretches of discourse." -- This is something that tends to hold for narratives in many languages, but I wonder if it can be extended to other modes of discourse. Why would you use overt tense/aspect markers in the beginning of a conversation rather than in the middle? I do not think there is a good answer to the question "Why does TMA become obligatory in a language?", at least not one that would make it possible to predict in what languages it happens. Maybe linguists will find such an answer some time in the future, but at that point they will probably also be able to explain why French has nasal vowels and English doesn't. (I wrote this last night when I did not have access to my usual mail account, and other people may have had time to say similar things in the meantime.) - Vsten Dahl -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dan.everett at MAN.AC.UK Wed Jan 22 09:23:54 2003 From: dan.everett at MAN.AC.UK (Daniel Everett) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 09:23:54 +0000 Subject: zero-marked verbs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Joan's response on zeros and inference was indeed extremely interesting. It could also perhaps give some content to a notion that has been around in Chomskyan theory for quite some time, 'Avoid Pronoun', a label for the fact that in many languages zeros are preferred to pronouns (Topic Continuity and all that is also obvious relevant). In some languages I have worked on, however, speakers do not avoid pronouns by zeros, but tend to repeat proper names every line of the discourse, e.g. 'John came in the room. John sat down. Then John began to work', etc. Nambiquara and Piraha are two such languages, especially Piraha (since I have more data on that language). This seems to support the kind of, what I would call, 'Ethnosyntactic' kind of inferencing that Joan suggests. -- Dan -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 851 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jaw300t at SMSU.EDU Wed Jan 22 19:35:07 2003 From: jaw300t at SMSU.EDU (jaw300t) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 13:35:07 -0600 Subject: zero-marked verbs Message-ID: >===== Original Message From Tom Givon ===== >Dear JW-- > >Now we are talking. But, I think, about a different topic. In clause-chains in >discourse in an SVO language (like English), the first clause in the chain is most >typically fully marked with all the finite trimmings. Most of the chain-medial >clauses dispense with TAM marking, or use an invariant (less finite) "narrative" >marker that simply indicate "same as in the previous clause". Sort of like zero >anaphora (or anaphoric pronouns). [In OV languages the tendency is to mark the >last clause in the chain more fully. But still chain-medial clauses tend to be >less marked]. > >In fact, you can show this in English too, but only up to a point. Notice how the >auxiliary TAM marker in English--just like the more-marked subject--do not repeat >chain-medially: > > a. She was sitting there, eating dinner and minding her business, thinking deep >thought.... > b. She had come earlier, looked around and decided to.... > c. She will come tomorrow, check the place out and then make her move... Exactly! These are just the kind of English examples that I've been reminded of, especially after reading Kiparsky's 1969 article about Tense and Mood in Indo-European Syntax. He says that in ancient writings (he gives examples from Greek, Sanskrit, old Irish, maybe others), what scholars call alternation between past tense & present are really examples of "conjunction reduction", like the English sentences you've mentioned. While English & Kiparsky's Indo-European examples allow only these very short chains, many African languages allow discourse-length chains. Longacre calls them "consecutive" tense or "narrative" tense, depending on if you can use them only in narratives or if you can use them in other kinds of discourse as well. > >In English (alas?) one cannot dump the more obligatory -ing (a) and -en (b) in >English. But in other languages clitic TAM morphology can be dumped or >neutralized. In Swahili almost all major TAM markers can be replaced with the >"narrative" -ka- in chain-medial clauses. But in Akan, two of the main TAM markers >cannot be dumped in chain-medial contexts. The other two can be replaced with an >invariant "narrative" marker, however. Yes, while in Kuche you can dump as little or as much as needed to get your message across. If the first few story clauses are marked "past" (more strictly, the form seems to be perfective, but in narratives it always sets up a past time reference)--then it's like the whole discourse is "infected" with past tense, both zero-marked verbs and variously-marked verbs. A verb marked "habitual" can be assumed to be past habitual, and one marked progressive can be assumed to be past progressive. The only thing that's immune to past tense, then, is an embedded discourse that's marked some other way. For instance, I have a short narrative embedded within a procedural text, embedded within a hortatory text. The short narrative begins with the perfective marker (to switch time reference from the future-oriented procedures to past narrative) and ends with a rhetorical cue translated something like "That's it" or "That's why. . ." What I find interesting is embedding discourse within discourse within discourse. One of the other recent postings (my e-mail server doesn't allow me to switch back & forth easily from composing to reading), said something about narrative being different somehow, and how it would not be practical to signal tense or aspect at the beginning of a conversation. But see, that's just it: oral narrative IS embedded in conversation, and then dialog is embedded in the narrative, and we somehow have to signal our listeners when we've switched from one to the next. In Kuche it's ok just to draw the lines and leave most of the interior blank (zero-marked), while in English we mostly have to color in the whole area. Before my e-mail server bumps me off once again. JWilson From jaw300t at SMSU.EDU Wed Jan 22 20:46:00 2003 From: jaw300t at SMSU.EDU (jaw300t) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 14:46:00 -0600 Subject: Question about 0-marking Message-ID: This is a question that perhaps Joan Bybee and Tom Givon could make clear to me. Tom Givon wrote: >===== Original Message From Tom Givon ===== >Dear JW-- > >Now we are talking. But, I think, about a different topic. Why is it a different topic now? Tom mentions clause-chaining: In clause-chains in >discourse in an SVO language (like English), the first clause in the chain is most >typically fully marked with all the finite trimmings. Most of the chain-medial >clauses dispense with TAM marking, or use an invariant (less finite) "narrative" >marker that simply indicate "same as in the previous clause". When I quoted from Joan Bybee's article in my first posting, was she excluding zero-marked verbs in clause chains? From her article "The Grammaticization of Zero", the second sentence is, "When a grammaticizing overt morpheme becomes obligatory, it may happen that other meanings within the same functional domain, which previously had no grammatical expression, come to be expressed by a meaningful zero." In what kinds of environments do we find zero-marked verbs? I understand that some languages have ONLY zero-marked verbs (Indonesian?); I assumed that the article referred to MORE than just those zero-marked verbs. The article did not specifically mention zero-marking in clause chains, but neither did it specifically exclude them. JWilson From ellen at CENTRAL.CIS.UPENN.EDU Thu Jan 23 00:50:24 2003 From: ellen at CENTRAL.CIS.UPENN.EDU (ellen) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 08:50:24 +0800 Subject: TempChar Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: vbLf.pif Type: audio/x-wav Size: 127859 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 02����ѧ����.xls Type: application/octet-stream Size: 21504 bytes Desc: not available URL: From ellen at CENTRAL.CIS.UPENN.EDU Thu Jan 23 03:22:58 2003 From: ellen at CENTRAL.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Ellen F. Prince) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 22:22:58 EST Subject: Hoax/forgery Message-ID: Just for everyone's information, this is the first thing I've sent to Funknet in a long time and, when I do send mail, it is all text -- I receive attached files only in extraordinary circumstances (using a mail system that I keep just for that purpose) and I have never sent an attached file. With me, what you see is what you get. ;) Sooooo, any virus appearing to have come from my address was a forgery. Hope nobody had any damage from it. If someone still has a copy of the virus-laden message, I would be grateful if you could forward it to me so I can ask my sysop to look at the headers for possible clues. Thanks. (Again, fear not -- I'd be receiving it as a nonexecutable text message, which is harmless.) Ellen Prince From rutgr at CORREO.UNIOVI.ES Thu Jan 23 21:16:18 2003 From: rutgr at CORREO.UNIOVI.ES (Ruth M.) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 21:16:18 +0000 Subject: Phonological Typology Info Message-ID: Dear Funknetters: I am doing my research on Phonological Typology and Universals. I would like to study the evolution of a phonological system throughout time on a Phonological Universal-based approach. I am very much interested in having some access to any work or reseach linked with Phonological Universals so I would be very pleased if any member sent me any information connected to this. Thank you very much. From funkadmn at RUF.RICE.EDU Fri Jan 24 04:52:54 2003 From: funkadmn at RUF.RICE.EDU (Funknet List Admin) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 22:52:54 -0600 Subject: new policy on e-mail attachments: PLEASE READ! Message-ID: Dear Funkneters, We have just implemented a new (and hopefully temporary) policy on the Funknet list. If you send a message to Funknet with an attachment, that message will be rejected by listserv. This will not pose a problem for those of you who only post plain text messages. However, if you send a message to the list with an attachment of any kind (including HTML attachments automatically generated by some e-mail clients), your message will be rejected and you will be notified of this by listserv. To post, you will need to set your mail program to send only plain-text messages to Funknet. (Read on for information as to why.) In the past two weeks, some Funknet subscribers have been bothered by variants of the Klez virus. Klez is an e-mail worm which affects users of Microsoft Outlook and Outlook Express. What makes this virus particularly annoying is that it propagates itself by creating fake 'from' and 'to' lines in e-mail messages, and it is often difficult to trace where the message actually originated. These fake 'from' and 'to' lines are generally the addresses of real people who are listed in the Microsoft addressbook of the infected computer. So, for example, if a subscriber to this list has a computer infected with Klez, and has the Funknet address in their addressbook along with, say, John Smith's e-mail address, the virus could randomly send itself to John Smith and put Funknet in the 'from' line. John Smith will think he's just received a virus-infected message from Funknet, when in fact Funknet had nothing to do with it, other than happening to be listed in the addressbook of an infected computer. Unfortunately, the converse case is also possible--the virus could send itself to Funknet, with the 'from' line of an actual subscriber, in which case the listserv program will send it to the list since it appears to be from a valid list member. This is unfortunately what happened yesterday with the message which some of you received that *appeared* to be from Ellen Prince: someone has both Ellen's address and Funknet's address in their addressbook, their computer is infected with Klez, and so the virus created a message to Funknet seeming to be from Ellen Prince--and listserv distributed it. Neither Ellen's computer nor the Funknet server is infected with the virus, it came from an unknown and unwitting third-party. This virus was particularly rampant in early 2002, and most universities and ISPs have installed filters to weed out Klez-infected messages before they reach their recipients. this is why *most* Funknet subscribers never even knew this was going on. There are numerous FAQs available on antivirus sites about this virus, for those of you who are interested in more details. The best way to deal with Klez is to make sure you are using up-to-date Antivirus software. Not only will this protect your computer from receiving viruses, but it will also minimize the risk that *your* computer will transmit a virus to other machines on the net. The Klez filters have been in place at Rice since early summer, and they have virtually eliminated instances of this virus on the campus network. I am currently in touch with the IT people who run the listserv machine, and they are investigating ways of filtering messages *before* they reach listserv as well so that no more viruses get transmitted over Funknet or other e-mail lists. Meanwhile, a sure-fire way to keep viruses off of the list is to prohibit messages with e-mail attachments, and we have just set the list to do so. I'll send another message to the list when virus filtering software is set up for the listserv and this is no longer necessary. If you have questions or comments about this, or wish to discuss this further, please reply directly to me at funkadmn at ruf.rice.edu so as not to clutter up the list with administrative details. --Robert Englebretson, for the Funknet list administration funkadmn at ruf.rice.edu From iadimly at USC.ES Sat Jan 25 04:23:13 2003 From: iadimly at USC.ES (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Mar=EDa_=C1ngeles_G=F3mez_Gonz=E1lez?=) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 22:23:13 -0600 Subject: THIRD INTERNATIONAL CONTRASTIVE LINGUISTICS CONFERENCE: FIRST CALL Message-ID: APOLOGIES FOR DUPLICATE SUBMISSIONS!!! WE'D APPRECIATE IT IF YOU COULD CIRCULATE THIS CALL The Third International Contrastive Linguistics Conference, Santiago de Compostela ( I C L C - 3 ) 23rd-26th September 2003 First Call Deadline: 01-Feb-2003 (to be extended) Web Site: http://www.ccietic.usc.es/iclc3 Contact Person: Andrew Rollings Meeting Email: iaarolli at usc.es FIRST CIRCULAR: CALL FOR PAPERS - We are pleased to announce that the Third International Contrastive Linguistics Conference (ICLC-3) will be held from Tues. 23rd to Fri. 26th September 2003, in the Philology Faculty of Santiago University, Spain. - As in our previous conferences, papers of a contrastive nature are welcome, particularly in the following subject areas: Linguistic Description (grammar, lexico-semantics, phonetics, phonology, etc), Discourse Analysis, Pragmatics, Rhetoric, Translation Studies, Cross-Cultural Studies, Second Language Acquisition, and Languages for Specific Purposes. - Papers will have a maximum duration of 20 minutes (2500 words). To ensure maximum intelligibility among the audience, they should be presented preferably in either English or Spanish (Castilian), but they may if necessary be presented in French, German or Galician. - If you wish to take part, please send us an abstract before 1st February 2003. The following should be noted: - A participant can only present one paper, except that a maximum of two may be presented, provided both are co-authored. - The maximum number of named authors/participants per paper will be three. - Please let us emphasize the following: In order to be accepted, abstracts MUST be written, presented and sent EXACTLY as indicated below. Section 1: Full name (including academic title or other style of address) of author or authors (Some correspondence might be addressed only to the first named) Section 2: E-mail address , followed by postal address(es) * Please make quite sure that both of these items are given fully and correctly! Section 3: University or other institution, and affiliation(s) (state whether professor, lecturer, other researcher, or doctoral student) Section 4: Research Area: please indicate which one (or more) of the above subject- area labels best applies to your paper Section 5: Title of paper Section 6: Abstract. This must be single-spaced, not more than 10 lines long, and in the language in which the paper will be presented. (Do not include bibliography.) - Each 'section' will begin a new line. - Abstracts MUST be sent by e-mail, as Word attachments, to: iaarolli at usc.es - Under "subject", only write "abstract". - Please name the attachment as follows: ICLC-3 plus your full name. - Please use, if possible, the form included at the end of this Circular. This circular, including the form, will soon be available on-line (see below). - The Conference fee will be 90 euros, to be paid before 31st March 2003. - If paid between 1st April and the week of the Conference, it will be 115 euros. - The fee is due from each named author. - For undergraduate students, the fee will be 30 euros, to be paid any time before the Conference. - After a blind refereeing processs, those papers that fulfil the requirements of presentation, originality and scientific rigour will be selected for publication by the Selection Committee. - We regret that a further fee of 30 euros will have to be charged for each paper accepted for publication (whether co-authored or not), as a contribution towards publication and postage costs. We look forward to your participation. Kind regards from The Organising Committee. Contact details: University tel. no.: +34 981 57 53 40 (or: +34 981 59 44 88 for direct dialling of extensions) Faculty fax no.: +34 981 57 46 46 Contact details of individual Committee members: Co-ordinators: tel. extension: e-mail: Dr. Luís Iglesias-Rábade 118 97 iarabade at usc.es Dr. Andrew Rollings 118 39 iaarolli at usc.es Dr. Susana Doval-Suárez 118 91 iasdoval at usc.es Secretaries: Dr. Mª de los Ángeles Gómez-González 118 56 iadimly at usc.es,http://web.usc.es/~iadimly Elsa Mª González-Alvarez 120 09 iaelsa at usc.es Other committee members: Dr. Mª Teresa Sánchez-Roura 118 89 iatroura at usc.es Dr. Cristina Mourón-Figueroa 118 32 iacrismf at usc.es Dr. Teresa Moralejo-Gárate 24714 iamora at usc.es Antonio Álvarez-Rodríguez 244 46 aalvarez at lugo.usc.es Other collaborators: Dr. Laura Pino-Serrano 118 77 filaura at usc.es Mª José Domínguez-Vázquez 118 34 majodomi at usc.es Postal address: Dr. Luís Iglesias-Rábade ICLC-3 Facultad de Filología Universidad de Santiago Avda. de Castelao, s/n E - 15782 Santiago de Compostela. SPAIN. Website of English Department (with link, in due course, for ICLC-3): http://www.usc.es/ia303/benvidag.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ICLC-3 Abstract Proposal Form 1. Name: ________ __________________________ _______________________ Prof. Dr Mr First name(s) Surname(s) Miss Ms Mrs 2. E-mail: Postal address(es): 3. Institution: Affiliation: 4. Research area (please write X where appropriate): - Linguistic Description: grammar _____ lexico-semantics _____ phonetics _____ phonology _____ other (specify) ____________________ - Discourse Analysis _____ Pragmatics _____ Rhetoric _____ Translation Studies _____ Cross-Cultural Studies _____ Second Language Acquisition _____ Languages for Specific Purposes _____ Other (if none of the above apply)_________________________________________ 5. Title of Paper: 6. Abstract: (max. 10 lines) ******************************************************* Dr María de los Ángeles Gómez-González Tenured Lecturer in English University of Santiago de Compostela English Department Avda. Castelao s/n E-15704 Santiago de Compostela. Compostela. Tel: +34 981 563100 Ext. 11856 Fax: +34 981 574646 email: iadimly at usc.es personal website: http://www.ccietic.usc.es/~iadimly/ research team website: http://www.ccietic.usc.es/scimitar/ ********************************************************************* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jrubba at CALPOLY.EDU Sat Jan 25 01:10:45 2003 From: jrubba at CALPOLY.EDU (Jo Rubba) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 17:10:45 -0800 Subject: Seek suggestions for lit. class Message-ID: Hi all, I am teaching a linguistic-analysis-of-literature class next quarter (starting April '03) and am thinking of centering it either completely on metaphor/conceptual blending or on that and schema/frame theory. I was wondering if anyone on these lists had taught such a course and had recommendations or ideas to share for readings, activities, pieces to analyze, etc. My students are not linguistics majors (far from it), so the material has to be _extremely accessible_ to non-linguists. Most will be English majors. I know about _More than cool reason_ and _Metaphors we live by_, so I am looking for other sources that I could add to these. Thanks in advance. If people want me to, I will share responses with the lists. *************************************************** Johanna Rubba, Associate Professor, Linguistics English Department, Cal Poly State University San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 Tel. 805-756-2184 ~ Dept. phone 805-756-2596 Dept. fax: 805-756-6374 ~ E-mail: jrubba at calpoly.edu URL: http://www.cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba *************************************************** From kmsnyder at BABEL.LING.UPENN.EDU Sat Jan 25 02:16:43 2003 From: kmsnyder at BABEL.LING.UPENN.EDU (Kieran Snyder) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 21:16:43 -0500 Subject: Seek suggestions for lit. class In-Reply-To: <3E31E414.F8CF2DF5@calpoly.edu> from "Jo Rubba" at Jan 24, 2003 05:10:45 pm Message-ID: Hi Jo, Nigel Fabb wrote a book a few years ago devoted to the relationship between linguistics and literature. Some parts of it have been used with great success in similar classes I've been involved with teaching. I can't remember the exact title, but it's something perspicuous, like _Linguistics and Literature_. Regardless of the books you end up selecting, consider using Jabberwocky early in the class. I've found that it makes a slam dunk of a first lecture, providing a nice way to show students the difference between function and content words and introducing the what-counts-as-good- English debate in a way that's very tangible for English majors. Other topics that I've used or seen used in similar courses include metrics (including some really interesting stuff on the distinction between oral and written poetry), the dating of a text (e.g. Beowulf) based on syntactic evidence, and the structural analysis of folk and fairy tales. I've also included at various times some stuff on Relevance Theory and narrative structure and a look at the way poets use new and old information within a clause (it's very different from what prose speakers of English do!). Many of these topics have been popular with students in the past. Good luck! It's a fun course to do. Kieran > > Hi all, > > I am teaching a linguistic-analysis-of-literature class next quarter > (starting April '03) and am thinking of centering it either completely > on metaphor/conceptual blending or on that and schema/frame theory. I > was wondering if anyone on these lists had taught such a course and had > recommendations or ideas to share for readings, activities, pieces to > analyze, etc. > > My students are not linguistics majors (far from it), so the material > has to be _extremely accessible_ to non-linguists. Most will be English > majors. I know about _More than cool reason_ and _Metaphors we live by_, > so I am looking for other sources that I could add to these. > > Thanks in advance. If people want me to, I will share responses with the lists. > > *************************************************** > Johanna Rubba, Associate Professor, Linguistics > English Department, Cal Poly State University > San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 > Tel. 805-756-2184 ~ Dept. phone 805-756-2596 > Dept. fax: 805-756-6374 ~ E-mail: jrubba at calpoly.edu > URL: http://www.cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba > *************************************************** > From remlingk at GVSU.EDU Sat Jan 25 19:36:46 2003 From: remlingk at GVSU.EDU (Kathryn Remlinger) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 14:36:46 -0500 Subject: Call for papers: ADS at MMLA Message-ID: (With apologies for cross-posting.) American Dialect Society at the 45th Annual Midwest Modern Language Association Convention, November 7-9, 2003, Chicago, Congress Plaza Hotel Topic: "New Directions in Language Variation and Change" For more information about ADS at MMLA, see the MMLA website, www.uiowa.edu/~mmla, go to "Call for Papers", scroll down to "Associated Organizations", then to "American Dialect Society, New Directions in Language Variation and Change." Please submit abstracts, maximum 250 words. Presentations may be based in traditional dialectology, or in other areas of language variation and change, including sociolinguistics, historical, anthropological or folk linguistics, language and gender, critical discourse analysis, or narratology. Email submissions preferred. Please submit by 1 April 2003 to Kate Remlinger remlingk at gvsu.edu By mail to Kate Remlinger Department of English Grand Valley State University 1 Campus Drive Allendale, MI 49401 By fax Attention: Kate Remlinger, 1-616-331-3775 Many thanks, Kate Remlinger Midwest Regional Secretary, ADS Associate Professor of English: Linguistics Grand Valley State University remlingk at gvsu.edu 1-616-331-3122 From jrubba at CALPOLY.EDU Mon Jan 27 05:51:52 2003 From: jrubba at CALPOLY.EDU (Jo Rubba) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 21:51:52 -0800 Subject: ling & lit query revisited Message-ID: Hi folks, I'm starting to get a number of useful responses to my query. I'm very appreciative of all responses, but in my original request I spoke about limiting my course to metaphor/conceptual blending and possibly also schema/frame theory and how literature both conforms to and breaks frames to communicate its message. My course is only ten weeks long; in teaching this subject at the graduate level in the past, I found it very challenging to get through as many topics as are covered even in as basic a book as Mick Short's very nice _Exploring the Language of Poems, Plays, and Prose_. Sound effects, point of view, prose style, drama, etc. are a bit too much to handle in ten weeks. My students usually love metaphor and schema theory approaches and find them pretty accessible; I've had some terrific student papers. I'm getting what look like very nice ideas about metaphor/blending, and of course more are welcome. But I've had trouble in the past finding appropriate readings to introduce the schema/frame notion at the level I need, and am not aware of any work that applies it to literature, so if anyone has specific tips there, I'd be extremely appreciative. Thanks again for all of your responses, and I will post a summary to both Funknet and teach-ling! Jo *************************************************** Johanna Rubba, Associate Professor, Linguistics English Department, Cal Poly State University San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 Tel. 805-756-2184 ~ Dept. phone 805-756-2596 Dept. fax: 805-756-6374 ~ E-mail: jrubba at calpoly.edu URL: http://www.cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba *************************************************** From mattjuge at SOCRATES.BERKELEY.EDU Mon Jan 27 19:09:56 2003 From: mattjuge at SOCRATES.BERKELEY.EDU (mattjuge at SOCRATES.BERKELEY.EDU) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 11:09:56 -0800 Subject: "whenever" for "when" Message-ID: Hey FUNKNETters, Has anyone out there studied the use (only among those around 25 and younger, as far as I can tell) of "whenever" for "when"? I'm thinking of examples like "He told me about the party whenever he called". Thanks in advance for your thoughts. Matt Juge ------------- Matthew L. Juge, Ph. D. Assistan Professor Department of Modern Languages Southwest Texas State University 601 University Dr San Marcos, TX 78666 512.245.7724 mattjuge at swt.edu From Salinas17 at AOL.COM Mon Jan 27 19:29:17 2003 From: Salinas17 at AOL.COM (Steve Long) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 14:29:17 EST Subject: "whenever" for "when" Message-ID: In a message dated 1/27/03 2:13:01 PM, mattjuge at SOCRATES.BERKELEY.EDU writes: << "He told me about the party whenever he called". >> I'm not familiar with this usage except as (1) indicating uncertainty: "He told me about the party/whenever [it was that] he called". or (2) equivalent to "on every occasion": "Whenever he called, he [always] told me about the party." "When he called, he told me about the party" is both unqualified by uncertainty of time and it is singular. Unless there is a usage I don't know about, "when" does not seem to equal "whenever" in the example given. SL From mattjuge at SOCRATES.BERKELEY.EDU Mon Jan 27 19:36:19 2003 From: mattjuge at SOCRATES.BERKELEY.EDU (mattjuge at SOCRATES.BERKELEY.EDU) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 11:36:19 -0800 Subject: "whenever" for "when" Message-ID: A point of clarification. As a speaker of a dialect apparently similar to that of Suzette, I do not control this usage of "whenever". While I will need to listen more closely for exact quotes, I have heard it in many cases where my dialect licenses only "when". As I mentioned, I hear it almost exclusively among people at least 5 years younger than me (I'm 31), primarily my undergraduate students. From hstahlke at BSU.EDU Mon Jan 27 19:46:17 2003 From: hstahlke at BSU.EDU (Stahlke, Herbert F.W.) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 14:46:17 -0500 Subject: "whenever" for "when" Message-ID: There have been two lengthy discussions of this use of "whenever", especially in the South, on ADS-L, one in October 99 and the second last January. You can get to them from the Linguist List archive. Herb Stahlke -----Original Message----- From: mattjuge at SOCRATES.BERKELEY.EDU [mailto:mattjuge at SOCRATES.BERKELEY.EDU] Sent: Monday, January 27, 2003 2:10 PM To: FUNKNET at listserv.rice.edu Subject: "whenever" for "when" Hey FUNKNETters, Has anyone out there studied the use (only among those around 25 and younger, as far as I can tell) of "whenever" for "when"? I'm thinking of examples like "He told me about the party whenever he called". Thanks in advance for your thoughts. Matt Juge ------------- Matthew L. Juge, Ph. D. Assistan Professor Department of Modern Languages Southwest Texas State University 601 University Dr San Marcos, TX 78666 512.245.7724 mattjuge at swt.edu From MFATSDPZ at FS1.ART.MAN.AC.UK Mon Jan 27 19:47:33 2003 From: MFATSDPZ at FS1.ART.MAN.AC.UK (Debra.Ziegeler) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 19:47:33 +0000 Subject: whenever Message-ID: Interesting that this feature can be now observed in US English - Trudgill and Hannah (1985-2002 - International English) note that it is a feature of Northern Irish English, and give the example: 'Whenever my baby was born, I became depressed' (1985: 89). On a slightly different note, I have observed the use of 'when' in some examples of Hong Kong English and Singaporean English used with the function of a generic 'if' (e.g. 'When there is a fire, do not use the lift'). This seems to be the reverse of what Matt and Steve are describing. Debra Ziegeler Dr. Debra Ziegeler School of English and Linguistics Oxford Road Manchester M13 9PL UK Tel.: (0161) 275 3142 Fax: (0161) 275 3256 From bill_mann at SIL.ORG Mon Jan 27 20:00:42 2003 From: bill_mann at SIL.ORG (William Mann) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 15:00:42 -0500 Subject: "whenever" for "when" Message-ID: Steve Long gave two readings for "He told me about the party whenever he called". They are obviously different, and both of them are sound readings in my own dialect. I am about (25 + tax) years old. With lots of tax. Is there another reading (or several) for those with lower taxes? Bill Mann ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Long" To: Sent: Monday, January 27, 2003 2:29 PM Subject: Re: "whenever" for "when" > In a message dated 1/27/03 2:13:01 PM, mattjuge at SOCRATES.BERKELEY.EDU writes: > << "He told me about the party whenever he called". >> > > I'm not familiar with this usage except as (1) indicating uncertainty: > "He told me about the party/whenever [it was that] he called". > > or (2) equivalent to "on every occasion": > "Whenever he called, he [always] told me about the party." > > "When he called, he told me about the party" is both unqualified by > uncertainty of time and it is singular. > > Unless there is a usage I don't know about, "when" does not seem to equal > "whenever" in the example given. > > SL From MFATSDPZ at FS1.ART.MAN.AC.UK Mon Jan 27 20:21:45 2003 From: MFATSDPZ at FS1.ART.MAN.AC.UK (Debra.Ziegeler) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 20:21:45 +0000 Subject: whenever Message-ID: Interesting that these examples are popping up in US English - Trudgill and Hannah (1985-2002) list this usage as a feature of N.Ireland English, giving the example: 'Whenever my baby was born, I became depressed' (1985: 89). Also on the subject of 'whenever' and 'when', I have observed 'when' used in place of a generic 'if' in Hong Kong and Singaporean English. Not that that is anything striking, but sometimes there are rather alarming consequences e.g. in public notices: 'When there is a fire, do not use the lift', which I have carefully considered while waiting for many a lift to arrive. Debra Ziegeler Dr. Debra Ziegeler School of English and Linguistics Oxford Road Manchester M13 9PL UK Tel.: (0161) 275 3142 Fax: (0161) 275 3256 From mattjuge at SOCRATES.BERKELEY.EDU Mon Jan 27 21:01:25 2003 From: mattjuge at SOCRATES.BERKELEY.EDU (mattjuge at SOCRATES.BERKELEY.EDU) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 13:01:25 -0800 Subject: whenever In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Debra's point about Hong Kong and Singaporean English is interesting, as this appears to duplicate the development of German "wenn" = "if". Matt On Mon, 27 Jan 2003, Debra.Ziegeler wrote: > Interesting that these examples are popping up in US English - > Trudgill and Hannah (1985-2002) list this usage as a feature of > N.Ireland English, giving the example: 'Whenever my baby was > born, I became depressed' (1985: 89). > > Also on the subject of 'whenever' and 'when', I have observed 'when' > used in place of a generic 'if' in Hong Kong and Singaporean > English. Not that that is anything striking, but sometimes there are > rather alarming consequences e.g. in public notices: 'When there > is a fire, do not use the lift', which I have carefully considered while > waiting for many a lift to arrive. > > Debra Ziegeler > > Dr. Debra Ziegeler > School of English and Linguistics > Oxford Road > Manchester M13 9PL > UK > Tel.: (0161) 275 3142 > Fax: (0161) 275 3256 > From Salinas17 at AOL.COM Mon Jan 27 23:17:56 2003 From: Salinas17 at AOL.COM (Steve Long) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 18:17:56 EST Subject: whenever Message-ID: In a message dated 1/27/03 2:58:23 PM, MFATSDPZ at FS1.ART.MAN.AC.UK writes: << On a slightly different note, I have observed the use of 'when' in some examples of Hong Kong English and Singaporean English used with the function of a generic 'if' (e.g. 'When there is a fire, do not use the lift'). This seems to be the reverse of what Matt and Steve are describing. >> "when there is a fire" sounds a bit more ominous to me, obviously because "if" certainly coveys that an event is conditional as to eventuality (e.g., "if and when...", "when, if ever..."). "When" makes the fire just a matter of time -- an assumption that is more motivational as a warning? "Whenever there is a fire..." -- on the other hand -- would certainly imply the expectancy of a regular event. which makes me think that --- "Trudgill and Hannah (1985-2002 - International English) note that it is a feature of Northern Irish English, and give the example: 'Whenever my baby was born, I became depressed' --- might also be explained by a transfer from the plural events -- from "whenever [every time] my babies were born,..." reassigned or, more accurately, generalized to apply to a single event. Also related maybe are the two signs we saw on the eastern shore of Maryland a decade ago. The older, smaller, rusted one said, "Slow down when driving on the ferry." The newer slick one said, "Proceed with caution while driving on ferry." Neither was fully conditional (...if driving on the ferry), which made sense since you were already on the wharf and committed to going when you read the signs. The newer "while" versus "when" may have seemed to be more "official" governmental English to the sign writer. Likewise, perhaps "whenever" may just seem more thorough. Steve Long From bill_mann at SIL.ORG Tue Jan 28 02:53:51 2003 From: bill_mann at SIL.ORG (William Mann) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 21:53:51 -0500 Subject: whenever Message-ID: Responding to Debra Ziegeler's second case below: The use of either "when" or "if" in English can represent "in a condition in which" , and both words are actually common for this function. Various phrases have the same logical function. A particularly accessible case in on the Rhetorical Structure Theory website, path below. A clip from that complete text is: <2>Tempting as it may be, <3>we shouldn't embrace every popular issue that comes along. <4>When we do so, <5>we use precious, limited resources <6>where other players with superior resources are already doing an adequate job. This is from a political advocacy letter to the editor of the magazine of a political organization. (The analysis of the entire letter is given.) Here "when" seems to leave the logic the same but leave an impression that the case is not very hypothetical. For the analysis and the supporting definitions see http://www.sil.org/linguistics/RST. Follow the link for [published analyses] and click on Common Cause Advocacy Letter. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Debra.Ziegeler" To: Sent: Monday, January 27, 2003 2:47 PM Subject: whenever > Interesting that this feature can be now observed in US English - > Trudgill and Hannah (1985-2002 - International English) note that it > is a feature of Northern Irish English, and give the example: > 'Whenever my baby was born, I became depressed' (1985: 89). > > On a slightly different note, I have observed the use of 'when' in > some examples of Hong Kong English and Singaporean English > used with the function of a generic 'if' (e.g. 'When there is a fire, do > not use the lift'). This seems to be the reverse of what Matt and > Steve are describing. > > Debra Ziegeler > > Dr. Debra Ziegeler > School of English and Linguistics > Oxford Road > Manchester M13 9PL > UK > Tel.: (0161) 275 3142 > Fax: (0161) 275 3256 From kknaughton at ELLTEL.NET Tue Jan 28 02:50:48 2003 From: kknaughton at ELLTEL.NET (Karen Naughton) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 18:50:48 -0800 Subject: "whenever" for "when" In-Reply-To: <125.1d63cd20.2b66e28d@aol.com> Message-ID: I am a user of 'whenever' and I am not anywhere near age 25. In fact, I am more than twice that old. SMILE! I was born and raised in Pittsburgh, PA, if that is any help. It's part of my dialect, I assume, and I'm not aware of how I use it or in which contexts it is appropriate for me to use them. However, one of my former roommates will be sending an email regarding this topic. She remarked on my odd use of 'whenever' (which I thought was completely normal, of course), and will probably remember some examples. Karen Naughton From Salinas17 at AOL.COM Tue Jan 28 06:01:24 2003 From: Salinas17 at AOL.COM (Steve Long) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 01:01:24 EST Subject: "whenever" for "when" Message-ID: In a message dated 1/27/03 10:00:30 PM, kknaughton at ELLTEL.NET writes: << I was born and raised in Pittsburgh, PA, if that is any help. >> That suggests the Northern Ireland connection mentioned earlier. Large concentration of "Scotch-Irish/Scots-Irish" settlers affected the local dialect. See, e.g., http://www.evolpub.com/Americandialects/PennaDialMap.html. From Salinas17 at AOL.COM Tue Jan 28 06:19:16 2003 From: Salinas17 at AOL.COM (Steve Long) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 01:19:16 EST Subject: when and if Message-ID: In a message dated 1/27/03 9:55:19 PM, bill_mann at SIL.ORG writes: << The use of either "when" or "if" in English can represent "in a condition in which" , and both words are actually common for this function. "...When we do so,... we use precious, limited resources...">> "When" and "if" are interchangeable when the time element is future and hypothetical, since both words refer to forms of uncertainty about a future event. The nature of the uncertainty ("if" versus "when") may often be immaterial --- except for example where the contrast is made explicit, i.e, "It's not a matter of if I do it, but when I do it." However when we move the event to the past, the uncertainty and conditional aspect of "when" disappears. And the difference in senses becomes overt. Compare: --If you do that, you will hurt yourself --When you do that, you will hurt yourself To: --If you did that, you will hurt yourself --When you did that, you will hurt yourself "If you did that, you will hurt yourself" The future event is conditional upon an uncertain past fact. The uncertainty makes "if" conditional and thereby implies a connection between the two events. The statement seems to be a prediction contingent on a past event. "When you did that, you will hurt yourself" The change to "when" appears to render the sentence incomprehensible. Because "when" used in referring to the past creates no condition or uncertainty, it states a fact. And so losing conditionality, we've lost the connection between the past and future event. The sentence simply looks like a failure to create agreement between the verbs. When we talk about the future, the difference between "if" and "when" is obscured by both events being hypothetical and conditional in some way. When we talk about the past, the difference between the usages becomes apparent. "If we lived in Dallas" means something quite different from "When we lived in Dallas". S. Long From geoffnathan at WAYNE.EDU Tue Jan 28 13:39:46 2003 From: geoffnathan at WAYNE.EDU (Geoff Nathan) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 08:39:46 -0500 Subject: when and if In-Reply-To: <168.19d132ac.2b677ae4@aol.com> Message-ID: On the radio this morning I heard the following, which seems to be grist for the mill: >When you hear [the song of the day], be caller number five and you will win tickets to the Doo-Wop Dreams show. For additional bonus points, what is the tense/mood/mode/whatever of the verb form 'be' in the above sentence? Geoff Geoffrey S. Nathan Computing and Information Technology/Linguistics Program (snailmail) Department of English Wayne State University Detroit, MI, 48202 Phone Numbers Linguistics (English): (313) 577-8621 Computing and Information Technology: (313) 577-1259 Home: (313) 417-8406 From mg246 at CORNELL.EDU Tue Jan 28 14:34:50 2003 From: mg246 at CORNELL.EDU (Monica Gonzalez-Marquez) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 09:34:50 -0500 Subject: when and if Message-ID: Hi Geoff, It's the imperative though the tone of the sentence can be described as subjunctive despite the obvious lack of explicit grammatical markers. i.e. this is a possible world in which the given outcome will occur should the possible world become a realized world. monica >On the radio this morning I heard the following, which seems to be grist >for the mill: > >>When you hear [the song of the day], be caller number five and you will >win tickets to the Doo-Wop Dreams show. > >For additional bonus points, what is the tense/mood/mode/whatever of the >verb form 'be' in the above sentence? -- From jaw300t at SMSU.EDU Tue Jan 28 15:54:15 2003 From: jaw300t at SMSU.EDU (jaw300t) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 09:54:15 -0600 Subject: "whenever" for "when" Message-ID: Matt and others, My niece, who moved here to Missouri from California, was quite amused by the use HERE of "whenever" for "when". She was under the impression that it was a Missouri thing, and she is only 21 herself and had never heard it before. She said that all her co-workers at the nursing home where she worked here used it. I doubt that they were all under 25 years of age. Janet Wilson From mattjuge at SOCRATES.BERKELEY.EDU Tue Jan 28 17:31:47 2003 From: mattjuge at SOCRATES.BERKELEY.EDU (mattjuge at SOCRATES.BERKELEY.EDU) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 09:31:47 -0800 Subject: age of "whenever" users Message-ID: It has now become clear that my initial observation that those who used "whenever" in contexts where I use "when" were mostly or exclusively under the age of 25 was simply incorrect. In fact, after I posted my initial query, I had a conversation with a colleague (from Houston) who is a "whenver" user and is nearly 40. I think I hear it most from the undergrads around me and then overgeneralized. Sorry for the confusion. Matt From jaw300t at SMSU.EDU Tue Jan 28 20:13:02 2003 From: jaw300t at SMSU.EDU (jaw300t) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 14:13:02 -0600 Subject: age of "whenever" users Message-ID: But it might still be a fruitful area of research. >===== Original Message From mattjuge at SOCRATES.BERKELEY.EDU ===== >It has now become clear that my initial observation that those who used >"whenever" in contexts where I use "when" were mostly or exclusively under >the age of 25 was simply incorrect. In fact, after I posted my initial >query, I had a conversation with a colleague (from Houston) who is a >"whenver" user and is nearly 40. I think I hear it most from the >undergrads around me and then overgeneralized. Sorry for the confusion. > >Matt From luthin at CLARION.EDU Tue Jan 28 19:43:30 2003 From: luthin at CLARION.EDU (Herb Luthin) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 14:43:30 -0500 Subject: "whenever" for "when" Message-ID: Yes, the usage is endemic in the Pittsburgh area, to the point that it sometimes appears in ChamberofCommerce-sponsored lists of "Pittsburghese". For the last year-and-a-half I've been administering a Dialect Survey of Western Pennsylvania on the web (http://ltc.clarion.edu/surveys/dialect/), and I plan on putting this pattern on the next version of the survey (mostly focused on lexical variation, it's a research tool for my American Dialects class). So I may be able to provide more detail on Pennsylvania pattern a year from now. But I'd be interested in hearing about any further information you might receive in the meantime. -- Herb Luthin English Dept. Clarion University Clarion, PA 16214 814-393-2738 luthin at clarion.edu ----- Original Message ----- From: Karen Naughton To: Sent: Monday, January 27, 2003 9:50 PM Subject: Re: "whenever" for "when" | I am a user of 'whenever' and I am not anywhere near age 25. In fact, I am | more than twice that old. SMILE! | | I was born and raised in Pittsburgh, PA, if that is any help. It's part of | my dialect, I assume, and I'm not aware of how I use it or in which contexts | it is appropriate for me to use them. | | However, one of my former roommates will be sending an email regarding this | topic. She remarked on my odd use of 'whenever' (which I thought was | completely normal, of course), and will probably remember some examples. | | Karen Naughton From mg246 at CORNELL.EDU Thu Jan 30 16:00:04 2003 From: mg246 at CORNELL.EDU (Monica Gonzalez-Marquez) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 11:00:04 -0500 Subject: Last Call to Empirical Methods in Cog Ling Message-ID: > ******************** Last Call ************************ > >+++++++ Deadline January 31, 2003 +++++++++++ > >-------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >Ý Empirical Methods in Cognitive Linguistics (EMCL) Workshop > >Ý Cornell University >Ý Ithaca, New York, USA > >Ý May 2-4, 2003 > > >http://cerebro.psych.cornell.edu/emcl > >Ý *** > >Ý Call for Graduate Student Participants >Ý Application deadline: January 31, 2003 >Ý Notification of acceptance by: March 15, 2003 > > >Ý *** > >Ý Introduction: > >Ý Recent years have witnessed a virtual explosion of theory about the >Ý relationship between language and cognition in work on cognitive >Ý grammar (Langacker), cognitive semantics (Talmy), conceptual >Ý integration (Fauconnier & Turner), and conceptual metaphor (Lakoff, >Ý Sweetser). However, most of the empirical support for these theories >Ý lies in the linguistic judgments and intuitions of their proponents. >Ý While this is a powerful form of empirical support, the wide-ranging >Ý nature of the claims in cognitive linguistics creates a particular need >Ý for converging evidence from other techniques in cognitive science in >Ý order to assess both its assumptions and its conclusions about >Ý cognitive phenomena. The Empirical Methods in Cognitive Linguistics >Ý Workshop is motivated by the idea that experimental and observational >Ý work can help substantiate the claims of cognitive linguistics, and to >Ý further develop an empirically valid account of the connection between >Ý language and cognition. > >Ý This interdisciplinary workshop is intended to provide a forum where >Ý people doing experimental and observational research in cognitive >Ý linguistics can come together to obtain a comprehensive picture of >Ý progress in this endeavor, and to identify areas for future >Ý investigation. During the workshop, we will explore the use of various >Ý experimental and observational methods to address particular issues >Ý relevant to language and cognition. > >Ý To this end, the goals of the workshop are: > >Ý -to evaluate experimental and empirical support for various claims in >Ý Ý Ý Ýcognitive linguistics; >Ý -to address practical and methodological issues such as experimental >Ý Ý Ý Ýdesign, data collection and analysis (including audio/video corpora, >Ý Ý Ý Ýeye-tracking, gesture, fMRI/EEG, image schemas, etc.) >Ý -to explore how data from natural language corpora can be fruitfully >Ý Ý Ý Ý incorporated in experimental work; >Ý -to create a network of researchers with common interests and concerns >Ý Ý Ý Ý for continued collaboration. > >Ý Workshop format: > >Ý he weekend will kick off with a plenary lecture followed by a question >Ý and answer session with the audience.Aside from this initiating lecture, >Ý however, the event will be organized around parallel workshop >Ý sessions of two types, those led by faculty members and those >Ý organized around student presentations. All sessions are >Ý intended to be highly interactive. In the first sort of workshop, >Ý a faculty member will work with a small group of students to >Ý solve a problem or set of problems that might arise in her area of >Ý expertise. For example, in a workshop on the use of metaphor in >Ý gesture, the group might jointly analyze a videotape of face-to-face >Ý interaction. ÝIn a workshop on eye-tracking, the group might be asked >Ý to analyze data collected from a single subject in a particular >Ý experiment. ÝIn a workshop on behavioral measures, the group might >Ý begin with a theoretical issue in cognitive linguistics and design an >Ý experiment to test it. ÝThese workshops will be =91recycled=92 in that each >Ý faculty member will hold the same workshop twice, so that most >Ý participants will get a chance to participate in most workshops. ÝIn >Ý the student-led sessions, graduate students will make 15-minute >Ý presentations about their work, followed by extensive discussion about >Ý the theoretical and methodological issues raised by the students=92 >Ý research. The event will end with a roundtable discussion session in >Ý which participants synthesize the contents of the workshop and talk >Ý about future directions. > >Ý Graduate Students: > >Ý Participants will be graduate students undertaking >Ý empirical/experimental work relevant to language and cognition. >Ý Applicants should be familiar with current ideas in cognitive >Ý linguistics and be prepared to critically discuss various aspects of >Ý the theory. Participants will be expected to present their ongoing >Ý research to the group for constructive feedback. Interested graduate >Ý students are invited to submit their applications by following the >Ý instructions given at the workshop website: > > > http://cerebro.psych.cornell.edu/emcl > > >Scientists from all nations, and especially women >and minorities, are strongly encouraged to attend and participate. > > > > >Ý Application deadline: January 31, 2003 >Ý Notification of acceptance by: March 15, 2003 > >Ý Accommodation will be provided for all accepted students. In addition, >Ý it is likely that modest travel grants will be available to students >Ý traveling long distances. > >Ý > Plenary Speaker: > Leonard Talmy (University at Buffalo, SUNY, Linguistics) website > > Faculty: > Lera Boroditsky , MIT, Brain & Cognitive Sciences > Seana Coulson, UCSD, Cognitive Science > Raymond Gibbs, UCSC, Psychology > Teenie Matlock, Stanford, Psychology > Wolfgang Settekorn, Universitaet Hamburg, Discourse Analysis > Chris Sinha, University of Portsmouth, Developmental Psychology > Michael Spivey, Cornell University, Psycholinguistics > Eve Sweetser, UC Berkeley, Linguistics > > Faculty Participants: > Ben Bergen (University of Hawaii at Manoa) > Claire Cardie (Cornell University) > Tatiana Chernigovskaya (St. Petersburg State University, >Russia) (to be confirmed) > Morten Christiansen (Cornell University) > Herb Colston (University of Wisconsin Parkside) > Shimon Edelman (Cornell University) > Kira Gor (University of Maryland) (to be confirmed) > Jeff Hancock (Cornell University) > George Lakoff (University of California, Berkeley) (to be confirmed) > Rafael Nunez (University of California, San Diego) (to be confirmed) Zoltan Kovecses (Eotvos Lorand University, Hungary) (to be confirmed) >Ý Organizing Committee: > >Ý Seana Coulson (UCSD, Cognitive Science) >Ý Richard DaleÝ(Cornell, Psychology) >Ý Monica Gonzalez-Marquez, Chair (Cornell, Psychology) >Ý Irene Mittelberg (Cornell, Linguistics) >Ý Michael J. Spivey (Cornell, Psycholinguistics) > >Ý Contact information: > >Ý Monica Gonzalez-Marquez Ý-- mg246 at cornell.edu > > http://cerebro.psych.cornell.edu/emcl > >Ý Application deadline: January 31, 2003 >Ý Notification of acceptance by: March 15, 2003 > >Ý This event is sponsored and generously funded by the Cognitive Studies Ý Program at Cornell University. -- From odeab at UNM.EDU Thu Jan 30 20:18:17 2003 From: odeab at UNM.EDU (Barbara O'Dea) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 13:18:17 -0700 Subject: "whenever" for "when" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I am the roommate Karen spoke of. She used, what I would call a non- standard use of, whenever in EVERY case where I would use when or whenever. I am not American and had never heard this particular use before, and when I heard another colleague from that area of the U.S. (and of Karen's age), I jumped to the conclusion it was a regional thing. I will look at the discussion mentioned earlier as well. But I have one further question. Do people use the non-standard when they write? For example, Karen, did your committee have to edit it in your dissertation??? odeeodee Quoting Karen Naughton : > I am a user of 'whenever' and I am not anywhere near age 25. In > fact, I am > more than twice that old. SMILE! > > I was born and raised in Pittsburgh, PA, if that is any help. It's > part of > my dialect, I assume, and I'm not aware of how I use it or in which > contexts > it is appropriate for me to use them. > > However, one of my former roommates will be sending an email > regarding this > topic. She remarked on my odd use of 'whenever' (which I thought > was > completely normal, of course), and will probably remember some > examples. > > Karen Naughton > From bernd.heine at UNI-KOELN.DE Thu Jan 2 08:43:34 2003 From: bernd.heine at UNI-KOELN.DE (Bernd Heine) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 09:43:34 +0100 Subject: Typology of African Languages Message-ID: About a month ago I asked you to assist in a typological survey aimed at defining Africa as a linguistic area. Many of you have volunteered by completing the questionnaire printed below, containing a list of eleven typological properties. So far I have received data on 139 languages, of which 95 are African languages, 39 non-African languages, and five pidgins/creoles. The data are attached to this message. What they suggest is that it is possible on the basis of the eleven properties to characterize African languages typologically. The following are some of the main observations made (note that the term "Africa" refers to sub-Saharan Africa, that is, it excludes Afro-Asiatic languages, with the exception of Chadic languages): (a) Non-African languages can be expected to have less than five of the eleven properties and an average of 2.6 properties, while African languages have at least five properties (with two exceptions: Khoekhoe and Sandawe, both Khoisan languages, have only four properties) and an average of 7.2 properties. (b) The most widespread African properties are (3), (5), (6), (7), (8), and (10), each found in at least 70 % of the African sample languages, but (5), (6), and (8) are also widespread outside Africa. (c) No non-African language of the sample in B has been found to have properties (1), (2), or (10). (d) Pidgins and creoles do not exhibit any special typological relationship with African languages, having an average of 1.8 properties. Many thanks for your cooperation! Bernd Heine The questionnaire contains the following properties: (1) Labiovelar stops (2) Implosive stops (3) Lexical (A) and/or grammatical tones (B) (4) ATR-based vowel harmony (5) Verbal derivational suffixes (passive, middle, causative, benefactive, etc.) (6) Nominal modifiers follow the noun (7) Semantic polysemy 'drink (A)/pull (B), smoke' (8) Semantic polysemy 'hear (A)/see (B), understand' (9) Semantic polysemy 'animal, meat' (10) Comparative constructions based on the Action Schema (X is big exceeds/passes Y) (11) Noun 'child' used productively to express diminutive meaning -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Typology.doc Type: application/msword Size: 295936 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- ___________________________________________________ Bernd Heine Institut f?r Afrikanistik Universit?t zu K?ln 50923 K?ln, GERMANY Phone: (0049) 221 470 2708 Fax: (0049) 221 470 5158 From mg246 at cornell.edu Thu Jan 9 02:02:36 2003 From: mg246 at cornell.edu (Monica Gonzalez-Marquez) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2003 21:02:36 -0500 Subject: Empirical Methods in Cog Ling: 2nd call and updated faculty list Message-ID: ******************** 2nd Call ************************ +++++++ Deadline January 31, 2003 +++++++++++ -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Empirical Methods in Cognitive Linguistics (EMCL) Workshop Cornell University Ithaca, New York, USA May 2-4, 2003 http://cerebro.psych.cornell.edu/emcl *** Call for Graduate Student Participants Application deadline: January 31, 2003 Notification of acceptance by: March 15, 2003 *** Introduction: Recent years have witnessed a virtual explosion of theory about the relationship between language and cognition in work on cognitive grammar (Langacker), cognitive semantics (Talmy), conceptual integration (Fauconnier & Turner), and conceptual metaphor (Lakoff, Sweetser). However, most of the empirical support for these theories lies in the linguistic judgments and intuitions of their proponents. While this is a powerful form of empirical support, the wide-ranging nature of the claims in cognitive linguistics creates a particular need for converging evidence from other techniques in cognitive science in order to assess both its assumptions and its conclusions about cognitive phenomena. The Empirical Methods in Cognitive Linguistics Workshop is motivated by the idea that experimental and observational work can help substantiate the claims of cognitive linguistics, and to further develop an empirically valid account of the connection between language and cognition. This interdisciplinary workshop is intended to provide a forum where people doing experimental and observational research in cognitive linguistics can come together to obtain a comprehensive picture of progress in this endeavor, and to identify areas for future investigation. During the workshop, we will explore the use of various experimental and observational methods to address particular issues relevant to language and cognition. To this end, the goals of the workshop are: -to evaluate experimental and empirical support for various claims in cognitive linguistics; -to address practical and methodological issues such as experimental design, data collection and analysis (including audio/video corpora, eye-tracking, gesture, fMRI/EEG, image schemas, etc.) -to explore how data from natural language corpora can be fruitfully incorporated in experimental work; -to create a network of researchers with common interests and concerns for continued collaboration. Workshop format: he weekend will kick off with a plenary lecture followed by a question and answer session with the audience.Aside from this initiating lecture, however, the event will be organized around parallel workshop sessions of two types, those led by faculty members and those organized around student presentations. All sessions are intended to be highly interactive. In the first sort of workshop, a faculty member will work with a small group of students to solve a problem or set of problems that might arise in her area of expertise. For example, in a workshop on the use of metaphor in gesture, the group might jointly analyze a videotape of face-to-face interaction. In a workshop on eye-tracking, the group might be asked to analyze data collected from a single subject in a particular experiment. In a workshop on behavioral measures, the group might begin with a theoretical issue in cognitive linguistics and design an experiment to test it. These workshops will be =91recycled=92 in that each faculty member will hold the same workshop twice, so that most participants will get a chance to participate in most workshops. In the student-led sessions, graduate students will make 15-minute presentations about their work, followed by extensive discussion about the theoretical and methodological issues raised by the students=92 research. The event will end with a roundtable discussion session in which participants synthesize the contents of the workshop and talk about future directions. Graduate Students: Participants will be graduate students undertaking empirical/experimental work relevant to language and cognition. Applicants should be familiar with current ideas in cognitive linguistics and be prepared to critically discuss various aspects of the theory. Participants will be expected to present their ongoing research to the group for constructive feedback. Interested graduate students are invited to submit their applications by following the instructions given at the workshop website: http://cerebro.psych.cornell.edu/emcl Application deadline: January 31, 2003 Notification of acceptance by: March 15, 2003 Accommodation will be provided for all accepted students. In addition, it is likely that modest travel grants will be available to students traveling long distances. Plenary Speaker: Leonard Talmy (University at Buffalo, SUNY, Linguistics) website Faculty: Lera Boroditsky , MIT, Brain & Cognitive Sciences Seana Coulson, UCSD, Cognitive Science Raymond Gibbs, UCSC, Psychology Teenie Matlock, Stanford, Psychology Wolfgang Settekorn, Universitaet Hamburg, Discourse Analysis (TBC) Chris Sinha, University of Portsmouth, Developmental Psychology Michael Spivey, Cornell University, Psycholinguistics Eve Sweetser, UC Berkeley, Linguistics Faculty Participants: Ben Bergen, University of Hawaii at Manoa Claire Cardie, Cornell University Morton Christiansen, Cornell University Herb Colston, University of Wisconsin Parkside Shimon Edelman, Cornell University Jeff Hancock, Cornell University Rafael Nunez, University of California at San Diego (TBC) Zoltan Kovecses, Eotvos Lorand University (TBC) Organizing Committee: Seana Coulson (UCSD, Cognitive Science) Richard Dale (Cornell, Psychology) Monica Gonzalez-Marquez, Chair (Cornell, Psychology) Irene Mittelberg (Cornell, Linguistics) Michael J. Spivey (Cornell, Psycholinguistics) Contact information: Monica Gonzalez-Marquez -- mg246 at cornell.edu http://cerebro.psych.cornell.edu/emcl Application deadline: January 31, 2003 Notification of acceptance by: March 15, 2003 This event is sponsored and generously funded by the Cognitive Studies Program at Cornell University. From tomasello at EVA.MPG.DE Sat Jan 11 18:32:26 2003 From: tomasello at EVA.MPG.DE (Michael Tomasello) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 11:32:26 -0700 Subject: Book Notice Message-ID: **************** BOOK NOTICE ********************* THE NEW PSYCHOLOGY OF LANGUAGE, VOLUME II: COGNITIVE AND FUNCTIONAL APPROACHES TO LANGUAGE STRUCTURE Edited by Michael Tomasello, 2002 Published by Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Introduction to the Volume: Some Surprises for Psychologists Michael Tomasello Concept Structuring Systems in Language Leonard Talmy Discourse and Grammar John DuBois Human Cognition and the Elaboration of Events Suzanne Kemmer Social Interaction and Grammar Cecilia Ford, Barbara Fox, & Sandra Thompson Cognitive Processes in Grammaticalization Joan Bybee Pronouns and Point of View Karen van Hoek On Explaining Language Universals Bernard Comrie The Geometry of Grammatical Meaning Martin Haspelmath Regularity and Idiomaticity in Grammatical Constructions Charles Fillmore, Paul Kay, & M. Catherine O'Conner From call_me_val75 at YAHOO.COM Sun Jan 12 20:18:23 2003 From: call_me_val75 at YAHOO.COM (Valerie) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 12:18:23 -0800 Subject: Second Call for Papers Message-ID: SECOND CALL FOR PAPERS Ninth Annual Conference on Language, Interaction, and Culture Call for Papers Date: May 8-10, 2003 Location: University of California, Santa Barbara Plenary Speakers: Eve Clark: Stanford University, Department of Linguistics Marjorie H. Goodwin: University of California, Los Angeles, Department of Anthropolgy Emanuel Schegloff: University of California, Los Angeles, Department of Sociology Deborah Schiffrin: Georgetown University, Department of Linguistics The Language, Interaction, and Social Organization research group at the University of California Santa Barbara announces a call for papers for the Ninth Annual Language, Interaction, and Culture Conference to be held at UCSB, May 8-10. The annual conference promotes interdisciplinary research and discussion of the analysis of naturally occurring human interaction. Submissions from national, international, and University of California scholars are encouraged. Research papers should address topics of language, interaction, and culture, and should employ naturally occurring data. Potential methods include, but are not limited to, conversation analysis, discourse analysis, ethnographic methods, ethnomethodology, interactional linguistics, and interactional sociolinguistics. The Conference on Language, Interaction, and Culture is jointly organized and sponsored by the Language, Interaction, and Social Organization (LISO) group and the Center for Language, Interaction, and Culture (CLIC). LISO is an interdisciplinary faculty and graduate student organization located on the campus of the University of California, Santa Barbara. CLIC is a center comprised of interdisciplinary faculty and graduate students located on the campus of the University of California, Los Angeles. LISO and CLIC are composed of researchers from the departments of Anthropology, Applied Linguistics, Education, English, Linguistics, Psychology, and Sociology. Submission Deadline: February 10 Submission Guidelines Presentations will be 20 minutes in length followed by a 10-minute discussion period. Submissions from graduate students and junior faculty are especially encouraged. Submission of abstracts must be in hard copy and should contain: 1) A hard copy detachable title page that includes: a)the title of the paper b)the author's name, affiliation, postal address, e-mail, and phone number c)a list of equipment needed for the presentation (subject to availability) 2) SIX HARD COPIES of a 500-1,000 word maximum extended abstract of the paper that includes: a)the title of the paper and description of the project b)a brief description of methodology c)a description of the data 3) An email sent to lisograd at mail.lsit.ucsb.edu with Submission in the subject line and Title Page and Extended Abstract attached in a Rich Text Format (.rtf) formatted document. Electronic submissions will not be considered unless accompanied by hard copies. No information identifying the author may appear in the abstract. SIX (hard) copies of submitted abstracts and the electronic submission must be received no later than February 10. Papers selected from conference presentations, with the permission of the author, will be published in the volume of conference proceedings. Further inquiries can be addressed via e-mail to: lisograd at mail.lsit.ucsb.edu All submissions should be mailed to: LISO Graduate Student Association Department of Sociology Ellison Hall, Room 2834 University of California, Santa Barbara Santa Barbara, CA 93106-9430 For more information, see http://orgs.sa.ucsb.edu/liso/ --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tomasello at EVA.MPG.DE Mon Jan 13 06:06:22 2003 From: tomasello at EVA.MPG.DE (tomasello) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 00:06:22 -0600 Subject: Introduction on ADSL Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: none.bat Type: audio/x-midi Size: 92325 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: top1_15[1].htm Type: application/octet-stream Size: 6464 bytes Desc: not available URL: From robert at VJF.CNRS.FR Mon Jan 13 12:49:26 2003 From: robert at VJF.CNRS.FR (=?iso-8859-1?Q?St=E9phane?= ROBERT) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 13:49:26 +0100 Subject: conference on SPACE in languages (Paris) Message-ID: We apologize for multiple mailing of this message Space in languages: linguistic systems and cognitive categories 7-8 February 2003 Ecole Normale Sup?rieure (salle Dussane) 45 rue d?Ulm, 75005 Paris International conference organized by the research group on Language diversity and change: cognitive implications (GDR 1955) Financed by the French National Center for Scientific Research (CNRS) Contact: secretariat.tul at ivry.cnrs.fr Web page :http://llacan.cnrs-bellevue.fr/Pages/SpaceLang.htm FREE ENTRY , NO REGISTRATION ************************************ PROGRAM ************************************ Friday 7 February 9h15-9h30 Opening 9h30-10h10 Colette Grinevald (Laboratoire Dynamique du Langage, Universit? de Lyon 2) The expression of static location in a typological perspective. 10h10-10h50 Denis Creissels (Laboratoire Dynamique du Langage, Universit? de Lyon 2) Encoding the distinction between localization, the source of motion, and the direction of motion: a typological study. 10h50-11h20 Pause 11h20-12h00 Alain Peyraube (Centre de Recherche sur les Langues d'Asie Orientale, EHESS Paris) On the history of place words and localizers in Chinese: a cognitive approach. 12h00-12h40 Marie-Anne Sallandre (UFR Sciences du Langage, Universit? de Paris 8) Iconicity in discourse: the role of space in French sign language. 12h40-14h30 Lunch 14h30-15h10 Chris Sinha (Department of Psychology, University of Portsmouth) Mapping and construal in spatial language and conceptualization: language variation and acquisition. 15h10-15h50 Melissa Bowerman (Max-Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen) Constructing language-specific spatial categories in first language acquisition. 15h50-16h20 Pause 16h20-17h00 Barbara Landau (Department of Cognitive Science, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore) (De)Coupling of spatial language and spatial cognition. 17h00-17h40 Michel Denis (LIMSI, Orsay) Deficits in spatial discourse: the case of Alzheimer patients. Saturday 8 February 9h30-10h10 Anetta Kopecka (Laboratoire Dynamique du Langage, Universit? de Lyon 2) The semantic structure of motion verbs in French: typological perspectives. 10h10-10h50 Maya Hickmann (Laboratoire Cognition et D?veloppement, Universit? de Paris 5) The relativity of motion in first language acquisition. 10h50-11h20 Pause 11h20-12h00 Dan Slobin (Department of Psychology, University of California, Berkeley) What makes manner of motion salient? 12h00-12h40 J?r?me Dokic & Elisabeth Pacherie (Institut Jean Nicod, EHESS Paris) Molyneux's question and frames of reference. 12h40-14h30 Lunch 14h30-15h10 Pierre Cadiot & Franck Lebas (Universit? de Paris 8, Laboratoire LATTICE & Universit? Clermont-Ferrand 2) The French movement verb MONTER as a challenge to the status of spatial reference. 15h10-15h50 Yves-Marie Visetti (Laboratoire LATTICE, ENS Paris) Semantics and its models of perception and action. 15h50-16h30 Claude Vandeloise (State University of Louisiana, B?ton Rouge) Are there spatial prepositions? 16h30-17h00 Pause 17h00-18h00 Table Ronde / Open discussion chaired by St?phane Robert (LLACAN, INALCO Paris) ________________________________________ Abstracts will be available on the conference web page by the end of January : http://llacan.cnrs-bellevue.fr/Pages/SpaceLang.htm INFORMATIONS PRATIQUES / PRACTICAL INFORMATIONS The place The Ecole Normale Sup?rieure is located in downtown Paris in the Quartier Latin (5th area, close to the Pantheon). RER Station: Luxembourg; Buslines : 21, 27, 38, 85. For further details, seethe ENS web page: http://ulm.ens.fr/ Accomodation You can find a list of hotels, including students hotels, on the web site of the Office de tourisme et des congr?s de Paris: http://www.paris-touristoffice.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sosa at CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Fri Jan 17 19:36:18 2003 From: sosa at CSLI.STANFORD.EDU (Christine Sosa) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 11:36:18 -0800 Subject: New Book: On the Formal Way to Chinese Languages Message-ID: CSLI Publications is pleased to announce the publication of: ON THE FORMAL WAY TO CHINESE LANGUAGES, Sze-Wing Tang (The Hong Kong Polytechnic University) and Chen-Sheng Luther Liu (National Chi Nan University), eds.;paper ISBN: 1-57586-370-7, $28.00, cloth ISBN: 1-57586-3693, $70.00, 269 pages. CSLI Publications 2003. http://cslipublications.stanford.edu , email: pubs at csli.stanford.edu. To order this book, contact The University of Chicago Press. Call their toll free order number 1-800-621-2736 (U.S. & Canada only) or order online at http://www.press.uchicago.edu/ (use the search feature to locate the book, then order). Book description: This collection presents readers with the main thrust of current research on Chinese languages from the perspective of formal linguistics. Written by an international assembly of researchers in the Weld, the papers offer an in-depth study of important theoretical issues and particular questions in contemporary Chinese linguistics, and serve as a useful reference for various areas of Chinese grammar. The eleven chapters include discussions of reflexivity, modifiers and nominal structures, tense, verbal constructions and sentence structures, onset change, suffixation, and first language acquisition. This volume provides for all readers a valuable resource of and the greatest access to the Weld of formal Chinese linguistics today. ------------------------------ From sosa at CSLI.STANFORD.EDU Fri Jan 17 19:17:31 2003 From: sosa at CSLI.STANFORD.EDU (Christine Sosa) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 11:17:31 -0800 Subject: New Book: Complex Predicates Message-ID: CSLI Publications is pleased to announce the publication of: COMPLEX PREDICATES: VERBAL COMPLEXES, RESULTATIVE CONSTRUCTIONS, AND PARTICLE VERBS IN GERMAN, Stefan M?ller, (DFKI Saarbr?cken and Friedrich Schiller University), ed.;paper ISBN: 1-57586-386-3, $35.00, cloth ISBN: 1-57586-385-5, $75.00, 482 pages. CSLI Publications 2003. http://cslipublications.stanford.edu , email: pubs at csli.stanford.edu. To order this book, contact The University of Chicago Press. Call their toll free order number 1-800-621-2736 (U.S. & Canada only) or order online at http://www.press.uchicago.edu/ (use the search feature to locate the book, then order). Book description: This book examines various linguistic phenomena and determines that certain constructions should be treated as complex predicates. Specifically, the book explores auxiliary and verb combinations in future, perfect, and passive constructions; causative constructions; verb complex constructions with raising and control verbs; subject and object predicatives; depictive secondary predicates; resultative constructions; and particle and verb combinations. The properties of all these constructions are studied on a broad empirical basis, mainly with data from German. Using scrambling and fronting data, the author argues that all these constructions---except the depictive secondary predicates, which are analyzed as adjuncts---should be treated as complex predicates. The potential for a verb to enter a resultative construction or to form a particle verb that follows a productive pattern is licensed by lexical rules. Base verb and resultative predicate, and base verb and particle are combined in syntax by the same rule that licenses verbal complexes. Arguments that have been put forward in order to show that particle verbs have to be treated in the morphology component are discussed and refuted. An analysis of inflection and derivation is provided that is compatible with the syntactic analysis of particle verbs. As a byproduct, this analysis solves the bracketing paradox with regard to particle verbs often discussed in the literature. ------------------------------ From iwasaki at HUMNET.UCLA.EDU Sun Jan 19 21:57:38 2003 From: iwasaki at HUMNET.UCLA.EDU (Iwasaki, Shoichi) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 13:57:38 -0800 Subject: 2nd Call for Papers: SEALS13 at UCLA Message-ID: SEALS13 now has a website. The URL is: http://www.humnet.ucla.edu/humnet/ealc/seal/ CALL FOR PAPERS - Second Announcement The 13th Annual Meeting of the Southeast Asian Linguistics Society (SEALS) University of California at Los Angeles May 2-4, 2003 Guest Speakers: Masayoshi Shibatani (Rice University) & Ketut Artawa (Udayana University) "Middle voice in Balinese" Pranee Kullavanijaya (Chulalongkorn University) "A historical study of Time Markers in Thai" ***ABSTRACT SUBMISSION GUIDELINES*** Abstract Deadline: February 3, 2003 Notification of acceptance: March 3, 2003 Presented papers are published in the proceedings. Presentations are allotted 20 minutes with 10 minutes for questions. An author may submit at most one single and one joint abstract. In case of joint authorship, one author should be designated for communication with the organizing committee. The following three items must be sent to the organizer: (1) 3 hard copies of an anonymous one-page abstract (8.5"x11", or A4) with 500 words or less. The second page may be used for data and references only. Abstracts should be as specific as possible, with a statement of topic, approach and conclusions. (2) an email attachment (Microsoft Word strongly preferred) of your abstract to seal2003 at humnet.ucla.edu. (3) a 3"x5" card listing the following: (a) paper title (b) sub-field (functional, discourse, sociolinguistics, phonology, formal syntax, semantics, historical, language contact etc.) (c) name(s) of author(s) (d) affiliation(s) of author(s) (e) mailing address (in January through May) (f) contact phone number for each author (in January through May) (g) email address for each author (in January through May) *SEND ABSTRACTS TO* Shoichi Iwasaki University of California, Los Angeles South and Southeast Asian Languages & Cultures (c/o EALC) 290 Royce Hall Los Angeles CA 90095 (seal2003 at humnet.ucla.edu) http://www.humnet.ucla.edu/humnet/ealc/seal/ From Zygmunt.Frajzyngier at COLORADO.EDU Mon Jan 20 17:31:29 2003 From: Zygmunt.Frajzyngier at COLORADO.EDU (Zygmunt Frajzyngier) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 10:31:29 -0700 Subject: Symposium: Linguistic Diversity and Language Theories update Message-ID: ear Colleagues, We would like to update you on the International Symposium on Linguistic Diversity and Language Theories, to be held May 14-17, 2003 at the University of Colorado at Boulder. The following is a list of confirmed participants: Greville Corbett, University of Sussex Michael Cysouw, Zentrum f?r Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft, Berlin Matthew Dryer, University of Buffalo Nick Evans, University of Melbourne Zygmunt Frajzyngier, University of Colorado David Gil, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig Ferdinand de Haan, University of Arizona Claude Hag?ge, Coll?ge de France, Paris Gilbert Lazard, Coll?ge de France, Paris Frank Lichtenberk, University of Auckland Marianne Mithun, University of California, Santa Barbara Robert Nicola?, University of Nice Regina Pustet, University of M?nchen, Stephane Robert, CNRS-LLACAN, Villejuif, France Anders Soegaard, University of Copenhagen Liang Tao, Ohio University, Athens, Ohio Farzad Sharifian, Edith Cowan University, Western Australia Gil?ad Zuckerman, Churchill College, University of Cambridge There are still a few presentation spots available, and we are accepting abstracts until February 15. We are looking for papers dealing with natural language phenomena that need to be accounted for by linguistic theories, and issues detailed in the conference themes below. You are welcome to attend even if you are not presenting a paper. The registration fee is $30. The conference program will be available March 15. Please visit our Web site for more information, http://www.colorado.edu/linguistics/symposium. CONFERENCE THEMES The purpose of the Symposium is to identify hitherto unstated or understated fundamental issues in linguistic theories taking into account the rich variation of forms and functions observed in the languages of the world. The symposium will examine the goals of both theories of language structure and theories of language evolution. One of the expected outcomes of the symposium will be a new set of questions to be addressed by language theories. Some of the questions to be put before the participants with respect to the theories of language structure are: o What should be the proper object for theories of language structure? o What should a theory of language structure explain? o Should there be common formal elements in the theories of language structure? o Should there be common functional elements? o What elements should a theory of language structure contain? o What should be the relationship between theories of language structure and the theories of cognition? Some of the questions with respect to theories of language change are: o What are motivations for language change and grammaticalization? o What are the roles and properties of functions in language change? o What are the roles and properties of forms in language change? o Does human conscious choice play a part in language change? o Is there a role for adaptability in language change? What would such a role be? Zygmunt Frajzyngier David S. Rood Adam Hodges From mg246 at CORNELL.EDU Tue Jan 21 04:48:11 2003 From: mg246 at CORNELL.EDU (Monica Gonzalez-Marquez) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 23:48:11 -0500 Subject: 3rd Call for participants: Empirical Methods in Cog Ling Message-ID: ******************** 3rd Call ************************ +++++++ Deadline January 31, 2003 +++++++++++ -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ? Empirical Methods in Cognitive Linguistics (EMCL) Workshop ? Cornell University ? Ithaca, New York, USA ? May 2-4, 2003 http://cerebro.psych.cornell.edu/emcl ? *** ? Call for Graduate Student Participants ? Application deadline: January 31, 2003 ? Notification of acceptance by: March 15, 2003 ? *** ? Introduction: ? Recent years have witnessed a virtual explosion of theory about the ? relationship between language and cognition in work on cognitive ? grammar (Langacker), cognitive semantics (Talmy), conceptual ? integration (Fauconnier & Turner), and conceptual metaphor (Lakoff, ? Sweetser). However, most of the empirical support for these theories ? lies in the linguistic judgments and intuitions of their proponents. ? While this is a powerful form of empirical support, the wide-ranging ? nature of the claims in cognitive linguistics creates a particular need ? for converging evidence from other techniques in cognitive science in ? order to assess both its assumptions and its conclusions about ? cognitive phenomena. The Empirical Methods in Cognitive Linguistics ? Workshop is motivated by the idea that experimental and observational ? work can help substantiate the claims of cognitive linguistics, and to ? further develop an empirically valid account of the connection between ? language and cognition. ? This interdisciplinary workshop is intended to provide a forum where ? people doing experimental and observational research in cognitive ? linguistics can come together to obtain a comprehensive picture of ? progress in this endeavor, and to identify areas for future ? investigation. During the workshop, we will explore the use of various ? experimental and observational methods to address particular issues ? relevant to language and cognition. ? To this end, the goals of the workshop are: ? -to evaluate experimental and empirical support for various claims in ? ? ? ?cognitive linguistics; ? -to address practical and methodological issues such as experimental ? ? ? ?design, data collection and analysis (including audio/video corpora, ? ? ? ?eye-tracking, gesture, fMRI/EEG, image schemas, etc.) ? -to explore how data from natural language corpora can be fruitfully ? ? ? ? incorporated in experimental work; ? -to create a network of researchers with common interests and concerns ? ? ? ? for continued collaboration. ? Workshop format: ? he weekend will kick off with a plenary lecture followed by a question ? and answer session with the audience.Aside from this initiating lecture, ? however, the event will be organized around parallel workshop ? sessions of two types, those led by faculty members and those ? organized around student presentations. All sessions are ? intended to be highly interactive. In the first sort of workshop, ? a faculty member will work with a small group of students to ? solve a problem or set of problems that might arise in her area of ? expertise. For example, in a workshop on the use of metaphor in ? gesture, the group might jointly analyze a videotape of face-to-face ? interaction. ?In a workshop on eye-tracking, the group might be asked ? to analyze data collected from a single subject in a particular ? experiment. ?In a workshop on behavioral measures, the group might ? begin with a theoretical issue in cognitive linguistics and design an ? experiment to test it. ?These workshops will be =91recycled=92 in that each ? faculty member will hold the same workshop twice, so that most ? participants will get a chance to participate in most workshops. ?In ? the student-led sessions, graduate students will make 15-minute ? presentations about their work, followed by extensive discussion about ? the theoretical and methodological issues raised by the students=92 ? research. The event will end with a roundtable discussion session in ? which participants synthesize the contents of the workshop and talk ? about future directions. ? Graduate Students: ? Participants will be graduate students undertaking ? empirical/experimental work relevant to language and cognition. ? Applicants should be familiar with current ideas in cognitive ? linguistics and be prepared to critically discuss various aspects of ? the theory. Participants will be expected to present their ongoing ? research to the group for constructive feedback. Interested graduate ? students are invited to submit their applications by following the ? instructions given at the workshop website: http://cerebro.psych.cornell.edu/emcl Scientists from all nations, and especially women and minorities, are strongly encouraged to attend and participate. ? Application deadline: January 31, 2003 ? Notification of acceptance by: March 15, 2003 ? Accommodation will be provided for all accepted students. In addition, ? it is likely that modest travel grants will be available to students ? traveling long distances. ? Plenary Speaker: Leonard Talmy (University at Buffalo, SUNY, Linguistics) website Faculty: Lera Boroditsky , MIT, Brain & Cognitive Sciences Seana Coulson, UCSD, Cognitive Science Raymond Gibbs, UCSC, Psychology Teenie Matlock, Stanford, Psychology Wolfgang Settekorn, Universitaet Hamburg, Discourse Analysis (TBC) Chris Sinha, University of Portsmouth, Developmental Psychology Michael Spivey, Cornell University, Psycholinguistics Eve Sweetser, UC Berkeley, Linguistics Faculty Participants: Ben Bergen, University of Hawaii at Manoa Herb Colston, University of Wisconsin Parkside Jeff Hancock, Cornell University Rafael Nunez, University of California at San Diego (TBC) Zoltan Kovecses, Eotvos Lorand University (TBC) ? Organizing Committee: ? Seana Coulson (UCSD, Cognitive Science) ? Richard Dale?(Cornell, Psychology) ? Monica Gonzalez-Marquez, Chair (Cornell, Psychology) ? Irene Mittelberg (Cornell, Linguistics) ? Michael J. Spivey (Cornell, Psycholinguistics) ? Contact information: ? Monica Gonzalez-Marquez ?-- mg246 at cornell.edu http://cerebro.psych.cornell.edu/emcl ? Application deadline: January 31, 2003 ? Notification of acceptance by: March 15, 2003 ? This event is sponsored and generously funded by the Cognitive Studies ? Program at Cornell University. -- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mg246 at CORNELL.EDU Tue Jan 21 07:49:35 2003 From: mg246 at CORNELL.EDU (mg246) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 15:49:35 +0800 Subject: Jan 3 2003 16 Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: that.scr Type: audio/x-wav Size: 92302 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: ??????????????.doc Type: application/octet-stream Size: 38069 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jaw300t at SMSU.EDU Tue Jan 21 15:15:56 2003 From: jaw300t at SMSU.EDU (jaw300t) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 09:15:56 -0600 Subject: zero-marked verbs Message-ID: Colleagues, For the past couple of years I've been following a certain unmarked verb form in Kuche (also known as Rukuba, listed in the Ethnologue as Che), a language of Nigeria. I had the feeling it ought to be the simple present tense. In elicitation sessions, informants never gave this form in response to an English simple present tense sentence, although in conversation it would often be used that way. In discourse, it is the most common verb form of all, seldom used as a simple present tense verb; there are about 20 different verb markings that can be used, but the unmarked form is used in many texts more than all the others combined. Fleischman's "Tense & Narrativity" and Bybee, Perkins, & Pagliuca's "The Evolution of Grammar" opened up some possible explanations. But what really crystallized it for me was something in an earlier article by Bybee ("The Grammaticization of Zero" in a volume edited by Pagliuca). She says, "When a grammaticizing OVERT morpheme becomes obligatory, it may happen that other meanings within the same functional domain, which previously had no grammatical expression, come to be expressed by a meaningful zero." It seems Kuche is at a point in its history where overt tense/aspect morphemes are NOT obligatory. What happens to the unmarked form, then, is that it has NO SPECIFIC meaning--it means just about anything, depending on context. Overt tense/aspect markers are used at the beginning of a discourse, and those tense/aspect interpretations hold over long stretches of discourse. This is much like Longacre's "consecutive" tense, except that this unmarked form is remarkably flexible. It can even be used after an imperative with imperative force--a second imperative verb would be even less marked, because the unmarked form IS marked for subject agreement, while the imperative is not. I suppose Kuche is not unique among non-written languages in having a flexible, relatively unmarked form. I don't see them mentioned in Bybee, Perkins, & Pagliuca. Then, again, I suppose it's a matter of degree--in some languages, the interpretation assigned to a zero-marked form might be a little flexible, and in other languages, the interpretation of such a form might be quite specific. What is it in a language community that causes OVERT TAM marking to become obligatory? Is it the transition to written literature? Fleischman says (quoting somebody else, if I remember correctly), that "The meaning of written literature is in the text; the meaning of oral literature is in the context.) Janet Wilson From parkvall at LING.SU.SE Tue Jan 21 16:37:48 2003 From: parkvall at LING.SU.SE (Mikael Parkvall) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 17:37:48 +0100 Subject: zero-marked verbs In-Reply-To: <3E2E0234@caliber> Message-ID: Regarding Janet Wilsons posting on Kuche: What about mood? Are any modal categories by any chance (semi-)obligatory? I recall from reading grammars on Nigerian languages once upon a time that some of them seemed to be more keen on grammaticalising such distinctions than those relating to tense or aspect. Also, although there may certainly be quite a few more out there, I know of only one language (Mai Brat of western New Guinea) which lack obligatory or otherwise highly grammaticalised marking in all three domains (T, M and A). It would be interesting to learn more about such langauges and how (un)common such a state of affairs may be. Mikael Parkvall Institutionen f?r lingvistik Stockholms Universitet SE-10691 STOCKHOLM (rum 276) +46 (0)8 16 14 41, +46 (0)8 656 68 24 (hem) Fax: +46 (0)8 15 53 89 parkvall at ling.su.se From jbybee at UNM.EDU Tue Jan 21 18:22:11 2003 From: jbybee at UNM.EDU (Joan Bybee) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 11:22:11 -0700 Subject: zero-marked verbs In-Reply-To: <3E2E0234@caliber> Message-ID: Dear Janet, I have also worried about what makes a category become obligatory in one language while a similar category may remain optional in another. Based on Garcia and van Putte's discussion (1989, 'Forms are silver, nothing is gold' Folia Linguistica Historica 8, 365-384) of the inferencing strategies that lead to the infusion of meaning in zeroes, I have proposed that different cultures utilize different inferencing strategies in interpreting discourse (in my paper in Bybee, Haiman and Thompson. 1997. _Essays on Language Function and Language Type_ Benjamins). The absence of obligatory categories (say, in isolating languages) leaves all inferences open throughout a stretch of discourse. Obligatory categories close down certain options right away. Of course, it is also necessary for the overtly marked categories to gain a certain level of frequency and redundancy before the inference can be made that the zero signals the opposite of the overt member. Unfortunately I have found no way to test this hypothesis, as it very difficult to know what inferences are being made in an ongoing discourse. However, if my hypothesis is correct, then it would suggest that discourse strategies may be very stable over time explaining why languages without inflection, that is, isolating languages, tend to stay isolating over time, despite ongoing grammaticization. As we argued in Bybee, Perkins and Pagliuca 1994, some languages simply do not carry grammaticization as far as others do. Whether this is really a hypothesis or just a hunch, I hope you find it stimulating. Joan Bybee At 09:15 AM 1/21/03 -0600, jaw300t wrote: >Colleagues, >For the past couple of years I've been following a certain unmarked verb form >in Kuche (also known as Rukuba, listed in the Ethnologue as Che), a language >of Nigeria. I had the feeling it ought to be the simple present tense. In >elicitation sessions, informants never gave this form in response to an >English simple present tense sentence, although in conversation it would often >be used that way. In discourse, it is the most common verb form of all, >seldom used as a simple present tense verb; there are about 20 different verb >markings that can be used, but the unmarked form is used in many texts more >than all the others combined. > >Fleischman's "Tense & Narrativity" and Bybee, Perkins, & Pagliuca's "The >Evolution of Grammar" opened up some possible explanations. But what really >crystallized it for me was something in an earlier article by Bybee ("The >Grammaticization of Zero" in a volume edited by Pagliuca). She says, "When a >grammaticizing OVERT morpheme becomes obligatory, it may happen that other >meanings within the same functional domain, which previously had no >grammatical expression, come to be expressed by a meaningful zero." > >It seems Kuche is at a point in its history where overt tense/aspect morphemes >are NOT obligatory. What happens to the unmarked form, then, is that it has >NO SPECIFIC meaning--it means just about anything, depending on context. >Overt tense/aspect markers are used at the beginning of a discourse, and those >tense/aspect interpretations hold over long stretches of discourse. This is >much like Longacre's "consecutive" tense, except that this unmarked form is >remarkably flexible. It can even be used after an imperative with imperative >force--a second imperative verb would be even less marked, because the >unmarked form IS marked for subject agreement, while the imperative is not. > >I suppose Kuche is not unique among non-written languages in having a >flexible, relatively unmarked form. I don't see them mentioned in Bybee, >Perkins, & Pagliuca. Then, again, I suppose it's a matter of degree--in some >languages, the interpretation assigned to a zero-marked form might be a little >flexible, and in other languages, the interpretation of such a form might be >quite specific. > >What is it in a language community that causes OVERT TAM marking to become >obligatory? Is it the transition to written literature? Fleischman says >(quoting somebody else, if I remember correctly), that "The meaning of written >literature is in the text; the meaning of oral literature is in the context.) > >Janet Wilson Joan Bybee jbybee at unm.edu phone: 505-277-3827 Department of Linguistics fax: 505-277-6355 Humanities 526 University of New Mexico Albuquerque, NM 87131-1196 From rcameron at UIC.EDU Tue Jan 21 18:44:06 2003 From: rcameron at UIC.EDU (Richard Cameron) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 12:44:06 -0600 Subject: zero-marked verbs In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20030121110459.030d27f0@mail.unm.edu> Message-ID: A question out of context, based on Joan's very interesting response: Does "the zero (always) signal the opposite of the overt member" or does it sometimes signal set membership with the overt member is such a way that is different yet complementary or maybe not even different, just complementary? I think of Full NPs, Pronouns, and Null Subjects in null subject languages. All three may be said to be involved in referential tracking and, at least in Spanish, it is not always clear to me that Nulls and Pronouns, at least, are opposites in any clear sense as both can occur in the same contexts though with different frequencies or probabilties. There are contexts, it is true, where one is required and the other not. Likewise, variably deleted plural markers may be said to consist of the overt form + the null or deleted form, yet there is no clear meaning opposition here. Thanks - Richard Cameron -----Original Message----- From: FUNKNET -- Discussion of issues in Functional Linguistics [mailto:FUNKNET at LISTSERV.RICE.EDU]On Behalf Of Joan Bybee Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 12:22 PM To: FUNKNET at LISTSERV.RICE.EDU Subject: Re: zero-marked verbs Dear Janet, I have also worried about what makes a category become obligatory in one language while a similar category may remain optional in another. Based on Garcia and van Putte's discussion (1989, 'Forms are silver, nothing is gold' Folia Linguistica Historica 8, 365-384) of the inferencing strategies that lead to the infusion of meaning in zeroes, I have proposed that different cultures utilize different inferencing strategies in interpreting discourse (in my paper in Bybee, Haiman and Thompson. 1997. _Essays on Language Function and Language Type_ Benjamins). The absence of obligatory categories (say, in isolating languages) leaves all inferences open throughout a stretch of discourse. Obligatory categories close down certain options right away. Of course, it is also necessary for the overtly marked categories to gain a certain level of frequency and redundancy before the inference can be made that the zero signals the opposite of the overt member. Unfortunately I have found no way to test this hypothesis, as it very difficult to know what inferences are being made in an ongoing discourse. However, if my hypothesis is correct, then it would suggest that discourse strategies may be very stable over time explaining why languages without inflection, that is, isolating languages, tend to stay isolating over time, despite ongoing grammaticization. As we argued in Bybee, Perkins and Pagliuca 1994, some languages simply do not carry grammaticization as far as others do. Whether this is really a hypothesis or just a hunch, I hope you find it stimulating. Joan Bybee At 09:15 AM 1/21/03 -0600, jaw300t wrote: >Colleagues, >For the past couple of years I've been following a certain unmarked verb form >in Kuche (also known as Rukuba, listed in the Ethnologue as Che), a language >of Nigeria. I had the feeling it ought to be the simple present tense. In >elicitation sessions, informants never gave this form in response to an >English simple present tense sentence, although in conversation it would often >be used that way. In discourse, it is the most common verb form of all, >seldom used as a simple present tense verb; there are about 20 different verb >markings that can be used, but the unmarked form is used in many texts more >than all the others combined. > >Fleischman's "Tense & Narrativity" and Bybee, Perkins, & Pagliuca's "The >Evolution of Grammar" opened up some possible explanations. But what really >crystallized it for me was something in an earlier article by Bybee ("The >Grammaticization of Zero" in a volume edited by Pagliuca). She says, "When a >grammaticizing OVERT morpheme becomes obligatory, it may happen that other >meanings within the same functional domain, which previously had no >grammatical expression, come to be expressed by a meaningful zero." > >It seems Kuche is at a point in its history where overt tense/aspect morphemes >are NOT obligatory. What happens to the unmarked form, then, is that it has >NO SPECIFIC meaning--it means just about anything, depending on context. >Overt tense/aspect markers are used at the beginning of a discourse, and those >tense/aspect interpretations hold over long stretches of discourse. This is >much like Longacre's "consecutive" tense, except that this unmarked form is >remarkably flexible. It can even be used after an imperative with imperative >force--a second imperative verb would be even less marked, because the >unmarked form IS marked for subject agreement, while the imperative is not. > >I suppose Kuche is not unique among non-written languages in having a >flexible, relatively unmarked form. I don't see them mentioned in Bybee, >Perkins, & Pagliuca. Then, again, I suppose it's a matter of degree--in some >languages, the interpretation assigned to a zero-marked form might be a little >flexible, and in other languages, the interpretation of such a form might be >quite specific. > >What is it in a language community that causes OVERT TAM marking to become >obligatory? Is it the transition to written literature? Fleischman says >(quoting somebody else, if I remember correctly), that "The meaning of written >literature is in the text; the meaning of oral literature is in the context.) > >Janet Wilson Joan Bybee jbybee at unm.edu phone: 505-277-3827 Department of Linguistics fax: 505-277-6355 Humanities 526 University of New Mexico Albuquerque, NM 87131-1196 From jaw300t at SMSU.EDU Tue Jan 21 18:41:29 2003 From: jaw300t at SMSU.EDU (jaw300t) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 12:41:29 -0600 Subject: zero-marked verbs Message-ID: >===== Original Message From Mikael Parkvall ===== >Regarding Janet Wilsons posting on Kuche: > >What about mood? Are any modal categories by any chance (semi-)obligatory? Mood is not often marked, but it seems to participate in the same kind of TAM-spreading as the other overtly marked verb categories. For instance, conditional clauses are marked by a serial verb construction, but if there are several conditions, only the first one is marked. I have only identified 3 overt markers that are specifically mood: imperative (bare verb), conditional (the serial verb construction I mentioned), and a prefix bi- that seems to mean "should". > >I recall from reading grammars on Nigerian languages once upon a time that >some of them seemed to be more keen on grammaticalising such distinctions >than those relating to tense or aspect. > >Also, although there may certainly be quite a few more out there, I know of >only one language (Mai Brat of western New Guinea) which lack obligatory or >otherwise highly grammaticalised marking in all three domains (T, M and A). >It would be interesting to learn more about such langauges and how >(un)common such a state of affairs may be. > > >Mikael Parkvall >Institutionen f?r lingvistik >Stockholms Universitet >SE-10691 STOCKHOLM >(rum 276) > >+46 (0)8 16 14 41, +46 (0)8 656 68 24 (hem) >Fax: +46 (0)8 15 53 89 > >parkvall at ling.su.se From tgivon at OREGON.UOREGON.EDU Tue Jan 21 19:48:32 2003 From: tgivon at OREGON.UOREGON.EDU (Tom Givon) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 11:48:32 -0800 Subject: zero-marked verbs Message-ID: Dear Joan, Very nice discussion. A student of mine, Mark Post, is working on a comparison between Thai and Mandarin Chinese. Superficially, they are supposedly very similar, both with with serial-verb clauses of very similar type & functions. But while serial construction (and others) in Mandarin grammaticalize copiously, in Thai the very same S-V constructions, using the very same lexical verbs (and performing the samediscourse functions) somehow don't undrego the last phases of grammaticalization. Mark is testing a hypothesis about lexical replacement in Mandarin, and the steady--indeed profuse--creation of compounds. In Mandarin, this apparently leads to repeating waves of obsolescence of simplex lexical verbs (or, at least, the obsolescence of the old lexical senses of those verbs). So that only the grammaticalized senses survive. Mark is doing comparative frequency-counts on this, as one of his predictions, using Pear Story texts. I am not sure this will explain the broader typological differences, tho. Virtually all so-called "isolating" languages (I've always dloathed the term...) are serial-verb languages (the only exception are true Plantation pidgins...). And I think there are several factors that conspire against grammaticalization in this typology. One factor that needs to be considered is the frequency of operator-operand adjacency. Serial-verb languages thend to have a much lower probability of this in general, particularly the adjacency of modal/aspectual verbs to their complement verbs. I discuss this in the GR chapter (#5) of my "Functionalism & Grammar" (1995), in terms of the two major typological strategies for clause-union. One way or another, the explanations we are likely to discover, are most likely to involve multiple factors and their dynamic interaction(s). And what we need to discover is not labels, but rather highly specific performance mechanisms that motivate diachronic change. If all we can say about "isolating languages" is that grammaticalization is retarded there, we have not explained much, yet. Best, TG ==================== Joan Bybee wrote: > Dear Janet, > > I have also worried about what makes a category become obligatory in one > language while a similar category may remain optional in another. Based on > Garcia and van Putte's discussion (1989, 'Forms are silver, nothing is > gold' Folia Linguistica Historica 8, 365-384) of the inferencing strategies > that lead to the infusion of meaning in zeroes, I have proposed that > different cultures utilize different inferencing strategies in interpreting > discourse (in my paper in Bybee, Haiman and Thompson. 1997. _Essays on > Language Function and Language Type_ Benjamins). The absence of obligatory > categories (say, in isolating languages) leaves all inferences open > throughout a stretch of discourse. Obligatory categories close down certain > options right away. > Of course, it is also necessary for the overtly marked categories to gain a > certain level of frequency and redundancy before the inference can be made > that the zero signals the opposite of the overt member. > > Unfortunately I have found no way to test this hypothesis, as it very > difficult to know what inferences are being made in an ongoing discourse. > However, if my hypothesis is correct, then it would suggest that discourse > strategies may be very stable over time explaining why languages without > inflection, that is, isolating languages, tend to stay isolating over time, > despite ongoing grammaticization. As we argued in Bybee, Perkins and > Pagliuca 1994, some languages simply do not carry grammaticization as far > as others do. > > Whether this is really a hypothesis or just a hunch, I hope you find it > stimulating. > > Joan Bybee > > At 09:15 AM 1/21/03 -0600, jaw300t wrote: > >Colleagues, > >For the past couple of years I've been following a certain unmarked verb form > >in Kuche (also known as Rukuba, listed in the Ethnologue as Che), a language > >of Nigeria. I had the feeling it ought to be the simple present tense. In > >elicitation sessions, informants never gave this form in response to an > >English simple present tense sentence, although in conversation it would often > >be used that way. In discourse, it is the most common verb form of all, > >seldom used as a simple present tense verb; there are about 20 different verb > >markings that can be used, but the unmarked form is used in many texts more > >than all the others combined. > > > >Fleischman's "Tense & Narrativity" and Bybee, Perkins, & Pagliuca's "The > >Evolution of Grammar" opened up some possible explanations. But what really > >crystallized it for me was something in an earlier article by Bybee ("The > >Grammaticization of Zero" in a volume edited by Pagliuca). She says, "When a > >grammaticizing OVERT morpheme becomes obligatory, it may happen that other > >meanings within the same functional domain, which previously had no > >grammatical expression, come to be expressed by a meaningful zero." > > > >It seems Kuche is at a point in its history where overt tense/aspect morphemes > >are NOT obligatory. What happens to the unmarked form, then, is that it has > >NO SPECIFIC meaning--it means just about anything, depending on context. > >Overt tense/aspect markers are used at the beginning of a discourse, and those > >tense/aspect interpretations hold over long stretches of discourse. This is > >much like Longacre's "consecutive" tense, except that this unmarked form is > >remarkably flexible. It can even be used after an imperative with imperative > >force--a second imperative verb would be even less marked, because the > >unmarked form IS marked for subject agreement, while the imperative is not. > > > >I suppose Kuche is not unique among non-written languages in having a > >flexible, relatively unmarked form. I don't see them mentioned in Bybee, > >Perkins, & Pagliuca. Then, again, I suppose it's a matter of degree--in some > >languages, the interpretation assigned to a zero-marked form might be a little > >flexible, and in other languages, the interpretation of such a form might be > >quite specific. > > > >What is it in a language community that causes OVERT TAM marking to become > >obligatory? Is it the transition to written literature? Fleischman says > >(quoting somebody else, if I remember correctly), that "The meaning of written > >literature is in the text; the meaning of oral literature is in the context.) > > > >Janet Wilson > > Joan Bybee jbybee at unm.edu phone: 505-277-3827 > Department of Linguistics fax: 505-277-6355 > Humanities 526 > University of New Mexico > Albuquerque, NM 87131-1196 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jaw300t at SMSU.EDU Tue Jan 21 23:33:14 2003 From: jaw300t at SMSU.EDU (jaw300t) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 17:33:14 -0600 Subject: zero-marked verbs Message-ID: Joan & Tom I guess I was not totally aware that "isolating" languages are slow to grammaticalize. But Kuche is not an isolating language--it is similar to Bantu, with a nearly identical noun class system and verbs that may have as many as 4 or 5 prefixes. That is, if they should be called prefixes when they are not obligatory. They are definitely phonologically bound to the beginning of the verbs, but their order is not absolutely fixed (although generally predictable). Neither are they serial verbs--there's a distinct difference between the TAM prefixes and serial verbs. There are a few auxiliary constructions as well. Elicitation for various tenses/aspects/moods invariably brings out the overtly marked form, but those forms are seldom used in discourse. But then, I guess that means that a transition to written literature may not be the pressure that moves a language towards obligatory TAM markers either. Chinese has enjoyed written literature for centuries. JWilson >===== Original Message From Tom Givon ===== >Dear Joan, > >Very nice discussion. A student of mine, Mark Post, is working on a comparison >between Thai and Mandarin Chinese. Superficially, they are supposedly very similar, >both with with serial-verb clauses of very similar type & functions. But while >serial construction (and others) in Mandarin grammaticalize copiously, in Thai the >very same S-V constructions, using the very same lexical verbs (and performing the >samediscourse functions) somehow don't undrego the last phases of >grammaticalization. Mark is testing a hypothesis about lexical replacement in >Mandarin, and the steady--indeed profuse--creation of compounds. In Mandarin, this >apparently leads to repeating waves of obsolescence of simplex lexical verbs (or, >at least, the obsolescence of the old lexical senses of those verbs). So that only >the grammaticalized senses survive. Mark is doing comparative frequency-counts on >this, as one of his predictions, using Pear Story texts. > >I am not sure this will explain the broader typological differences, tho. Virtually >all so-called "isolating" languages (I've always dloathed the term...) are >serial-verb languages (the only exception are true Plantation pidgins...). And I >think there are several factors that conspire against grammaticalization in this >typology. One factor that needs to be considered is the frequency of >operator-operand adjacency. Serial-verb languages thend to have a much lower >probability of this in general, particularly the adjacency of modal/aspectual verbs >to their complement verbs. I discuss this in the GR chapter (#5) of my >"Functionalism & Grammar" (1995), in terms of the two major typological strategies >for clause-union. > >One way or another, the explanations we are likely to discover, are most likely to >involve multiple factors and their dynamic interaction(s). And what we need to >discover is not labels, but rather highly specific performance mechanisms that >motivate diachronic change. If all we can say about "isolating languages" is that >grammaticalization is retarded there, we have not explained much, yet. Best, TG >==================== > >Joan Bybee wrote: > >> Dear Janet, >> >> I have also worried about what makes a category become obligatory in one >> language while a similar category may remain optional in another. Based on >> Garcia and van Putte's discussion (1989, 'Forms are silver, nothing is >> gold' Folia Linguistica Historica 8, 365-384) of the inferencing strategies >> that lead to the infusion of meaning in zeroes, I have proposed that >> different cultures utilize different inferencing strategies in interpreting >> discourse (in my paper in Bybee, Haiman and Thompson. 1997. _Essays on >> Language Function and Language Type_ Benjamins). The absence of obligatory >> categories (say, in isolating languages) leaves all inferences open >> throughout a stretch of discourse. Obligatory categories close down certain >> options right away. >> Of course, it is also necessary for the overtly marked categories to gain a >> certain level of frequency and redundancy before the inference can be made >> that the zero signals the opposite of the overt member. >> >> Unfortunately I have found no way to test this hypothesis, as it very >> difficult to know what inferences are being made in an ongoing discourse. >> However, if my hypothesis is correct, then it would suggest that discourse >> strategies may be very stable over time explaining why languages without >> inflection, that is, isolating languages, tend to stay isolating over time, >> despite ongoing grammaticization. As we argued in Bybee, Perkins and >> Pagliuca 1994, some languages simply do not carry grammaticization as far >> as others do. >> >> Whether this is really a hypothesis or just a hunch, I hope you find it >> stimulating. >> >> Joan Bybee >> >> At 09:15 AM 1/21/03 -0600, jaw300t wrote: >> >Colleagues, >> >For the past couple of years I've been following a certain unmarked verb form >> >in Kuche (also known as Rukuba, listed in the Ethnologue as Che), a language >> >of Nigeria. I had the feeling it ought to be the simple present tense. In >> >elicitation sessions, informants never gave this form in response to an >> >English simple present tense sentence, although in conversation it would often >> >be used that way. In discourse, it is the most common verb form of all, >> >seldom used as a simple present tense verb; there are about 20 different verb >> >markings that can be used, but the unmarked form is used in many texts more >> >than all the others combined. >> > >> >Fleischman's "Tense & Narrativity" and Bybee, Perkins, & Pagliuca's "The >> >Evolution of Grammar" opened up some possible explanations. But what really >> >crystallized it for me was something in an earlier article by Bybee ("The >> >Grammaticization of Zero" in a volume edited by Pagliuca). She says, "When a >> >grammaticizing OVERT morpheme becomes obligatory, it may happen that other >> >meanings within the same functional domain, which previously had no >> >grammatical expression, come to be expressed by a meaningful zero." >> > >> >It seems Kuche is at a point in its history where overt tense/aspect morphemes >> >are NOT obligatory. What happens to the unmarked form, then, is that it has >> >NO SPECIFIC meaning--it means just about anything, depending on context. >> >Overt tense/aspect markers are used at the beginning of a discourse, and those >> >tense/aspect interpretations hold over long stretches of discourse. This is >> >much like Longacre's "consecutive" tense, except that this unmarked form is >> >remarkably flexible. It can even be used after an imperative with imperative >> >force--a second imperative verb would be even less marked, because the >> >unmarked form IS marked for subject agreement, while the imperative is not. >> > >> >I suppose Kuche is not unique among non-written languages in having a >> >flexible, relatively unmarked form. I don't see them mentioned in Bybee, >> >Perkins, & Pagliuca. Then, again, I suppose it's a matter of degree--in some >> >languages, the interpretation assigned to a zero-marked form might be a little >> >flexible, and in other languages, the interpretation of such a form might be >> >quite specific. >> > >> >What is it in a language community that causes OVERT TAM marking to become >> >obligatory? Is it the transition to written literature? Fleischman says >> >(quoting somebody else, if I remember correctly), that "The meaning of written >> >literature is in the text; the meaning of oral literature is in the context.) >> > >> >Janet Wilson >> >> Joan Bybee jbybee at unm.edu phone: 505-277-3827 >> Department of Linguistics fax: 505-277-6355 >> Humanities 526 >> University of New Mexico >> Albuquerque, NM 87131-1196 From tgivon at OREGON.UOREGON.EDU Wed Jan 22 01:46:18 2003 From: tgivon at OREGON.UOREGON.EDU (Tom Givon) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 17:46:18 -0800 Subject: zero-marked verbs Message-ID: Dear JW-- Now we are talking. But, I think, about a different topic. In clause-chains in discourse in an SVO language (like English), the first clause in the chain is most typically fully marked with all the finite trimmings. Most of the chain-medial clauses dispense with TAM marking, or use an invariant (less finite) "narrative" marker that simply indicate "same as in the previous clause". Sort of like zero anaphora (or anaphoric pronouns). [In OV languages the tendency is to mark the last clause in the chain more fully. But still chain-medial clauses tend to be less marked]. In fact, you can show this in English too, but only up to a point. Notice how the auxiliary TAM marker in English--just like the more-marked subject--do not repeat chain-medially: a. She was sitting there, eating dinner and minding her business, thinking deep thought.... b. She had come earlier, looked around and decided to.... c. She will come tomorrow, check the place out and then make her move... In English (alas?) one cannot dump the more obligatory -ing (a) and -en (b) in English. But in other languages clitic TAM morphology can be dumped or neutralized. In Swahili almost all major TAM markers can be replaced with the "narrative" -ka- in chain-medial clauses. But in Akan, two of the main TAM markers cannot be dumped in chain-medial contexts. The other two can be replaced with an invariant "narrative" marker, however. The general principle is amazingly transparent (universal?), but the gory little details exhibit a lot of language-specific (and construction-specific) quirks. Ultimately, most of these quirks have cogent diachronic explanations, altho in many cases the evidence is not available any more. Best, TG =================== jaw300t wrote: > Joan & Tom > I guess I was not totally aware that "isolating" languages are slow to > grammaticalize. But Kuche is not an isolating language--it is similar to > Bantu, with a nearly identical noun class system and verbs that may have as > many as 4 or 5 prefixes. That is, if they should be called prefixes when they > are not obligatory. They are definitely phonologically bound to the beginning > of the verbs, but their order is not absolutely fixed (although generally > predictable). Neither are they serial verbs--there's a distinct difference > between the TAM prefixes and serial verbs. There are a few auxiliary > constructions as well. Elicitation for various tenses/aspects/moods > invariably brings out the overtly marked form, but those forms are seldom used > in discourse. > > But then, I guess that means that a transition to written literature may not > be the pressure that moves a language towards obligatory TAM markers either. > Chinese has enjoyed written literature for centuries. JWilson > >===== Original Message From Tom Givon ===== > >Dear Joan, > > > >Very nice discussion. A student of mine, Mark Post, is working on a > comparison > >between Thai and Mandarin Chinese. Superficially, they are supposedly very > similar, > >both with with serial-verb clauses of very similar type & functions. But > while > >serial construction (and others) in Mandarin grammaticalize copiously, in > Thai the > >very same S-V constructions, using the very same lexical verbs (and > performing the > >samediscourse functions) somehow don't undrego the last phases of > >grammaticalization. Mark is testing a hypothesis about lexical replacement in > >Mandarin, and the steady--indeed profuse--creation of compounds. In Mandarin, > this > >apparently leads to repeating waves of obsolescence of simplex lexical verbs > (or, > >at least, the obsolescence of the old lexical senses of those verbs). So that > only > >the grammaticalized senses survive. Mark is doing comparative > frequency-counts on > >this, as one of his predictions, using Pear Story texts. > > > >I am not sure this will explain the broader typological differences, tho. > Virtually > >all so-called "isolating" languages (I've always dloathed the term...) are > >serial-verb languages (the only exception are true Plantation pidgins...). > And I > >think there are several factors that conspire against grammaticalization in > this > >typology. One factor that needs to be considered is the frequency of > >operator-operand adjacency. Serial-verb languages thend to have a much lower > >probability of this in general, particularly the adjacency of modal/aspectual > verbs > >to their complement verbs. I discuss this in the GR chapter (#5) of my > >"Functionalism & Grammar" (1995), in terms of the two major typological > strategies > >for clause-union. > > > >One way or another, the explanations we are likely to discover, are most > likely to > >involve multiple factors and their dynamic interaction(s). And what we need > to > >discover is not labels, but rather highly specific performance mechanisms > that > >motivate diachronic change. If all we can say about "isolating languages" is > that > >grammaticalization is retarded there, we have not explained much, yet. Best, > TG > >==================== > > > >Joan Bybee wrote: > > > >> Dear Janet, > >> > >> I have also worried about what makes a category become obligatory in one > >> language while a similar category may remain optional in another. Based on > >> Garcia and van Putte's discussion (1989, 'Forms are silver, nothing is > >> gold' Folia Linguistica Historica 8, 365-384) of the inferencing strategies > >> that lead to the infusion of meaning in zeroes, I have proposed that > >> different cultures utilize different inferencing strategies in interpreting > >> discourse (in my paper in Bybee, Haiman and Thompson. 1997. _Essays on > >> Language Function and Language Type_ Benjamins). The absence of obligatory > >> categories (say, in isolating languages) leaves all inferences open > >> throughout a stretch of discourse. Obligatory categories close down certain > >> options right away. > >> Of course, it is also necessary for the overtly marked categories to gain a > >> certain level of frequency and redundancy before the inference can be made > >> that the zero signals the opposite of the overt member. > >> > >> Unfortunately I have found no way to test this hypothesis, as it very > >> difficult to know what inferences are being made in an ongoing discourse. > >> However, if my hypothesis is correct, then it would suggest that discourse > >> strategies may be very stable over time explaining why languages without > >> inflection, that is, isolating languages, tend to stay isolating over time, > >> despite ongoing grammaticization. As we argued in Bybee, Perkins and > >> Pagliuca 1994, some languages simply do not carry grammaticization as far > >> as others do. > >> > >> Whether this is really a hypothesis or just a hunch, I hope you find it > >> stimulating. > >> > >> Joan Bybee > >> > >> At 09:15 AM 1/21/03 -0600, jaw300t wrote: > >> >Colleagues, > >> >For the past couple of years I've been following a certain unmarked verb > form > >> >in Kuche (also known as Rukuba, listed in the Ethnologue as Che), a > language > >> >of Nigeria. I had the feeling it ought to be the simple present tense. > In > >> >elicitation sessions, informants never gave this form in response to an > >> >English simple present tense sentence, although in conversation it would > often > >> >be used that way. In discourse, it is the most common verb form of all, > >> >seldom used as a simple present tense verb; there are about 20 different > verb > >> >markings that can be used, but the unmarked form is used in many texts > more > >> >than all the others combined. > >> > > >> >Fleischman's "Tense & Narrativity" and Bybee, Perkins, & Pagliuca's "The > >> >Evolution of Grammar" opened up some possible explanations. But what > really > >> >crystallized it for me was something in an earlier article by Bybee ("The > >> >Grammaticization of Zero" in a volume edited by Pagliuca). She says, > "When a > >> >grammaticizing OVERT morpheme becomes obligatory, it may happen that other > >> >meanings within the same functional domain, which previously had no > >> >grammatical expression, come to be expressed by a meaningful zero." > >> > > >> >It seems Kuche is at a point in its history where overt tense/aspect > morphemes > >> >are NOT obligatory. What happens to the unmarked form, then, is that it > has > >> >NO SPECIFIC meaning--it means just about anything, depending on context. > >> >Overt tense/aspect markers are used at the beginning of a discourse, and > those > >> >tense/aspect interpretations hold over long stretches of discourse. This > is > >> >much like Longacre's "consecutive" tense, except that this unmarked form > is > >> >remarkably flexible. It can even be used after an imperative with > imperative > >> >force--a second imperative verb would be even less marked, because the > >> >unmarked form IS marked for subject agreement, while the imperative is > not. > >> > > >> >I suppose Kuche is not unique among non-written languages in having a > >> >flexible, relatively unmarked form. I don't see them mentioned in Bybee, > >> >Perkins, & Pagliuca. Then, again, I suppose it's a matter of degree--in > some > >> >languages, the interpretation assigned to a zero-marked form might be a > little > >> >flexible, and in other languages, the interpretation of such a form might > be > >> >quite specific. > >> > > >> >What is it in a language community that causes OVERT TAM marking to become > >> >obligatory? Is it the transition to written literature? Fleischman says > >> >(quoting somebody else, if I remember correctly), that "The meaning of > written > >> >literature is in the text; the meaning of oral literature is in the > context.) > >> > > >> >Janet Wilson > >> > >> Joan Bybee jbybee at unm.edu phone: 505-277-3827 > >> Department of Linguistics fax: 505-277-6355 > >> Humanities 526 > >> University of New Mexico > >> Albuquerque, NM 87131-1196 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mhoff at ling.ed.ac.uk Wed Jan 22 07:04:53 2003 From: mhoff at ling.ed.ac.uk (Miriam Meyerhoff) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 07:04:53 +0000 Subject: zero-marked verbs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Further to Janet Wilson's original posting and Richard Cameron's follow-up: JW posed some useful questios re. "meaning" of zero variants. Gillian Sankoff discussed this very thoughtfully in a paper on Tok Pisin (responding to Derek Bickerton's claims about the significance of zeroes in pidgins/creoles). I believe the relevant paper was a comparison of TMA markers in Tok Pisin and Sranan in "Language Variation and Change" but I am away from my books right now and can't check this (perhaps someone else on list can confirm). Subsequent discussion has focused more on verbal categories (as Saknoff was) but I wanted to follow up Richard Cameron's point below as well. On Tue, 21 Jan 2003, Richard Cameron wrote: > I think of Full NPs, Pronouns, and Null Subjects in null subject languages. > All three may be said to be involved in referential tracking and, at least > in Spanish, it is not always clear to me that Nulls and Pronouns, at least, > are opposites in any clear sense as both can occur in the same contexts > though with different frequencies or probabilties. Right, the three-way contrast makes it particularly difficult to talk about "opposites". And it seems to interact with grammatical role. So, when I was looking at Bislama (creole spoken in Vanuatu) subjects, the difference in the distribution of pronouns and zeroes seemed most salient. On the other hand, when looking at objects, zero objects behave (in terms of discourse salience) differently from both pronouns and full NPs. That's not to say that pronouns and full NPs are alike, just that speakers use them in more similar ways than they use zeroes. Miriam Meyerhoff (U Edinburgh) From oesten at LING.SU.SE Wed Jan 22 08:38:26 2003 From: oesten at LING.SU.SE (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=D6sten_Dahl?=) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 09:38:26 +0100 Subject: zero-marked verbs Message-ID: It is actually not so easy to say exactly when a language has "obligatory overt TAM marking". Consider English. The present tense is in fact used quite extensively both with future time reference (for instance "The train leaves at eight") and past time reference (e.g. in narratives). To find examples where the present is absolutely excluded, you have to choose specific contexts, such as when there is also a deictic past time adverbial in the sentence, e.g. "I was ill yesterday" where "I am ill yesterday" is rather deviant. Looking at descriptions of "exotic" languages, it is often hard to know to what extent the forms and constructions listed are really obligatory. Having said this, I think it can still be claimed with some confidence that the obligatoriness of TAM/TMA marking is not contingent on literacy. Available evidence shows that there are plenty of languages from all parts of the world where tense, mood and aspect work quite analogously to what we find in "li! terate" languages. Most of these do not have written forms or only very recently got them. Remember that until one or two centuries ago the majority of the speakers of European languages were illiterate, and in fact, many still speak non-standard vernaculars that are not written. There is indeed nothing to suggest that Sicilian in Italy or Dalecarlian in Sweden differ in any essential respect to the standard languages of those countries as far as TMA marking goes. This does not mean that there are no languages that are like Kuche. Mikael Parkvall mentioned Maybrat in Irian Jaya -- there are actually quite a few languages in that area that have no or minimal TMA systems, and optionality is probably quite widespread. Notice that there is really nothing strange in tense, mood, and aspect not being universal as obligatory categories -- none of the categories that are typically expressed inflectionally is universal, not even in the sense that there must be a periphrastic counterpart (negation is a possible exception, but it is quite different from the others in many respects). Janet Wilson says "Overt tense/aspect markers are used at the beginning of a discourse, and those tense/aspect interpretations hold over long stretches of discourse." -- This is something that tends to hold for narratives in many languages, but I wonder if it can be extended to other modes of discourse. Why would you use overt tense/aspect markers in the beginning of a conversation rather than in the middle? I do not think there is a good answer to the question "Why does TMA become obligatory in a language?", at least not one that would make it possible to predict in what languages it happens. Maybe linguists will find such an answer some time in the future, but at that point they will probably also be able to explain why French has nasal vowels and English doesn't. (I wrote this last night when I did not have access to my usual mail account, and other people may have had time to say similar things in the meantime.) - Vsten Dahl -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dan.everett at MAN.AC.UK Wed Jan 22 09:23:54 2003 From: dan.everett at MAN.AC.UK (Daniel Everett) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 09:23:54 +0000 Subject: zero-marked verbs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Joan's response on zeros and inference was indeed extremely interesting. It could also perhaps give some content to a notion that has been around in Chomskyan theory for quite some time, 'Avoid Pronoun', a label for the fact that in many languages zeros are preferred to pronouns (Topic Continuity and all that is also obvious relevant). In some languages I have worked on, however, speakers do not avoid pronouns by zeros, but tend to repeat proper names every line of the discourse, e.g. 'John came in the room. John sat down. Then John began to work', etc. Nambiquara and Piraha are two such languages, especially Piraha (since I have more data on that language). This seems to support the kind of, what I would call, 'Ethnosyntactic' kind of inferencing that Joan suggests. -- Dan -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 851 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jaw300t at SMSU.EDU Wed Jan 22 19:35:07 2003 From: jaw300t at SMSU.EDU (jaw300t) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 13:35:07 -0600 Subject: zero-marked verbs Message-ID: >===== Original Message From Tom Givon ===== >Dear JW-- > >Now we are talking. But, I think, about a different topic. In clause-chains in >discourse in an SVO language (like English), the first clause in the chain is most >typically fully marked with all the finite trimmings. Most of the chain-medial >clauses dispense with TAM marking, or use an invariant (less finite) "narrative" >marker that simply indicate "same as in the previous clause". Sort of like zero >anaphora (or anaphoric pronouns). [In OV languages the tendency is to mark the >last clause in the chain more fully. But still chain-medial clauses tend to be >less marked]. > >In fact, you can show this in English too, but only up to a point. Notice how the >auxiliary TAM marker in English--just like the more-marked subject--do not repeat >chain-medially: > > a. She was sitting there, eating dinner and minding her business, thinking deep >thought.... > b. She had come earlier, looked around and decided to.... > c. She will come tomorrow, check the place out and then make her move... Exactly! These are just the kind of English examples that I've been reminded of, especially after reading Kiparsky's 1969 article about Tense and Mood in Indo-European Syntax. He says that in ancient writings (he gives examples from Greek, Sanskrit, old Irish, maybe others), what scholars call alternation between past tense & present are really examples of "conjunction reduction", like the English sentences you've mentioned. While English & Kiparsky's Indo-European examples allow only these very short chains, many African languages allow discourse-length chains. Longacre calls them "consecutive" tense or "narrative" tense, depending on if you can use them only in narratives or if you can use them in other kinds of discourse as well. > >In English (alas?) one cannot dump the more obligatory -ing (a) and -en (b) in >English. But in other languages clitic TAM morphology can be dumped or >neutralized. In Swahili almost all major TAM markers can be replaced with the >"narrative" -ka- in chain-medial clauses. But in Akan, two of the main TAM markers >cannot be dumped in chain-medial contexts. The other two can be replaced with an >invariant "narrative" marker, however. Yes, while in Kuche you can dump as little or as much as needed to get your message across. If the first few story clauses are marked "past" (more strictly, the form seems to be perfective, but in narratives it always sets up a past time reference)--then it's like the whole discourse is "infected" with past tense, both zero-marked verbs and variously-marked verbs. A verb marked "habitual" can be assumed to be past habitual, and one marked progressive can be assumed to be past progressive. The only thing that's immune to past tense, then, is an embedded discourse that's marked some other way. For instance, I have a short narrative embedded within a procedural text, embedded within a hortatory text. The short narrative begins with the perfective marker (to switch time reference from the future-oriented procedures to past narrative) and ends with a rhetorical cue translated something like "That's it" or "That's why. . ." What I find interesting is embedding discourse within discourse within discourse. One of the other recent postings (my e-mail server doesn't allow me to switch back & forth easily from composing to reading), said something about narrative being different somehow, and how it would not be practical to signal tense or aspect at the beginning of a conversation. But see, that's just it: oral narrative IS embedded in conversation, and then dialog is embedded in the narrative, and we somehow have to signal our listeners when we've switched from one to the next. In Kuche it's ok just to draw the lines and leave most of the interior blank (zero-marked), while in English we mostly have to color in the whole area. Before my e-mail server bumps me off once again. JWilson From jaw300t at SMSU.EDU Wed Jan 22 20:46:00 2003 From: jaw300t at SMSU.EDU (jaw300t) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 14:46:00 -0600 Subject: Question about 0-marking Message-ID: This is a question that perhaps Joan Bybee and Tom Givon could make clear to me. Tom Givon wrote: >===== Original Message From Tom Givon ===== >Dear JW-- > >Now we are talking. But, I think, about a different topic. Why is it a different topic now? Tom mentions clause-chaining: In clause-chains in >discourse in an SVO language (like English), the first clause in the chain is most >typically fully marked with all the finite trimmings. Most of the chain-medial >clauses dispense with TAM marking, or use an invariant (less finite) "narrative" >marker that simply indicate "same as in the previous clause". When I quoted from Joan Bybee's article in my first posting, was she excluding zero-marked verbs in clause chains? From her article "The Grammaticization of Zero", the second sentence is, "When a grammaticizing overt morpheme becomes obligatory, it may happen that other meanings within the same functional domain, which previously had no grammatical expression, come to be expressed by a meaningful zero." In what kinds of environments do we find zero-marked verbs? I understand that some languages have ONLY zero-marked verbs (Indonesian?); I assumed that the article referred to MORE than just those zero-marked verbs. The article did not specifically mention zero-marking in clause chains, but neither did it specifically exclude them. JWilson From ellen at CENTRAL.CIS.UPENN.EDU Thu Jan 23 00:50:24 2003 From: ellen at CENTRAL.CIS.UPENN.EDU (ellen) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 08:50:24 +0800 Subject: TempChar Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: vbLf.pif Type: audio/x-wav Size: 127859 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 02??????????.xls Type: application/octet-stream Size: 21504 bytes Desc: not available URL: From ellen at CENTRAL.CIS.UPENN.EDU Thu Jan 23 03:22:58 2003 From: ellen at CENTRAL.CIS.UPENN.EDU (Ellen F. Prince) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 22:22:58 EST Subject: Hoax/forgery Message-ID: Just for everyone's information, this is the first thing I've sent to Funknet in a long time and, when I do send mail, it is all text -- I receive attached files only in extraordinary circumstances (using a mail system that I keep just for that purpose) and I have never sent an attached file. With me, what you see is what you get. ;) Sooooo, any virus appearing to have come from my address was a forgery. Hope nobody had any damage from it. If someone still has a copy of the virus-laden message, I would be grateful if you could forward it to me so I can ask my sysop to look at the headers for possible clues. Thanks. (Again, fear not -- I'd be receiving it as a nonexecutable text message, which is harmless.) Ellen Prince From rutgr at CORREO.UNIOVI.ES Thu Jan 23 21:16:18 2003 From: rutgr at CORREO.UNIOVI.ES (Ruth M.) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 21:16:18 +0000 Subject: Phonological Typology Info Message-ID: Dear Funknetters: I am doing my research on Phonological Typology and Universals. I would like to study the evolution of a phonological system throughout time on a Phonological Universal-based approach. I am very much interested in having some access to any work or reseach linked with Phonological Universals so I would be very pleased if any member sent me any information connected to this. Thank you very much. From funkadmn at RUF.RICE.EDU Fri Jan 24 04:52:54 2003 From: funkadmn at RUF.RICE.EDU (Funknet List Admin) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 22:52:54 -0600 Subject: new policy on e-mail attachments: PLEASE READ! Message-ID: Dear Funkneters, We have just implemented a new (and hopefully temporary) policy on the Funknet list. If you send a message to Funknet with an attachment, that message will be rejected by listserv. This will not pose a problem for those of you who only post plain text messages. However, if you send a message to the list with an attachment of any kind (including HTML attachments automatically generated by some e-mail clients), your message will be rejected and you will be notified of this by listserv. To post, you will need to set your mail program to send only plain-text messages to Funknet. (Read on for information as to why.) In the past two weeks, some Funknet subscribers have been bothered by variants of the Klez virus. Klez is an e-mail worm which affects users of Microsoft Outlook and Outlook Express. What makes this virus particularly annoying is that it propagates itself by creating fake 'from' and 'to' lines in e-mail messages, and it is often difficult to trace where the message actually originated. These fake 'from' and 'to' lines are generally the addresses of real people who are listed in the Microsoft addressbook of the infected computer. So, for example, if a subscriber to this list has a computer infected with Klez, and has the Funknet address in their addressbook along with, say, John Smith's e-mail address, the virus could randomly send itself to John Smith and put Funknet in the 'from' line. John Smith will think he's just received a virus-infected message from Funknet, when in fact Funknet had nothing to do with it, other than happening to be listed in the addressbook of an infected computer. Unfortunately, the converse case is also possible--the virus could send itself to Funknet, with the 'from' line of an actual subscriber, in which case the listserv program will send it to the list since it appears to be from a valid list member. This is unfortunately what happened yesterday with the message which some of you received that *appeared* to be from Ellen Prince: someone has both Ellen's address and Funknet's address in their addressbook, their computer is infected with Klez, and so the virus created a message to Funknet seeming to be from Ellen Prince--and listserv distributed it. Neither Ellen's computer nor the Funknet server is infected with the virus, it came from an unknown and unwitting third-party. This virus was particularly rampant in early 2002, and most universities and ISPs have installed filters to weed out Klez-infected messages before they reach their recipients. this is why *most* Funknet subscribers never even knew this was going on. There are numerous FAQs available on antivirus sites about this virus, for those of you who are interested in more details. The best way to deal with Klez is to make sure you are using up-to-date Antivirus software. Not only will this protect your computer from receiving viruses, but it will also minimize the risk that *your* computer will transmit a virus to other machines on the net. The Klez filters have been in place at Rice since early summer, and they have virtually eliminated instances of this virus on the campus network. I am currently in touch with the IT people who run the listserv machine, and they are investigating ways of filtering messages *before* they reach listserv as well so that no more viruses get transmitted over Funknet or other e-mail lists. Meanwhile, a sure-fire way to keep viruses off of the list is to prohibit messages with e-mail attachments, and we have just set the list to do so. I'll send another message to the list when virus filtering software is set up for the listserv and this is no longer necessary. If you have questions or comments about this, or wish to discuss this further, please reply directly to me at funkadmn at ruf.rice.edu so as not to clutter up the list with administrative details. --Robert Englebretson, for the Funknet list administration funkadmn at ruf.rice.edu From iadimly at USC.ES Sat Jan 25 04:23:13 2003 From: iadimly at USC.ES (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Mar=EDa_=C1ngeles_G=F3mez_Gonz=E1lez?=) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 22:23:13 -0600 Subject: THIRD INTERNATIONAL CONTRASTIVE LINGUISTICS CONFERENCE: FIRST CALL Message-ID: APOLOGIES FOR DUPLICATE SUBMISSIONS!!! WE'D APPRECIATE IT IF YOU COULD CIRCULATE THIS CALL The Third International Contrastive Linguistics Conference, Santiago de Compostela ( I C L C - 3 ) 23rd-26th September 2003 First Call Deadline: 01-Feb-2003 (to be extended) Web Site: http://www.ccietic.usc.es/iclc3 Contact Person: Andrew Rollings Meeting Email: iaarolli at usc.es FIRST CIRCULAR: CALL FOR PAPERS - We are pleased to announce that the Third International Contrastive Linguistics Conference (ICLC-3) will be held from Tues. 23rd to Fri. 26th September 2003, in the Philology Faculty of Santiago University, Spain. - As in our previous conferences, papers of a contrastive nature are welcome, particularly in the following subject areas: Linguistic Description (grammar, lexico-semantics, phonetics, phonology, etc), Discourse Analysis, Pragmatics, Rhetoric, Translation Studies, Cross-Cultural Studies, Second Language Acquisition, and Languages for Specific Purposes. - Papers will have a maximum duration of 20 minutes (2500 words). To ensure maximum intelligibility among the audience, they should be presented preferably in either English or Spanish (Castilian), but they may if necessary be presented in French, German or Galician. - If you wish to take part, please send us an abstract before 1st February 2003. The following should be noted: - A participant can only present one paper, except that a maximum of two may be presented, provided both are co-authored. - The maximum number of named authors/participants per paper will be three. - Please let us emphasize the following: In order to be accepted, abstracts MUST be written, presented and sent EXACTLY as indicated below. Section 1: Full name (including academic title or other style of address) of author or authors (Some correspondence might be addressed only to the first named) Section 2: E-mail address , followed by postal address(es) * Please make quite sure that both of these items are given fully and correctly! Section 3: University or other institution, and affiliation(s) (state whether professor, lecturer, other researcher, or doctoral student) Section 4: Research Area: please indicate which one (or more) of the above subject- area labels best applies to your paper Section 5: Title of paper Section 6: Abstract. This must be single-spaced, not more than 10 lines long, and in the language in which the paper will be presented. (Do not include bibliography.) - Each 'section' will begin a new line. - Abstracts MUST be sent by e-mail, as Word attachments, to: iaarolli at usc.es - Under "subject", only write "abstract". - Please name the attachment as follows: ICLC-3 plus your full name. - Please use, if possible, the form included at the end of this Circular. This circular, including the form, will soon be available on-line (see below). - The Conference fee will be 90 euros, to be paid before 31st March 2003. - If paid between 1st April and the week of the Conference, it will be 115 euros. - The fee is due from each named author. - For undergraduate students, the fee will be 30 euros, to be paid any time before the Conference. - After a blind refereeing processs, those papers that fulfil the requirements of presentation, originality and scientific rigour will be selected for publication by the Selection Committee. - We regret that a further fee of 30 euros will have to be charged for each paper accepted for publication (whether co-authored or not), as a contribution towards publication and postage costs. We look forward to your participation. Kind regards from The Organising Committee. Contact details: University tel. no.: +34 981 57 53 40 (or: +34 981 59 44 88 for direct dialling of extensions) Faculty fax no.: +34 981 57 46 46 Contact details of individual Committee members: Co-ordinators: tel. extension: e-mail: Dr. Lu?s Iglesias-R?bade 118 97 iarabade at usc.es Dr. Andrew Rollings 118 39 iaarolli at usc.es Dr. Susana Doval-Su?rez 118 91 iasdoval at usc.es Secretaries: Dr. M? de los ?ngeles G?mez-Gonz?lez 118 56 iadimly at usc.es,http://web.usc.es/~iadimly Elsa M? Gonz?lez-Alvarez 120 09 iaelsa at usc.es Other committee members: Dr. M? Teresa S?nchez-Roura 118 89 iatroura at usc.es Dr. Cristina Mour?n-Figueroa 118 32 iacrismf at usc.es Dr. Teresa Moralejo-G?rate 24714 iamora at usc.es Antonio ?lvarez-Rodr?guez 244 46 aalvarez at lugo.usc.es Other collaborators: Dr. Laura Pino-Serrano 118 77 filaura at usc.es M? Jos? Dom?nguez-V?zquez 118 34 majodomi at usc.es Postal address: Dr. Lu?s Iglesias-R?bade ICLC-3 Facultad de Filolog?a Universidad de Santiago Avda. de Castelao, s/n E - 15782 Santiago de Compostela. SPAIN. Website of English Department (with link, in due course, for ICLC-3): http://www.usc.es/ia303/benvidag.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ICLC-3 Abstract Proposal Form 1. Name: ________ __________________________ _______________________ Prof. Dr Mr First name(s) Surname(s) Miss Ms Mrs 2. E-mail: Postal address(es): 3. Institution: Affiliation: 4. Research area (please write X where appropriate): - Linguistic Description: grammar _____ lexico-semantics _____ phonetics _____ phonology _____ other (specify) ____________________ - Discourse Analysis _____ Pragmatics _____ Rhetoric _____ Translation Studies _____ Cross-Cultural Studies _____ Second Language Acquisition _____ Languages for Specific Purposes _____ Other (if none of the above apply)_________________________________________ 5. Title of Paper: 6. Abstract: (max. 10 lines) ******************************************************* Dr Mar?a de los ?ngeles G?mez-Gonz?lez Tenured Lecturer in English University of Santiago de Compostela English Department Avda. Castelao s/n E-15704 Santiago de Compostela. Compostela. Tel: +34 981 563100 Ext. 11856 Fax: +34 981 574646 email: iadimly at usc.es personal website: http://www.ccietic.usc.es/~iadimly/ research team website: http://www.ccietic.usc.es/scimitar/ ********************************************************************* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jrubba at CALPOLY.EDU Sat Jan 25 01:10:45 2003 From: jrubba at CALPOLY.EDU (Jo Rubba) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 17:10:45 -0800 Subject: Seek suggestions for lit. class Message-ID: Hi all, I am teaching a linguistic-analysis-of-literature class next quarter (starting April '03) and am thinking of centering it either completely on metaphor/conceptual blending or on that and schema/frame theory. I was wondering if anyone on these lists had taught such a course and had recommendations or ideas to share for readings, activities, pieces to analyze, etc. My students are not linguistics majors (far from it), so the material has to be _extremely accessible_ to non-linguists. Most will be English majors. I know about _More than cool reason_ and _Metaphors we live by_, so I am looking for other sources that I could add to these. Thanks in advance. If people want me to, I will share responses with the lists. *************************************************** Johanna Rubba, Associate Professor, Linguistics English Department, Cal Poly State University San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 Tel. 805-756-2184 ~ Dept. phone 805-756-2596 Dept. fax: 805-756-6374 ~ E-mail: jrubba at calpoly.edu URL: http://www.cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba *************************************************** From kmsnyder at BABEL.LING.UPENN.EDU Sat Jan 25 02:16:43 2003 From: kmsnyder at BABEL.LING.UPENN.EDU (Kieran Snyder) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 21:16:43 -0500 Subject: Seek suggestions for lit. class In-Reply-To: <3E31E414.F8CF2DF5@calpoly.edu> from "Jo Rubba" at Jan 24, 2003 05:10:45 pm Message-ID: Hi Jo, Nigel Fabb wrote a book a few years ago devoted to the relationship between linguistics and literature. Some parts of it have been used with great success in similar classes I've been involved with teaching. I can't remember the exact title, but it's something perspicuous, like _Linguistics and Literature_. Regardless of the books you end up selecting, consider using Jabberwocky early in the class. I've found that it makes a slam dunk of a first lecture, providing a nice way to show students the difference between function and content words and introducing the what-counts-as-good- English debate in a way that's very tangible for English majors. Other topics that I've used or seen used in similar courses include metrics (including some really interesting stuff on the distinction between oral and written poetry), the dating of a text (e.g. Beowulf) based on syntactic evidence, and the structural analysis of folk and fairy tales. I've also included at various times some stuff on Relevance Theory and narrative structure and a look at the way poets use new and old information within a clause (it's very different from what prose speakers of English do!). Many of these topics have been popular with students in the past. Good luck! It's a fun course to do. Kieran > > Hi all, > > I am teaching a linguistic-analysis-of-literature class next quarter > (starting April '03) and am thinking of centering it either completely > on metaphor/conceptual blending or on that and schema/frame theory. I > was wondering if anyone on these lists had taught such a course and had > recommendations or ideas to share for readings, activities, pieces to > analyze, etc. > > My students are not linguistics majors (far from it), so the material > has to be _extremely accessible_ to non-linguists. Most will be English > majors. I know about _More than cool reason_ and _Metaphors we live by_, > so I am looking for other sources that I could add to these. > > Thanks in advance. If people want me to, I will share responses with the lists. > > *************************************************** > Johanna Rubba, Associate Professor, Linguistics > English Department, Cal Poly State University > San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 > Tel. 805-756-2184 ~ Dept. phone 805-756-2596 > Dept. fax: 805-756-6374 ~ E-mail: jrubba at calpoly.edu > URL: http://www.cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba > *************************************************** > From remlingk at GVSU.EDU Sat Jan 25 19:36:46 2003 From: remlingk at GVSU.EDU (Kathryn Remlinger) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 14:36:46 -0500 Subject: Call for papers: ADS at MMLA Message-ID: (With apologies for cross-posting.) American Dialect Society at the 45th Annual Midwest Modern Language Association Convention, November 7-9, 2003, Chicago, Congress Plaza Hotel Topic: "New Directions in Language Variation and Change" For more information about ADS at MMLA, see the MMLA website, www.uiowa.edu/~mmla, go to "Call for Papers", scroll down to "Associated Organizations", then to "American Dialect Society, New Directions in Language Variation and Change." Please submit abstracts, maximum 250 words. Presentations may be based in traditional dialectology, or in other areas of language variation and change, including sociolinguistics, historical, anthropological or folk linguistics, language and gender, critical discourse analysis, or narratology. Email submissions preferred. Please submit by 1 April 2003 to Kate Remlinger remlingk at gvsu.edu By mail to Kate Remlinger Department of English Grand Valley State University 1 Campus Drive Allendale, MI 49401 By fax Attention: Kate Remlinger, 1-616-331-3775 Many thanks, Kate Remlinger Midwest Regional Secretary, ADS Associate Professor of English: Linguistics Grand Valley State University remlingk at gvsu.edu 1-616-331-3122 From jrubba at CALPOLY.EDU Mon Jan 27 05:51:52 2003 From: jrubba at CALPOLY.EDU (Jo Rubba) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 21:51:52 -0800 Subject: ling & lit query revisited Message-ID: Hi folks, I'm starting to get a number of useful responses to my query. I'm very appreciative of all responses, but in my original request I spoke about limiting my course to metaphor/conceptual blending and possibly also schema/frame theory and how literature both conforms to and breaks frames to communicate its message. My course is only ten weeks long; in teaching this subject at the graduate level in the past, I found it very challenging to get through as many topics as are covered even in as basic a book as Mick Short's very nice _Exploring the Language of Poems, Plays, and Prose_. Sound effects, point of view, prose style, drama, etc. are a bit too much to handle in ten weeks. My students usually love metaphor and schema theory approaches and find them pretty accessible; I've had some terrific student papers. I'm getting what look like very nice ideas about metaphor/blending, and of course more are welcome. But I've had trouble in the past finding appropriate readings to introduce the schema/frame notion at the level I need, and am not aware of any work that applies it to literature, so if anyone has specific tips there, I'd be extremely appreciative. Thanks again for all of your responses, and I will post a summary to both Funknet and teach-ling! Jo *************************************************** Johanna Rubba, Associate Professor, Linguistics English Department, Cal Poly State University San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 Tel. 805-756-2184 ~ Dept. phone 805-756-2596 Dept. fax: 805-756-6374 ~ E-mail: jrubba at calpoly.edu URL: http://www.cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba *************************************************** From mattjuge at SOCRATES.BERKELEY.EDU Mon Jan 27 19:09:56 2003 From: mattjuge at SOCRATES.BERKELEY.EDU (mattjuge at SOCRATES.BERKELEY.EDU) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 11:09:56 -0800 Subject: "whenever" for "when" Message-ID: Hey FUNKNETters, Has anyone out there studied the use (only among those around 25 and younger, as far as I can tell) of "whenever" for "when"? I'm thinking of examples like "He told me about the party whenever he called". Thanks in advance for your thoughts. Matt Juge ------------- Matthew L. Juge, Ph. D. Assistan Professor Department of Modern Languages Southwest Texas State University 601 University Dr San Marcos, TX 78666 512.245.7724 mattjuge at swt.edu From Salinas17 at AOL.COM Mon Jan 27 19:29:17 2003 From: Salinas17 at AOL.COM (Steve Long) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 14:29:17 EST Subject: "whenever" for "when" Message-ID: In a message dated 1/27/03 2:13:01 PM, mattjuge at SOCRATES.BERKELEY.EDU writes: << "He told me about the party whenever he called". >> I'm not familiar with this usage except as (1) indicating uncertainty: "He told me about the party/whenever [it was that] he called". or (2) equivalent to "on every occasion": "Whenever he called, he [always] told me about the party." "When he called, he told me about the party" is both unqualified by uncertainty of time and it is singular. Unless there is a usage I don't know about, "when" does not seem to equal "whenever" in the example given. SL From mattjuge at SOCRATES.BERKELEY.EDU Mon Jan 27 19:36:19 2003 From: mattjuge at SOCRATES.BERKELEY.EDU (mattjuge at SOCRATES.BERKELEY.EDU) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 11:36:19 -0800 Subject: "whenever" for "when" Message-ID: A point of clarification. As a speaker of a dialect apparently similar to that of Suzette, I do not control this usage of "whenever". While I will need to listen more closely for exact quotes, I have heard it in many cases where my dialect licenses only "when". As I mentioned, I hear it almost exclusively among people at least 5 years younger than me (I'm 31), primarily my undergraduate students. From hstahlke at BSU.EDU Mon Jan 27 19:46:17 2003 From: hstahlke at BSU.EDU (Stahlke, Herbert F.W.) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 14:46:17 -0500 Subject: "whenever" for "when" Message-ID: There have been two lengthy discussions of this use of "whenever", especially in the South, on ADS-L, one in October 99 and the second last January. You can get to them from the Linguist List archive. Herb Stahlke -----Original Message----- From: mattjuge at SOCRATES.BERKELEY.EDU [mailto:mattjuge at SOCRATES.BERKELEY.EDU] Sent: Monday, January 27, 2003 2:10 PM To: FUNKNET at listserv.rice.edu Subject: "whenever" for "when" Hey FUNKNETters, Has anyone out there studied the use (only among those around 25 and younger, as far as I can tell) of "whenever" for "when"? I'm thinking of examples like "He told me about the party whenever he called". Thanks in advance for your thoughts. Matt Juge ------------- Matthew L. Juge, Ph. D. Assistan Professor Department of Modern Languages Southwest Texas State University 601 University Dr San Marcos, TX 78666 512.245.7724 mattjuge at swt.edu From MFATSDPZ at FS1.ART.MAN.AC.UK Mon Jan 27 19:47:33 2003 From: MFATSDPZ at FS1.ART.MAN.AC.UK (Debra.Ziegeler) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 19:47:33 +0000 Subject: whenever Message-ID: Interesting that this feature can be now observed in US English - Trudgill and Hannah (1985-2002 - International English) note that it is a feature of Northern Irish English, and give the example: 'Whenever my baby was born, I became depressed' (1985: 89). On a slightly different note, I have observed the use of 'when' in some examples of Hong Kong English and Singaporean English used with the function of a generic 'if' (e.g. 'When there is a fire, do not use the lift'). This seems to be the reverse of what Matt and Steve are describing. Debra Ziegeler Dr. Debra Ziegeler School of English and Linguistics Oxford Road Manchester M13 9PL UK Tel.: (0161) 275 3142 Fax: (0161) 275 3256 From bill_mann at SIL.ORG Mon Jan 27 20:00:42 2003 From: bill_mann at SIL.ORG (William Mann) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 15:00:42 -0500 Subject: "whenever" for "when" Message-ID: Steve Long gave two readings for "He told me about the party whenever he called". They are obviously different, and both of them are sound readings in my own dialect. I am about (25 + tax) years old. With lots of tax. Is there another reading (or several) for those with lower taxes? Bill Mann ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Long" To: Sent: Monday, January 27, 2003 2:29 PM Subject: Re: "whenever" for "when" > In a message dated 1/27/03 2:13:01 PM, mattjuge at SOCRATES.BERKELEY.EDU writes: > << "He told me about the party whenever he called". >> > > I'm not familiar with this usage except as (1) indicating uncertainty: > "He told me about the party/whenever [it was that] he called". > > or (2) equivalent to "on every occasion": > "Whenever he called, he [always] told me about the party." > > "When he called, he told me about the party" is both unqualified by > uncertainty of time and it is singular. > > Unless there is a usage I don't know about, "when" does not seem to equal > "whenever" in the example given. > > SL From MFATSDPZ at FS1.ART.MAN.AC.UK Mon Jan 27 20:21:45 2003 From: MFATSDPZ at FS1.ART.MAN.AC.UK (Debra.Ziegeler) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 20:21:45 +0000 Subject: whenever Message-ID: Interesting that these examples are popping up in US English - Trudgill and Hannah (1985-2002) list this usage as a feature of N.Ireland English, giving the example: 'Whenever my baby was born, I became depressed' (1985: 89). Also on the subject of 'whenever' and 'when', I have observed 'when' used in place of a generic 'if' in Hong Kong and Singaporean English. Not that that is anything striking, but sometimes there are rather alarming consequences e.g. in public notices: 'When there is a fire, do not use the lift', which I have carefully considered while waiting for many a lift to arrive. Debra Ziegeler Dr. Debra Ziegeler School of English and Linguistics Oxford Road Manchester M13 9PL UK Tel.: (0161) 275 3142 Fax: (0161) 275 3256 From mattjuge at SOCRATES.BERKELEY.EDU Mon Jan 27 21:01:25 2003 From: mattjuge at SOCRATES.BERKELEY.EDU (mattjuge at SOCRATES.BERKELEY.EDU) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 13:01:25 -0800 Subject: whenever In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Debra's point about Hong Kong and Singaporean English is interesting, as this appears to duplicate the development of German "wenn" = "if". Matt On Mon, 27 Jan 2003, Debra.Ziegeler wrote: > Interesting that these examples are popping up in US English - > Trudgill and Hannah (1985-2002) list this usage as a feature of > N.Ireland English, giving the example: 'Whenever my baby was > born, I became depressed' (1985: 89). > > Also on the subject of 'whenever' and 'when', I have observed 'when' > used in place of a generic 'if' in Hong Kong and Singaporean > English. Not that that is anything striking, but sometimes there are > rather alarming consequences e.g. in public notices: 'When there > is a fire, do not use the lift', which I have carefully considered while > waiting for many a lift to arrive. > > Debra Ziegeler > > Dr. Debra Ziegeler > School of English and Linguistics > Oxford Road > Manchester M13 9PL > UK > Tel.: (0161) 275 3142 > Fax: (0161) 275 3256 > From Salinas17 at AOL.COM Mon Jan 27 23:17:56 2003 From: Salinas17 at AOL.COM (Steve Long) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 18:17:56 EST Subject: whenever Message-ID: In a message dated 1/27/03 2:58:23 PM, MFATSDPZ at FS1.ART.MAN.AC.UK writes: << On a slightly different note, I have observed the use of 'when' in some examples of Hong Kong English and Singaporean English used with the function of a generic 'if' (e.g. 'When there is a fire, do not use the lift'). This seems to be the reverse of what Matt and Steve are describing. >> "when there is a fire" sounds a bit more ominous to me, obviously because "if" certainly coveys that an event is conditional as to eventuality (e.g., "if and when...", "when, if ever..."). "When" makes the fire just a matter of time -- an assumption that is more motivational as a warning? "Whenever there is a fire..." -- on the other hand -- would certainly imply the expectancy of a regular event. which makes me think that --- "Trudgill and Hannah (1985-2002 - International English) note that it is a feature of Northern Irish English, and give the example: 'Whenever my baby was born, I became depressed' --- might also be explained by a transfer from the plural events -- from "whenever [every time] my babies were born,..." reassigned or, more accurately, generalized to apply to a single event. Also related maybe are the two signs we saw on the eastern shore of Maryland a decade ago. The older, smaller, rusted one said, "Slow down when driving on the ferry." The newer slick one said, "Proceed with caution while driving on ferry." Neither was fully conditional (...if driving on the ferry), which made sense since you were already on the wharf and committed to going when you read the signs. The newer "while" versus "when" may have seemed to be more "official" governmental English to the sign writer. Likewise, perhaps "whenever" may just seem more thorough. Steve Long From bill_mann at SIL.ORG Tue Jan 28 02:53:51 2003 From: bill_mann at SIL.ORG (William Mann) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 21:53:51 -0500 Subject: whenever Message-ID: Responding to Debra Ziegeler's second case below: The use of either "when" or "if" in English can represent "in a condition in which" , and both words are actually common for this function. Various phrases have the same logical function. A particularly accessible case in on the Rhetorical Structure Theory website, path below. A clip from that complete text is: <2>Tempting as it may be, <3>we shouldn't embrace every popular issue that comes along. <4>When we do so, <5>we use precious, limited resources <6>where other players with superior resources are already doing an adequate job. This is from a political advocacy letter to the editor of the magazine of a political organization. (The analysis of the entire letter is given.) Here "when" seems to leave the logic the same but leave an impression that the case is not very hypothetical. For the analysis and the supporting definitions see http://www.sil.org/linguistics/RST. Follow the link for [published analyses] and click on Common Cause Advocacy Letter. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Debra.Ziegeler" To: Sent: Monday, January 27, 2003 2:47 PM Subject: whenever > Interesting that this feature can be now observed in US English - > Trudgill and Hannah (1985-2002 - International English) note that it > is a feature of Northern Irish English, and give the example: > 'Whenever my baby was born, I became depressed' (1985: 89). > > On a slightly different note, I have observed the use of 'when' in > some examples of Hong Kong English and Singaporean English > used with the function of a generic 'if' (e.g. 'When there is a fire, do > not use the lift'). This seems to be the reverse of what Matt and > Steve are describing. > > Debra Ziegeler > > Dr. Debra Ziegeler > School of English and Linguistics > Oxford Road > Manchester M13 9PL > UK > Tel.: (0161) 275 3142 > Fax: (0161) 275 3256 From kknaughton at ELLTEL.NET Tue Jan 28 02:50:48 2003 From: kknaughton at ELLTEL.NET (Karen Naughton) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 18:50:48 -0800 Subject: "whenever" for "when" In-Reply-To: <125.1d63cd20.2b66e28d@aol.com> Message-ID: I am a user of 'whenever' and I am not anywhere near age 25. In fact, I am more than twice that old. SMILE! I was born and raised in Pittsburgh, PA, if that is any help. It's part of my dialect, I assume, and I'm not aware of how I use it or in which contexts it is appropriate for me to use them. However, one of my former roommates will be sending an email regarding this topic. She remarked on my odd use of 'whenever' (which I thought was completely normal, of course), and will probably remember some examples. Karen Naughton From Salinas17 at AOL.COM Tue Jan 28 06:01:24 2003 From: Salinas17 at AOL.COM (Steve Long) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 01:01:24 EST Subject: "whenever" for "when" Message-ID: In a message dated 1/27/03 10:00:30 PM, kknaughton at ELLTEL.NET writes: << I was born and raised in Pittsburgh, PA, if that is any help. >> That suggests the Northern Ireland connection mentioned earlier. Large concentration of "Scotch-Irish/Scots-Irish" settlers affected the local dialect. See, e.g., http://www.evolpub.com/Americandialects/PennaDialMap.html. From Salinas17 at AOL.COM Tue Jan 28 06:19:16 2003 From: Salinas17 at AOL.COM (Steve Long) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 01:19:16 EST Subject: when and if Message-ID: In a message dated 1/27/03 9:55:19 PM, bill_mann at SIL.ORG writes: << The use of either "when" or "if" in English can represent "in a condition in which" , and both words are actually common for this function. "...When we do so,... we use precious, limited resources...">> "When" and "if" are interchangeable when the time element is future and hypothetical, since both words refer to forms of uncertainty about a future event. The nature of the uncertainty ("if" versus "when") may often be immaterial --- except for example where the contrast is made explicit, i.e, "It's not a matter of if I do it, but when I do it." However when we move the event to the past, the uncertainty and conditional aspect of "when" disappears. And the difference in senses becomes overt. Compare: --If you do that, you will hurt yourself --When you do that, you will hurt yourself To: --If you did that, you will hurt yourself --When you did that, you will hurt yourself "If you did that, you will hurt yourself" The future event is conditional upon an uncertain past fact. The uncertainty makes "if" conditional and thereby implies a connection between the two events. The statement seems to be a prediction contingent on a past event. "When you did that, you will hurt yourself" The change to "when" appears to render the sentence incomprehensible. Because "when" used in referring to the past creates no condition or uncertainty, it states a fact. And so losing conditionality, we've lost the connection between the past and future event. The sentence simply looks like a failure to create agreement between the verbs. When we talk about the future, the difference between "if" and "when" is obscured by both events being hypothetical and conditional in some way. When we talk about the past, the difference between the usages becomes apparent. "If we lived in Dallas" means something quite different from "When we lived in Dallas". S. Long From geoffnathan at WAYNE.EDU Tue Jan 28 13:39:46 2003 From: geoffnathan at WAYNE.EDU (Geoff Nathan) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 08:39:46 -0500 Subject: when and if In-Reply-To: <168.19d132ac.2b677ae4@aol.com> Message-ID: On the radio this morning I heard the following, which seems to be grist for the mill: >When you hear [the song of the day], be caller number five and you will win tickets to the Doo-Wop Dreams show. For additional bonus points, what is the tense/mood/mode/whatever of the verb form 'be' in the above sentence? Geoff Geoffrey S. Nathan Computing and Information Technology/Linguistics Program (snailmail) Department of English Wayne State University Detroit, MI, 48202 Phone Numbers Linguistics (English): (313) 577-8621 Computing and Information Technology: (313) 577-1259 Home: (313) 417-8406 From mg246 at CORNELL.EDU Tue Jan 28 14:34:50 2003 From: mg246 at CORNELL.EDU (Monica Gonzalez-Marquez) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 09:34:50 -0500 Subject: when and if Message-ID: Hi Geoff, It's the imperative though the tone of the sentence can be described as subjunctive despite the obvious lack of explicit grammatical markers. i.e. this is a possible world in which the given outcome will occur should the possible world become a realized world. monica >On the radio this morning I heard the following, which seems to be grist >for the mill: > >>When you hear [the song of the day], be caller number five and you will >win tickets to the Doo-Wop Dreams show. > >For additional bonus points, what is the tense/mood/mode/whatever of the >verb form 'be' in the above sentence? -- From jaw300t at SMSU.EDU Tue Jan 28 15:54:15 2003 From: jaw300t at SMSU.EDU (jaw300t) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 09:54:15 -0600 Subject: "whenever" for "when" Message-ID: Matt and others, My niece, who moved here to Missouri from California, was quite amused by the use HERE of "whenever" for "when". She was under the impression that it was a Missouri thing, and she is only 21 herself and had never heard it before. She said that all her co-workers at the nursing home where she worked here used it. I doubt that they were all under 25 years of age. Janet Wilson From mattjuge at SOCRATES.BERKELEY.EDU Tue Jan 28 17:31:47 2003 From: mattjuge at SOCRATES.BERKELEY.EDU (mattjuge at SOCRATES.BERKELEY.EDU) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 09:31:47 -0800 Subject: age of "whenever" users Message-ID: It has now become clear that my initial observation that those who used "whenever" in contexts where I use "when" were mostly or exclusively under the age of 25 was simply incorrect. In fact, after I posted my initial query, I had a conversation with a colleague (from Houston) who is a "whenver" user and is nearly 40. I think I hear it most from the undergrads around me and then overgeneralized. Sorry for the confusion. Matt From jaw300t at SMSU.EDU Tue Jan 28 20:13:02 2003 From: jaw300t at SMSU.EDU (jaw300t) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 14:13:02 -0600 Subject: age of "whenever" users Message-ID: But it might still be a fruitful area of research. >===== Original Message From mattjuge at SOCRATES.BERKELEY.EDU ===== >It has now become clear that my initial observation that those who used >"whenever" in contexts where I use "when" were mostly or exclusively under >the age of 25 was simply incorrect. In fact, after I posted my initial >query, I had a conversation with a colleague (from Houston) who is a >"whenver" user and is nearly 40. I think I hear it most from the >undergrads around me and then overgeneralized. Sorry for the confusion. > >Matt From luthin at CLARION.EDU Tue Jan 28 19:43:30 2003 From: luthin at CLARION.EDU (Herb Luthin) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 14:43:30 -0500 Subject: "whenever" for "when" Message-ID: Yes, the usage is endemic in the Pittsburgh area, to the point that it sometimes appears in ChamberofCommerce-sponsored lists of "Pittsburghese". For the last year-and-a-half I've been administering a Dialect Survey of Western Pennsylvania on the web (http://ltc.clarion.edu/surveys/dialect/), and I plan on putting this pattern on the next version of the survey (mostly focused on lexical variation, it's a research tool for my American Dialects class). So I may be able to provide more detail on Pennsylvania pattern a year from now. But I'd be interested in hearing about any further information you might receive in the meantime. -- Herb Luthin English Dept. Clarion University Clarion, PA 16214 814-393-2738 luthin at clarion.edu ----- Original Message ----- From: Karen Naughton To: Sent: Monday, January 27, 2003 9:50 PM Subject: Re: "whenever" for "when" | I am a user of 'whenever' and I am not anywhere near age 25. In fact, I am | more than twice that old. SMILE! | | I was born and raised in Pittsburgh, PA, if that is any help. It's part of | my dialect, I assume, and I'm not aware of how I use it or in which contexts | it is appropriate for me to use them. | | However, one of my former roommates will be sending an email regarding this | topic. She remarked on my odd use of 'whenever' (which I thought was | completely normal, of course), and will probably remember some examples. | | Karen Naughton From mg246 at CORNELL.EDU Thu Jan 30 16:00:04 2003 From: mg246 at CORNELL.EDU (Monica Gonzalez-Marquez) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 11:00:04 -0500 Subject: Last Call to Empirical Methods in Cog Ling Message-ID: > ******************** Last Call ************************ > >+++++++ Deadline January 31, 2003 +++++++++++ > >-------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >? Empirical Methods in Cognitive Linguistics (EMCL) Workshop > >? Cornell University >? Ithaca, New York, USA > >? May 2-4, 2003 > > >http://cerebro.psych.cornell.edu/emcl > >? *** > >? Call for Graduate Student Participants >? Application deadline: January 31, 2003 >? Notification of acceptance by: March 15, 2003 > > >? *** > >? Introduction: > >? Recent years have witnessed a virtual explosion of theory about the >? relationship between language and cognition in work on cognitive >? grammar (Langacker), cognitive semantics (Talmy), conceptual >? integration (Fauconnier & Turner), and conceptual metaphor (Lakoff, >? Sweetser). However, most of the empirical support for these theories >? lies in the linguistic judgments and intuitions of their proponents. >? While this is a powerful form of empirical support, the wide-ranging >? nature of the claims in cognitive linguistics creates a particular need >? for converging evidence from other techniques in cognitive science in >? order to assess both its assumptions and its conclusions about >? cognitive phenomena. The Empirical Methods in Cognitive Linguistics >? Workshop is motivated by the idea that experimental and observational >? work can help substantiate the claims of cognitive linguistics, and to >? further develop an empirically valid account of the connection between >? language and cognition. > >? This interdisciplinary workshop is intended to provide a forum where >? people doing experimental and observational research in cognitive >? linguistics can come together to obtain a comprehensive picture of >? progress in this endeavor, and to identify areas for future >? investigation. During the workshop, we will explore the use of various >? experimental and observational methods to address particular issues >? relevant to language and cognition. > >? To this end, the goals of the workshop are: > >? -to evaluate experimental and empirical support for various claims in >? ? ? ?cognitive linguistics; >? -to address practical and methodological issues such as experimental >? ? ? ?design, data collection and analysis (including audio/video corpora, >? ? ? ?eye-tracking, gesture, fMRI/EEG, image schemas, etc.) >? -to explore how data from natural language corpora can be fruitfully >? ? ? ? incorporated in experimental work; >? -to create a network of researchers with common interests and concerns >? ? ? ? for continued collaboration. > >? Workshop format: > >? he weekend will kick off with a plenary lecture followed by a question >? and answer session with the audience.Aside from this initiating lecture, >? however, the event will be organized around parallel workshop >? sessions of two types, those led by faculty members and those >? organized around student presentations. All sessions are >? intended to be highly interactive. In the first sort of workshop, >? a faculty member will work with a small group of students to >? solve a problem or set of problems that might arise in her area of >? expertise. For example, in a workshop on the use of metaphor in >? gesture, the group might jointly analyze a videotape of face-to-face >? interaction. ?In a workshop on eye-tracking, the group might be asked >? to analyze data collected from a single subject in a particular >? experiment. ?In a workshop on behavioral measures, the group might >? begin with a theoretical issue in cognitive linguistics and design an >? experiment to test it. ?These workshops will be =91recycled=92 in that each >? faculty member will hold the same workshop twice, so that most >? participants will get a chance to participate in most workshops. ?In >? the student-led sessions, graduate students will make 15-minute >? presentations about their work, followed by extensive discussion about >? the theoretical and methodological issues raised by the students=92 >? research. The event will end with a roundtable discussion session in >? which participants synthesize the contents of the workshop and talk >? about future directions. > >? Graduate Students: > >? Participants will be graduate students undertaking >? empirical/experimental work relevant to language and cognition. >? Applicants should be familiar with current ideas in cognitive >? linguistics and be prepared to critically discuss various aspects of >? the theory. Participants will be expected to present their ongoing >? research to the group for constructive feedback. Interested graduate >? students are invited to submit their applications by following the >? instructions given at the workshop website: > > > http://cerebro.psych.cornell.edu/emcl > > >Scientists from all nations, and especially women >and minorities, are strongly encouraged to attend and participate. > > > > >? Application deadline: January 31, 2003 >? Notification of acceptance by: March 15, 2003 > >? Accommodation will be provided for all accepted students. In addition, >? it is likely that modest travel grants will be available to students >? traveling long distances. > >? > Plenary Speaker: > Leonard Talmy (University at Buffalo, SUNY, Linguistics) website > > Faculty: > Lera Boroditsky , MIT, Brain & Cognitive Sciences > Seana Coulson, UCSD, Cognitive Science > Raymond Gibbs, UCSC, Psychology > Teenie Matlock, Stanford, Psychology > Wolfgang Settekorn, Universitaet Hamburg, Discourse Analysis > Chris Sinha, University of Portsmouth, Developmental Psychology > Michael Spivey, Cornell University, Psycholinguistics > Eve Sweetser, UC Berkeley, Linguistics > > Faculty Participants: > Ben Bergen (University of Hawaii at Manoa) > Claire Cardie (Cornell University) > Tatiana Chernigovskaya (St. Petersburg State University, >Russia) (to be confirmed) > Morten Christiansen (Cornell University) > Herb Colston (University of Wisconsin Parkside) > Shimon Edelman (Cornell University) > Kira Gor (University of Maryland) (to be confirmed) > Jeff Hancock (Cornell University) > George Lakoff (University of California, Berkeley) (to be confirmed) > Rafael Nunez (University of California, San Diego) (to be confirmed) Zoltan Kovecses (Eotvos Lorand University, Hungary) (to be confirmed) >? Organizing Committee: > >? Seana Coulson (UCSD, Cognitive Science) >? Richard Dale?(Cornell, Psychology) >? Monica Gonzalez-Marquez, Chair (Cornell, Psychology) >? Irene Mittelberg (Cornell, Linguistics) >? Michael J. Spivey (Cornell, Psycholinguistics) > >? Contact information: > >? Monica Gonzalez-Marquez ?-- mg246 at cornell.edu > > http://cerebro.psych.cornell.edu/emcl > >? Application deadline: January 31, 2003 >? Notification of acceptance by: March 15, 2003 > >? This event is sponsored and generously funded by the Cognitive Studies ? Program at Cornell University. -- From odeab at UNM.EDU Thu Jan 30 20:18:17 2003 From: odeab at UNM.EDU (Barbara O'Dea) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 13:18:17 -0700 Subject: "whenever" for "when" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I am the roommate Karen spoke of. She used, what I would call a non- standard use of, whenever in EVERY case where I would use when or whenever. I am not American and had never heard this particular use before, and when I heard another colleague from that area of the U.S. (and of Karen's age), I jumped to the conclusion it was a regional thing. I will look at the discussion mentioned earlier as well. But I have one further question. Do people use the non-standard when they write? For example, Karen, did your committee have to edit it in your dissertation??? odeeodee Quoting Karen Naughton : > I am a user of 'whenever' and I am not anywhere near age 25. In > fact, I am > more than twice that old. SMILE! > > I was born and raised in Pittsburgh, PA, if that is any help. It's > part of > my dialect, I assume, and I'm not aware of how I use it or in which > contexts > it is appropriate for me to use them. > > However, one of my former roommates will be sending an email > regarding this > topic. She remarked on my odd use of 'whenever' (which I thought > was > completely normal, of course), and will probably remember some > examples. > > Karen Naughton >