From jrubba at calpoly.edu Sat Jan 1 23:34:13 2011 From: jrubba at calpoly.edu (Johanna Rubba) Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2011 15:34:13 -0800 Subject: Query about language-related media articles Message-ID: Hello, everyone, I would like to compile a list of shortish readings about language for my introduction to linguistics students (and perhaps for use in other courses, as well). Of course, I would like them to be linguistically sound. The topics should be ones that would interest the general reader who is in the process of gaining new insights and new information about language. The articles should be accessible to the general reader. The length I have in mind is, say, the typical length of a New Yorker or Atlantic Monthly feature article. It would be helpful if the articles were accessible full-text online, including through library databases. Some examples I can think of from my own reading habits include a NYer article about Dan Everett's work on Pirahã, an Atl. Monthly one about growing official-language movements for Celtic languages in England, something somewhere about language evolution, something somewhere about language in Neanderthals -- so the topic range is pretty wide open. They don't have to be recent, as long as the content is sound. Newspaper articles would be too short. But if you have some that have a reference to a longer work, it would be helpful to pass that on. If you have some in mind, could you send along the bibliographic information plus a very short summary of the article (1-3 sentences)? I will post a summary of my responses to the list. Thank you, and Happy 2011 to you all! Dr. Johanna Rubba, Ph. D. Professor, Linguistics Linguistics Minor Advisor English Dept. Cal Poly State University San Luis Obispo San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 Ofc. tel. : 805-756-2184 Dept. tel.: 805-756-2596 Dept. fax: 805-756-6374 E-mail: jrubba at calpoly.edu URL: http://cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba From john at research.haifa.ac.il Mon Jan 3 15:12:36 2011 From: john at research.haifa.ac.il (john at research.haifa.ac.il) Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2011 17:12:36 +0200 Subject: Help with Moroccan/Algerian Arabic In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dear Funknetters, I need some information about spoken Moroccan/Algerian Arabic (for example the pronunciation of the /q/, which is apparently realized as [g] with certain words). Might any of you be able to give some basic information or suggest someone who can? (Jeff Heath seems to be incommunicado). Thanks, John ------------------------------------------------------------------------ This message was sent using IMP, the Webmail Program of Haifa University From ceford at wisc.edu Tue Jan 4 02:30:44 2011 From: ceford at wisc.edu (Cecilia E. Ford) Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2011 20:30:44 -0600 Subject: approaches to text analysis Message-ID: I teach a regular course on grammar in use, centering on language in interaction. I would like to include some coverage of analyzing written text and am interested in suggestions of approaches that would work for a mixed graduate/undergraduate class. Any suggestions on textbooks, articles, chapters, introductory essays or the like? thanks,Ceci -- Cecilia E. Ford Nancy C. Hoefs Professor of English Professor of Sociology University of Wisconsin-Madison UW Interaction Interest Group (UWIIG): http://uwiig.blogspot.com/ Ford website: http://mendota.english.wisc.edu/~ceford/ Be GREEN, keep it on the SCREEN From jrubba at calpoly.edu Tue Jan 4 02:48:07 2011 From: jrubba at calpoly.edu (Johanna Rubba) Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2011 18:48:07 -0800 Subject: approaches to text analysis In-Reply-To: <7460ce131e465.4d2231f4@wiscmail.wisc.edu> Message-ID: Here is a rather basic one by Raphael Salkie: http://www.amazon.com/Text-Discourse-Analysis-Language-Workbooks/dp/0415092787 This is also worth a look. It's intended for language education (ESL, particularly), but I think you'll find it very rich. Evelyn Hatch: http://www.amazon.com/Discourse-Language-Education-Cambridge-Teaching/dp/0521426057/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1294109083&sr=1-1 On Jan 3, 2011, at 6:30 PM, Cecilia E. Ford wrote: I teach a regular course on grammar in use, centering on language in interaction. I would like to include some coverage of analyzing written text and am interested in suggestions of approaches that would work for a mixed graduate/undergraduate class. Any suggestions on textbooks, articles, chapters, introductory essays or the like? thanks,Ceci -- Cecilia E. Ford Nancy C. Hoefs Professor of English Professor of Sociology University of Wisconsin-Madison UW Interaction Interest Group (UWIIG): http://uwiig.blogspot.com/ Ford website: http://mendota.english.wisc.edu/~ceford/ Be GREEN, keep it on the SCREEN Dr. Johanna Rubba, Professor, Linguistics Linguistics Minor Advisor English Department California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo E-mail: jrubba at calpoly.edu Tel.: 805.756.2184 Dept. Ofc. Tel.: 805.756.2596 Dept. Fax: 805.756.6374 URL: http://www.cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba From ceford at wisc.edu Tue Jan 4 02:55:05 2011 From: ceford at wisc.edu (Cecilia E. Ford) Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2011 20:55:05 -0600 Subject: approaches to text analysis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Thank you. I have the Hatch book and can use it right off the shelf. From what I can recall, it is better than Salkie because it goes into verb forms and clause constrution, not just cohesive devices. It covers written and spoken language, but I think it has parts that are primarily about writing. great! Ceci On 01/03/11, Johanna Rubba wrote: > Here is a rather basic one by Raphael Salkie: > > http://www.amazon.com/Text-Discourse-Analysis-Language-Workbooks/dp/0415092787 > > This is also worth a look. It's intended for language education (ESL, particularly), but I think you'll find it very rich. Evelyn Hatch: > > http://www.amazon.com/Discourse-Language-Education-Cambridge-Teaching/dp/0521426057/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1294109083&sr=1-1 > > > On Jan 3, 2011, at 6:30 PM, Cecilia E. Ford wrote: > > I teach a regular course on grammar in use, centering on language in interaction. I would like to include some coverage of analyzing written text and am interested in suggestions of approaches that would work for a mixed graduate/undergraduate class.  Any suggestions on textbooks, articles, chapters, introductory essays or the like? > thanks,Ceci > -- > Cecilia E. Ford > Nancy C. Hoefs Professor of English > Professor of Sociology > University of Wisconsin-Madison > > UW Interaction Interest Group (UWIIG):   http://uwiig.blogspot.com/ > > Ford website:   http://mendota.english.wisc.edu/~ceford/ > > > > > > Be GREEN, keep it on the SCREEN > > Dr. Johanna Rubba, Professor, Linguistics > Linguistics Minor Advisor > English Department > California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo > E-mail: jrubba at calpoly.edu > Tel.: 805.756.2184 > Dept. Ofc. Tel.: 805.756.2596 > Dept. Fax: 805.756.6374 > URL: http://www.cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba -- Cecilia E. Ford Nancy C. Hoefs Professor of English Professor of Sociology University of Wisconsin-Madison UW Interaction Interest Group (UWIIG): http://uwiig.blogspot.com/ Ford website: http://mendota.english.wisc.edu/~ceford/ Be GREEN, keep it on the SCREEN From wsmith at csusb.edu Tue Jan 4 03:11:03 2011 From: wsmith at csusb.edu (Wendy Smith) Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2011 19:11:03 -0800 Subject: approaches to text analysis In-Reply-To: <732081df1ef2d.4d2237a9@wiscmail.wisc.edu> Message-ID: Hi Cece, Make sure you use the book by Hatch with Anne Lazarton as co-author. Wendy On 1/3/2011 6:55 PM, Cecilia E. Ford wrote: > Thank you. I have the Hatch book and can use it right off the shelf. From what I can recall, it is better than Salkie because it goes into verb forms and clause constrution, not just cohesive devices. It covers written and spoken language, but I think it has parts that are primarily about writing. > great! > Ceci > > On 01/03/11, Johanna Rubba wrote: > >> Here is a rather basic one by Raphael Salkie: >> >> http://www.amazon.com/Text-Discourse-Analysis-Language-Workbooks/dp/0415092787 >> >> This is also worth a look. It's intended for language education (ESL, particularly), but I think you'll find it very rich. Evelyn Hatch: >> >> http://www.amazon.com/Discourse-Language-Education-Cambridge-Teaching/dp/0521426057/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1294109083&sr=1-1 >> >> >> On Jan 3, 2011, at 6:30 PM, Cecilia E. Ford wrote: >> >> I teach a regular course on grammar in use, centering on language in interaction. I would like to include some coverage of analyzing written text and am interested in suggestions of approaches that would work for a mixed graduate/undergraduate class. Any suggestions on textbooks, articles, chapters, introductory essays or the like? >> thanks,Ceci >> -- >> Cecilia E. Ford >> Nancy C. Hoefs Professor of English >> Professor of Sociology >> University of Wisconsin-Madison >> >> UW Interaction Interest Group (UWIIG): http://uwiig.blogspot.com/ >> >> Ford website: http://mendota.english.wisc.edu/~ceford/ >> >> >> >> >> >> Be GREEN, keep it on the SCREEN >> >> Dr. Johanna Rubba, Professor, Linguistics >> Linguistics Minor Advisor >> English Department >> California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo >> E-mail: jrubba at calpoly.edu >> Tel.: 805.756.2184 >> Dept. Ofc. Tel.: 805.756.2596 >> Dept. Fax: 805.756.6374 >> URL: http://www.cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba From T.J.M.Sanders at uu.nl Tue Jan 4 09:39:12 2011 From: T.J.M.Sanders at uu.nl (Sanders, Ted) Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 10:39:12 +0100 Subject: approaches to text analysis In-Reply-To: <732081df1ef2d.4d2237a9@wiscmail.wisc.edu> Message-ID: Hi Ceci In addition: Jan Renkema has edited a 2009 volume with Benjamins "Disocurse, of course" which has several interesting contributions for your purpose (by Maite Taboada, Max Louwerse, Ted Sanders & Wilbert Spooren, for instance). I guess this could function as the introdoctory chapters you mention, but it could easily be extended with original research papers, to which the chapters point. Best wishes, Ted -------------------------------------------------------- Ted Sanders Departement Nederlandse Taal en Cultuur / Utrecht institute of Linguistics UiL OTS Universiteit Utrecht Trans 10 NL-3512 JK Utrecht The Netherlands T +31 30 2536080 / 8000 F +31 30 2536000 E T.J.M.Sanders at uu.nl http://www.let.uu.nl/~ted.sanders/personal/index.php ------------------------------------------------------ -----Original Message----- From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [mailto:funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Cecilia E. Ford Sent: dinsdag 4 januari 2011 3:55 To: Johanna Rubba Cc: funknet Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] approaches to text analysis Thank you. I have the Hatch book and can use it right off the shelf. >>From what I can recall, it is better than Salkie because it goes into verb forms and clause constrution, not just cohesive devices. It covers written and spoken language, but I think it has parts that are primarily about writing. great! Ceci On 01/03/11, Johanna Rubba wrote: > Here is a rather basic one by Raphael Salkie: > > http://www.amazon.com/Text-Discourse-Analysis-Language-Workbooks/dp/04 > 15092787 > > This is also worth a look. It's intended for language education (ESL, particularly), but I think you'll find it very rich. Evelyn Hatch: > > http://www.amazon.com/Discourse-Language-Education-Cambridge-Teaching/ > dp/0521426057/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1294109083&sr=1-1 > > > On Jan 3, 2011, at 6:30 PM, Cecilia E. Ford wrote: > > I teach a regular course on grammar in use, centering on language in interaction. I would like to include some coverage of analyzing written text and am interested in suggestions of approaches that would work for a mixed graduate/undergraduate class.  Any suggestions on textbooks, articles, chapters, introductory essays or the like? > thanks,Ceci > -- > Cecilia E. Ford > Nancy C. Hoefs Professor of English > Professor of Sociology > University of Wisconsin-Madison > > UW Interaction Interest Group (UWIIG):   http://uwiig.blogspot.com/ > > Ford website:   http://mendota.english.wisc.edu/~ceford/ > > > > > > Be GREEN, keep it on the SCREEN > > Dr. Johanna Rubba, Professor, Linguistics Linguistics Minor Advisor > English Department California Polytechnic State University, San Luis > Obispo > E-mail: jrubba at calpoly.edu > Tel.: 805.756.2184 > Dept. Ofc. Tel.: 805.756.2596 > Dept. Fax: 805.756.6374 > URL: http://www.cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba -- Cecilia E. Ford Nancy C. Hoefs Professor of English Professor of Sociology University of Wisconsin-Madison UW Interaction Interest Group (UWIIG): http://uwiig.blogspot.com/ Ford website: http://mendota.english.wisc.edu/~ceford/ Be GREEN, keep it on the SCREEN From hancock at albany.edu Tue Jan 4 14:35:32 2011 From: hancock at albany.edu (hancock at albany.edu) Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 09:35:32 -0500 Subject: approaches to text analysis Message-ID: > For a course in "Writing, Reading, and Language," I am using (for the first time) "Exploring English Language: from Formal to Functional", Coffin, Donohue, and North, Routledge 2009. It takes an admittedly SFL perspective, though it starts with a more traditional orientation. What I especially like are the large numbers of texts and a great many interactive exercises built in. When I taught the class last semester, I used Kolln's Rhetorical Grammar and The Longman Student Grammar (Biber et. al.). I was surprised that my students found the Longman (a corpus based grammar) much more useful, and so I am ordering it again. Biber's contention is that language features co-occur within genres for functional reasons. The book examines language frequencies and patterns in speech, fiction, newswriting, and academic writing. That's a very broad brush, but a useful base to work from. I teach this as a "writing intensive" course out of the linguistics department. Students try out the genres as they explore them. There has been a good deal of discourse analysis out of SFL. Genre and text are the central focus of a language curriculum in the schools. If language is what it is because of what it does (a central tenet, I think, of a functional perspective), then discourse analysis should be more central than it is to language study in the schools. There is a growing argument for this. I recommend Terry Locke's "Beyond The Grammar Wars" (Routledge, 2010) for an international conversation. Craig > Hi Ceci > In addition: > Jan Renkema has edited a 2009 volume with Benjamins "Disocurse, of course" > which has several interesting contributions for your purpose (by Maite > Taboada, Max Louwerse, Ted Sanders & Wilbert Spooren, for instance). I > guess this could function as the introdoctory chapters you mention, but it > could easily be extended with original research papers, to which the > chapters point. > > Best wishes, > Ted > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > Ted Sanders > Departement Nederlandse Taal en Cultuur / > Utrecht institute of Linguistics UiL OTS > Universiteit Utrecht > Trans 10 > NL-3512 JK Utrecht > The Netherlands > T +31 30 2536080 / 8000 > F +31 30 2536000 > E T.J.M.Sanders at uu.nl > http://www.let.uu.nl/~ted.sanders/personal/index.php > ------------------------------------------------------ > > -----Original Message----- > From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu > [mailto:funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Cecilia E. Ford > Sent: dinsdag 4 januari 2011 3:55 > To: Johanna Rubba > Cc: funknet > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] approaches to text analysis > > Thank you. I have the Hatch book and can use it right off the shelf. >From > what I can recall, it is better than Salkie because it goes into verb > forms and clause constrution, not just cohesive devices. It covers written > and spoken language, but I think it has parts that are primarily about > writing. > great! > Ceci > > On 01/03/11, Johanna Rubba wrote: > >> Here is a rather basic one by Raphael Salkie: >> >> http://www.amazon.com/Text-Discourse-Analysis-Language-Workbooks/dp/04 >> 15092787 >> >> This is also worth a look. It's intended for language education (ESL, >> particularly), but I think you'll find it very rich. Evelyn Hatch: >> >> http://www.amazon.com/Discourse-Language-Education-Cambridge-Teaching/ >> dp/0521426057/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1294109083&sr=1-1 >> >> >> On Jan 3, 2011, at 6:30 PM, Cecilia E. Ford wrote: >> >> I teach a regular course on grammar in use, centering on language in >> interaction. I would like to include some coverage of analyzing written >> text and am interested in suggestions of approaches that would work for >> a mixed graduate/undergraduate class.  Any suggestions on textbooks, >> articles, chapters, introductory essays or the like? >> thanks,Ceci >> -- >> Cecilia E. Ford >> Nancy C. Hoefs Professor of English >> Professor of Sociology >> University of Wisconsin-Madison >> >> UW Interaction Interest Group (UWIIG):   http://uwiig.blogspot.com/ >> >> Ford website:   http://mendota.english.wisc.edu/~ceford/ >> >> >> >> >> >> Be GREEN, keep it on the SCREEN >> >> Dr. Johanna Rubba, Professor, Linguistics Linguistics Minor Advisor >> English Department California Polytechnic State University, San Luis >> Obispo >> E-mail: jrubba at calpoly.edu >> Tel.: 805.756.2184 >> Dept. Ofc. Tel.: 805.756.2596 >> Dept. Fax: 805.756.6374 >> URL: http://www.cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba > -- > Cecilia E. Ford > Nancy C. Hoefs Professor of English > Professor of Sociology > University of Wisconsin-Madison > > UW Interaction Interest Group (UWIIG): http://uwiig.blogspot.com/ > > Ford website: http://mendota.english.wisc.edu/~ceford/ > > > > > > Be GREEN, keep it on the SCREEN > From amnfn at well.com Wed Jan 5 14:21:29 2011 From: amnfn at well.com (A. Katz) Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 06:21:29 -0800 Subject: Project Bow Summer Internship; A request for collaboration and grad student sharing Message-ID: Fellow funknetters, The purpose of this email is twofold: first, to announce the new summer internship with Project Bow, which has an April 15 application deadline, and might be of interest to some of your students. Here is the link: http://pin.primate.wisc.edu/jobs/listings/258 The second purpose is to address those of you who are tenured professors in linguistics and cognitive science and who have an active research program. Have you ever been interested in investigating ape language? Did you give it up when you realized there was no funding for it, apes are now banned from most academic campuses, and there are all sorts of Federal laws making it virtually impossible to do anything without the supervision of a special committee and complying with lots of red tape requirements? If this applies to you, consider this: I have an ape language program already in progress. Collaborating with me will not cost you anything in your research budget. You have something that I want: graduate students whose time is paid for by stipends. I have something that you and your students want: access to an enculturated, linguistically sophisticated chimpanzee. My internship program allows young people to begin participating in the project, but it is not something that they can continue with and make a lifetime commitment to, because there are no institutional funds for us. You have the institutional funds. Please look into the possibility of allowing some of your graduate students to write their doctoral dissertation about Bow. This is a wonderful opportunity for all of us to collaborate! Best, --Aya Katz http://hubpages.com/hub/What-Constitutes-Proof-in-Ape-Language-Studies From agreenwood at utpress.utoronto.ca Wed Jan 5 21:05:12 2011 From: agreenwood at utpress.utoronto.ca (Greenwood, Audrey) Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 21:05:12 +0000 Subject: Now available - The Canadian Journal of Linguistics 55 (3), November 2010 Message-ID: The Canadian Journal of Linguistics / La revue canadienne de linguistique 55(3), November/novembre 2010 is now available at http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/toc/cjl.55.3.html Noun incorporation as symmetry breaking Michael Barrie Abstract:This article proposes a novel account of noun incorporation in Northern Iroquoian. It is proposed that there is no special mechanism for noun incorporation and that this phenomenon falls out naturally from the geometry of the phrase structure under Moro’s theory of Dynamic Antisymmetry. In a nutshell, when the verbal head and the nominal head undergoMerge, they form a point of symmetric c-command,which is resolved by the nominal head moving to the specifier of the verb phrase. Further, it is proposed that, in noun incorporation constructions with a full DP double, the incorporated noun and the DP form a constituent, which is merged in theta-position. Résumé:Cet article propose une nouvelle description de l’incorporation nominale dans l’iroquoïen du Nord. Il est proposé qu’il n’y a aucun mécanisme particulier en matière d’incorporation nominale et que ce phénomène découle naturellement de la géométrie de la syntaxe selon la théorie de l’Antisymétrie dynamique de Moro. En un mot, la fusion (Merge) des têtes verbale et nominale forme un point de c-commande symétrique qui se voit résoudre par le déplacement de la tête nominale au spécifieur du syntagme verbal. De plus, j’avance que le nom incorporé dans les constructions ayant un sd double forme avec celui-ci un constituent qui est fusionné en position thématique. http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.barrie.pdf Omission des déterminants : Contraintes d’alternances rythmiques ou contraintes liées aux niveaux supérieurs de la structure prosodique Roseline Fréchette Marie Labelle Résumé:Cet article vise à déterminer si l’omission des déterminants chez des enfants de deux ans est contrainte au niveau du pied ou si elle est contrainte par les différents niveaux de la hiérarchie prosodique. Neuf enfants francophones âgés de 24 à 31 mois ont participé à une tâche de répétition de 54 phrases de quatre ou cinq mots de la forme suivante «Pronomv sn» réparties en trois conditions : a) dét + nom monosyllabique; b) dét + nom bisyllabique; c) dét + adjectif monosyllabique + nom monosyllabique. Les résultats démontrent 1) plus d’omission du déterminant dans la condition b que dans la condition a; 2) plus d’omission du déterminant en c qu’en b. Il est démontré que l’omission du déterminant ne s’explique pas par une contrainte d’alternance rythmique de bas niveau et que le niveau de la structure prosodique auquel doit s’attacher le déterminant joue un rôle dans l’omission des déterminants. Abstract:This article focuses on whether determiner omission by two-year-old children is constrained at the level of the prosodic foot or whether it is a function of the different levels of the prosodic hierarchy. Nine French-speaking children aged 2;0 to 2;7 were asked to repeat 54 four-or five-word sentences of the form “Pronoun V NP” with three conditions: a) det + monosyllabic noun; b) det + bisyllabic noun; c) det + monosyllabic adjective + monosyllabic noun. The results show 1) more determiner omission in condition b than in a; 2) more determiner omission in c than in b. It is shown that determiner omission is not accounted for by a low-level stress-alternation constraint and that the level of prosodic structure to which the determiner is attached plays a role in determiner omission. http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.frechette.pdf Redefining what matters: Syntactic explanation in American linguistics, 1955–1970 Janet Martin-Nielsen Abstract:The postwar decades are well known for having brought dramatic change to American linguistics on many fronts. This paper explores an internally focused aspect of this change: conditions of explanation. The two questions at stake are, firstly, what counts as explanation in linguistics? and, secondly, how is this decided? I argue that transformational grammarians dominated the setting of explanatory criteria in 1960s American syntax, and that this dominance was essential to the overall success of that theory. Importantly, rival grammarians were forced to devote as much time and effort to fitting their theories to the transformational criteria as they were to advancing their own explanatory priorities. By successfully naming the conditions for explanation, transformationalists provided their own supporters with significant questions to pursue and, simultaneously, drew energy away from rivals. This monopoly over explanatory criteria was central to the dominant position transformational grammar established in the American academic linguistics community. Résumé:Les décennies de l’après-guerre ont été caractérisées par des changements importants dans la linguistique américaine. Cet article explore un aspect interne de ces changements : les conditions d’explication.Deux questions sont en jeu ici : premièrement, en quoi consiste l’explication en linguistique? et en deuxième lieu : Comment décide-t-on en quoi consiste l’explication? Je soutiens que les grammairiens transformationnels ont imposé le choix des critères d’explication de la syntaxe américaine au cours des années 1960 et que cette domination était essentielle au succès global de la grammaire transformationnelle. Les grammairiens rivaux ont dû consacrer autant de temps et d’effort à adapter leurs théories aux critères transformationnels qu’à avancer leur propres priorités d’explication. En réussissant à définir les critères d’explication, les transformationalistes ont nourri leur propres partisans de questions importantes à poursuivre en même temps qu’ils ont drainé les énergies de leurs rivaux. Ce monopole des critères d’explication était central à la position dominante que la grammaire transformationelle a établie dans la communauté linguistique universitaire américaine. http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.martin-nielsen.pdf Some remarks on subject positions and the architecture of the left periphery in Spanish Bernhard Pöll This article reexamines the puzzling issue of where subjects, lexical and null, are located in Spanish and offers a novel explanation for the incompatibility of preverbal lexical subjects with fronted focussed constituents. Both Specip and the left periphery appear to be potential landing sites for subjects, according to discourse-pragmatic factors. Assuming that pro is a clitic, it is argued that the aforementioned incompatibility can be captured by a simple rule: Specip must be empty for focus fronting to occur. This is the case with pro, which adjoins to Infl, or with postverbal subjects since they remain in Specvp. From this analysis it follows that: 1) the subject field in Spanish is less articulated than is generally assumed, 2) the differences between Spanish and other null subject languages with respect to the availability of preverbal subjets can be reduced to this rule and a different ordering of focus and topic phrases, and 3) it is unnecessary to posit two different topic positions. Résumé:Cet article examine l’épineuse question de la position préverbale occupée par le sujet lexical en espagnol et offre une nouvelle explication pour la contrainte sur la cooccurrence de sujets lexicaux et de constituants focalisés en position préverbale. S’agissant des positions sujet, il apparaît que tant le spécifieur de si que la périphérie gauche peuvent servir comme cible de mouvement, en fonction de paramètres discursifs. En présumant que pro est un clitique, je soutiens qu’il est possible de ramener la contrainte ci-dessus à la règle suivante : le mouvement d’items focalisés vers la périphérie gauche requiert que le spécifieur de si soit vide. C’est le cas avec pro (attaché à la tête de si) et également avec les sujets postverbaux. Il s’ensuit que 1) la structure des positions sujet en espagnol est moins complexe qu’on ne l’affirme souvent, 2) les différences entre l’espagnol et d’autres langues à sujet nul quant à la possibilité de sujets préverbaux se réduisent à la règle mentionnée de même qu’à une structure différente de la périphérie gauche, et 3) il n’est pas nécessaire de postuler deux positions différentes pour les topiques. http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.poll.pdf The Canadian Shift in Toronto Rebecca Roeder Lidia-Gabriela Jarmasz Abstract:This study provides the first wide-scale, apparent time, instrumental description of the Canadian Shift in mainstream Toronto English. In contrast with some previous findings, the Toronto data suggest that for the last 70 years or more the shift has not affected the high front lax vowel (I). We observe that the movement of the non-high front lax vowels (ε) and (æ) involves both lowering and retraction in Toronto English, although retraction is the primary direction of more recent change and the shift appears to be slowing down. Our findings also suggest that continued retraction of the vowel resulting from the low back merger is involved in the final stage of the shift. We do not find evidence of a chain shift but instead propose that a parallel shift is occurring and make reference to Vowel Dispersion Theory in our discussion. Résumé:Cette étude présente la première description instrumentale en temps apparent de grande envergure du Canadian Shift dans l’anglais courant de Toronto. En contraste avec certains résultats antérieurs, les données de Toronto suggèrent qu’au cours des 70 dernières années ou plus, cette mutation n’a pas touché la voyelle haute antérieure relâchée (I). Nous observons que le mouvement des voyelles antérieures relâchées non hautes (ε) et (æ) implique à la fois abaissement et postériorisation, bien que cette dernière représente la direction principale du changement plus récent; de plus, nous observons que la mutation semble ralentir. Nos résultats suggèrent également que la postériorisation continue de la voyelle qui provient de la fusion des voyelles postérieures basses est impliquée dans la dernière étape de la mutation. Ne trouvant aucune preuve de mutation en chaîne, nous proposons plutôt que le Canadian Shift est unemutation en parallèle. Nous invoquons la théorie de la dispersion des voyelles dans notre discussion. http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.roeder.pdf Honorific agreement in Japanese Hideki Kishimoto http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.kishimoto.pdf One-replacement and the label-less theory of adjuncts Yosuke Sato http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.sato.pdf Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics and second language acquisition (review) Engin Arik http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.arik.pdf The locative syntax of experiencers (review) Marco Nicolis http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.nicolis.pdf L’enfant dans la langue (review) Nelleke Strik http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.strik.pdf Pragmatics and grammar (review) Dorota Zielinska http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.zielinska.pdf The Canadian Journal of Linguistics publishes articles of original research in linguistics in both English and French. The articles deal with linguistic theory, linguistic description of English, French and a variety of other natural languages, phonetics, phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics, historical linguistics, sociolinguistics, psycholinguistics, first and second language acquisition, and other areas of interest to linguists. For more information, please contact: University of Toronto Press - Journals Division, 5201 Dufferin St., Toronto, ON M3H 5T8 Tel: (416) 667-7810 Fax: (416) 667-7881 email: journals at utpress.utoronto.ca UTP Journals on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/utpjournals Join us for advance notice of tables of contents of forthcoming issues, author and editor commentaries and insights, calls for papers and advice on publishing in our journals. Become a fan and receive free access to articles weekly through UTPJournals focus. From tgivon at uoregon.edu Wed Jan 5 21:30:40 2011 From: tgivon at uoregon.edu (Tom Givon) Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 14:30:40 -0700 Subject: Now available - The Canadian Journal of Linguistics 55 (3), November 2010 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Isn't this beautiful? It just falls out, naturally, from a geometry, and a theory of Dynamic Antisymmetry, no less. Wow! TG ============ On 1/5/2011 2:05 PM, Greenwood, Audrey wrote: > The Canadian Journal of Linguistics / La revue canadienne de linguistique > 55(3), November/novembre 2010 is now available at http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/toc/cjl.55.3.html > > > > Noun incorporation as symmetry breaking > Michael Barrie > > Abstract:This article proposes a novel account of noun incorporation in Northern Iroquoian. It is proposed that there is no special mechanism for noun incorporation and that this phenomenon falls out naturally from the geometry of the phrase structure under Moro’s theory of Dynamic Antisymmetry. In a nutshell, when the verbal head and the nominal head undergoMerge, they form a point of symmetric c-command,which is resolved by the nominal head moving to the specifier of the verb phrase. Further, it is proposed that, in noun incorporation constructions with a full DP double, the incorporated noun and the DP form a constituent, which is merged in theta-position. > > Résumé:Cet article propose une nouvelle description de l’incorporation nominale dans l’iroquoïen du Nord. Il est proposé qu’il n’y a aucun mécanisme particulier en matière d’incorporation nominale et que ce phénomène découle naturellement de la géométrie de la syntaxe selon la théorie de l’Antisymétrie dynamique de Moro. En un mot, la fusion (Merge) des têtes verbale et nominale forme un point de c-commande symétrique qui se voit résoudre par le déplacement de la tête nominale au spécifieur du syntagme verbal. De plus, j’avance que le nom incorporé dans les constructions ayant un sd double forme avec celui-ci un constituent qui est fusionné en position thématique. http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.barrie.pdf > > > > Omission des déterminants : Contraintes d’alternances rythmiques ou contraintes liées aux niveaux supérieurs de la structure prosodique > Roseline Fréchette > Marie Labelle > > Résumé:Cet article vise � déterminer si l’omission des déterminants chez des enfants de deux ans est contrainte au niveau du pied ou si elle est contrainte par les différents niveaux de la hiérarchie prosodique. Neuf enfants francophones âgés de 24 � 31 mois ont participé � une tâche de répétition de 54 phrases de quatre ou cinq mots de la forme suivante «Pronomv sn» réparties en trois conditions : a) dét + nom monosyllabique; b) dét + nom bisyllabique; c) dét + adjectif monosyllabique + nom monosyllabique. Les résultats démontrent 1) plus d’omission du déterminant dans la condition b que dans la condition a; 2) plus d’omission du déterminant en c qu’en b. Il est démontré que l’omission du déterminant ne s’explique pas par une contrainte d’alternance rythmique de bas niveau et que le niveau de la structure prosodique auquel doit s’attacher le déterminant joue un rôle dans l’omission des déterminants. > > Abstract:This article focuses on whether determiner omission by two-year-old children is constrained at the level of the prosodic foot or whether it is a function of the different levels of the prosodic hierarchy. Nine French-speaking children aged 2;0 to 2;7 were asked to repeat 54 four-or five-word sentences of the form “Pronoun V NP” with three conditions: a) det + monosyllabic noun; b) det + bisyllabic noun; c) det + monosyllabic adjective + monosyllabic noun. The results show 1) more determiner omission in condition b than in a; 2) more determiner omission in c than in b. It is shown that determiner omission is not accounted for by a low-level stress-alternation constraint and that the level of prosodic structure to which the determiner is attached plays a role in determiner omission. > http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.frechette.pdf > > > > Redefining what matters: Syntactic explanation in American linguistics, 1955–1970 > Janet Martin-Nielsen > > Abstract:The postwar decades are well known for having brought dramatic change to American linguistics on many fronts. This paper explores an internally focused aspect of this change: conditions of explanation. The two questions at stake are, firstly, what counts as explanation in linguistics? and, secondly, how is this decided? I argue that transformational grammarians dominated the setting of explanatory criteria in 1960s American syntax, and that this dominance was essential to the overall success of that theory. Importantly, rival grammarians were forced to devote as much time and effort to fitting their theories to the transformational criteria as they were to advancing their own explanatory priorities. By successfully naming the conditions for explanation, transformationalists provided their own supporters with significant questions to pursue and, simultaneously, drew energy away from rivals. This monopoly over explanatory criteria was central to the dominant position transformational grammar established in the American academic linguistics community. > > Résumé:Les décennies de l’après-guerre ont été caractérisées par des changements importants dans la linguistique américaine. Cet article explore un aspect interne de ces changements : les conditions d’explication.Deux questions sont en jeu ici : premièrement, en quoi consiste l’explication en linguistique? et en deuxième lieu : Comment décide-t-on en quoi consiste l’explication? Je soutiens que les grammairiens transformationnels ont imposé le choix des critères d’explication de la syntaxe américaine au cours des années 1960 et que cette domination était essentielle au succès global de la grammaire transformationnelle. Les grammairiens rivaux ont dû consacrer autant de temps et d’effort � adapter leurs théories aux critères transformationnels qu’� avancer leur propres priorités d’explication. En réussissant � définir les critères d’explication, les transformationalistes ont nourri leur propres partisans de questions importantes � poursuivre en même temps qu’ils ont drainé les énergies de leurs rivaux. Ce monopole des critères d’explication était central � la position dominante que la grammaire transformationelle a établie dans la communauté linguistique universitaire américaine. > http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.martin-nielsen.pdf > > > > Some remarks on subject positions and the architecture of the left periphery in Spanish > Bernhard Pöll > > This article reexamines the puzzling issue of where subjects, lexical and null, are located in Spanish and offers a novel explanation for the incompatibility of preverbal lexical subjects with fronted focussed constituents. Both Specip and the left periphery appear to be potential landing sites for subjects, according to discourse-pragmatic factors. Assuming that pro is a clitic, it is argued that the aforementioned incompatibility can be captured by a simple rule: Specip must be empty for focus fronting to occur. This is the case with pro, which adjoins to Infl, or with postverbal subjects since they remain in Specvp. From this analysis it follows that: 1) the subject field in Spanish is less articulated than is generally assumed, 2) the differences between Spanish and other null subject languages with respect to the availability of preverbal subjets can be reduced to this rule and a different ordering of focus and topic phrases, and 3) it is unnecessary to posit two different topic positions. > > Résumé:Cet article examine l’épineuse question de la position préverbale occupée par le sujet lexical en espagnol et offre une nouvelle explication pour la contrainte sur la cooccurrence de sujets lexicaux et de constituants focalisés en position préverbale. S’agissant des positions sujet, il apparaît que tant le spécifieur de si que la périphérie gauche peuvent servir comme cible de mouvement, en fonction de paramètres discursifs. En présumant que pro est un clitique, je soutiens qu’il est possible de ramener la contrainte ci-dessus � la règle suivante : le mouvement d’items focalisés vers la périphérie gauche requiert que le spécifieur de si soit vide. C’est le cas avec pro (attaché � la tête de si) et également avec les sujets postverbaux. Il s’ensuit que 1) la structure des positions sujet en espagnol est moins complexe qu’on ne l’affirme souvent, 2) les différences entre l’espagnol et d’autres langues � sujet nul quant � la possibilité de sujets préverbaux se réduisent � la règle mentionnée de même qu’� une structure différente de la périphérie gauche, et 3) il n’est pas nécessaire de postuler deux positions différentes pour les topiques. > http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.poll.pdf > > > > The Canadian Shift in Toronto > Rebecca Roeder > Lidia-Gabriela Jarmasz > > Abstract:This study provides the first wide-scale, apparent time, instrumental description of the Canadian Shift in mainstream Toronto English. In contrast with some previous findings, the Toronto data suggest that for the last 70 years or more the shift has not affected the high front lax vowel (I). We observe that the movement of the non-high front lax vowels (ε) and (æ) involves both lowering and retraction in Toronto English, although retraction is the primary direction of more recent change and the shift appears to be slowing down. Our findings also suggest that continued retraction of the vowel resulting from the low back merger is involved in the final stage of the shift. We do not find evidence of a chain shift but instead propose that a parallel shift is occurring and make reference to Vowel Dispersion Theory in our discussion. > > Résumé:Cette étude présente la première description instrumentale en temps apparent de grande envergure du Canadian Shift dans l’anglais courant de Toronto. En contraste avec certains résultats antérieurs, les données de Toronto suggèrent qu’au cours des 70 dernières années ou plus, cette mutation n’a pas touché la voyelle haute antérieure relâchée (I). Nous observons que le mouvement des voyelles antérieures relâchées non hautes (ε) et (æ) implique � la fois abaissement et postériorisation, bien que cette dernière représente la direction principale du changement plus récent; de plus, nous observons que la mutation semble ralentir. Nos résultats suggèrent également que la postériorisation continue de la voyelle qui provient de la fusion des voyelles postérieures basses est impliquée dans la dernière étape de la mutation. Ne trouvant aucune preuve de mutation en chaîne, nous proposons plutôt que le Canadian Shift est unemutation en parallèle. Nous invoquons la théorie de la dispersion des voyelles dans notre discussion. > http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.roeder.pdf > > > > Honorific agreement in Japanese > Hideki Kishimoto > http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.kishimoto.pdf > > > > One-replacement and the label-less theory of adjuncts > Yosuke Sato > http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.sato.pdf > > > > Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics and second language acquisition (review) > Engin Arik > http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.arik.pdf > > > > The locative syntax of experiencers (review) > Marco Nicolis > http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.nicolis.pdf > > > > L’enfant dans la langue (review) > Nelleke Strik > http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.strik.pdf > > > > Pragmatics and grammar (review) > Dorota Zielinska > http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.zielinska.pdf > > > The Canadian Journal of Linguistics publishes articles of original research in linguistics in both English and French. The articles deal with linguistic theory, linguistic description of English, French and a variety of other natural languages, phonetics, phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics, historical linguistics, sociolinguistics, psycholinguistics, first and second language acquisition, and other areas of interest to linguists. > > > For more information, please contact: University of Toronto Press - Journals Division, 5201 Dufferin St., Toronto, ON M3H 5T8 Tel: (416) 667-7810 Fax: (416) 667-7881 email: journals at utpress.utoronto.ca > > > UTP Journals on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/utpjournals > Join us for advance notice of tables of contents of forthcoming issues, author and editor commentaries and insights, calls for papers and advice on publishing in our journals. Become a fan and receive free access to articles weekly through UTPJournals focus. > > From mark at polymathix.com Wed Jan 5 22:00:20 2011 From: mark at polymathix.com (Mark P. Line) Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 16:00:20 -0600 Subject: Now available - The Canadian Journal of Linguistics 55 (3), November 2010 In-Reply-To: <4D24E300.80902@uoregon.edu> Message-ID: So, what would be the procedure for falsifying the claims in that paper? I'm pretty sure I don't have a clue as to how to show that something doesn't really merge in theta-position. -- Mark Tom Givon wrote: > > Isn't this beautiful? It just falls out, naturally, from a geometry, and > a theory of Dynamic Antisymmetry, no less. Wow! TG > > ============ > > > On 1/5/2011 2:05 PM, Greenwood, Audrey wrote: >> The Canadian Journal of Linguistics / La revue canadienne de >> linguistique >> 55(3), November/novembre 2010 is now available at >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/toc/cjl.55.3.html >> >> >> >> Noun incorporation as symmetry breaking >> Michael Barrie >> >> Abstract:This article proposes a novel account of noun incorporation in >> Northern Iroquoian. It is proposed that there is no special mechanism >> for noun incorporation and that this phenomenon falls out naturally from >> the geometry of the phrase structure under Moroâ??s theory of Dynamic >> Antisymmetry. In a nutshell, when the verbal head and the nominal head >> undergoMerge, they form a point of symmetric c-command,which is resolved >> by the nominal head moving to the specifier of the verb phrase. Further, >> it is proposed that, in noun incorporation constructions with a full DP >> double, the incorporated noun and the DP form a constituent, which is >> merged in theta-position. >> >> Résumé:Cet article propose une nouvelle description de >> lâ??incorporation nominale dans lâ??iroquoïen du Nord. Il est proposé >> quâ??il nâ??y a aucun mécanisme particulier en matière >> dâ??incorporation nominale et que ce phénomène découle naturellement >> de la géométrie de la syntaxe selon la théorie de lâ??Antisymétrie >> dynamique de Moro. En un mot, la fusion (Merge) des têtes verbale et >> nominale forme un point de c-commande symétrique qui se voit résoudre >> par le déplacement de la tête nominale au spécifieur du syntagme >> verbal. De plus, jâ??avance que le nom incorporé dans les constructions >> ayant un sd double forme avec celui-ci un constituent qui est fusionné >> en position thématique. >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.barrie.pdf >> >> >> >> Omission des déterminants : Contraintes dâ??alternances rythmiques ou >> contraintes liées aux niveaux supérieurs de la structure prosodique >> Roseline Fréchette >> Marie Labelle >> >> Résumé:Cet article vise à déterminer si lâ??omission des >> déterminants chez des enfants de deux ans est contrainte au niveau du >> pied ou si elle est contrainte par les différents niveaux de la >> hiérarchie prosodique. Neuf enfants francophones âgés de 24 à 31 >> mois ont participé à une tâche de répétition de 54 phrases de >> quatre ou cinq mots de la forme suivante «Pronomv sn» réparties en >> trois conditions : a) dét + nom monosyllabique; b) dét + nom >> bisyllabique; c) dét + adjectif monosyllabique + nom monosyllabique. >> Les résultats démontrent 1) plus dâ??omission du déterminant dans la >> condition b que dans la condition a; 2) plus dâ??omission du >> déterminant en c quâ??en b. Il est démontré que lâ??omission du >> déterminant ne sâ??explique pas par une contrainte dâ??alternance >> rythmique de bas niveau et que le niveau de la structure prosodique >> auquel doit sâ??attacher le déterminant joue un rôle dans lâ??omission >> des déterminants. >> >> Abstract:This article focuses on whether determiner omission by >> two-year-old children is constrained at the level of the prosodic foot >> or whether it is a function of the different levels of the prosodic >> hierarchy. Nine French-speaking children aged 2;0 to 2;7 were asked to >> repeat 54 four-or five-word sentences of the form â??Pronoun V NPâ?? >> with three conditions: a) det + monosyllabic noun; b) det + bisyllabic >> noun; c) det + monosyllabic adjective + monosyllabic noun. The results >> show 1) more determiner omission in condition b than in a; 2) more >> determiner omission in c than in b. It is shown that determiner omission >> is not accounted for by a low-level stress-alternation constraint and >> that the level of prosodic structure to which the determiner is attached >> plays a role in determiner omission. >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.frechette.pdf >> >> >> >> Redefining what matters: Syntactic explanation in American linguistics, >> 1955â??1970 >> Janet Martin-Nielsen >> >> Abstract:The postwar decades are well known for having brought dramatic >> change to American linguistics on many fronts. This paper explores an >> internally focused aspect of this change: conditions of explanation. The >> two questions at stake are, firstly, what counts as explanation in >> linguistics? and, secondly, how is this decided? I argue that >> transformational grammarians dominated the setting of explanatory >> criteria in 1960s American syntax, and that this dominance was essential >> to the overall success of that theory. Importantly, rival grammarians >> were forced to devote as much time and effort to fitting their theories >> to the transformational criteria as they were to advancing their own >> explanatory priorities. By successfully naming the conditions for >> explanation, transformationalists provided their own supporters with >> significant questions to pursue and, simultaneously, drew energy away >> from rivals. This monopoly over explanatory criteria was central to the >> dominant position transformational grammar established in the American >> academic linguistics community. >> >> Résumé:Les décennies de lâ??après-guerre ont été caractérisées >> par des changements importants dans la linguistique américaine. Cet >> article explore un aspect interne de ces changements : les conditions >> dâ??explication.Deux questions sont en jeu ici : premièrement, en quoi >> consiste lâ??explication en linguistique? et en deuxième lieu : Comment >> décide-t-on en quoi consiste lâ??explication? Je soutiens que les >> grammairiens transformationnels ont imposé le choix des critères >> dâ??explication de la syntaxe américaine au cours des années 1960 et >> que cette domination était essentielle au succès global de la >> grammaire transformationnelle. Les grammairiens rivaux ont dû consacrer >> autant de temps et dâ??effort à adapter leurs théories aux critères >> transformationnels quâ??à avancer leur propres priorités >> dâ??explication. En réussissant à définir les critères >> dâ??explication, les transformationalistes ont nourri leur propres >> partisans de questions importantes à poursuivre en même temps quâ??ils >> ont drainé les énergies de leurs rivaux. Ce monopole des critères >> dâ??explication était central à la position dominante que la grammaire >> transformationelle a établie dans la communauté linguistique >> universitaire américaine. >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.martin-nielsen.pdf >> >> >> >> Some remarks on subject positions and the architecture of the left >> periphery in Spanish >> Bernhard Pöll >> >> This article reexamines the puzzling issue of where subjects, lexical >> and null, are located in Spanish and offers a novel explanation for the >> incompatibility of preverbal lexical subjects with fronted focussed >> constituents. Both Specip and the left periphery appear to be potential >> landing sites for subjects, according to discourse-pragmatic factors. >> Assuming that pro is a clitic, it is argued that the aforementioned >> incompatibility can be captured by a simple rule: Specip must be empty >> for focus fronting to occur. This is the case with pro, which adjoins to >> Infl, or with postverbal subjects since they remain in Specvp. From this >> analysis it follows that: 1) the subject field in Spanish is less >> articulated than is generally assumed, 2) the differences between >> Spanish and other null subject languages with respect to the >> availability of preverbal subjets can be reduced to this rule and a >> different ordering of focus and topic phrases, and 3) it is unnecessary >> to posit two different topic positions. >> >> Résumé:Cet article examine lâ??épineuse question de la position >> préverbale occupée par le sujet lexical en espagnol et offre une >> nouvelle explication pour la contrainte sur la cooccurrence de sujets >> lexicaux et de constituants focalisés en position préverbale. >> Sâ??agissant des positions sujet, il apparaît que tant le spécifieur >> de si que la périphérie gauche peuvent servir comme cible de >> mouvement, en fonction de paramètres discursifs. En présumant que pro >> est un clitique, je soutiens quâ??il est possible de ramener la >> contrainte ci-dessus à la règle suivante : le mouvement dâ??items >> focalisés vers la périphérie gauche requiert que le spécifieur de si >> soit vide. Câ??est le cas avec pro (attaché à la tête de si) et >> également avec les sujets postverbaux. Il sâ??ensuit que 1) la >> structure des positions sujet en espagnol est moins complexe quâ??on ne >> lâ??affirme souvent, 2) les différences entre lâ??espagnol et >> dâ??autres langues à sujet nul quant à la possibilité de sujets >> préverbaux se réduisent à la règle mentionnée de même quâ??à une >> structure différente de la périphérie gauche, et 3) il nâ??est pas >> nécessaire de postuler deux positions différentes pour les topiques. >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.poll.pdf >> >> >> >> The Canadian Shift in Toronto >> Rebecca Roeder >> Lidia-Gabriela Jarmasz >> >> Abstract:This study provides the first wide-scale, apparent time, >> instrumental description of the Canadian Shift in mainstream Toronto >> English. In contrast with some previous findings, the Toronto data >> suggest that for the last 70 years or more the shift has not affected >> the high front lax vowel (I). We observe that the movement of the >> non-high front lax vowels (ε) and (æ) involves both lowering and >> retraction in Toronto English, although retraction is the primary >> direction of more recent change and the shift appears to be slowing >> down. Our findings also suggest that continued retraction of the vowel >> resulting from the low back merger is involved in the final stage of the >> shift. We do not find evidence of a chain shift but instead propose that >> a parallel shift is occurring and make reference to Vowel Dispersion >> Theory in our discussion. >> >> Résumé:Cette étude présente la première description instrumentale >> en temps apparent de grande envergure du Canadian Shift dans lâ??anglais >> courant de Toronto. En contraste avec certains résultats antérieurs, >> les données de Toronto suggèrent quâ??au cours des 70 dernières >> années ou plus, cette mutation nâ??a pas touché la voyelle haute >> antérieure relâchée (I). Nous observons que le mouvement des voyelles >> antérieures relâchées non hautes (ε) et (æ) implique à la fois >> abaissement et postériorisation, bien que cette dernière représente >> la direction principale du changement plus récent; de plus, nous >> observons que la mutation semble ralentir. Nos résultats suggèrent >> également que la postériorisation continue de la voyelle qui provient >> de la fusion des voyelles postérieures basses est impliquée dans la >> dernière étape de la mutation. Ne trouvant aucune preuve de mutation >> en chaîne, nous proposons plutôt que le Canadian Shift est unemutation >> en parallèle. Nous invoquons la théorie de la dispersion des voyelles >> dans notre discussion. >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.roeder.pdf >> >> >> >> Honorific agreement in Japanese >> Hideki Kishimoto >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.kishimoto.pdf >> >> >> >> One-replacement and the label-less theory of adjuncts >> Yosuke Sato >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.sato.pdf >> >> >> >> Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics and second language acquisition >> (review) >> Engin Arik >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.arik.pdf >> >> >> >> The locative syntax of experiencers (review) >> Marco Nicolis >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.nicolis.pdf >> >> >> >> Lâ??enfant dans la langue (review) >> Nelleke Strik >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.strik.pdf >> >> >> >> Pragmatics and grammar (review) >> Dorota Zielinska >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.zielinska.pdf >> >> >> The Canadian Journal of Linguistics publishes articles of original >> research in linguistics in both English and French. The articles deal >> with linguistic theory, linguistic description of English, French and a >> variety of other natural languages, phonetics, phonology, morphology, >> syntax, semantics, historical linguistics, sociolinguistics, >> psycholinguistics, first and second language acquisition, and other >> areas of interest to linguists. >> >> >> For more information, please contact: University of Toronto Press - >> Journals Division, 5201 Dufferin St., Toronto, ON M3H 5T8 Tel: (416) >> 667-7810 Fax: (416) 667-7881 email: >> journals at utpress.utoronto.ca >> >> >> UTP Journals on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/utpjournals >> Join us for advance notice of tables of contents of forthcoming issues, >> author and editor commentaries and insights, calls for papers and advice >> on publishing in our journals. Become a fan and receive free access to >> articles weekly through UTPJournals focus. >> >> > > > > -- Mark Mark P. Line Bartlesville, OK From smyth at utsc.utoronto.ca Wed Jan 5 22:41:35 2011 From: smyth at utsc.utoronto.ca (Ron Smyth) Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 17:41:35 -0500 Subject: Now available - The Canadian Journal of Linguistics 55 (3), November 2010 In-Reply-To: <8024474f5e11cf0c33c196d77a045deb.squirrel@sm.webmail.pair.com> Message-ID: Tom and Mark: On the rare occasions when I read such a paper I see the theoretical constructs as a way to express generalizations about structures (as opposed to taking the theoretical apparatus too seriously). I don't think people should be so sarcastic without first looking at the paper to see what other value it might have for non-theoreticians. If it has some insight about noun incorporation structures -- e.g. something that a psycholinguist, sociolinguist or historical linguist would be interested to know about -- then I don't get too upset about the formalisms. Often the distributional facts that come up because of the pursuit of a theoretical issue are all that I really find valuable in these papers. I stopped worrying about this approximately 30 years ago, and instead I just mine the theoretical literature for different purposes. Of course if the paper is just taking something that's already understood at some level and fitting it into the current week's framework, then I'm not interested (and I let those who are interested love it if they want to). Moreoever if you had read the paper and come up with some great alternative functional explanation, you would have earned the right to dismiss this as theoretical drivel, but I don't see any of that in this thread. Theoretical papers are always falsifiable in the sense that counter-examples can upset the applecart. What you are questioning is much broader than that, but this has been an issue since the early 1970s, so as far as Barrie's paper is concerned, there's nothing that we can't see see every day. It's been going on for 50 years. I'm sorry that you didn't read down to the bottom of the CJL posting. One of the papers is about evidence in linguistics and how the transformational paradigm managed to hijack everyone's agenda; another is a fairly concrete article on vowel changes in Canadian English; another is about possible prosodic explanations for kids' ability to produce noun phrases. Why no sarcastic comments about those abstracts? What purpose does this kind of sarcasm serve, especially when it is so superficial and confined to funknet where the author is unlikely to see it? ron ============================================================================== Ron Smyth, Associate Professor Linguistics & Psychology University of Toronto =========================================================================== On Wed, 5 Jan 2011, Mark P. Line wrote: > So, what would be the procedure for falsifying the claims in that paper? > > I'm pretty sure I don't have a clue as to how to show that something > doesn't really merge in theta-position. > > -- Mark > > > > Tom Givon wrote: > > > > Isn't this beautiful? It just falls out, naturally, from a geometry, and > > a theory of Dynamic Antisymmetry, no less. Wow! TG > > > > ============ > > > > > > On 1/5/2011 2:05 PM, Greenwood, Audrey wrote: > >> The Canadian Journal of Linguistics / La revue canadienne de > >> linguistique > >> 55(3), November/novembre 2010 is now available at > >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/toc/cjl.55.3.html > >> > >> > >> > >> Noun incorporation as symmetry breaking > >> Michael Barrie > >> > >> Abstract:This article proposes a novel account of noun incorporation in > >> Northern Iroquoian. It is proposed that there is no special mechanism > >> for noun incorporation and that this phenomenon falls out naturally from > >> the geometry of the phrase structure under Moro�??s theory of Dynamic > >> Antisymmetry. In a nutshell, when the verbal head and the nominal head > >> undergoMerge, they form a point of symmetric c-command,which is resolved > >> by the nominal head moving to the specifier of the verb phrase. Further, > >> it is proposed that, in noun incorporation constructions with a full DP > >> double, the incorporated noun and the DP form a constituent, which is > >> merged in theta-position. > >> > >> Résumé:Cet article propose une nouvelle description de > >> l�??incorporation nominale dans l�??iroquoïen du Nord. Il est proposé > >> qu�??il n�??y a aucun mécanisme particulier en matière > >> d�??incorporation nominale et que ce phénomène découle naturellement > >> de la géométrie de la syntaxe selon la théorie de l�??Antisymétrie > >> dynamique de Moro. En un mot, la fusion (Merge) des têtes verbale et > >> nominale forme un point de c-commande symétrique qui se voit résoudre > >> par le déplacement de la tête nominale au spécifieur du syntagme > >> verbal. De plus, j�??avance que le nom incorporé dans les constructions > >> ayant un sd double forme avec celui-ci un constituent qui est fusionné > >> en position thématique. > >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.barrie.pdf > >> > >> > >> > >> Omission des déterminants : Contraintes d�??alternances rythmiques ou > >> contraintes liées aux niveaux supérieurs de la structure prosodique > >> Roseline Fréchette > >> Marie Labelle > >> > >> Résumé:Cet article vise � déterminer si l�??omission des > >> déterminants chez des enfants de deux ans est contrainte au niveau du > >> pied ou si elle est contrainte par les différents niveaux de la > >> hiérarchie prosodique. Neuf enfants francophones âgés de 24 � 31 > >> mois ont participé � une tâche de répétition de 54 phrases de > >> quatre ou cinq mots de la forme suivante «Pronomv sn» réparties en > >> trois conditions : a) dét + nom monosyllabique; b) dét + nom > >> bisyllabique; c) dét + adjectif monosyllabique + nom monosyllabique. > >> Les résultats démontrent 1) plus d�??omission du déterminant dans la > >> condition b que dans la condition a; 2) plus d�??omission du > >> déterminant en c qu�??en b. Il est démontré que l�??omission du > >> déterminant ne s�??explique pas par une contrainte d�??alternance > >> rythmique de bas niveau et que le niveau de la structure prosodique > >> auquel doit s�??attacher le déterminant joue un rôle dans l�??omission > >> des déterminants. > >> > >> Abstract:This article focuses on whether determiner omission by > >> two-year-old children is constrained at the level of the prosodic foot > >> or whether it is a function of the different levels of the prosodic > >> hierarchy. Nine French-speaking children aged 2;0 to 2;7 were asked to > >> repeat 54 four-or five-word sentences of the form �??Pronoun V NP�?? > >> with three conditions: a) det + monosyllabic noun; b) det + bisyllabic > >> noun; c) det + monosyllabic adjective + monosyllabic noun. The results > >> show 1) more determiner omission in condition b than in a; 2) more > >> determiner omission in c than in b. It is shown that determiner omission > >> is not accounted for by a low-level stress-alternation constraint and > >> that the level of prosodic structure to which the determiner is attached > >> plays a role in determiner omission. > >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.frechette.pdf > >> > >> > >> > >> Redefining what matters: Syntactic explanation in American linguistics, > >> 1955�??1970 > >> Janet Martin-Nielsen > >> > >> Abstract:The postwar decades are well known for having brought dramatic > >> change to American linguistics on many fronts. This paper explores an > >> internally focused aspect of this change: conditions of explanation. The > >> two questions at stake are, firstly, what counts as explanation in > >> linguistics? and, secondly, how is this decided? I argue that > >> transformational grammarians dominated the setting of explanatory > >> criteria in 1960s American syntax, and that this dominance was essential > >> to the overall success of that theory. Importantly, rival grammarians > >> were forced to devote as much time and effort to fitting their theories > >> to the transformational criteria as they were to advancing their own > >> explanatory priorities. By successfully naming the conditions for > >> explanation, transformationalists provided their own supporters with > >> significant questions to pursue and, simultaneously, drew energy away > >> from rivals. This monopoly over explanatory criteria was central to the > >> dominant position transformational grammar established in the American > >> academic linguistics community. > >> > >> Résumé:Les décennies de l�??après-guerre ont été caractérisées > >> par des changements importants dans la linguistique américaine. Cet > >> article explore un aspect interne de ces changements : les conditions > >> d�??explication.Deux questions sont en jeu ici : premièrement, en quoi > >> consiste l�??explication en linguistique? et en deuxième lieu : Comment > >> décide-t-on en quoi consiste l�??explication? Je soutiens que les > >> grammairiens transformationnels ont imposé le choix des critères > >> d�??explication de la syntaxe américaine au cours des années 1960 et > >> que cette domination était essentielle au succès global de la > >> grammaire transformationnelle. Les grammairiens rivaux ont dû consacrer > >> autant de temps et d�??effort � adapter leurs théories aux critères > >> transformationnels qu�??� avancer leur propres priorités > >> d�??explication. En réussissant � définir les critères > >> d�??explication, les transformationalistes ont nourri leur propres > >> partisans de questions importantes � poursuivre en même temps qu�??ils > >> ont drainé les énergies de leurs rivaux. Ce monopole des critères > >> d�??explication était central � la position dominante que la grammaire > >> transformationelle a établie dans la communauté linguistique > >> universitaire américaine. > >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.martin-nielsen.pdf > >> > >> > >> > >> Some remarks on subject positions and the architecture of the left > >> periphery in Spanish > >> Bernhard Pöll > >> > >> This article reexamines the puzzling issue of where subjects, lexical > >> and null, are located in Spanish and offers a novel explanation for the > >> incompatibility of preverbal lexical subjects with fronted focussed > >> constituents. Both Specip and the left periphery appear to be potential > >> landing sites for subjects, according to discourse-pragmatic factors. > >> Assuming that pro is a clitic, it is argued that the aforementioned > >> incompatibility can be captured by a simple rule: Specip must be empty > >> for focus fronting to occur. This is the case with pro, which adjoins to > >> Infl, or with postverbal subjects since they remain in Specvp. From this > >> analysis it follows that: 1) the subject field in Spanish is less > >> articulated than is generally assumed, 2) the differences between > >> Spanish and other null subject languages with respect to the > >> availability of preverbal subjets can be reduced to this rule and a > >> different ordering of focus and topic phrases, and 3) it is unnecessary > >> to posit two different topic positions. > >> > >> Résumé:Cet article examine l�??épineuse question de la position > >> préverbale occupée par le sujet lexical en espagnol et offre une > >> nouvelle explication pour la contrainte sur la cooccurrence de sujets > >> lexicaux et de constituants focalisés en position préverbale. > >> S�??agissant des positions sujet, il apparaît que tant le spécifieur > >> de si que la périphérie gauche peuvent servir comme cible de > >> mouvement, en fonction de paramètres discursifs. En présumant que pro > >> est un clitique, je soutiens qu�??il est possible de ramener la > >> contrainte ci-dessus � la règle suivante : le mouvement d�??items > >> focalisés vers la périphérie gauche requiert que le spécifieur de si > >> soit vide. C�??est le cas avec pro (attaché � la tête de si) et > >> également avec les sujets postverbaux. Il s�??ensuit que 1) la > >> structure des positions sujet en espagnol est moins complexe qu�??on ne > >> l�??affirme souvent, 2) les différences entre l�??espagnol et > >> d�??autres langues � sujet nul quant � la possibilité de sujets > >> préverbaux se réduisent � la règle mentionnée de même qu�??� une > >> structure différente de la périphérie gauche, et 3) il n�??est pas > >> nécessaire de postuler deux positions différentes pour les topiques. > >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.poll.pdf > >> > >> > >> > >> The Canadian Shift in Toronto > >> Rebecca Roeder > >> Lidia-Gabriela Jarmasz > >> > >> Abstract:This study provides the first wide-scale, apparent time, > >> instrumental description of the Canadian Shift in mainstream Toronto > >> English. In contrast with some previous findings, the Toronto data > >> suggest that for the last 70 years or more the shift has not affected > >> the high front lax vowel (I). We observe that the movement of the > >> non-high front lax vowels (ε) and (æ) involves both lowering and > >> retraction in Toronto English, although retraction is the primary > >> direction of more recent change and the shift appears to be slowing > >> down. Our findings also suggest that continued retraction of the vowel > >> resulting from the low back merger is involved in the final stage of the > >> shift. We do not find evidence of a chain shift but instead propose that > >> a parallel shift is occurring and make reference to Vowel Dispersion > >> Theory in our discussion. > >> > >> Résumé:Cette étude présente la première description instrumentale > >> en temps apparent de grande envergure du Canadian Shift dans l�??anglais > >> courant de Toronto. En contraste avec certains résultats antérieurs, > >> les données de Toronto suggèrent qu�??au cours des 70 dernières > >> années ou plus, cette mutation n�??a pas touché la voyelle haute > >> antérieure relâchée (I). Nous observons que le mouvement des voyelles > >> antérieures relâchées non hautes (ε) et (æ) implique � la fois > >> abaissement et postériorisation, bien que cette dernière représente > >> la direction principale du changement plus récent; de plus, nous > >> observons que la mutation semble ralentir. Nos résultats suggèrent > >> également que la postériorisation continue de la voyelle qui provient > >> de la fusion des voyelles postérieures basses est impliquée dans la > >> dernière étape de la mutation. Ne trouvant aucune preuve de mutation > >> en chaîne, nous proposons plutôt que le Canadian Shift est unemutation > >> en parallèle. Nous invoquons la théorie de la dispersion des voyelles > >> dans notre discussion. > >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.roeder.pdf > >> > >> > >> > >> Honorific agreement in Japanese > >> Hideki Kishimoto > >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.kishimoto.pdf > >> > >> > >> > >> One-replacement and the label-less theory of adjuncts > >> Yosuke Sato > >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.sato.pdf > >> > >> > >> > >> Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics and second language acquisition > >> (review) > >> Engin Arik > >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.arik.pdf > >> > >> > >> > >> The locative syntax of experiencers (review) > >> Marco Nicolis > >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.nicolis.pdf > >> > >> > >> > >> L�??enfant dans la langue (review) > >> Nelleke Strik > >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.strik.pdf > >> > >> > >> > >> Pragmatics and grammar (review) > >> Dorota Zielinska > >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.zielinska.pdf > >> > >> > >> The Canadian Journal of Linguistics publishes articles of original > >> research in linguistics in both English and French. The articles deal > >> with linguistic theory, linguistic description of English, French and a > >> variety of other natural languages, phonetics, phonology, morphology, > >> syntax, semantics, historical linguistics, sociolinguistics, > >> psycholinguistics, first and second language acquisition, and other > >> areas of interest to linguists. > >> > >> > >> For more information, please contact: University of Toronto Press - > >> Journals Division, 5201 Dufferin St., Toronto, ON M3H 5T8 Tel: (416) > >> 667-7810 Fax: (416) 667-7881 email: > >> journals at utpress.utoronto.ca > >> > >> > >> UTP Journals on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/utpjournals > >> Join us for advance notice of tables of contents of forthcoming issues, > >> author and editor commentaries and insights, calls for papers and advice > >> on publishing in our journals. Become a fan and receive free access to > >> articles weekly through UTPJournals focus. > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > -- Mark > > Mark P. Line > Bartlesville, OK > From tgivon at uoregon.edu Wed Jan 5 23:20:48 2011 From: tgivon at uoregon.edu (Tom Givon) Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 16:20:48 -0700 Subject: Now available - The Canadian Journal of Linguistics 55 (3), November 2010 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dear Ron, Thanks. Perhaps one should bear in mind that I've been exposed to this kind of lit, on its multiple permutations and from close quarters, since 1964, and can by now predict every quirk and gambit. The book of Ecclesiastes may perhaps express my cynicism better. As for hijacking, the notion of 'theory' was hijacked just as early. And for the record, I am a theoretician. Best, TG ============= On 1/5/2011 3:41 PM, Ron Smyth wrote: > Tom and Mark: On the rare occasions when I read such a paper I see the > theoretical constructs as a way to express generalizations about > structures (as opposed to taking the theoretical apparatus too seriously). > I don't think people should be so sarcastic without first looking at the > paper to see what other value it might have for non-theoreticians. If it > has some insight about noun incorporation structures -- e.g. something > that a psycholinguist, sociolinguist or historical linguist would be > interested to know about -- then I don't get too upset about the > formalisms. Often the distributional facts that come up because of the > pursuit of a theoretical issue are all that I really find valuable in > these papers. > > I stopped worrying about this approximately 30 years ago, and instead I > just mine the theoretical literature for different purposes. Of course if > the paper is just taking something that's already understood at some level > and fitting it into the current week's framework, then I'm not interested > (and I let those who are interested love it if they want to). Moreoever > if you had read the paper and come up with some great alternative > functional explanation, you would have earned the right to dismiss this as > theoretical drivel, but I don't see any of that in this thread. > > Theoretical papers are always falsifiable in the sense that > counter-examples can upset the applecart. What you are questioning is > much broader than that, but this has been an issue since the early 1970s, > so as far as Barrie's paper is concerned, there's nothing that we can't > see see every day. It's been going on for 50 years. > > I'm sorry that you didn't read down to the bottom of the CJL posting. > One of the papers is about evidence in linguistics and how the > transformational paradigm managed to hijack everyone's agenda; another is > a fairly concrete article on vowel changes in Canadian English; another is > about possible prosodic explanations for kids' ability to produce noun > phrases. Why no sarcastic comments about those abstracts? What purpose > does this kind of sarcasm serve, especially when it is so superficial and > confined to funknet where the author is unlikely to see it? > ron > > =============================================================================== > Ron Smyth, Associate Professor > Linguistics& Psychology > University of Toronto > ============================================================================ > > On Wed, 5 Jan 2011, Mark P. Line wrote: > >> So, what would be the procedure for falsifying the claims in that paper? >> >> I'm pretty sure I don't have a clue as to how to show that something >> doesn't really merge in theta-position. >> >> -- Mark >> >> >> >> Tom Givon wrote: >>> Isn't this beautiful? It just falls out, naturally, from a geometry, and >>> a theory of Dynamic Antisymmetry, no less. Wow! TG >>> >>> ============ >>> >>> >>> On 1/5/2011 2:05 PM, Greenwood, Audrey wrote: >>>> The Canadian Journal of Linguistics / La revue canadienne de >>>> linguistique >>>> 55(3), November/novembre 2010 is now available at >>>> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/toc/cjl.55.3.html >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Noun incorporation as symmetry breaking >>>> Michael Barrie >>>> >>>> Abstract:This article proposes a novel account of noun incorporation in >>>> Northern Iroquoian. It is proposed that there is no special mechanism >>>> for noun incorporation and that this phenomenon falls out naturally from >>>> the geometry of the phrase structure under Moroâ??s theory of Dynamic >>>> Antisymmetry. In a nutshell, when the verbal head and the nominal head >>>> undergoMerge, they form a point of symmetric c-command,which is resolved >>>> by the nominal head moving to the specifier of the verb phrase. Further, >>>> it is proposed that, in noun incorporation constructions with a full DP >>>> double, the incorporated noun and the DP form a constituent, which is >>>> merged in theta-position. >>>> >>>> Résumé:Cet article propose une nouvelle description de >>>> lâ??incorporation nominale dans lâ??iroquoïen du Nord. Il est proposé >>>> quâ??il nâ??y a aucun mécanisme particulier en matière >>>> dâ??incorporation nominale et que ce phénomène découle naturellement >>>> de la géométrie de la syntaxe selon la théorie de lâ??Antisymétrie >>>> dynamique de Moro. En un mot, la fusion (Merge) des têtes verbale et >>>> nominale forme un point de c-commande symétrique qui se voit résoudre >>>> par le déplacement de la tête nominale au spécifieur du syntagme >>>> verbal. De plus, jâ??avance que le nom incorporé dans les constructions >>>> ayant un sd double forme avec celui-ci un constituent qui est fusionné >>>> en position thématique. >>>> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.barrie.pdf >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Omission des déterminants : Contraintes dâ??alternances rythmiques ou >>>> contraintes liées aux niveaux supérieurs de la structure prosodique >>>> Roseline Fréchette >>>> Marie Labelle >>>> >>>> Résumé:Cet article vise à déterminer si lâ??omission des >>>> déterminants chez des enfants de deux ans est contrainte au niveau du >>>> pied ou si elle est contrainte par les différents niveaux de la >>>> hiérarchie prosodique. Neuf enfants francophones âgés de 24 à 31 >>>> mois ont participé à une tâche de répétition de 54 phrases de >>>> quatre ou cinq mots de la forme suivante «Pronomv sn» réparties en >>>> trois conditions : a) dét + nom monosyllabique; b) dét + nom >>>> bisyllabique; c) dét + adjectif monosyllabique + nom monosyllabique. >>>> Les résultats démontrent 1) plus dâ??omission du déterminant dans la >>>> condition b que dans la condition a; 2) plus dâ??omission du >>>> déterminant en c quâ??en b. Il est démontré que lâ??omission du >>>> déterminant ne sâ??explique pas par une contrainte dâ??alternance >>>> rythmique de bas niveau et que le niveau de la structure prosodique >>>> auquel doit sâ??attacher le déterminant joue un rôle dans lâ??omission >>>> des déterminants. >>>> >>>> Abstract:This article focuses on whether determiner omission by >>>> two-year-old children is constrained at the level of the prosodic foot >>>> or whether it is a function of the different levels of the prosodic >>>> hierarchy. Nine French-speaking children aged 2;0 to 2;7 were asked to >>>> repeat 54 four-or five-word sentences of the form â??Pronoun V NPâ?? >>>> with three conditions: a) det + monosyllabic noun; b) det + bisyllabic >>>> noun; c) det + monosyllabic adjective + monosyllabic noun. The results >>>> show 1) more determiner omission in condition b than in a; 2) more >>>> determiner omission in c than in b. It is shown that determiner omission >>>> is not accounted for by a low-level stress-alternation constraint and >>>> that the level of prosodic structure to which the determiner is attached >>>> plays a role in determiner omission. >>>> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.frechette.pdf >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Redefining what matters: Syntactic explanation in American linguistics, >>>> 1955â??1970 >>>> Janet Martin-Nielsen >>>> >>>> Abstract:The postwar decades are well known for having brought dramatic >>>> change to American linguistics on many fronts. This paper explores an >>>> internally focused aspect of this change: conditions of explanation. The >>>> two questions at stake are, firstly, what counts as explanation in >>>> linguistics? and, secondly, how is this decided? I argue that >>>> transformational grammarians dominated the setting of explanatory >>>> criteria in 1960s American syntax, and that this dominance was essential >>>> to the overall success of that theory. Importantly, rival grammarians >>>> were forced to devote as much time and effort to fitting their theories >>>> to the transformational criteria as they were to advancing their own >>>> explanatory priorities. By successfully naming the conditions for >>>> explanation, transformationalists provided their own supporters with >>>> significant questions to pursue and, simultaneously, drew energy away >>>> from rivals. This monopoly over explanatory criteria was central to the >>>> dominant position transformational grammar established in the American >>>> academic linguistics community. >>>> >>>> Résumé:Les décennies de lâ??après-guerre ont été caractérisées >>>> par des changements importants dans la linguistique américaine. Cet >>>> article explore un aspect interne de ces changements : les conditions >>>> dâ??explication.Deux questions sont en jeu ici : premièrement, en quoi >>>> consiste lâ??explication en linguistique? et en deuxième lieu : Comment >>>> décide-t-on en quoi consiste lâ??explication? Je soutiens que les >>>> grammairiens transformationnels ont imposé le choix des critères >>>> dâ??explication de la syntaxe américaine au cours des années 1960 et >>>> que cette domination était essentielle au succès global de la >>>> grammaire transformationnelle. Les grammairiens rivaux ont dû consacrer >>>> autant de temps et dâ??effort à adapter leurs théories aux critères >>>> transformationnels quâ??à avancer leur propres priorités >>>> dâ??explication. En réussissant à définir les critères >>>> dâ??explication, les transformationalistes ont nourri leur propres >>>> partisans de questions importantes à poursuivre en même temps quâ??ils >>>> ont drainé les énergies de leurs rivaux. Ce monopole des critères >>>> dâ??explication était central à la position dominante que la grammaire >>>> transformationelle a établie dans la communauté linguistique >>>> universitaire américaine. >>>> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.martin-nielsen.pdf >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Some remarks on subject positions and the architecture of the left >>>> periphery in Spanish >>>> Bernhard Pöll >>>> >>>> This article reexamines the puzzling issue of where subjects, lexical >>>> and null, are located in Spanish and offers a novel explanation for the >>>> incompatibility of preverbal lexical subjects with fronted focussed >>>> constituents. Both Specip and the left periphery appear to be potential >>>> landing sites for subjects, according to discourse-pragmatic factors. >>>> Assuming that pro is a clitic, it is argued that the aforementioned >>>> incompatibility can be captured by a simple rule: Specip must be empty >>>> for focus fronting to occur. This is the case with pro, which adjoins to >>>> Infl, or with postverbal subjects since they remain in Specvp. From this >>>> analysis it follows that: 1) the subject field in Spanish is less >>>> articulated than is generally assumed, 2) the differences between >>>> Spanish and other null subject languages with respect to the >>>> availability of preverbal subjets can be reduced to this rule and a >>>> different ordering of focus and topic phrases, and 3) it is unnecessary >>>> to posit two different topic positions. >>>> >>>> Résumé:Cet article examine lâ??épineuse question de la position >>>> préverbale occupée par le sujet lexical en espagnol et offre une >>>> nouvelle explication pour la contrainte sur la cooccurrence de sujets >>>> lexicaux et de constituants focalisés en position préverbale. >>>> Sâ??agissant des positions sujet, il apparaît que tant le spécifieur >>>> de si que la périphérie gauche peuvent servir comme cible de >>>> mouvement, en fonction de paramètres discursifs. En présumant que pro >>>> est un clitique, je soutiens quâ??il est possible de ramener la >>>> contrainte ci-dessus à la règle suivante : le mouvement dâ??items >>>> focalisés vers la périphérie gauche requiert que le spécifieur de si >>>> soit vide. Câ??est le cas avec pro (attaché à la tête de si) et >>>> également avec les sujets postverbaux. Il sâ??ensuit que 1) la >>>> structure des positions sujet en espagnol est moins complexe quâ??on ne >>>> lâ??affirme souvent, 2) les différences entre lâ??espagnol et >>>> dâ??autres langues à sujet nul quant à la possibilité de sujets >>>> préverbaux se réduisent à la règle mentionnée de même quâ??à une >>>> structure différente de la périphérie gauche, et 3) il nâ??est pas >>>> nécessaire de postuler deux positions différentes pour les topiques. >>>> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.poll.pdf >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> The Canadian Shift in Toronto >>>> Rebecca Roeder >>>> Lidia-Gabriela Jarmasz >>>> >>>> Abstract:This study provides the first wide-scale, apparent time, >>>> instrumental description of the Canadian Shift in mainstream Toronto >>>> English. In contrast with some previous findings, the Toronto data >>>> suggest that for the last 70 years or more the shift has not affected >>>> the high front lax vowel (I). We observe that the movement of the >>>> non-high front lax vowels (ε) and (æ) involves both lowering and >>>> retraction in Toronto English, although retraction is the primary >>>> direction of more recent change and the shift appears to be slowing >>>> down. Our findings also suggest that continued retraction of the vowel >>>> resulting from the low back merger is involved in the final stage of the >>>> shift. We do not find evidence of a chain shift but instead propose that >>>> a parallel shift is occurring and make reference to Vowel Dispersion >>>> Theory in our discussion. >>>> >>>> Résumé:Cette étude présente la première description instrumentale >>>> en temps apparent de grande envergure du Canadian Shift dans lâ??anglais >>>> courant de Toronto. En contraste avec certains résultats antérieurs, >>>> les données de Toronto suggèrent quâ??au cours des 70 dernières >>>> années ou plus, cette mutation nâ??a pas touché la voyelle haute >>>> antérieure relâchée (I). Nous observons que le mouvement des voyelles >>>> antérieures relâchées non hautes (ε) et (æ) implique à la fois >>>> abaissement et postériorisation, bien que cette dernière représente >>>> la direction principale du changement plus récent; de plus, nous >>>> observons que la mutation semble ralentir. Nos résultats suggèrent >>>> également que la postériorisation continue de la voyelle qui provient >>>> de la fusion des voyelles postérieures basses est impliquée dans la >>>> dernière étape de la mutation. Ne trouvant aucune preuve de mutation >>>> en chaîne, nous proposons plutôt que le Canadian Shift est unemutation >>>> en parallèle. Nous invoquons la théorie de la dispersion des voyelles >>>> dans notre discussion. >>>> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.roeder.pdf >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Honorific agreement in Japanese >>>> Hideki Kishimoto >>>> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.kishimoto.pdf >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> One-replacement and the label-less theory of adjuncts >>>> Yosuke Sato >>>> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.sato.pdf >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics and second language acquisition >>>> (review) >>>> Engin Arik >>>> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.arik.pdf >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> The locative syntax of experiencers (review) >>>> Marco Nicolis >>>> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.nicolis.pdf >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Lâ??enfant dans la langue (review) >>>> Nelleke Strik >>>> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.strik.pdf >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Pragmatics and grammar (review) >>>> Dorota Zielinska >>>> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.zielinska.pdf >>>> >>>> >>>> The Canadian Journal of Linguistics publishes articles of original >>>> research in linguistics in both English and French. The articles deal >>>> with linguistic theory, linguistic description of English, French and a >>>> variety of other natural languages, phonetics, phonology, morphology, >>>> syntax, semantics, historical linguistics, sociolinguistics, >>>> psycholinguistics, first and second language acquisition, and other >>>> areas of interest to linguists. >>>> >>>> >>>> For more information, please contact: University of Toronto Press - >>>> Journals Division, 5201 Dufferin St., Toronto, ON M3H 5T8 Tel: (416) >>>> 667-7810 Fax: (416) 667-7881 email: >>>> journals at utpress.utoronto.ca >>>> >>>> >>>> UTP Journals on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/utpjournals >>>> Join us for advance notice of tables of contents of forthcoming issues, >>>> author and editor commentaries and insights, calls for papers and advice >>>> on publishing in our journals. Become a fan and receive free access to >>>> articles weekly through UTPJournals focus. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> -- Mark >> >> Mark P. Line >> Bartlesville, OK >> From smyth at utsc.utoronto.ca Thu Jan 6 00:22:11 2011 From: smyth at utsc.utoronto.ca (Ron Smyth) Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 19:22:11 -0500 Subject: theoretician In-Reply-To: <4D24FCD0.2090308@uoregon.edu> Message-ID: Touche re my use of the word "theoretician". Blame it on frequency in the input; it is used so often to refer to generative grammarians alone. No branch of linguistics is without theory, nor is any flavour of any of those branches without theory. ron ============================================================================== Ron Smyth, Associate Professor Linguistics & Psychology University of Toronto =========================================================================== From mark at polymathix.com Thu Jan 6 14:27:49 2011 From: mark at polymathix.com (Mark P. Line) Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 08:27:49 -0600 Subject: Now available - The Canadian Journal of Linguistics 55 (3), November 2010 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Oh, it's just a kind of payback. There was continuous sarcasm (and worse) when I said I wanted to do empirical linguistics on the basis of a large natural corpus, or when I said I didn't think trying to elicit *un*grammatical forms or grammaticality judgments from informants was methodologically viable. You had to have been there, Ron. More substantively, I'm simply not prepared to follow somebody's arcane abstractions about abstractions about abstractions about introspections and then pretend that my reverse-engieerred interpretations of those introspections are in fact data that I should be considering. The very thought of it is beyond ludicrous. And I reserve the right to make fun of anybody who's in that game and calls herself a linguist. They can bloody well call themselves philosophers of language, because that's what they are. Harrumph. Harrumph, I say. -- Mark Mark P. Line Ron Smyth wrote: > Tom and Mark: On the rare occasions when I read such a paper I see the > theoretical constructs as a way to express generalizations about > structures (as opposed to taking the theoretical apparatus too seriously). > I don't think people should be so sarcastic without first looking at the > paper to see what other value it might have for non-theoreticians. If it > has some insight about noun incorporation structures -- e.g. something > that a psycholinguist, sociolinguist or historical linguist would be > interested to know about -- then I don't get too upset about the > formalisms. Often the distributional facts that come up because of the > pursuit of a theoretical issue are all that I really find valuable in > these papers. > > I stopped worrying about this approximately 30 years ago, and instead I > just mine the theoretical literature for different purposes. Of course if > the paper is just taking something that's already understood at some level > and fitting it into the current week's framework, then I'm not interested > (and I let those who are interested love it if they want to). Moreoever > if you had read the paper and come up with some great alternative > functional explanation, you would have earned the right to dismiss this as > theoretical drivel, but I don't see any of that in this thread. > > Theoretical papers are always falsifiable in the sense that > counter-examples can upset the applecart. What you are questioning is > much broader than that, but this has been an issue since the early 1970s, > so as far as Barrie's paper is concerned, there's nothing that we can't > see see every day. It's been going on for 50 years. > > I'm sorry that you didn't read down to the bottom of the CJL posting. > One of the papers is about evidence in linguistics and how the > transformational paradigm managed to hijack everyone's agenda; another is > a fairly concrete article on vowel changes in Canadian English; another is > about possible prosodic explanations for kids' ability to produce noun > phrases. Why no sarcastic comments about those abstracts? What purpose > does this kind of sarcasm serve, especially when it is so superficial and > confined to funknet where the author is unlikely to see it? > ron > > =============================================================================== > Ron Smyth, Associate Professor > Linguistics & Psychology > University of Toronto > ============================================================================ > > On Wed, 5 Jan 2011, Mark P. Line wrote: > >> So, what would be the procedure for falsifying the claims in that paper? >> >> I'm pretty sure I don't have a clue as to how to show that something >> doesn't really merge in theta-position. >> >> -- Mark >> >> >> >> Tom Givon wrote: >> > >> > Isn't this beautiful? It just falls out, naturally, from a geometry, >> and >> > a theory of Dynamic Antisymmetry, no less. Wow! TG >> > >> > ============ >> > >> > >> > On 1/5/2011 2:05 PM, Greenwood, Audrey wrote: >> >> The Canadian Journal of Linguistics / La revue canadienne de >> >> linguistique >> >> 55(3), November/novembre 2010 is now available at >> >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/toc/cjl.55.3.html >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Noun incorporation as symmetry breaking >> >> Michael Barrie >> >> >> >> Abstract:This article proposes a novel account of noun incorporation >> in >> >> Northern Iroquoian. It is proposed that there is no special mechanism >> >> for noun incorporation and that this phenomenon falls out naturally >> from >> >> the geometry of the phrase structure under Moroâ??s theory of Dynamic >> >> Antisymmetry. In a nutshell, when the verbal head and the nominal >> head >> >> undergoMerge, they form a point of symmetric c-command,which is >> resolved >> >> by the nominal head moving to the specifier of the verb phrase. >> Further, >> >> it is proposed that, in noun incorporation constructions with a full >> DP >> >> double, the incorporated noun and the DP form a constituent, which is >> >> merged in theta-position. >> >> >> >> Résumé:Cet article propose une nouvelle description de >> >> lâ??incorporation nominale dans lâ??iroquoïen du Nord. Il est >> proposé >> >> quâ??il nâ??y a aucun mécanisme particulier en matière >> >> dâ??incorporation nominale et que ce phénomène découle >> naturellement >> >> de la géométrie de la syntaxe selon la théorie de >> lâ??Antisymétrie >> >> dynamique de Moro. En un mot, la fusion (Merge) des têtes verbale et >> >> nominale forme un point de c-commande symétrique qui se voit >> résoudre >> >> par le déplacement de la tête nominale au spécifieur du syntagme >> >> verbal. De plus, jâ??avance que le nom incorporé dans les >> constructions >> >> ayant un sd double forme avec celui-ci un constituent qui est >> fusionné >> >> en position thématique. >> >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.barrie.pdf >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Omission des déterminants : Contraintes dâ??alternances rythmiques >> ou >> >> contraintes liées aux niveaux supérieurs de la structure prosodique >> >> Roseline Fréchette >> >> Marie Labelle >> >> >> >> Résumé:Cet article vise à déterminer si lâ??omission des >> >> déterminants chez des enfants de deux ans est contrainte au niveau >> du >> >> pied ou si elle est contrainte par les différents niveaux de la >> >> hiérarchie prosodique. Neuf enfants francophones âgés de 24 à 31 >> >> mois ont participé à une tâche de répétition de 54 phrases de >> >> quatre ou cinq mots de la forme suivante «Pronomv sn» réparties en >> >> trois conditions : a) dét + nom monosyllabique; b) dét + nom >> >> bisyllabique; c) dét + adjectif monosyllabique + nom monosyllabique. >> >> Les résultats démontrent 1) plus dâ??omission du déterminant dans >> la >> >> condition b que dans la condition a; 2) plus dâ??omission du >> >> déterminant en c quâ??en b. Il est démontré que lâ??omission du >> >> déterminant ne sâ??explique pas par une contrainte dâ??alternance >> >> rythmique de bas niveau et que le niveau de la structure prosodique >> >> auquel doit sâ??attacher le déterminant joue un rôle dans >> lâ??omission >> >> des déterminants. >> >> >> >> Abstract:This article focuses on whether determiner omission by >> >> two-year-old children is constrained at the level of the prosodic >> foot >> >> or whether it is a function of the different levels of the prosodic >> >> hierarchy. Nine French-speaking children aged 2;0 to 2;7 were asked >> to >> >> repeat 54 four-or five-word sentences of the form â??Pronoun V NPâ?? >> >> with three conditions: a) det + monosyllabic noun; b) det + >> bisyllabic >> >> noun; c) det + monosyllabic adjective + monosyllabic noun. The >> results >> >> show 1) more determiner omission in condition b than in a; 2) more >> >> determiner omission in c than in b. It is shown that determiner >> omission >> >> is not accounted for by a low-level stress-alternation constraint and >> >> that the level of prosodic structure to which the determiner is >> attached >> >> plays a role in determiner omission. >> >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.frechette.pdf >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Redefining what matters: Syntactic explanation in American >> linguistics, >> >> 1955â??1970 >> >> Janet Martin-Nielsen >> >> >> >> Abstract:The postwar decades are well known for having brought >> dramatic >> >> change to American linguistics on many fronts. This paper explores an >> >> internally focused aspect of this change: conditions of explanation. >> The >> >> two questions at stake are, firstly, what counts as explanation in >> >> linguistics? and, secondly, how is this decided? I argue that >> >> transformational grammarians dominated the setting of explanatory >> >> criteria in 1960s American syntax, and that this dominance was >> essential >> >> to the overall success of that theory. Importantly, rival grammarians >> >> were forced to devote as much time and effort to fitting their >> theories >> >> to the transformational criteria as they were to advancing their own >> >> explanatory priorities. By successfully naming the conditions for >> >> explanation, transformationalists provided their own supporters with >> >> significant questions to pursue and, simultaneously, drew energy away >> >> from rivals. This monopoly over explanatory criteria was central to >> the >> >> dominant position transformational grammar established in the >> American >> >> academic linguistics community. >> >> >> >> Résumé:Les décennies de lâ??après-guerre ont été >> caractérisées >> >> par des changements importants dans la linguistique américaine. Cet >> >> article explore un aspect interne de ces changements : les conditions >> >> dâ??explication.Deux questions sont en jeu ici : premièrement, en >> quoi >> >> consiste lâ??explication en linguistique? et en deuxième lieu : >> Comment >> >> décide-t-on en quoi consiste lâ??explication? Je soutiens que les >> >> grammairiens transformationnels ont imposé le choix des critères >> >> dâ??explication de la syntaxe américaine au cours des années 1960 >> et >> >> que cette domination était essentielle au succès global de la >> >> grammaire transformationnelle. Les grammairiens rivaux ont dû >> consacrer >> >> autant de temps et dâ??effort à adapter leurs théories aux >> critères >> >> transformationnels quâ??à avancer leur propres priorités >> >> dâ??explication. En réussissant à définir les critères >> >> dâ??explication, les transformationalistes ont nourri leur propres >> >> partisans de questions importantes à poursuivre en même temps >> quâ??ils >> >> ont drainé les énergies de leurs rivaux. Ce monopole des critères >> >> dâ??explication était central à la position dominante que la >> grammaire >> >> transformationelle a établie dans la communauté linguistique >> >> universitaire américaine. >> >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.martin-nielsen.pdf >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Some remarks on subject positions and the architecture of the left >> >> periphery in Spanish >> >> Bernhard Pöll >> >> >> >> This article reexamines the puzzling issue of where subjects, lexical >> >> and null, are located in Spanish and offers a novel explanation for >> the >> >> incompatibility of preverbal lexical subjects with fronted focussed >> >> constituents. Both Specip and the left periphery appear to be >> potential >> >> landing sites for subjects, according to discourse-pragmatic factors. >> >> Assuming that pro is a clitic, it is argued that the aforementioned >> >> incompatibility can be captured by a simple rule: Specip must be >> empty >> >> for focus fronting to occur. This is the case with pro, which adjoins >> to >> >> Infl, or with postverbal subjects since they remain in Specvp. From >> this >> >> analysis it follows that: 1) the subject field in Spanish is less >> >> articulated than is generally assumed, 2) the differences between >> >> Spanish and other null subject languages with respect to the >> >> availability of preverbal subjets can be reduced to this rule and a >> >> different ordering of focus and topic phrases, and 3) it is >> unnecessary >> >> to posit two different topic positions. >> >> >> >> Résumé:Cet article examine lâ??épineuse question de la position >> >> préverbale occupée par le sujet lexical en espagnol et offre une >> >> nouvelle explication pour la contrainte sur la cooccurrence de sujets >> >> lexicaux et de constituants focalisés en position préverbale. >> >> Sâ??agissant des positions sujet, il apparaît que tant le >> spécifieur >> >> de si que la périphérie gauche peuvent servir comme cible de >> >> mouvement, en fonction de paramètres discursifs. En présumant que >> pro >> >> est un clitique, je soutiens quâ??il est possible de ramener la >> >> contrainte ci-dessus à la règle suivante : le mouvement dâ??items >> >> focalisés vers la périphérie gauche requiert que le spécifieur de >> si >> >> soit vide. Câ??est le cas avec pro (attaché à la tête de si) et >> >> également avec les sujets postverbaux. Il sâ??ensuit que 1) la >> >> structure des positions sujet en espagnol est moins complexe quâ??on >> ne >> >> lâ??affirme souvent, 2) les différences entre lâ??espagnol et >> >> dâ??autres langues à sujet nul quant à la possibilité de sujets >> >> préverbaux se réduisent à la règle mentionnée de même quâ??à >> une >> >> structure différente de la périphérie gauche, et 3) il nâ??est pas >> >> nécessaire de postuler deux positions différentes pour les >> topiques. >> >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.poll.pdf >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> The Canadian Shift in Toronto >> >> Rebecca Roeder >> >> Lidia-Gabriela Jarmasz >> >> >> >> Abstract:This study provides the first wide-scale, apparent time, >> >> instrumental description of the Canadian Shift in mainstream Toronto >> >> English. In contrast with some previous findings, the Toronto data >> >> suggest that for the last 70 years or more the shift has not affected >> >> the high front lax vowel (I). We observe that the movement of the >> >> non-high front lax vowels (ε) and (æ) involves both lowering and >> >> retraction in Toronto English, although retraction is the primary >> >> direction of more recent change and the shift appears to be slowing >> >> down. Our findings also suggest that continued retraction of the >> vowel >> >> resulting from the low back merger is involved in the final stage of >> the >> >> shift. We do not find evidence of a chain shift but instead propose >> that >> >> a parallel shift is occurring and make reference to Vowel Dispersion >> >> Theory in our discussion. >> >> >> >> Résumé:Cette étude présente la première description >> instrumentale >> >> en temps apparent de grande envergure du Canadian Shift dans >> lâ??anglais >> >> courant de Toronto. En contraste avec certains résultats >> antérieurs, >> >> les données de Toronto suggèrent quâ??au cours des 70 dernières >> >> années ou plus, cette mutation nâ??a pas touché la voyelle haute >> >> antérieure relâchée (I). Nous observons que le mouvement des >> voyelles >> >> antérieures relâchées non hautes (ε) et (æ) implique à la fois >> >> abaissement et postériorisation, bien que cette dernière >> représente >> >> la direction principale du changement plus récent; de plus, nous >> >> observons que la mutation semble ralentir. Nos résultats suggèrent >> >> également que la postériorisation continue de la voyelle qui >> provient >> >> de la fusion des voyelles postérieures basses est impliquée dans la >> >> dernière étape de la mutation. Ne trouvant aucune preuve de >> mutation >> >> en chaîne, nous proposons plutôt que le Canadian Shift est >> unemutation >> >> en parallèle. Nous invoquons la théorie de la dispersion des >> voyelles >> >> dans notre discussion. >> >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.roeder.pdf >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Honorific agreement in Japanese >> >> Hideki Kishimoto >> >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.kishimoto.pdf >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> One-replacement and the label-less theory of adjuncts >> >> Yosuke Sato >> >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.sato.pdf >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics and second language acquisition >> >> (review) >> >> Engin Arik >> >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.arik.pdf >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> The locative syntax of experiencers (review) >> >> Marco Nicolis >> >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.nicolis.pdf >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Lâ??enfant dans la langue (review) >> >> Nelleke Strik >> >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.strik.pdf >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Pragmatics and grammar (review) >> >> Dorota Zielinska >> >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.zielinska.pdf >> >> >> >> >> >> The Canadian Journal of Linguistics publishes articles of original >> >> research in linguistics in both English and French. The articles deal >> >> with linguistic theory, linguistic description of English, French and >> a >> >> variety of other natural languages, phonetics, phonology, morphology, >> >> syntax, semantics, historical linguistics, sociolinguistics, >> >> psycholinguistics, first and second language acquisition, and other >> >> areas of interest to linguists. >> >> >> >> >> >> For more information, please contact: University of Toronto Press - >> >> Journals Division, 5201 Dufferin St., Toronto, ON M3H 5T8 Tel: (416) >> >> 667-7810 Fax: (416) 667-7881 email: >> >> journals at utpress.utoronto.ca >> >> >> >> >> >> UTP Journals on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/utpjournals >> >> Join us for advance notice of tables of contents of forthcoming >> issues, >> >> author and editor commentaries and insights, calls for papers and >> advice >> >> on publishing in our journals. Become a fan and receive free access >> to >> >> articles weekly through UTPJournals focus. >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> -- Mark >> >> Mark P. Line >> Bartlesville, OK >> > > -- Mark Mark P. Line Bartlesville, OK From mark at polymathix.com Thu Jan 6 14:35:43 2011 From: mark at polymathix.com (Mark P. Line) Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 08:35:43 -0600 Subject: theoretician In-Reply-To: Message-ID: So that gives you an idea of the kind of subliminal and sometimes unintentional discrimination non-Chomskyan theoreticians are exposed to, at the drop of a hat, even today, this 6th day of January, 2011. Maybe that will help you excuse the occasional sarcasm at the expense of the discriminatrices behind their collective backs. -- Mark Mark P. Line Ron Smyth wrote: > Touche re my use of the word "theoretician". Blame it on frequency in the > input; it is used so often to refer to generative grammarians alone. No > branch of linguistics is without theory, nor is any flavour of any of > those branches without theory. > > ron > > =============================================================================== > Ron Smyth, Associate Professor > Linguistics & Psychology > University of Toronto > ============================================================================ > > > -- Mark Mark P. Line Bartlesville, OK From bradley.mcdonnell at gmail.com Fri Jan 7 22:06:31 2011 From: bradley.mcdonnell at gmail.com (Bradley McDonnell) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2011 14:06:31 -0800 Subject: CALL FOR PAPERS: Workshop on American Indigenous Languages Message-ID: CALL FOR PAPERS Workshop on American Indigenous Languages Santa Barbara, CA April 15th- 16th, 2011 The Linguistics department at the University of California, Santa Barbara announces its 14th Annual Workshop on American Indigenous Languages (WAIL), which provides a forum for the discussion of theoretical, descriptive, and practical studies of the indigenous languages of the Americas. This year's conference will feature a keynote address by Nora England (UT Austin). Anonymous abstracts are invited for talks on any topic relevant to the study of language in the Americas. Talks will be 20 minutes, followed by 10 minutes for discussion. Abstracts should be 500 words or less (excluding examples and/or references) and can be submitted online at http://linguistlist.org/confcustom/wail2011. Hard copy submissions will be accepted from those who do not have internet access. Individuals may submit abstracts for one single-authored and one co-authored paper. Please indicate your source(s) and type(s) of data in the abstract (e.g. recordings, texts, conversational, elicited, narrative, etc.). For co-authored papers, please indicate who plans to present the paper as well as who will be in attendance. *Online submissions:* Abstracts can be submitted online at http://linguistlist.org/confcustom/wail2011 in PDF format. *For hard copy submissions:* Please send four copies of your abstract, along with a 3x5 card with the following information: (1) your name; (2) affiliation; (3) mailing address; (4) phone number; (5) email address; (6) title of your paper; (7) whether your submission is for the general session or the Special Panel. Send hard copy submissions to: Workshop on American Indigenous Languages Attn: Stephanie Morse or Elliott Hoey Department of Linguistics University of California, Santa Barbara Santa Barbara, CA 93106 DEADLINE FOR RECEIPT OF ABSTRACTS: *January 21**st**, 2011* Notification of acceptance will be by email no later than February 14th, 2011. General Information: Santa Barbara is situated on the Pacific Ocean near the Santa Yñez Mountains. The UCSB campus is located near the Santa Barbara airport. Participants may also fly into LAX airport in Los Angeles, which is approximately 90 miles southeast of the campus. Shuttle buses run between LAX and Santa Barbara. Information about hotel accommodations will be posted on our website (http://orgs.sa.ucsb.edu/nailsg/). For further information contact the conference coordinators, Stephanie Morse or Elliott Hoey, at wail.ucsb at gmail.com, or check out our website at http://orgs.sa.ucsb.edu/nailsg/ From dan at daneverett.org Sat Jan 8 16:38:26 2011 From: dan at daneverett.org (Daniel Everett) Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2011 11:38:26 -0500 Subject: Affixal quantification Message-ID: Folks, I am interested in compiling a bibliography for studies of affixal quantification. In particular, I am looking for discussions of this in grammars from different parts of the world. If you know of such works and would be willing to suggest some references, I would be grateful. Sincerely, Dan Everett ************************* Daniel L. Everett Dean of Arts and Sciences 308 Morison Hall Bentley University 175 Forest Street Waltham, MA 02452 Office Phone: 781-891-2131 Fax: 781-891-2125 From sepkit at utu.fi Mon Jan 10 07:53:25 2011 From: sepkit at utu.fi (=?iso-8859-1?B?IlNlcHBvIEtpdHRpbOQi?=) Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 09:53:25 +0200 Subject: Second call for papers: Variation and typology (Helsinki, 25.-27.8.2011) Message-ID: (apologies for multiple postings) Variation and Typology: New trends in Syntactic Research Helsinki, August 25–27, 2011 In recent years, theoretical discussion around syntactic issues has been characterized by a growing interest towards variation, both dialectal and cross-linguistic. Typological considerations have proven to be essential even for research on individual languages. On the other hand, detailed studies of variation within languages (e.g. studies of dialectical variation) and variation across closely related languages have attracted more interest among typologists. One consequence of this has been that the focus in dialect research has shifted from phonological and morphological towards syntactic questions. Whether this will turn out to be a mere adjustment in attention or a major paradigm shift, a broadened perspective is welcome and also necessary. In order for new approaches to emerge, old ones need to be combined in novel ways. This symposium offers a forum for scholars interested in syntactic questions within typology and variation (and combinations thereof) and willing to contribute to this collective shift of focus. The goal of the symposium is to approach the concept of variation from a broader perspective for gaining new insights into what variation (in its different forms) can reveal about language. Basically, variation can be seen both language-internal (e.g. dialects, sociolects etc.) and cross-linguistic (typological variation).There are numerous studies of both of these, but only quite recently has there been real effort to combine these two aspects of variation (e.g. Kortmann 2004, Nevalainen et al. 2006, Barbiers et al. 2008). Special attention will be given to the oft-neglected areas which fall between the foci of linguistic typology and variation studies within syntax when these are seen as separate fields of study. The question we would like to be addressed is briefly: what do we gai n by studying variation both within and across languages. Put another way, what are the implications of variation studies and language typology to one another? We heartily welcome papers related to the overall enterprise. Possible topics for talks include, but, as usual, are not restricted to, the following: – dialect syntax vs. syntactic typology: what is the relation between cross-linguistic variation and dialectal variation? – accounting for variation in syntactic theory: rigid rules, fuzzy templates, or something else? – implications of language variation to typological data selection & research: what is the ‘best variant’ of a language to be presented in reference grammars? What are the consequences of relying on standard language data in cross-linguistic research? And what is the significance of having vs. not having variation data available to the grammarian? – how to take into account variation in typological research in syntax? - case studies of variation within and across languages (e.g. clause combining, use of reflexive pronouns, possessive constructions, argument marking, word order variations, etc. etc. within and across languages) - methodological contributions to variation: to what extent do we need different machinery for dealing with different types of variation, and to what extent are we dealing with “just variation”? - variation and marginal constructions: do we need a distinction between core and periphery in grammar? Does this involve a distinction between common and dialectal variants? Are certain constructions marginal both in dialects and across languages? - borderline between dialectal and typological variation: e.g. issues of dealing with closely related languages, distinguishing between dialects vs. languages, spontaneous vs. contact-induced variation, etc. - qualitative methods in typology and dialect studies For more information please visit the webpage of the symposium at: http://www.linguistics.fi/variation Invited speakers: Balthasar Bickel (University of Leipzig) Joan Bresnan (Stanford University) Marja-Liisa Helasvuo (University of Turku) Scientific committee Sjef Barbiers (University of Amsterdam) Hans Boas (University of Texas, Austin) Hannele Forsberg (University of Eastern Finland) Bernd Kortmann (University of Freiburg) Ekkehard König (Freie Universität Berlin) Michel Launey (University of Paris 7) Silvia Luraghi (University of Pavia) Jan-Ola Östman (University of Helsinki) Cecilia Poletto (University of Padova) Stéphane Robert (CNRS) Anna Siewierska (University of Lancaster) Jussi Ylikoski (University of Helsinki) Organizing committee Seppo Kittilä (University of Helsinki) Aki Kyröläinen (University of Turku) Meri Larjavaara (Åbo Akademi University) Jaakko Leino (Research Institute for the Languages of Finland) Alexandre Nikolaev (University of Eastern Finland) Maria Vilkuna (Research Institute for the Languages of Finland) Abstract submission Please send your abstract to typ-variation /at/ helsinki.fi no later than March 1, 2011. The length of abstracts should not exceed 500 words (excluding data and references). Abstracts will be evaluated by the members of the scientific committee and also by the organizing committee. Letters of acceptance will be sent by March 31, 2011. The abstracts themselves must be anonymous, but the body of the message should include the following information: Name of the participant Title of presentation Affiliation E-mail address Whether the paper is meant as a section paper, a poster, or a workshop Workshops The symposium will include a workshop on Finnish and Finnic dialect syntax. Proposals for all workshops should be submitted no later than February 11, 2011. Notification of acceptance will be given by March 7, 2011. These one-day workshops will run in parallel sessions with the main conference program. Alternatively, the first day of the symposium may be dedicated to workshops. The symposium organizers will provide the lecture rooms and other facilities, but the workshop organizers will be responsible for the organization of their workshops (choosing the speakers etc.). Key dates: – Deadline for abstract submission: March 1, 2011 – Notification of acceptance: March 31, 2011 – Proposals for workshops: February 11, 2011 – Notification of acceptance of workshops: March 7, 2011 Activities: – Presentations by the invited speakers – Presentations by other participants – Posters – Workshops Registration The registration deadline is August 5, 2011. An on-line registration form to the symposium will appear on the webpage of the symposium after the evaluation of abstracts. Registration fees General: 100 Euro Members of the association: 80 Euro Undergraduate students: 50 Euro Finnish participants are requested to pay the registration fee to the SKY bank account when they register for the conference (bank account number 174530-71243 (Nordea)). Participants from abroad are likewise requested to pay in advance by bank transfer, if at all possible, to the SKY bank account in Finland (Bank: Nordea; IBAN: FI76 1745 3000 0712 43, BIC: NDEAFIHH). However, we may also accept payment IN CASH (only in Euros; moreover, we CANNOT accept credit cards of any sort) upon arrival in case bank transfer is not possible. If you have paid via bank transfer from abroad, we would kindly ask you to bring a COPY of the original transaction receipt with you and present it upon registration. References Barbiers, Sjef & Olaf Koeneman & Marika Lekakou & Margreet van der Ham (eds.) 2008. Microvariation in syntactic doubling. Syntax and Semantics, volume 36. Bingley: Emerald. Kortmann, Bernd (ed.) 2004. Dialectology meets typology: dialect grammar from a cross-linguistic perspective. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Nevalainen, Terttu & Juhani Klemola & Mikko Laitinen (eds.) 2006. Types of variation: diachronic, dialectical and typological interfaces. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. From dan at daneverett.org Mon Jan 10 18:57:06 2011 From: dan at daneverett.org (Daniel Everett) Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 13:57:06 -0500 Subject: vocal tract images Message-ID: I am looking for images of the human vocal tract, for infants and for adults, that can be either downloaded for free or purchased. Any help would be much-appreciated. Dan Everett From d.trenkic.96 at cantab.net Mon Jan 10 19:18:25 2011 From: d.trenkic.96 at cantab.net (Danijela Trenkic) Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 19:18:25 -0000 Subject: the 'well known secret' Message-ID: Hi, I'm just catching up with the debate from 31 December started by Tom on the 'well known secret' that teaching foreign langauges should start early, and on Helen Neville's studies on the neurology of the critical period. It is true that Neville's studies show different cortical activations in early and late bilinguals, however in those studies (as far as I am aware) proficiency levels (and / or the amount of exposure) were not tightly controlled for. When proficiency levels of early and late bilinguals are kept constant, the difference in cortical activation disappears (see Perani et al 1998, Brain, http://brain.oxfordjournals.org/content/121/10/1841.abstract). But more importantly (for the debate on when one should start teaching foreign languages in school), the type of research that finds cortical differences of early vs late bilinguals (and other research, that, more generally, finds clear advantages for early over late bilinguals) is almost invariably based on immersion / naturalistic learners (especially in the case of early bilinguals). Unfortunately, you cannot extrapolate from that that teaching foreign languages early in school (for an hour or so a week, with no opportunity for any out-of-class exposure) would produce the same effect, or bypass the supposed critical period problem. There is plenty of research to suggest that, as far as foreign languages in schools are concerned, adolescent learners have an edge over child learners (see Carmen Munoz's article "Symmetries and asymmetries of age effects in naturalistic and instructed L2 learning", Applied Linguistics, 2008). So if you can afford to teach languages for just a few years in school, then, yes, doing it between 12-16 (or 16-20) may well be better than teaching it to 7-12 year olds. Danijela P.S. Having said all this, I'd better add that I'm not against early foreign language instruction in principle - just against the inappropriate application of research. Clearly, the earlier you start, the more input you'll have (and that ought to be a good thing) IF you stick with it. But that is a big IF. The UK experience suggests that the majority of students will opt out of languages at the first available opportunity. From BartlettT at cardiff.ac.uk Mon Jan 10 23:02:32 2011 From: BartlettT at cardiff.ac.uk (Tom Bartlett) Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 23:02:32 +0000 Subject: New eries on Text and Social Context - Proposals sought Message-ID: We are pleased to announce a new series from Equinox books that will be of interest to all those working within functional linguistic frameworks that seek to interrelate textual and lexicogrammatical features with aspects of social life in a motivated and systematic way. The series outline follows. Potential contributors should contact the series editors with an outline of the proposed work: Tom Bartlett bartlettt at cardiff.ac..uk Alison Moore amoore at uow.edu.aus Geoff Thompson Geoff9 at liverpool.ac.uk Text and Social Context The purpose of the series is to provide in-depth accounts of language use in social life that interrelate fine-grained analysis of texts and extensive analysis of the sociocultural context in which the texts are produced and interpreted. The series thus aims to bring together and consolidate the strengths of various sociolinguistic, textual and critical discourse approaches to linguistic analysis that are often treated in isolation. The series will draw explicitly on functional accounts of language-as-action in specific social contexts in order both to analyse the social meaning of situated texts and to test and develop the theory against these accounts. Books in this series will provide a fuller and more adequate description of the social context than is often afforded by existing textual studies and equal prominence will therefore be given to descriptions of context, drawing on methods from disciplines such as ethnography, sociology and psychology, and to the language produced. Titles will be expected to discuss not only significant patterns of linguistic choices in texts and their role in construing the context in which the texts function, but also the dynamics of language production and uptake. Thus they will typically present and discuss (in any appropriate sequence): (i) a broad account of the context of the study; (ii) a functional linguistic account of the area of language in focus; (iii) analyses of language-in-use in the specific context, drawing on disciplines such as ethnography, sociology and psychology to enhance the interpretation of the linguistic analysis; (iv) suggested theoretical developments to the theory in light of the analyses. The books might also present (v) suggestions for linguistic intervention in the context described. The books in this series are mainly addressed to researchers, postgraduate students and teachers working within all areas of language in social life, though they will also be of use in specialist undergraduate study From tristanpurvis at gmail.com Tue Jan 11 03:18:36 2011 From: tristanpurvis at gmail.com (Tristan Purvis) Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 22:18:36 -0500 Subject: Fwd: 42nd Annual Conference on African Linguistics (ACAL) - 2nd Call for Papers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: 42nd ACAL Organizing Committee <42ndacal at gmail.com> Date: Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 11:02 AM Subject: 42nd Annual Conference on African Linguistics (ACAL) - 2nd Call for Papers To: Africanist/Linguist Friends of ACAL <42ndacal at gmail.com> *Apologies for cross-postings.* ** *Please be reminded that the deadline for submissions for the 42nd Annual Conference on African Linguistics is January 14, 2011: * http://acal2011.umd.edu/*.* *Details about registration will be available on the event website in the first week of January (apologies for the delay): http://acal2011.umd.edu/registration*. ** ==================================================================== 42nd Annual Conference on African Linguistics (ACAL) University of Maryland, College Park, MD June 10-12, 2011 http://acal2011.umd.edu/ ======================================================== 2nd Call for Papers || Deadline: January 14, 2011 ======================================================== The 42nd Annual Conference on African Linguistics (ACAL) will be held on June 10-12 at the University of Maryland, College Park. The theme of this year’s conference is 'African Languages in Context.' The organizers of ACAL 42 would like to invite papers that address the conference theme, or any other topic relating to African languages and linguistics. Please check our website for the most current information regarding submission of abstracts: http://acal2011.umd.edu/callforpapers Invited Speakers: * Professor Enoch Aboh, University of Amsterdam * Professor Vicki Carstens, University of Missouri * Professor Samuel Gyasi Obeng, Indiana University * Professor David Odden, Ohio State University ---------------------- Paper Topics Priority consideration will be given to papers that specifically address the conference theme and then to papers addressing the following subfields or combinations thereof; however, related topics are also welcome. - Computational linguistics - Historical linguistics - Language acquisition (i.e., first, second, or additional language) - Language pedagogy - Lexicography - Morphology - Neurolinguistics - Phonetics - Phonology - Pidgin and Creole languages - Pragmatics - Semantics - Sociolinguistics (e.g., code-switching, language contact in Africa and in the African Diaspora, language endangerment, bi- or multi-lingualism, language in African literature, and language planning, spread, use, and variation) - Syntax - Tonology Submission Guidelines We invite anonymous abstracts for 20-minute individual papers (additional time will be allowed for questions). All abstracts should be in English with glosses or translations for words or examples in any other language. Each abstract, including the title and any data in figures or tables, must not exceed 500 words. The 500-word abstract should be single-spaced and in a font no smaller than 11 pt. A separate page should accompany the abstract with name, institutional affiliation, and contact information, including e-mail address and abstract title. Abstracts must be submitted as a PDF or Microsoft Word document. Abstracts containing special characters must be submitted in a PDF format, preferably as an e-mail attachment. Individuals who do not have regular access to e-mail may submit one copy of their abstract by regular mail on a compact disc. Faxes will not be accepted. In the text of your email, please include the following information (we recommend you paste the following fields in the body of your email): Title (e.g., Mr., Ms., Mrs., Dr., etc): Given name (first name): Family name (last name): Suffix (e.g., Jr., III, etc): Institution: Title of presentation: Email address to be included in program: Electronic Submissions To submit abstracts electronically, please send your abstracts to: * 42ndACAL at gmail.com* Postal Mail Submissions To mail a compact disc containing your abstract, please use the following address: ACAL 42 Organizing Committee c/o Tristan Purvis 7005 52nd Ave College Park, MD 20740 Deadline The deadline for receipt of abstracts is January 14, 2011. Please be advised that late submissions may not be considered. Because of visa requirements, prospective international participants are urged to submit their abstracts at the earliest date possible. Participants will be notified of the acceptance of their proposal by February 28, 2011. From amnfn at well.com Tue Jan 11 21:59:02 2011 From: amnfn at well.com (A. Katz) Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2011 13:59:02 -0800 Subject: the 'well known secret' In-Reply-To: <44741.10.0.7.178.1294687105.squirrel@webmail.cantab.net> Message-ID: I think that while total immersion has more chances of producing a native speaker-like proficiency before the critical age than after, the deciding factor of how much of the potential for learning a new language is realized in any given person of whatever age is the degree to which the social situation subjects the person to a dominant language viewpoint. I elaborate more on this idea in the following essay: http://hubpages.com/hub/How-to-Learn-a-Foreign-Language-Issues-in-Second-Language-Acquisition-and-Pedagogy I have found that resistance by monolinguals to internalizing their first foreign language is high, and these observations also carry over to the attitude toward language universals by linguists who have never experienced total immersion in a second language. --Aya On Mon, 10 Jan 2011, Danijela Trenkic wrote: > Hi, > > I'm just catching up with the debate from 31 December started by Tom on > the 'well known secret' that teaching foreign langauges should start > early, and on Helen Neville's studies on the neurology of the critical > period. > > It is true that Neville's studies show different cortical activations in > early and late bilinguals, however in those studies (as far as I am aware) > proficiency levels (and / or the amount of exposure) were not tightly > controlled for. When proficiency levels of early and late bilinguals are > kept constant, the difference in cortical activation disappears (see > Perani et al 1998, Brain, > http://brain.oxfordjournals.org/content/121/10/1841.abstract). > > But more importantly (for the debate on when one should start teaching > foreign languages in school), the type of research that finds cortical > differences of early vs late bilinguals (and other research, that, more > generally, finds clear advantages for early over late bilinguals) is > almost invariably based on immersion / naturalistic learners (especially > in the case of early bilinguals). > > Unfortunately, you cannot extrapolate from that that teaching foreign > languages early in school (for an hour or so a week, with no opportunity > for any out-of-class exposure) would produce the same effect, or bypass > the supposed critical period problem. There is plenty of research to > suggest that, as far as foreign languages in schools are concerned, > adolescent learners have an edge over child learners (see Carmen Munoz's > article "Symmetries and asymmetries of age effects in naturalistic and > instructed L2 learning", Applied Linguistics, 2008). So if you can afford > to teach languages for just a few years in school, then, yes, doing it > between 12-16 (or 16-20) may well be better than teaching it to 7-12 year > olds. > > Danijela > > P.S. > > Having said all this, I'd better add that I'm not against early foreign > language instruction in principle - just against the inappropriate > application of research. Clearly, the earlier you start, the more input > you'll have (and that ought to be a good thing) IF you stick with it. But > that is a big IF. The UK experience suggests that the majority of students > will opt out of languages at the first available opportunity. > > From anne_mariedevlin at hotmail.com Wed Jan 12 01:23:56 2011 From: anne_mariedevlin at hotmail.com (anne marie devlin) Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 01:23:56 +0000 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age Message-ID: Just to add to the debate on teaching foreign languages at an early age. The Munoz article mentioned earlier is part of a much larger project entitled the Barcelona Age Factor (BAF). Although Munoz did suggest that early foreign language teaching produced no long term results, she did say that intense exposure to a foreign language at an early age does have a long term impact. So the question is not necessarily whether to introduce foreign languages at an early stage, but how much exposure is necessary to have a long term impact. As an interesting aside re: monolinguals and their resistance to their 1st FL, it's worth pointing out that Munoz's informants are bilingual Catalan/Spanish speakers, so the resistance towards a first foreign language may also be common to bilinguals. AMD From tgivon at uoregon.edu Wed Jan 12 01:42:38 2011 From: tgivon at uoregon.edu (Tom Givon) Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2011 18:42:38 -0700 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Well, maybe it is also worth mentioning that when you get into Catalunia, you get into thick layers of language politics and liberation ideology. So sometimes it is not all that easy to tell when the science ends and something else begins. Of course, Catalunia is not the only place where this can be observed. But once you get into the convoluted relations between a dominant/imperial language and an indigenous/liberation language, it becomes harder to do simple science. People have all kinds of axes to grind. Our earlier discussion last year about the Israeli-Arabic situation certainly overlapped with these issues. I am not so worried about the oft-subconscious effect of socio-linguistic factors on SLA. This should be studied as part of science. It is the deliberate ideologs that scare me. Best, TG ============ On 1/11/2011 6:23 PM, anne marie devlin wrote: > Just to add to the debate on teaching foreign languages at an early age. The Munoz article mentioned earlier is part of a much larger project entitled the Barcelona Age Factor (BAF). Although Munoz did suggest that early foreign language teaching produced no long term results, she did say that intense exposure to a foreign language at an early age does have a long term impact. So the question is not necessarily whether to introduce foreign languages at an early stage, but how much exposure is necessary to have a long term impact. As an interesting aside re: monolinguals and their resistance to their 1st FL, it's worth pointing out that Munoz's informants are bilingual Catalan/Spanish speakers, so the resistance towards a first foreign language may also be common to bilinguals. > AMD From moorej at ucsd.edu Wed Jan 12 04:58:45 2011 From: moorej at ucsd.edu (Moore, John) Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2011 20:58:45 -0800 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: <4D2D070E.3050608@uoregon.edu> Message-ID: Against my better judgement I feel I should add a rejoinder to this; anything said in this domain is bound to bother many, if not all. The linguistic situation in Catalunya is, indeed complex. However, to refer to Catalan as 'liberation' and Spanish (or Castellano) as 'imperial' over-simplifies. Catalan is, of course, the indigenous language of the region which was strenuously repressed during the Franco period. Spanish, is also clearly the national language that was imposed, also during that period. However, since around the 1950s, there was a significant internal migration of of Spanish-speaking Andalucians to Catalunya, who formed a guest-worker-like Spanish-speaking underclass. This leads to the question: how much of many Catalans' aversion to Spanish is because of historical repression, and how much is due to old-fashion prejudice against an under-class? John ________________________________________ From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Tom Givon [tgivon at uoregon.edu] Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 5:42 PM To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] teaching foreign languages at an early age Well, maybe it is also worth mentioning that when you get into Catalunia, you get into thick layers of language politics and liberation ideology. So sometimes it is not all that easy to tell when the science ends and something else begins. Of course, Catalunia is not the only place where this can be observed. But once you get into the convoluted relations between a dominant/imperial language and an indigenous/liberation language, it becomes harder to do simple science. People have all kinds of axes to grind. Our earlier discussion last year about the Israeli-Arabic situation certainly overlapped with these issues. I am not so worried about the oft-subconscious effect of socio-linguistic factors on SLA. This should be studied as part of science. It is the deliberate ideologs that scare me. Best, TG From tgivon at uoregon.edu Wed Jan 12 11:25:18 2011 From: tgivon at uoregon.edu (Tom Givon) Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 04:25:18 -0700 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: <2DDBB3E58272D646A9066A2A59BC57822130B25DD4@MBX5.AD.UCSD.EDU> Message-ID: I suppose I should have indicated by some graphemic means that I was using the terms 'imperial' and 'liberation' tongue in cheek. I think they pretty much characterize the ideological position of many of my Catalan friends. But as is the case in at least one other region in Spain, the ideological/national aspirations of one group cut into the legitimate rights of another. Internal migration ('imperialism' to some) in Spain has made all AutonomIas linguistically mixed. It is fun to speak Anzaluz with the taxistas in Barcelona, and once you get them going, they will tell you their tale of woes about Catalan linguistic nationalism. It is not that in Anzaluzia people don't poke fun at the way NorteNos speak, but at least they don't curtail their civil rights. These are all subtle details of multilingualism (tho Andaluz is not recognized as a language). My point remains tho, that once you get in the midst of ideological nationalist zealotry, science becomes murky. Best, TG ========= On 1/11/2011 9:58 PM, Moore, John wrote: > Against my better judgement I feel I should add a rejoinder to this; anything said in this domain is bound to bother many, if not all. The linguistic situation in Catalunya is, indeed complex. However, to refer to Catalan as 'liberation' and Spanish (or Castellano) as 'imperial' over-simplifies. Catalan is, of course, the indigenous language of the region which was strenuously repressed during the Franco period. Spanish, is also clearly the national language that was imposed, also during that period. However, since around the 1950s, there was a significant internal migration of of Spanish-speaking Andalucians to Catalunya, who formed a guest-worker-like Spanish-speaking underclass. This leads to the question: how much of many Catalans' aversion to Spanish is because of historical repression, and how much is due to old-fashion prejudice against an under-class? > > John > ________________________________________ > From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Tom Givon [tgivon at uoregon.edu] > Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 5:42 PM > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] teaching foreign languages at an early age > > Well, maybe it is also worth mentioning that when you get into > Catalunia, you get into thick layers of language politics and liberation > ideology. So sometimes it is not all that easy to tell when the science > ends and something else begins. Of course, Catalunia is not the only > place where this can be observed. But once you get into the convoluted > relations between a dominant/imperial language and an > indigenous/liberation language, it becomes harder to do simple science. > People have all kinds of axes to grind. Our earlier discussion last year > about the Israeli-Arabic situation certainly overlapped with these > issues. I am not so worried about the oft-subconscious effect of > socio-linguistic factors on SLA. This should be studied as part of > science. It is the deliberate ideologs that scare me. Best, TG > From dcyr at yorku.ca Wed Jan 12 12:46:29 2011 From: dcyr at yorku.ca (Danielle E. Cyr) Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 07:46:29 -0500 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: <4D2D8F9E.5020803@uoregon.edu> Message-ID: In Canada, an officially bilingual country, many if not most of the French as a Second Language (FSL) students enrol in these programs for political reasons. Indeed most of our students are first or second generation immigrants. They REALLY aim at becoming the "perfect" citizens, thus at becoming bilingual. However, all are not equally talented for learning a SL. Some end up at the end of their undergraduate studies with a middle and high school background of French core courses and four years in departments of French Studies with very little command of spoken French and even less of written French. Others come out brilliantly fluent in both. They all had the same motivation at the onset. Once, in a undergraduate course - Linguistics applied to the teaching of FSL (a course for future FSL teachers)- a student had the idea of having all her classmates to go through a basic multiple intelligences test. Between 1/3 and 1/2 of the class had not languaging as their major form of intelligence. I was too busy teaching overload during that year and FSL not being my main research area, I did not think of searching for correlations between the test results and the student performance in FSL. Yet the idea of my message here is that talent is a big factor that is hard to measure although it has to be taken into account. Talmy I agree with you that invoking talent might look like drifting away from science. However, there must be methodologies for taking it into account: the heredity factor, family members as role models, broad educational history, etc. These methodologies should also be used for detecting good (FSL) teachers. I say so because in the same class I refer to above, more than half of the students had grand-parents, parents, older siblings, uncles /aunts etc who were also teachers. Excellence in languaging and teaching it might be something partly "gifted" at birth and reinforce by role models, educational orientations, etc. Science should find a way to account for that. Best, Danielle Quoting Tom Givon : > > I suppose I should have indicated by some graphemic means that I was > using the terms 'imperial' and 'liberation' tongue in cheek. I think > they pretty much characterize the ideological position of many of my > Catalan friends. But as is the case in at least one other region in > Spain, the ideological/national aspirations of one group cut into the > legitimate rights of another. Internal migration ('imperialism' to some) > in Spain has made all AutonomIas linguistically mixed. It is fun to > speak Anzaluz with the taxistas in Barcelona, and once you get them > going, they will tell you their tale of woes about Catalan linguistic > nationalism. It is not that in Anzaluzia people don't poke fun at the > way NorteNos speak, but at least they don't curtail their civil rights. > These are all subtle details of multilingualism (tho Andaluz is not > recognized as a language). My point remains tho, that once you get in > the midst of ideological nationalist zealotry, science becomes murky. > Best, TG > > ========= > > > On 1/11/2011 9:58 PM, Moore, John wrote: > > Against my better judgement I feel I should add a rejoinder to this; > anything said in this domain is bound to bother many, if not all. The > linguistic situation in Catalunya is, indeed complex. However, to refer to > Catalan as 'liberation' and Spanish (or Castellano) as 'imperial' > over-simplifies. Catalan is, of course, the indigenous language of the > region which was strenuously repressed during the Franco period. Spanish, is > also clearly the national language that was imposed, also during that period. > However, since around the 1950s, there was a significant internal migration > of of Spanish-speaking Andalucians to Catalunya, who formed a > guest-worker-like Spanish-speaking underclass. This leads to the question: > how much of many Catalans' aversion to Spanish is because of historical > repression, and how much is due to old-fashion prejudice against an > under-class? > > > > John > > ________________________________________ > > From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] > On Behalf Of Tom Givon [tgivon at uoregon.edu] > > Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 5:42 PM > > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] teaching foreign languages at an early age > > > > Well, maybe it is also worth mentioning that when you get into > > Catalunia, you get into thick layers of language politics and liberation > > ideology. So sometimes it is not all that easy to tell when the science > > ends and something else begins. Of course, Catalunia is not the only > > place where this can be observed. But once you get into the convoluted > > relations between a dominant/imperial language and an > > indigenous/liberation language, it becomes harder to do simple science. > > People have all kinds of axes to grind. Our earlier discussion last year > > about the Israeli-Arabic situation certainly overlapped with these > > issues. I am not so worried about the oft-subconscious effect of > > socio-linguistic factors on SLA. This should be studied as part of > > science. It is the deliberate ideologs that scare me. Best, TG > > > > "The only hope we have as human beings is to learn each other's languages. Only then can we truly hope to understand one another." Professor Danielle E. Cyr Department of French Studies York University Toronto, ON, Canada, M3J 1P3 Tel. 1.416.736.2100 #310180 FAX. 1.416.736.5924 dcyr at yorku.ca From Elise.Karkkainen at oulu.fi Wed Jan 12 12:57:55 2011 From: Elise.Karkkainen at oulu.fi (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Elise_K=E4rkk=E4inen?=) Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 14:57:55 +0200 Subject: 2nd call for papers: Social Action Formats, Oulu, Finland 17-19 May 2011 Message-ID: (apologies for cross-postings) SECOND CALL FOR PAPERS International workshop "Social Action Formats: Conversational Patterns in Embodied Face-to-Face Interaction" University of Oulu, Finland, 17-19 May 2011 Website: Email: SAF2011 (at) oulu.fi Recently, conversation analysis and other related areas of research have begun to pay serious attention to interaction as fully material and embodied (cf. ICCA10 conference theme "Multimodal Interaction"). We welcome presentations to this international workshop that examine language and body behavior together as complementary aspects of talk-in-interaction, examining how speakers deploy the grammatical, lexico-semantic, prosodic, and embodied practices (gestures, head shakes, gaze and the body) in the moment-by-moment construction of situated social actions (cf. M. Goodwin 1980, C. Goodwin 2000). On this view, language is not an autonomous (grammatical) system, but a set of practices and resources within the sequential organization of social interaction. The workshop specifically aims to explore the notion of 'social action formats', or conversational patterns for routinely enacting particular activities and actions in interaction (Fox 2000, 2007, Ford et al. 2003, Couper-Kuhlen and Thompson 2005, 2008, Curl 2006). Social action formats can be broadly understood as recurrent conversational patterns or turn-constructional formats which originate in the interactional needs of participants in talk-in-interaction, and in which language and embodiment may be variously present. We invite presentations that explore social action formats within and across languages and cultures, by focusing on the complex relations among grammatical form, sequential organization and embodiment. Presenters will have either: 30 minutes for a presentation and 10 minutes for discussion or 40 minutes for a data session: presentation/discussion of research and data The workshop format allows for in-depth exploration of data by the invited speakers, the presenters, and the audience. The workshop has two invited speakers: Professor Cecilia Ford (University of Wisconsin, Madison) Professor Barbara Fox (University of Colorado) Their extensive research on language and social interaction provide a foundation for much current work on positionally sensitive linguistic and embodied practices. The theoretical starting points to naturally occurring interaction in different settings may include conversation analysis, interactional linguistics, multimodal interaction analysis, and related fields of study that use video recordings of social interactions as their data. Possible topics for papers include (but are not limited to) the following: - What are conversational patterns or 'social action formats'? How can we identify and define them? - Do we begin with language (and traditional linguistic and grammatical categories) or with social action when searching for conversational patterns in interaction? - What are the limits of social action formats and their relationship to units such as intonation units, clauses, or constructions with varying degrees of open and fixed slots? - How do the different modalities and the material world figure in the construction of social action formats at the level of single and extended turns at talk? - Are there formats which are constructed only through embodied action? - Does embodiment extend over sequences of social actions and how? If it does, what are the implications for the participants and the organization of interaction? Participation Proposals for papers or data sessions should be submitted as abstracts of about 500 words, including bibliographic references, diagrams and tables. The proposals should be sent as email attachments to by 31 January 2011. Please include the name and affiliation of author(s) and the title of the paper in the abstract. Authors will be notified about acceptance by mid-February 2011. Important deadlines 31 January 2011 - Deadline for the submission of proposals mid-February 2011 - Information about the decisions of the review process 17-19 May 2011 - International workshop Venue Conference center Lasaretti Registration fees There will be no registration fee for the workshop. Organizing committee Project "Social Action Formats" Elise Kärkkäinen Tiina Keisanen Marika Sutinen For further questions please contact the organizers at SAF2011 (at) oulu.fi References Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth and Sandra Thompson 2005. A linguistic practice for retracting overstatements: 'Concessive repair'. In Hakulinen, Auli and Margret Selting (eds.), Syntax and Lexis in Conversation: Studies on the use of linguistic resources in talk-in-interaction. 257-288. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth and Sandra Thompson 2008. On assessing situations and events in conversation: 'Extraposition' and its relatives. Discourse Studies 10(4): 443-467. Curl Traci 2006. Offers of assistance: Constraints on syntactic design. Journal of Pragmatics 38(8), 1257-1280. Ford, Cecilia, Barbara Fox and Sandra Thompson 2003. Social interaction and grammar. In Tomasello, M. (ed.). The new psychology of language. Cognitive and functional approaches to language structure, 119-144. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum. Fox, Barbara 2000. Micro-syntax in conversation. Paper presented at the Interactional Linguistics Conference, Spa. Fox, Barbara 2007. Principles shaping grammatical practices: an exploration. Discourse Studies 9(3): 299-318. Goodwin, Charles 2000. Action and embodiment within situated human interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 32, 1489-1522. Goodwin, Marjorie Harness 1980. Processes of mutual monitoring implicated in the production of description sequences. Sociological Inquiry, 50, 303-317. From tgivon at uoregon.edu Wed Jan 12 13:45:22 2011 From: tgivon at uoregon.edu (Tom Givon) Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 06:45:22 -0700 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: <1294836389.4d2da2a5efaa4@mymail.yorku.ca> Message-ID: Actually, I have always thought that 'talent', or whatever you want to call an inherent/innate variable, was a huge predictive factor in post-puberty SLA. But notice that it is much less relevant in natural child-language acquisition, where everybody becomes fluent fairly quickly, albeit with well-known induividual variation. My own informal cumulative observation over the years has been that ca. 5% of the population can learn a 2nd (or 3rd, or 4th) language fluently popst-puberty. As for the rest, it's a struggle, sheer drudgery. TG ========= On 1/12/2011 5:46 AM, Danielle E. Cyr wrote: > In Canada, an officially bilingual country, many if not most of the French as a > Second Language (FSL) students enrol in these programs for political reasons. > Indeed most of our students are first or second generation immigrants. They > REALLY aim at becoming the "perfect" citizens, thus at becoming bilingual. > > However, all are not equally talented for learning a SL. Some end up at the end > of their undergraduate studies with a middle and high school background of > French core courses and four years in departments of French Studies with very > little command of spoken French and even less of written French. Others come > out brilliantly fluent in both. They all had the same motivation at the onset. > > Once, in a undergraduate course - Linguistics applied to the teaching of FSL (a > course for future FSL teachers)- a student had the idea of having all her > classmates to go through a basic multiple intelligences test. Between 1/3 and > 1/2 of the class had not languaging as their major form of intelligence. > > I was too busy teaching overload during that year and FSL not being my main > research area, I did not think of searching for correlations between the test > results and the student performance in FSL. > > Yet the idea of my message here is that talent is a big factor that is hard to > measure although it has to be taken into account. > > Talmy I agree with you that invoking talent might look like drifting away from > science. However, there must be methodologies for taking it into account: the > heredity factor, family members as role models, broad educational history, etc. > These methodologies should also be used for detecting good (FSL) teachers. I say > so because in the same class I refer to above, more than half of the students > had grand-parents, parents, older siblings, uncles /aunts etc who were also > teachers. > > Excellence in languaging and teaching it might be something partly "gifted" at > birth and reinforce by role models, educational orientations, etc. Science > should find a way to account for that. > > > Best, > Danielle > > > Quoting Tom Givon: > >> I suppose I should have indicated by some graphemic means that I was >> using the terms 'imperial' and 'liberation' tongue in cheek. I think >> they pretty much characterize the ideological position of many of my >> Catalan friends. But as is the case in at least one other region in >> Spain, the ideological/national aspirations of one group cut into the >> legitimate rights of another. Internal migration ('imperialism' to some) >> in Spain has made all AutonomIas linguistically mixed. It is fun to >> speak Anzaluz with the taxistas in Barcelona, and once you get them >> going, they will tell you their tale of woes about Catalan linguistic >> nationalism. It is not that in Anzaluzia people don't poke fun at the >> way NorteNos speak, but at least they don't curtail their civil rights. >> These are all subtle details of multilingualism (tho Andaluz is not >> recognized as a language). My point remains tho, that once you get in >> the midst of ideological nationalist zealotry, science becomes murky. >> Best, TG >> >> ========= >> >> >> On 1/11/2011 9:58 PM, Moore, John wrote: >>> Against my better judgement I feel I should add a rejoinder to this; >> anything said in this domain is bound to bother many, if not all. The >> linguistic situation in Catalunya is, indeed complex. However, to refer to >> Catalan as 'liberation' and Spanish (or Castellano) as 'imperial' >> over-simplifies. Catalan is, of course, the indigenous language of the >> region which was strenuously repressed during the Franco period. Spanish, is >> also clearly the national language that was imposed, also during that period. >> However, since around the 1950s, there was a significant internal migration >> of of Spanish-speaking Andalucians to Catalunya, who formed a >> guest-worker-like Spanish-speaking underclass. This leads to the question: >> how much of many Catalans' aversion to Spanish is because of historical >> repression, and how much is due to old-fashion prejudice against an >> under-class? >>> John >>> ________________________________________ >>> From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] >> On Behalf Of Tom Givon [tgivon at uoregon.edu] >>> Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 5:42 PM >>> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >>> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] teaching foreign languages at an early age >>> >>> Well, maybe it is also worth mentioning that when you get into >>> Catalunia, you get into thick layers of language politics and liberation >>> ideology. So sometimes it is not all that easy to tell when the science >>> ends and something else begins. Of course, Catalunia is not the only >>> place where this can be observed. But once you get into the convoluted >>> relations between a dominant/imperial language and an >>> indigenous/liberation language, it becomes harder to do simple science. >>> People have all kinds of axes to grind. Our earlier discussion last year >>> about the Israeli-Arabic situation certainly overlapped with these >>> issues. I am not so worried about the oft-subconscious effect of >>> socio-linguistic factors on SLA. This should be studied as part of >>> science. It is the deliberate ideologs that scare me. Best, TG >>> >> > > "The only hope we have as human beings is to learn each other's languages. Only > then can we truly hope to understand one another." > > Professor Danielle E. Cyr > Department of French Studies > York University > Toronto, ON, Canada, M3J 1P3 > Tel. 1.416.736.2100 #310180 > FAX. 1.416.736.5924 > dcyr at yorku.ca From amnfn at well.com Wed Jan 12 14:25:17 2011 From: amnfn at well.com (A. Katz) Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 06:25:17 -0800 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: <4D2DB072.9010106@uoregon.edu> Message-ID: It's nice to see people recognizing that there is such a thing as talent, after years of the pretense that all native speakers of a language have equal proficiency, and that everything depends on exposure. However, I think we also have to recognize that the degree of difficulty post puberty in the acquisition of fluency in a new language depends not only on the level of exposure and the specific internal motivation of the learner, but also on the extent to which the new language differs from the languages that learner acquired fluency in, pre-puberty. It can't be very hard to learn Spanish, if you already speak Portuguese, or to pick up Italian if you already speak Spanish, but when the languages are not closely related, and also not typologically similar, it's more of a challenge. I found that picking up Russian post puberty was easy, because somehow there's a structural similarity to Hebrew, but also because I had a good teacher. German was harder to become fluent in, even though it's related to English, and I spoke English fluently. Picking up a tone language in middle age for the very first time is really hard. Sometimes what we think is talent has a little more to do with similarity to a familiar language. We piggy back what we can onto existing structures in the brain, building new ones only when absolutely necessary. --Aya On Wed, 12 Jan 2011, Tom Givon wrote: > > Actually, I have always thought that 'talent', or whatever you want to call > an inherent/innate variable, was a huge predictive factor in post-puberty > SLA. But notice that it is much less relevant in natural child-language > acquisition, where everybody becomes fluent fairly quickly, albeit with > well-known induividual variation. My own informal cumulative observation over > the years has been that ca. 5% of the population can learn a 2nd (or 3rd, or > 4th) language fluently popst-puberty. As for the rest, it's a struggle, sheer > drudgery. TG > > ========= > > > On 1/12/2011 5:46 AM, Danielle E. Cyr wrote: >> In Canada, an officially bilingual country, many if not most of the French >> as a >> Second Language (FSL) students enrol in these programs for political >> reasons. >> Indeed most of our students are first or second generation immigrants. They >> REALLY aim at becoming the "perfect" citizens, thus at becoming bilingual. >> >> However, all are not equally talented for learning a SL. Some end up at the >> end >> of their undergraduate studies with a middle and high school background of >> French core courses and four years in departments of French Studies with >> very >> little command of spoken French and even less of written French. Others >> come >> out brilliantly fluent in both. They all had the same motivation at the >> onset. >> >> Once, in a undergraduate course - Linguistics applied to the teaching of >> FSL (a >> course for future FSL teachers)- a student had the idea of having all her >> classmates to go through a basic multiple intelligences test. Between 1/3 >> and >> 1/2 of the class had not languaging as their major form of intelligence. >> >> I was too busy teaching overload during that year and FSL not being my main >> research area, I did not think of searching for correlations between the >> test >> results and the student performance in FSL. >> >> Yet the idea of my message here is that talent is a big factor that is hard >> to >> measure although it has to be taken into account. >> >> Talmy I agree with you that invoking talent might look like drifting away >> from >> science. However, there must be methodologies for taking it into account: >> the >> heredity factor, family members as role models, broad educational history, >> etc. >> These methodologies should also be used for detecting good (FSL) teachers. >> I say >> so because in the same class I refer to above, more than half of the >> students >> had grand-parents, parents, older siblings, uncles /aunts etc who were also >> teachers. >> >> Excellence in languaging and teaching it might be something partly "gifted" >> at >> birth and reinforce by role models, educational orientations, etc. Science >> should find a way to account for that. >> >> >> Best, >> Danielle >> >> >> Quoting Tom Givon: >> >>> I suppose I should have indicated by some graphemic means that I was >>> using the terms 'imperial' and 'liberation' tongue in cheek. I think >>> they pretty much characterize the ideological position of many of my >>> Catalan friends. But as is the case in at least one other region in >>> Spain, the ideological/national aspirations of one group cut into the >>> legitimate rights of another. Internal migration ('imperialism' to some) >>> in Spain has made all AutonomIas linguistically mixed. It is fun to >>> speak Anzaluz with the taxistas in Barcelona, and once you get them >>> going, they will tell you their tale of woes about Catalan linguistic >>> nationalism. It is not that in Anzaluzia people don't poke fun at the >>> way NorteNos speak, but at least they don't curtail their civil rights. >>> These are all subtle details of multilingualism (tho Andaluz is not >>> recognized as a language). My point remains tho, that once you get in >>> the midst of ideological nationalist zealotry, science becomes murky. >>> Best, TG >>> >>> ========= >>> >>> >>> On 1/11/2011 9:58 PM, Moore, John wrote: >>>> Against my better judgement I feel I should add a rejoinder to this; >>> anything said in this domain is bound to bother many, if not all. The >>> linguistic situation in Catalunya is, indeed complex. However, to refer >>> to >>> Catalan as 'liberation' and Spanish (or Castellano) as 'imperial' >>> over-simplifies. Catalan is, of course, the indigenous language of the >>> region which was strenuously repressed during the Franco period. Spanish, >>> is >>> also clearly the national language that was imposed, also during that >>> period. >>> However, since around the 1950s, there was a significant internal >>> migration >>> of of Spanish-speaking Andalucians to Catalunya, who formed a >>> guest-worker-like Spanish-speaking underclass. This leads to the >>> question: >>> how much of many Catalans' aversion to Spanish is because of historical >>> repression, and how much is due to old-fashion prejudice against an >>> under-class? >>>> John >>>> ________________________________________ >>>> From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] >>> On Behalf Of Tom Givon [tgivon at uoregon.edu] >>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 5:42 PM >>>> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >>>> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] teaching foreign languages at an early age >>>> >>>> Well, maybe it is also worth mentioning that when you get into >>>> Catalunia, you get into thick layers of language politics and liberation >>>> ideology. So sometimes it is not all that easy to tell when the science >>>> ends and something else begins. Of course, Catalunia is not the only >>>> place where this can be observed. But once you get into the convoluted >>>> relations between a dominant/imperial language and an >>>> indigenous/liberation language, it becomes harder to do simple science. >>>> People have all kinds of axes to grind. Our earlier discussion last year >>>> about the Israeli-Arabic situation certainly overlapped with these >>>> issues. I am not so worried about the oft-subconscious effect of >>>> socio-linguistic factors on SLA. This should be studied as part of >>>> science. It is the deliberate ideologs that scare me. Best, TG >>>> >>> >> >> "The only hope we have as human beings is to learn each other's languages. >> Only >> then can we truly hope to understand one another." >> >> Professor Danielle E. Cyr >> Department of French Studies >> York University >> Toronto, ON, Canada, M3J 1P3 >> Tel. 1.416.736.2100 #310180 >> FAX. 1.416.736.5924 >> dcyr at yorku.ca > > From moorej at ucsd.edu Wed Jan 12 18:05:36 2011 From: moorej at ucsd.edu (Moore, John) Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 10:05:36 -0800 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: <4D2D8F9E.5020803@uoregon.edu> Message-ID: For the past three summers, and, I hope, again this summer I take a group of undergraduates to Cadiz on a study abroad program, where I give a course on Spanish dialectology and another on flamenco. I'm pretty sure most students, especially the many Latino Heritage Spanish speakers, probably think Andaluz should be considered a separate language :-) This program is open to all students anywhere, in case anyone may have interested students - we're still accepting applications (shameless self-promotion). John -----Original Message----- From: Tom Givon [mailto:tgivon at uoregon.edu] ... tho Andaluz is not recognized as a language From caterina.mauri at unipv.it Fri Jan 14 09:59:39 2011 From: caterina.mauri at unipv.it (Caterina Mauri) Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2011 10:59:39 +0100 Subject: 2nd call for papers - Pavia, May 2011 - Workshop on "GRADUALNESS IN CHANGE AND ITS RELATION TO SYNCHRONIC VARIATION AND USE" Message-ID: ** WE APOLOGIZE FOR CROSS-POSTING ** ------------------------ International workshop on: "GRADUALNESS IN CHANGE AND ITS RELATION TO SYNCHRONIC VARIATION AND USE" Pavia (Italy), 30-31 May 2011 Workshop URL: https://sites.google.com/site/workshoppavia2011/ ------------------------ DESCRIPTION: The workshop aims to contribute to the discussion on the factors at play in diachronic change and to investigate the relationship between diachronic gradualness and synchronic variation, integrating the current views on linguistic variation and language use. Special attention will be devoted to theoretical and methodological issues concerning i) how the study of language change can benefit from the most recent achievements in linguistic theories and ii) how the explanations of synchronic variation may be found in diachronic processes, discussing whether diachronic gradualness and synchronic variation may be analyzed through the same lenses and by means of the same theoretical instruments. Furthermore, the workshop also wants to address the question of the impact of contact on linguistic change. Language contact may indeed be seen as a special type of synchronic phenomenon that may last in time and may gradually lead to diachronic change, triggering or influencing the development of particular constructions in neighbouring languages. INVITED SPEAKERS: Olga Fischer (University of Amsterdam): ---- Topic: On the role of analogy in processes of language change Béatrice Lamiroy (University of Leuven): ---- Topic: The pace of grammaticalization in Romance languages Graeme Trousdale (University of Edinburgh): ---- Topic: Diachronic construction grammar and gradualness in language change Johan van der Auwera (University of Antwerp): ----- Topic: On diachronic semantic maps The workshop will also accommodate four contributions from the project members (t.b.a) on the effects of contact and interference within the macro-geographic-area of the Mediterranean. CALL FOR PAPERS: Authors are invited to submit a one-page abstract, keeping in mind that the slot for their communication will last 40 min. including discussion. Abstracts should be anonymous and should be sent as attachments in PDF format to: gradualness.workshop at gmail.com. Author(s) name(s) and affiliation should be indicated in the corpus of the e-mail. The abstracts will be anonimously reviewed by two members of the Scientific Committee. Besides theoretical issues, the exam of specific examples and the description of general patterns will also be welcome. Topics of interest include: • what kind of factors trigger the grammaticalization processes • the relation of grammaticalization to other mechanisms of language change such as reanalysis and analogy • the relationship between synchronic variation and grammatical change • the interaction between frequency, entrenchment and use • the possibility of multiple source constructions in language change • the role of language contact in grammatical change • how particular diachronic phenomena may be analyzed in the light of the most recent linguistic theories (e.g. construction grammar) • diachronic explanations for synchronic patterns of variation • ….. IMPORTANT DATES: Deadline for submission: 10 February 2011 Notification of acceptance 10 March 2011 ORGANIZERS AND CONTACT: Anna Giacalone Ramat - annaram (at) unipv.it Caterina Mauri - caterina.mauri (at) unipv.it Piera Molinelli - piera.molinelli (at) unibg.it For any questions and for submissions, please write to gradualness.workshop at gmail.com SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE: Pierluigi Cuzzolin (University of Bergamo), Chiara Fedriani (University of Pavia), Chiara Ghezzi (University of Pavia), Anna Giacalone Ramat (University of Pavia), Gianguido Manzelli (University of Pavia), Caterina Mauri (University of Pavia), Piera Molinelli (University of Bergamo), Paolo Ramat (IUSS Institute), Andrea Sansò (Insubria University - Como), Federica Venier (University of Bergamo) From bischoff.st at gmail.com Fri Jan 14 14:43:05 2011 From: bischoff.st at gmail.com (s.t. bischoff) Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2011 09:43:05 -0500 Subject: Twitter Corpus Message-ID: Hi all, Some of you may find this of interest... http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/suttin-hella-koo-yall-regional-dialects-thrive-on-twitter/28960?sid=wc&utm_source=wc&utm_medium=en Suttin Hella Koo, Y’all: Regional Dialects Thrive on Twitter January 13, 2011, 11:41 am By Marc Parry When people wanted to study language, they used to have two options. They could use a computer to analyze a large body of formal writing, like newspapers. Or they could go out and interview a bunch of people. Now Twitter offers something fresh for researchers interested in the evolution of language: massive amounts of informal written communication. Scientists at Carnegie Mellon University are demonstrating the potential of that data in a study, which has found that regional dialects are thriving on Twitter. In fact, local slang seems to be evolving within the social-media site. From bischoff.st at gmail.com Fri Jan 14 17:16:05 2011 From: bischoff.st at gmail.com (s.t. bischoff) Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2011 12:16:05 -0500 Subject: language technology/presence survey Message-ID: Please forward We are conducting two surveys about endangered languages. One is regarding language use. The other is regarding the relationship between language and technology. Please take a few minutes to visit our website http://users.ipfw.edu/bischofs/ling/langsurvey/survey1home.htmland take the short surveys (10 questions each). Each survey should take 10 to 20 minutes to complete. The surveys are in Spanish and English. Please note participation is voluntary. Participants must be 18 years old. If you have any questions please contact Shannon Bischoff at bischoff [dot] st [at] gmail [dot] com or Rosita Rivera at rositalisa [dot] rivera [at] gmail [dot ] com or Kimberly Santiago at kimberly [dot] santiago [at] upr [dot] edu. The surveys will be available indefinitely, and results will be added to the website periodically. Thank you for your time. Estamos administrando dos encuestas acerca de lenguajes en peligro de extinción. Uno es relacionado al uso del idioma. El otro es acerca de la relación entre el uso del lenguaje y la tecnología. Por favor, tome unos minutos para visitar nuestro sitio en el web http://users.ipfw.edu/bischofs/ling/langsurvey/survey1homespn.html y conteste la encuesta (10 preguntas cada una). Cada encuesta debe tomar unos 10 a 20 minutos para completar. Las encuestas están disponibles en español y en inglés. Su participación es voluntaria. Los participantes deben ser mayor de 18 años. Si tiene alguna pregunta relacionada con la encuesta, por favor, contacte a Shannon Bischoff a bischoff [dot] st [at] gmail [dot] com o a Rosita L. Rivera a rositalisa [dot] rivera [at] gmail [dot ] com o a Kimberly Santiago a kimberly [dot] santiago [at] upr [dot] edu. Gracias por su tiempo From bischoff.st at gmail.com Sun Jan 16 22:08:52 2011 From: bischoff.st at gmail.com (s.t. bischoff) Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2011 17:08:52 -0500 Subject: Lang Tech Survey: Redux Message-ID: Apparently some folks had difficulty with the English link. It should work now. Please forward We are conducting two surveys about endangered languages. One is regarding language use. The other is regarding the relationship between language and technology. Please take a few minutes to visit our website http://users.ipfw.edu/bischofs/ling/langsurvey/survey1home.html and take the short surveys (10 questions each). Each survey should take 10 to 20 minutes to complete. The surveys are in Spanish and English. Please note participation is voluntary. Participants must be 18 years old. If you have any questions please contact Shannon Bischoff at bischoff [dot] st [at] gmail [dot] com or Rosita Rivera at rositalisa [dot] rivera [at] gmail [dot ] com or Kimberly Santiago at kimberly [dot] santiago [at] upr [dot] edu. The surveys will be available indefinitely, and results will be added to the website periodically. Thank you for your time. Estamos administrando dos encuestas acerca de lenguajes en peligro de extinción. Uno es relacionado al uso del idioma. El otro es acerca de la relación entre el uso del lenguaje y la tecnología. Por favor, tome unos minutos para visitar nuestro sitio en el web http://users.ipfw.edu/bischofs/ling/langsurvey/survey1homespn.html y conteste la encuesta (10 preguntas cada una). Cada encuesta debe tomar unos 10 a 20 minutos para completar. Las encuestas están disponibles en español y en inglés. Su participación es voluntaria. Los participantes deben ser mayor de 18 años. Si tiene alguna pregunta relacionada con la encuesta, por favor, contacte a Shannon Bischoff a bischoff [dot] st [at] gmail [dot] com o a Rosita L. Rivera a rositalisa [dot] rivera [at] gmail [dot ] com o a Kimberly Santiago a kimberly [dot] santiago [at] upr [dot] edu. Gracias por su tiempo From jrubba at calpoly.edu Mon Jan 17 03:08:07 2011 From: jrubba at calpoly.edu (Johanna Rubba) Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2011 19:08:07 -0800 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I began studying Arabic in my mid-20's. I used a book from the old "Teach Yourself" series, which presented Classical Arabic, I think. Later, I lived in Tunisia for four years. I began using Tunisian Arabic for many everyday encounters after I had been there for about 2.5 years. By my fourth year there strangers would ask me if I was from Algeria or some other Arabic-speaking country. My communicative range was, of course, pretty narrow, since I operated within a pretty restricted domain of experience (I used English, French, or German for most purposes), but it struck me that my accent and grammar were good enough for people to ask me that question. The biggest challenge, was, of course, the vocabulary, but I still had a good memory then! I studied German for 7 years, from sophomore year of high school to senior year of college, and then lived in Germany from '76 to '78. Within four or so months, my comprehension was very good. A year or so in, people thought I was a native speaker; I came back with influence from the local dialect (Mainz). On a good day, I can still fool people, although I'm losing word genders, and that's a giveaway. I have, however, found French extremely difficult, from the point of view of both pronunciation and grammar -- more difficult than Arabic, believe it or not. Still, if I hit the right balance between effort and relaxation, my French pronunciation can be pretty good. I don't think there's any doubt that some people have a talent for learning other languages, even in adulthood. I was raised monolingual English (though I did learn to speak Cat). I think one's talent can also be concentrated in one area over another -- pronunciation is particularly easy for me. I consider it an inborn talent (no brag). I'd have to disagree with the idea that learning a Germanic language like German is easier for an English speaker than a less Germanic or less Indo-European language. A lot of German words are obvious -- Buch, Hand, Mann, gut -- but, in many, if not most, cases, sound change or semantic shift obscures the connection; this is compounded, of course, by English's massive loss of Germanic words and adoption of thousands of French, Latin, and Greek words. 'Oak' and 'Eich,' 'Zeit' and 'tide,' 'treiben' and 'drive,' 'tragen' and 'draw' are all recoverable only if you can undo the sound changes and are familiar with the Old English lexicon. Then there's all that inflection! When I taught German as a TA at UCSD, my students just did not *get* case marking. Their minds were blown by the fact that changing a 'reversible' sentence's word order would not change who did what to whom. It was always their weakest point. Dr. Johanna Rubba, Ph. D. Professor, Linguistics Linguistics Minor Advisor English Dept. Cal Poly State University San Luis Obispo San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 Ofc. tel. : 805-756-2184 Dept. tel.: 805-756-2596 Dept. fax: 805-756-6374 E-mail: jrubba at calpoly.edu URL: http://cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba From amnfn at well.com Mon Jan 17 13:59:11 2011 From: amnfn at well.com (A. Katz) Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 05:59:11 -0800 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: <1F735A99-96F0-4310-8B6F-96D66C4E863C@calpoly.edu> Message-ID: Johanna, German and English are bad examples of "similar" languages, because despite the genetic relationship, they are very different structurally, and so the only thing that is helpful for English speakers in German are a few stray lexical cognates. That doesn't help achieve grammatical fluency. Sometimes two languages can have some degree of structural similarity and not be genetecally related at all (at least in any way that's attested.) I started studying Russian in college, as a minor. I was able to speed through the beginning material really fast, because something about Russian was very familiar. I'd never spoken any other Slavic language, and yet the syntax more or less made sense, and I had no trouble putting together a sentence that didn't sound strange. The accent was also easy to pick up. Some things, like case and aspect, were not as familiar, but not hard to learn. After only about two years of study, I could converse and pass myself off as, if not exactly a "Russian", a Ukrainian. ;-> At the time, I was an adult, and I considered myself to be "talented" at languages. Most people who knew me thought so, too. I got a degree in foreign languages, with a concentration in French and a minor in Russian and German. Then I went to law school and didn't do anything with languages for about twelve years, then went back to grad school, got a Ph.D. in linguistics, and eventually a job teaching in Taiwan. I went there believing that I was good at languages, and that I would be fluent in a matter of months. It didn't work out that way. Here are some of the factors that may have made the difference: * I was thirty-eight when I arrived. I think brain plasticity changes over time, and someone who is able to pick something up fast at eighteen or twenty or even twenty-eight isn't as good at it at thrity-eight or forty. * I had a full time job and no time to play. I didn't socialize outside the workplace or explore after hours. I was too exhausted. * Eventually I had a baby to take care of as well as a job, as well as old business in the states. * Mandarin is very different from the languages I had known previously. It wasn't a superficial fit with some other language I knew. It was my first tone language, and I could not seem to open a new category for tone, even though I could mimic the sounds well. These are some of the factors that go in to making someone appear to be "talented" or not at language. For whatever it's worth, I did not speak Mandarin like an American, and nothing about the way I used it suggested that to the locals. Instead, one merchant asked me if I was Korean! I don't know much about Catalan, but I am wondering if there might not be some grammatical or areal feautures of the language that might make Arabic not that hard to learn, if you already speak Cat. After all, Spanish had some Arabic influence in it in general, and I imagine that all languages spoken on the Iberian peninsula have Semitic influences from both the moorish conquests and the earlier Carthaginian occupation. When we are talented at something, there is usually a reason for it, even if we don't know what that reason is. Chances are it has more to do with function, and less to do with labels. Best, --Aya http://hubpages.com/hub/How-to-Learn-a-Foreign-Language-Issues-in-Second-Language-Acquisition-and-Pedagogy http://hubpages.com/hub/The-Once-and-Future-Nanny On Sun, 16 Jan 2011, Johanna Rubba wrote: > I began studying Arabic in my mid-20's. I used a book from the old "Teach > Yourself" series, which presented Classical Arabic, I think. Later, I lived > in Tunisia for four years. I began using Tunisian Arabic for many everyday > encounters after I had been there for about 2.5 years. By my fourth year > there strangers would ask me if I was from Algeria or some other > Arabic-speaking country. My communicative range was, of course, pretty > narrow, since I operated within a pretty restricted domain of experience (I > used English, French, or German for most purposes), but it struck me that my > accent and grammar were good enough for people to ask me that question. The > biggest challenge, was, of course, the vocabulary, but I still had a good > memory then! > > I studied German for 7 years, from sophomore year of high school to senior > year of college, and then lived in Germany from '76 to '78. Within four or so > months, my comprehension was very good. A year or so in, people thought I was > a native speaker; I came back with influence from the local dialect (Mainz). > On a good day, I can still fool people, although I'm losing word genders, and > that's a giveaway. > > I have, however, found French extremely difficult, from the point of view of > both pronunciation and grammar -- more difficult than Arabic, believe it or > not. Still, if I hit the right balance between effort and relaxation, my > French pronunciation can be pretty good. > > I don't think there's any doubt that some people have a talent for learning > other languages, even in adulthood. I was raised monolingual > English (though I did learn to speak Cat). I think one's talent can also be > concentrated in one area over another -- pronunciation is particularly easy > for me. I consider it an inborn talent (no brag). > > I'd have to disagree with the idea that learning a Germanic language like > German is easier for an English speaker than a less Germanic or less > Indo-European language. A lot of German words are obvious -- Buch, Hand, > Mann, gut -- but, in many, if not most, cases, sound change or semantic shift > obscures the connection; this is compounded, of course, by English's massive > loss of Germanic words and adoption of thousands of French, Latin, and Greek > words. 'Oak' and 'Eich,' 'Zeit' and 'tide,' 'treiben' and 'drive,' 'tragen' > and 'draw' are all recoverable only if you can undo the sound changes and are > familiar with the Old English lexicon. Then there's all that inflection! When > I taught German as a TA at UCSD, my students just did not *get* case marking. > Their minds were blown by the fact that changing a 'reversible' sentence's > word order would not change who did what to whom. It was always their weakest > point. > > Dr. Johanna Rubba, Ph. D. > Professor, Linguistics > Linguistics Minor Advisor > English Dept. > Cal Poly State University San Luis Obispo > San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 > Ofc. tel. : 805-756-2184 > Dept. tel.: 805-756-2596 > Dept. fax: 805-756-6374 > E-mail: jrubba at calpoly.edu > URL: http://cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba > > > From danielrr2 at gmail.com Mon Jan 17 15:01:37 2011 From: danielrr2 at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Daniel_Ria=F1o?=) Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 16:01:37 +0100 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: The influence of Arabic over modern Spanish is amazingly scarce, specially considering the centuries of Moorish presence in the Iberian Peninsula. Probably even less over Catalan. The identifiable influence of other Semitic languages over Modern Spanish (outside toponymy and modern borrowings) is almost zero. Almost all the influence of Arabic on Modern Spanish affects the vocabulary, and even there, the quantity of words of Arabic origin in the common modern vocabulary is surprisingly small, probably around one or (at most) two hundreds, mostly restricted to substantives, and almost all of them belonging to a small number of semantic fields: water and irrigation, warfare, local institutions, building, horses, some crafts, and specially plants and food. Most educated Spanish speakers identify the "al" element at the beginning of many words with an Arabic etymology, with or without reason (usually with). A good number of scientific terms entered the Spanish vocabulary via the arabic scholars, most of them of Greek origin. There's one expresion of Arabic origin ("ojala", "God Willing") that Spanish-speaking people use vey often. With much philological pain it has been collected a list of almost 4,000 words of Arabic origin used in documents written in Spanish at some time, but most of them are words out of use, often terms to designate aspects of Islamic life. There is very little of Arabic in modern Spanish morphology: an -i suffix used almost only with Arabic (or muslim-) related realia ("nazarí") and maybe an "a" causative prefix (as in "acalorar") still productive. Most phonetic and syntactical phenomena that have been attributed to Arabic influence, and there's not much of them, are best (and usually) explained otherwise. Daniel P.S. The influence of Berber languages over all romance languages of the Iberian Peninsula is much smaller, limited to local lexical borrowings in some small locations. 2011/1/17 A. Katz > > I don't know much about Catalan, but I am wondering if there might not be > some grammatical or areal feautures of the language that might make Arabic > not that hard to learn, if you already speak Cat. After all, Spanish had > some Arabic influence in it in general, and I imagine that all languages > spoken on the Iberian peninsula have Semitic influences from both the > moorish conquests and the earlier Carthaginian occupation. > >> >> From dcyr at yorku.ca Mon Jan 17 15:22:22 2011 From: dcyr at yorku.ca (Danielle E. Cyr) Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 10:22:22 -0500 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: <1F735A99-96F0-4310-8B6F-96D66C4E863C@calpoly.edu> Message-ID: Thanks Jo for your language learning narrative. It really interesting and enlightening. Ii is also an incentive to add mine to our conversation. I was born in an Acadian family of New Richmond in the Gaspé Peninsula (Gaspesie) and thus raised in that variety of French. Both my parents were children of teachers (my paternal grandmother an elementary school teacher and my maternal grandfather a teacher’s college teacher). This means that we were speaking a less archaic variety of Acadian French than other children around us. I have to add that New Richmond was then, and is still a bilingual town with 20% English speakers and 80% French Speakers. I learnt my first English with NYC Long Island kids who came with their parents every year to spend the summer months in a log cabin close to our house. By the age of ten I was able to converse in English with a definite Long Island accent. My adult relatives used to burst in laughter when hearing me saying that I spoke like a Yankee. During teenage I then I socialized with New Richmond local anglophones and my yankee accent shifted towards the Gaspé Peninsula regional accent (a mix of canadianized Irish and Scottish accents I would say). Then the Québec Independence movement arose and, in its wake all my generation got into the idea that speaking English was a betrayal to the cause. So my English went dormant. Meanwhile I was sent to a boarding school to do what was called in Québec a « cours classique », i.e. eight years of classics and humanities starting in G8. I then did a lot of English grammar and a bit of English literature + eight years of Latin and six years of Old Greek. On the side with a classmate we bought each a Assimil German and taught ourselves enough German. so After two years I met some German tourists and I could carry a small conversation with them, to my astonishment. After a B.A. in linguistics I did a M.A. on tense and aspect in pre-classical Latin, I then spent a year in Tuscany and taugh myself Italian from a book. It was very easy mostly because I could use my French apply backward Latin to French historical phonetics to it and hit the right Italian words. It was also easy because I lived in the Tuscan countryside and the neighbours spoke nothing else than Italian (Tuscan variety). When I came back to Québec I enrolled in Italian courses at the university level. When I first opened my mouth in the class the teacher laughed and said that I spoke Italian like a Tuscan peasant. Anyway, I passed all levels of Italian and even received an award from the Swiss Embassy for the best student of Italian in Canada! When I went back to Tuscany, however, my good neighbours said that my grammar had improved but my accent was impoverished ... Meanwhile I enrolled in Inuktitut, Innu (Algonquian) and German at university level. I started to teach myself Swedish with a book and tapes. Some times at the end of the day my brain was so full of foreign languages that I could hardly read the French advertisments in the bus I was taking for my ride home. Anyway I passed all the exams that allowed me to go and study in Germany and I could start to think in Inuktitut, Innu and Swedish One year into my doctoral (I was then 39) I went to do my coursework at Stockholm University (with Östen Dahl and Ake Viberg). Getting there I could understand about 75% of what was said in Swedish. I suppose I could have started to speak right away but I was a bit shy and all the Swedes spoke such a beautiful English that there seemed to me no way I could try my poor Swedish on these great people. Also, because I was a Canadian people took for granted that English was my first language so they wanted to take the opportunity to practice their English with me. That is how MY English got a lot better in my first year in Sweden because I learnt a lot more English from the Swedes than THEY ever learnt from me! And, consequently, my English accent shifted again from the Yankee-Gaspé variety to something a bit more British à la Swedish. It is only after the first year, however, and having made a lot of friends that I became quite fluent in Swedish I believe. During my first summer in Scandinavia I went to immerse myself in Finnish intensive courses for three weeks. I found Finnish very easy. In the first place I was used to declensions because of Latin and Inuktitut, in the second place Finns get so excited that somebody want to learn their language that they are highly collaborative. Each Finn turns into a private teacher when you try talking to them. Third, at that time back in 1987 not a lot of them spoke English so Finnish was the only way to communicate. Or else it would have had to be Russian or German but I never told them that I spoke German. The pronunciation is quite easy except for the fact that one has to get used to put the stress on the first syllable instead of on the last like in French. After three weeks of learning Finnish, on the eve of my departure I was able to go to a taxi driver, explain to him that my boarding place (a student residence) had no phone connection before 7 :00 a.m. and that I needed to catch a train at 6 :30 so could he come and fetch me a 6 :00 the morning after. All in Finnish after three weeks only. Well, guess what, he had understood me because he was there the morning after! After my PH.D I went to teach at York University in Toronto, where I still am. I had an Australian roommate for almost three years, thus my English accent shifted again to become a bit Australian. And I became much more fluent than ever. I watched every possible BBC Masterpiece theater, read most of the 19th century English classics, and worked hard at improving my vocabulary. Sometimes English speaking people would wonder where I was from with my 19th century vocabulary and my unique blend of accents overlaying a slight French background. Now, when in England I can shift from North American English to British English without any difficulty. >>From 1995 to 1997 I took a leave of absence and went for two years as school principal in the Mi’gmaq reserve of Listuguj. I had already started to teach myself the language from a teaching grammar and tapes. Getting there however, I found that the linguistic situation was very tensed. Only people above 50 still spoke. Those of them who worked in the school were so resentful that they refrained from speaking in Mi’gmaq in front of me in case I would learn from them. I was also forbidden to interview people and conduct any kind of research, not to mention to publish. So I did not learn much. It is then that I launched the sentence : « Trying to learn a dying language is like trying to learn dancing with a dying dancer. » So, in the end, I conclude that learning foreign languages successfully depends on many factors : talent, love of languages and cultures, good teachers, helping context, age, good teaching materials among others. The distance from one’s own first language is easily compensated by how nurturing the context is, how helpful the native speakers are and how good the teaching material is. If all these conditions are satisfied, the more languages one learns, the easier they become to learn. The Pope is a good case. Based on my personal experience also, retaining foreign languages is a matter of practice of course; yet once a language has become dormant, it is quite easy to reawake through practice in context. When I go back to either Italy, Germany, Sweden of Finland, it takes about 4-5 days before I can resume speaking and regaining fluency at a satisfying pace. I also find that improving one’s fluency is possible at any age if there is need or interest. This is my story, Danielle By the way, I want to thank all my Swedish and Finnish friends and colleagues who have been so patient and generous towards me with their time and knowledge. "The only hope we have as human beings is to learn each other's languages. Only then can we truly hope to understand one another." Professor Danielle E. Cyr Department of French Studies York University Toronto, ON, Canada, M3J 1P3 Tel. 1.416.736.2100 #310180 FAX. 1.416.736.5924 dcyr at yorku.ca From jrubba at calpoly.edu Mon Jan 17 17:42:42 2011 From: jrubba at calpoly.edu (Johanna Rubba) Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 09:42:42 -0800 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Aya, It is a bit mysterious why some languages come easier to some people than others. I spoke about French. I finally understood French grammar after reading Knud Lambrecht's book on information structure. It suddenly made sense. I will always have trouble with the pronunciation, though. I think it is a problem that you would find sensible -- French doesn't use reduced vowels, or many central vowels, while both English and Arabic do (at least the Arabic dialect I learned), and German to some extent. Spanish and French don't, and I find that I have to "stretch" to move among the cardinal vowel points. I could probably master this if I practiced a lot, but I haven't had or taken much opportunity to do so. I've never tried a tone language. I've always found them scary. I did take a few classes on Standard Arabic, taught by some nuns (!) in Tunis. I couldn't stick with the class, because of its location and transportation/time issues, but we did get into some pretty complex grammar and I did find it oddly logical and familiar. It is pretty different from the dialect I was learning; I certainly never got into the grammar concepts with the dialect that I did in those few classes of Standard. Like what you experienced with Russian. Anyway ... thanks for writing back. Dr. Johanna Rubba, Ph. D. Professor, Linguistics Linguistics Minor Advisor English Dept. Cal Poly State University San Luis Obispo San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 Ofc. tel. : 805-756-2184 Dept. tel.: 805-756-2596 Dept. fax: 805-756-6374 E-mail: jrubba at calpoly.edu URL: http://cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba From amnfn at well.com Mon Jan 17 18:00:42 2011 From: amnfn at well.com (A. Katz) Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 10:00:42 -0800 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Daniel, For purposes of ease of learning as a new language, Arabic and Spanish, or Arabic and Catalan, need not have any elements that can be properly traced to historical borrowing or genetic common origin. All that is required is that there be some genuine similarity in their present forms of whatever origin -- even mere coincidence. For instance, the definite articles are superficially similar. Are they related? Most would say "no." The Spanish comes from Latin ille and the Arabic from maybe hal-, but "el" and "al" seem very similar, and this is not just a sound similarity, but a similarity of function. After all, not every language has a definite article, let alone one that sounds like that. As Jo said, it can all seem very mysterious why one language seems easy to learn, and the ease is often a subconscious assessment of similarity that has nothing to do with the rigors of genetic classification. --Aya On Mon, 17 Jan 2011, Daniel Ria�o wrote: > The influence of Arabic over modern Spanish is amazingly scarce, specially > considering the centuries of Moorish presence in the Iberian Peninsula. > Probably even less over Catalan. The identifiable influence of other Semitic > languages over Modern Spanish (outside toponymy and modern borrowings) is > almost zero. > > Almost all the influence of Arabic on Modern Spanish affects the vocabulary, > and even there, the quantity of words of Arabic origin in the common modern > vocabulary is surprisingly small, probably around one or (at most) two > hundreds, mostly restricted to substantives, and almost all of them > belonging to a small number of semantic fields: water and irrigation, > warfare, local institutions, building, horses, some crafts, and specially > plants and food. Most educated Spanish speakers identify the "al" element at > the beginning of many words with an Arabic etymology, with or without reason > (usually with). A good number of scientific terms entered the Spanish > vocabulary via the arabic scholars, most of them of Greek origin. There's > one expresion of Arabic origin ("ojala", "God Willing") that > Spanish-speaking people use vey often. > > With much philological pain it has been collected a list of almost 4,000 > words of Arabic origin used in documents written in Spanish at some time, > but most of them are words out of use, often terms to designate aspects of > Islamic life. > > There is very little of Arabic in modern Spanish morphology: an -i suffix > used almost only with Arabic (or muslim-) related realia ("nazar�") and > maybe an "a" causative prefix (as in "acalorar") still productive. > > Most phonetic and syntactical phenomena that have been attributed to Arabic > influence, and there's not much of them, are best (and usually) explained > otherwise. > > > Daniel > > P.S. The influence of Berber languages over all romance languages of the > Iberian Peninsula is much smaller, limited to local lexical borrowings in > some small locations. > > > 2011/1/17 A. Katz > >> >> I don't know much about Catalan, but I am wondering if there might not be >> some grammatical or areal feautures of the language that might make Arabic >> not that hard to learn, if you already speak Cat. After all, Spanish had >> some Arabic influence in it in general, and I imagine that all languages >> spoken on the Iberian peninsula have Semitic influences from both the >> moorish conquests and the earlier Carthaginian occupation. >> >>> >>> > From danielrr2 at gmail.com Mon Jan 17 21:01:33 2011 From: danielrr2 at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Daniel_Ria=F1o?=) Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 22:01:33 +0100 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dear Aya, 2011/1/17 A. Katz > > For purposes of ease of learning as a new language, Arabic and Spanish, or > Arabic and Catalan, need not have any elements that can be properly traced > to historical borrowing or genetic common origin. All that is required is > that there be some genuine similarity in their present forms of whatever > origin -- even mere coincidence. > > This is very true, in many senses. Castillian speakers, for instance, find much more easy to speak in Greek than they do in French, since the phonetics of Greek and Castillian are similar, whilst the repertory of French vocals, just to mention one point, is too exuberant for the typical Castillian taste. Spanish learners of Greek with just some proficiency may pass as native talkers of some dialectal variety of Greek, while for French, well you've heard about the Spanish cow... But, to me, the hardest part for learning a language is vocabulary, and the irregularities of a given grammar. For that reason my experience is that, for a Spaniard, it may be easier to progress in Tagalog than it is in, say, Russian, in spite of lingustic affiliations. As for Arabic, (and you can take this with a grain of salt) I don't think Spaniards (speakers of Spanish or Catalan) have any advantage in learning it (or the reverse); Phonetics are not specially close (and vocal length pose always an issue for Spaniards), and there are huge differences in syntax, of course, just to mention two points. Without much in the vocabulary to help, is no wonder that Arabic immigrants in Spain seem to find it harder to master the language than many immigrants coming from other non Indoeuropean communities (there may be many additional explanations, of course). > For instance, the definite articles are superficially similar. Are they > related? Most would say "no." The Spanish comes from Latin ille and the > Arabic from maybe hal-, but "el" and "al" seem very similar, and this is not > just a sound similarity, but a similarity of function. After all, not every > language has a definite article, let alone one that sounds like that. > > Hmmmm, I think the relation between the Arabic and Spanish articles a little bit far-fetched. Of course they share similarities (both are articles after all) but the Spanish article is, as you say, the old story of ille-finds-a-new-meaning for its old function & falls in love & become engaged, so common in most Romance languages, with no special phonetic changes calling for a foreign explanation. There are big differences in use, too! It is a bit like the similarities between "potamos" and "Potomac", which doesn't explain the Corinthian columns of the Capitol (I think). And articles have so little phonetic substance that chance may play a big role in apparent similarities. best, Daniel > As Jo said, it can all seem very mysterious why one language seems easy to > learn, and the ease is often a subconscious assessment of similarity that > has nothing to do with the rigors of genetic classification. > > > --Aya > > > > > On Mon, 17 Jan 2011, Daniel Riańo wrote: > > The influence of Arabic over modern Spanish is amazingly scarce, specially >> considering the centuries of Moorish presence in the Iberian Peninsula. >> Probably even less over Catalan. The identifiable influence of other >> Semitic >> languages over Modern Spanish (outside toponymy and modern borrowings) is >> almost zero. >> >> Almost all the influence of Arabic on Modern Spanish affects the >> vocabulary, >> and even there, the quantity of words of Arabic origin in the common >> modern >> vocabulary is surprisingly small, probably around one or (at most) two >> hundreds, mostly restricted to substantives, and almost all of them >> belonging to a small number of semantic fields: water and irrigation, >> warfare, local institutions, building, horses, some crafts, and specially >> plants and food. Most educated Spanish speakers identify the "al" element >> at >> the beginning of many words with an Arabic etymology, with or without >> reason >> (usually with). A good number of scientific terms entered the Spanish >> vocabulary via the arabic scholars, most of them of Greek origin. There's >> one expresion of Arabic origin ("ojala", "God Willing") that >> Spanish-speaking people use vey often. >> >> With much philological pain it has been collected a list of almost 4,000 >> words of Arabic origin used in documents written in Spanish at some time, >> but most of them are words out of use, often terms to designate aspects of >> Islamic life. >> >> There is very little of Arabic in modern Spanish morphology: an -i suffix >> used almost only with Arabic (or muslim-) related realia ("nazarí") and >> maybe an "a" causative prefix (as in "acalorar") still productive. >> >> Most phonetic and syntactical phenomena that have been attributed to >> Arabic >> influence, and there's not much of them, are best (and usually) explained >> otherwise. >> >> >> Daniel >> >> P.S. The influence of Berber languages over all romance languages of the >> Iberian Peninsula is much smaller, limited to local lexical borrowings in >> some small locations. >> >> >> 2011/1/17 A. Katz >> >> >>> I don't know much about Catalan, but I am wondering if there might not be >>> some grammatical or areal feautures of the language that might make >>> Arabic >>> not that hard to learn, if you already speak Cat. After all, Spanish had >>> some Arabic influence in it in general, and I imagine that all languages >>> spoken on the Iberian peninsula have Semitic influences from both the >>> moorish conquests and the earlier Carthaginian occupation. >>> >>> >>>> >>>> From john at research.haifa.ac.il Mon Jan 17 21:51:52 2011 From: john at research.haifa.ac.il (john at research.haifa.ac.il) Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 23:51:52 +0200 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: As an extreme example of this, there are a number of things about Chinese which made it feel particularly easy to me as an English speaker. It has no grammatical gender (as a native English speaker, when I'm speaking a language like Hebrew or Spanish I not infrequently 'forgot' about which grammatical gender the antecedent of a pronoun is and use the wrong one--of course I know in principle which one to use but in running conversation I just don't pay much attention because I don't instinctively track the gender of inanimate objects). It has diphthongs galore, many sounding very similar to English diphthongs. The serial verb constructions usually wind up decomposing and expressing meaning in a way parallel to English verb plus particle combinations. Same dummy for existential constructions ('you' in Chinese). Even the /r/ sounds much like English /r/ (obviously more frication, but the same general idea). (On the other hand, writing is another matter...). Of course these are just coincidences, but it's still very helpful. John Quoting "A. Katz" : > Daniel, > > For purposes of ease of learning as a new language, Arabic and Spanish, or > Arabic and Catalan, need not have any elements that can be properly traced > to historical borrowing or genetic common origin. All that is required is > that there be some genuine similarity in their present forms of whatever > origin -- even mere coincidence. > > For instance, the definite articles are superficially similar. Are they > related? Most would say "no." The Spanish comes from Latin ille and the > Arabic from maybe hal-, but "el" and "al" seem very similar, and this is > not just a sound similarity, but a similarity of function. After all, not > every language has a definite article, let alone one that sounds like > that. > > As Jo said, it can all seem very mysterious why one language seems easy to > learn, and the ease is often a subconscious assessment of similarity that > has nothing to do with the rigors of genetic classification. > > > --Aya > > > > On Mon, 17 Jan 2011, Daniel Riaסo wrote: > > > The influence of Arabic over modern Spanish is amazingly scarce, specially > > considering the centuries of Moorish presence in the Iberian Peninsula. > > Probably even less over Catalan. The identifiable influence of other > Semitic > > languages over Modern Spanish (outside toponymy and modern borrowings) is > > almost zero. > > > > Almost all the influence of Arabic on Modern Spanish affects the > vocabulary, > > and even there, the quantity of words of Arabic origin in the common modern > > vocabulary is surprisingly small, probably around one or (at most) two > > hundreds, mostly restricted to substantives, and almost all of them > > belonging to a small number of semantic fields: water and irrigation, > > warfare, local institutions, building, horses, some crafts, and specially > > plants and food. Most educated Spanish speakers identify the "al" element > at > > the beginning of many words with an Arabic etymology, with or without > reason > > (usually with). A good number of scientific terms entered the Spanish > > vocabulary via the arabic scholars, most of them of Greek origin. There's > > one expresion of Arabic origin ("ojala", "God Willing") that > > Spanish-speaking people use vey often. > > > > With much philological pain it has been collected a list of almost 4,000 > > words of Arabic origin used in documents written in Spanish at some time, > > but most of them are words out of use, often terms to designate aspects of > > Islamic life. > > > > There is very little of Arabic in modern Spanish morphology: an -i suffix > > used almost only with Arabic (or muslim-) related realia ("nazarם") and > > maybe an "a" causative prefix (as in "acalorar") still productive. > > > > Most phonetic and syntactical phenomena that have been attributed to Arabic > > influence, and there's not much of them, are best (and usually) explained > > otherwise. > > > > > > Daniel > > > > P.S. The influence of Berber languages over all romance languages of the > > Iberian Peninsula is much smaller, limited to local lexical borrowings in > > some small locations. > > > > > > 2011/1/17 A. Katz > > > >> > >> I don't know much about Catalan, but I am wondering if there might not be > >> some grammatical or areal feautures of the language that might make Arabic > >> not that hard to learn, if you already speak Cat. After all, Spanish had > >> some Arabic influence in it in general, and I imagine that all languages > >> spoken on the Iberian peninsula have Semitic influences from both the > >> moorish conquests and the earlier Carthaginian occupation. > >> > >>> > >>> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ This message was sent using IMP, the Webmail Program of Haifa University From john at research.haifa.ac.il Mon Jan 17 22:05:13 2011 From: john at research.haifa.ac.il (john at research.haifa.ac.il) Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 00:05:13 +0200 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: About the similarity of Spanish and Greek--I know Spanish but not Greek, and sometimes if I hear people speaking Greek from a distance and I can't hear the words very well, I think that it's Spanish until I get closer and hear the actual words. The same thing happens with English and Dutch (at least if the Dutch speaker doesn't say the numerous uvular fricatives with much vehemence), but of course these are very closely related languages. John Quoting Daniel Riaסo : > Dear Aya, > > 2011/1/17 A. Katz > > > > > For purposes of ease of learning as a new language, Arabic and Spanish, or > > Arabic and Catalan, need not have any elements that can be properly traced > > to historical borrowing or genetic common origin. All that is required is > > that there be some genuine similarity in their present forms of whatever > > origin -- even mere coincidence. > > > > This is very true, in many senses. Castillian speakers, for instance, find > much more easy to speak in Greek than they do in French, since the phonetics > of Greek and Castillian are similar, whilst the repertory of French vocals, > just to mention one point, is too exuberant for the typical Castillian > taste. Spanish learners of Greek with just some proficiency may pass as > native talkers of some dialectal variety of Greek, while for French, well > you've heard about the Spanish cow... > > But, to me, the hardest part for learning a language is vocabulary, and the > irregularities of a given grammar. For that reason my experience is that, > for a Spaniard, it may be easier to progress in Tagalog than it is in, say, > Russian, in spite of lingustic affiliations. As for Arabic, (and you can > take this with a grain of salt) I don't think Spaniards (speakers of Spanish > or Catalan) have any advantage in learning it (or the reverse); Phonetics > are not specially close (and vocal length pose always an issue for > Spaniards), and there are huge differences in syntax, of course, just to > mention two points. Without much in the vocabulary to help, is no wonder > that Arabic immigrants in Spain seem to find it harder to master the > language than many immigrants coming from other non Indoeuropean communities > (there may be many additional explanations, of course). > > > > For instance, the definite articles are superficially similar. Are they > > related? Most would say "no." The Spanish comes from Latin ille and the > > Arabic from maybe hal-, but "el" and "al" seem very similar, and this is > not > > just a sound similarity, but a similarity of function. After all, not every > > language has a definite article, let alone one that sounds like that. > > > > > Hmmmm, I think the relation between the Arabic and Spanish articles a little > bit far-fetched. Of course they share similarities (both are articles after > all) but the Spanish article is, as you say, the old story of > ille-finds-a-new-meaning for its old function & falls in love & become > engaged, so common in most Romance languages, with no special phonetic > changes calling for a foreign explanation. There are big differences in use, > too! It is a bit like the similarities between "potamos" and "Potomac", > which doesn't explain the Corinthian columns of the Capitol (I think). And > articles have so little phonetic substance that chance may play a big role > in apparent similarities. > > best, > > Daniel > > > > As Jo said, it can all seem very mysterious why one language seems easy to > > learn, and the ease is often a subconscious assessment of similarity that > > has nothing to do with the rigors of genetic classification. > > > > > > --Aya > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 17 Jan 2011, Daniel Riaֵ„o wrote: > > > > The influence of Arabic over modern Spanish is amazingly scarce, specially > >> considering the centuries of Moorish presence in the Iberian Peninsula. > >> Probably even less over Catalan. The identifiable influence of other > >> Semitic > >> languages over Modern Spanish (outside toponymy and modern borrowings) is > >> almost zero. > >> > >> Almost all the influence of Arabic on Modern Spanish affects the > >> vocabulary, > >> and even there, the quantity of words of Arabic origin in the common > >> modern > >> vocabulary is surprisingly small, probably around one or (at most) two > >> hundreds, mostly restricted to substantives, and almost all of them > >> belonging to a small number of semantic fields: water and irrigation, > >> warfare, local institutions, building, horses, some crafts, and specially > >> plants and food. Most educated Spanish speakers identify the "al" element > >> at > >> the beginning of many words with an Arabic etymology, with or without > >> reason > >> (usually with). A good number of scientific terms entered the Spanish > >> vocabulary via the arabic scholars, most of them of Greek origin. There's > >> one expresion of Arabic origin ("ojala", "God Willing") that > >> Spanish-speaking people use vey often. > >> > >> With much philological pain it has been collected a list of almost 4,000 > >> words of Arabic origin used in documents written in Spanish at some time, > >> but most of them are words out of use, often terms to designate aspects of > >> Islamic life. > >> > >> There is very little of Arabic in modern Spanish morphology: an -i suffix > >> used almost only with Arabic (or muslim-) related realia ("nazarֳ­") and > >> maybe an "a" causative prefix (as in "acalorar") still productive. > >> > >> Most phonetic and syntactical phenomena that have been attributed to > >> Arabic > >> influence, and there's not much of them, are best (and usually) explained > >> otherwise. > >> > >> > >> Daniel > >> > >> P.S. The influence of Berber languages over all romance languages of the > >> Iberian Peninsula is much smaller, limited to local lexical borrowings in > >> some small locations. > >> > >> > >> 2011/1/17 A. Katz > >> > >> > >>> I don't know much about Catalan, but I am wondering if there might not be > >>> some grammatical or areal feautures of the language that might make > >>> Arabic > >>> not that hard to learn, if you already speak Cat. After all, Spanish had > >>> some Arabic influence in it in general, and I imagine that all languages > >>> spoken on the Iberian peninsula have Semitic influences from both the > >>> moorish conquests and the earlier Carthaginian occupation. > >>> > >>> > >>>> > >>>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ This message was sent using IMP, the Webmail Program of Haifa University From gregor.perko at guest.arnes.si Tue Jan 18 11:48:27 2011 From: gregor.perko at guest.arnes.si (Gregor Perko) Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 12:48:27 +0100 Subject: Journal call for papers: Morphology Message-ID: Call for papers The journal Linguistica, published by the Faculty of Arts, University of Ljubljana (Slovenia), will devote its 51th issue (2011) to internal and external boundaries of morphology. Guest editor: Gregor Perko, Faculty of Arts, University of Ljubljana Over the past decades, morphology is witnessing some fundamental changes. One of the issues frequently addressed by several linguists concerns "peripheral", "marginal" or "irregular" phenomena that do not belong to the "core" of morphology. See, among others, Zwicky and Pullum (1987), Thornton and Doleschal (eds) (2000), Dressler et al. (eds) (2005), Fradin, Plénat and Montermini (2009). Some of the topics proposed are: - the relation(s) between the central, prototypical or grammatical morphology, and marginal, expressive or extragrammatical morphology; - issues related to typologies of morphological processes; - morphology from the perspective of dichotomies: langue/parole, competence/performance; - boundary between morphology and syntax; - boundary between inflectional and derivational morphology; - morphology and the boundaries between lexis and grammar; - boundaries between morphology and phraseology/idioms; - morphological productivity vs. morphological creativity; - morphology and lexicalization. This list is not exhaustive and all papers aimed at investigating internal and external boundaries of morphology are welcome. Authors wishing to participate are invited to submit the title and the abstract (100 - 200 words) of their article as an email attachment (Word or PDF) at linguistica at ff.uni-lj.si by 31th March 2011. Each abstract will be evaluated by two members of the reviewing committee. Notifications of acceptance of submitted abstracts will be sent to the authors in mid April. Articles and abstracts can be written in English, German, Spanish, French or Italian. The accepted articles should not exceed 30 000 characters, including spaces. Deadline for abstracts: 31 March 2011 Deadline for sending in accepted papers: 30 June 2011 July to September 2011: evaluation of articles by members of the reading committee October, November 2011: submission of revised versions and proofs References : Doleschal, Ursula/Anna M. THORNTON (eds) (2000) Extragrammatical and Marginal Morphology. München: Lincom Europa. Dressler, Wolfgang U. et al. (eds) (2005) Morphology and its Demarcations. Amsterdam/Philadephia: John Benjamins. Fradin, Bernard/Fabio Montermini/Marc PlÉnat (2009) In: B. Fradin/F. Kerleroux/M. Plénat (eds.), Aperçus de morphologie du français. Paris: Presses universitaires de Vincennes, 21-45. Zwicky, Arnold M./Geofrey K. Pullum (1987) In: J. Aske et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the Thirteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic Society. Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistic Society, 330-340. From jrubba at calpoly.edu Tue Jan 18 15:28:29 2011 From: jrubba at calpoly.edu (Johanna Rubba) Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 07:28:29 -0800 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: <1295301913.4d34bd1910ef9@webmail.haifa.ac.il> Message-ID: Spanish and Greek may sound similar in part because they both have an unusual /s/. I don't know how to describe it phonetically; it sounds "mushier" than /s/ in other IE languages. It's one of the things I find attractive about both languages. They don't sound similar to me otherwise; especially since Greek has theta (I'm used to American Spanish, not Castilian) and /ks/. Dr. Johanna Rubba, Ph. D. Professor, Linguistics Linguistics Minor Advisor English Dept. Cal Poly State University San Luis Obispo San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 Ofc. tel. : 805-756-2184 Dept. tel.: 805-756-2596 Dept. fax: 805-756-6374 E-mail: jrubba at calpoly.edu URL: http://cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba From john at research.haifa.ac.il Tue Jan 18 15:48:17 2011 From: john at research.haifa.ac.il (john at research.haifa.ac.il) Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 17:48:17 +0200 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: The /s/ you're talking about is used in northern Spain (it's from Basque). It feels to me like the difference from a 'normal' /s/ is that the passage for frication is formed more with the blade of the tongue than the tip. I don't think the /s/ for other Spanish speakers is in any way unusual (except that in many dialects it gets elided or forms a geminate with the following consonant in syllable-final position, but I don't think that's what you're talking about). One thing Spanish and Greek have in common is that both have voiced bilabial, dental, and velar fricatives (although the allophonic distribution of them is different), I personal don't know any other language with all three of these. But I don't know whether this is why they sound similar to me--maybe other people don't feel this way. John Quoting Johanna Rubba : > Spanish and Greek may sound similar in part because they both have an > unusual /s/. I don't know how to describe it phonetically; it sounds > "mushier" than /s/ in other IE languages. It's one of the things I > find attractive about both languages. They don't sound similar to me > otherwise; especially since Greek has theta (I'm used to American > Spanish, not Castilian) and /ks/. > > Dr. Johanna Rubba, Ph. D. > Professor, Linguistics > Linguistics Minor Advisor > English Dept. > Cal Poly State University San Luis Obispo > San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 > Ofc. tel. : 805-756-2184 > Dept. tel.: 805-756-2596 > Dept. fax: 805-756-6374 > E-mail: jrubba at calpoly.edu > URL: http://cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ This message was sent using IMP, the Webmail Program of Haifa University From ariel.spigelman at usyd.edu.au Tue Jan 18 16:29:49 2011 From: ariel.spigelman at usyd.edu.au (Ariel Spigelman) Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 13:29:49 -0300 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: <1295365697.4d35b64144348@webmail.haifa.ac.il> Message-ID: An interesting view of certain Spanish phoneticians (e.g. Marti?nez-Celdra?n 2004) is that the bilabial, dental, and velar fricatives in Spanish shouldn't be classified as fricatives at all, lacking as they do a "turbulent airstream...which is required for any fricative" (p. 203). He rather classifies them as a kind of 'spirantized approximant'. Eugenio Marti'nez-Celdra'n (2004). Problems in the classification of approximants. /Journal of the International Phonetic Association/, 34, pp 201-210 On 18/01/11 12:48 PM, john at research.haifa.ac.il wrote: > The /s/ you're talking about is used in northern Spain (it's from Basque). > It feels to me like the difference from a 'normal' /s/ is that the passage for > frication is formed more with the blade of the tongue than the tip. > I don't think the /s/ for other Spanish speakers is in any way unusual (except > that in many dialects it gets elided or forms a geminate with the following > consonant in syllable-final position, but I don't think that's what you're > talking about). One thing Spanish and Greek have in common is that both have > voiced bilabial, dental, and velar fricatives (although the allophonic > distribution of them is different), I personal don't know any other language > with all three of these. But I don't know whether this is why they sound > similar to me--maybe other people don't feel this way. > John > > > > > Quoting Johanna Rubba: > >> Spanish and Greek may sound similar in part because they both have an >> unusual /s/. I don't know how to describe it phonetically; it sounds >> "mushier" than /s/ in other IE languages. It's one of the things I >> find attractive about both languages. They don't sound similar to me >> otherwise; especially since Greek has theta (I'm used to American >> Spanish, not Castilian) and /ks/. >> >> Dr. Johanna Rubba, Ph. D. >> Professor, Linguistics >> Linguistics Minor Advisor >> English Dept. >> Cal Poly State University San Luis Obispo >> San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 >> Ofc. tel. : 805-756-2184 >> Dept. tel.: 805-756-2596 >> Dept. fax: 805-756-6374 >> E-mail:jrubba at calpoly.edu >> URL:http://cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba >> >> >> >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > This message was sent using IMP, the Webmail Program of Haifa University From bischoff.st at gmail.com Tue Jan 18 17:13:06 2011 From: bischoff.st at gmail.com (s.t. bischoff) Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 12:13:06 -0500 Subject: LSA: Functionalism Panel Message-ID: Hi all, There were a number of requests at the LSA to make the power points from the talks and Tom's handout available online. They can now be accessed as PDFs at the following link: http://users.ipfw.edu/bischofs/ling/LSA_2011/lsa.html Thanks to all the folks that showed up on Sunday morning. We had a very good crowd...perhaps some folks will consider proposing similar panels for the next LSA annual conference. Cheers, Shannon From tgivon at uoregon.edu Tue Jan 18 19:42:03 2011 From: tgivon at uoregon.edu (Tom Givon) Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 12:42:03 -0700 Subject: Dog Might Provide Clues on How Language Is Acquired - NYTimes.com Message-ID: Before we all go wild patting ourselves on the shoulder for being able to learn a 2nd (and 3rd, and 4th) language, I thought the enclosed link might furnish some amusement, maybe even perspective. The SL-learner in question is native speaker of Canine, a language many of us have been struggling to acquire for many years with, alas, less-than-perfect results. Cheers, TG http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/18/science/18dog.html?_r=1&emc=eta1 From amnfn at well.com Tue Jan 18 20:04:55 2011 From: amnfn at well.com (A. Katz) Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 12:04:55 -0800 Subject: Dog Might Provide Clues on How Language Is Acquired - NYTimes.com In-Reply-To: <4D35ED0B.1070502@uoregon.edu> Message-ID: I don't think there is any doubt that dogs who live with humans comprehend much of what is said around them. I've known dogs who were bilingual who understood things that were said, when other humans in the room who did not speak the language in question didn't understand. The problem with all this evidence? It's anecdotal. There is the opposite problem with the experiment described here. In this type of set-up, all the evidence is predictable and rote. The experiment described in the NYTimes article did not teach the dog to comprehend by rote: the dog was trained to obey by rote. The problem with this kind of experiment is that it doesn't seem to distinguish comprehension from obedience. The way the dog proves comprehension is by fetching an item. (The assumption being, if he didn't fetch it, we have no proof of comprehension.) As an aside, all the words for "objects" in the experiment are really being used as commands. Sue Savage-Rumbaugh made a very big point that if a chimp uses "apple" to ask for an apple, this does not mean that he understands that apple also refers to an apple in a different kind of context. It's easy to get chimps in experimental settings to ask for things, and it's easy to get dogs (of certain breeds) to fetch things, but what is not easy is to prove comprehension when uncoupled from obedience or someone asking someone else to do something. I don't doubt that the dog in question understands the words. I'm just saying there is something wrong with our standards of proof. --Aya On Tue, 18 Jan 2011, Tom Givon wrote: > > > Before we all go wild patting ourselves on the shoulder for being able to > learn a 2nd (and 3rd, and 4th) language, I thought the enclosed link might > furnish some amusement, maybe even perspective. The SL-learner in question is > native speaker of Canine, a language many of us have been struggling to > acquire for many years with, alas, less-than-perfect results. Cheers, TG > > > > http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/18/science/18dog.html?_r=1&emc=eta1 > > From phonosemantics at earthlink.net Tue Jan 18 21:02:28 2011 From: phonosemantics at earthlink.net (jess tauber) Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 16:02:28 -0500 Subject: Dog Might Provide Clues on How Language Is Acquired - NYTimes.com Message-ID: Perhaps distinct word classes are a late development in the evolution of language- there are still discussions of issues about the distinction yet lurking about in the literature. Some languages let most nouns act as verbs, or vice versa; in others the inflectable verb class has shrunk to almost nothing. Carved in stone? Or just evolved there? For a retriever, 'getting' is the most used verblike notion in the context, so perhaps its presence is assumed by the animal? How would a pointer fare? Jess Tauber From grvsmth at panix.com Wed Jan 19 01:05:11 2011 From: grvsmth at panix.com (Angus B. Grieve-Smith) Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 20:05:11 -0500 Subject: Dog Might Provide Clues on How Language Is Acquired - NYTimes.com In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On 1/18/2011 3:04 PM, A. Katz wrote: > I don't think there is any doubt that dogs who live with humans > comprehend much of what is said around them. I've known dogs who were > bilingual who understood things that were said, when other humans in > the room who did not speak the language in question didn't understand. > The problem with all this evidence? It's anecdotal. Yes. Also from an anecdotal standpoint, there's Gary Larsen's famous critique of people's expectations about animal language: http://s173.photobucket.com/albums/w57/spn_imgs/?action=view¤t=blahblah.jpg&newest=1 -- -Angus B. Grieve-Smith grvsmth at panix.com From keithjohnson at berkeley.edu Thu Jan 20 16:50:19 2011 From: keithjohnson at berkeley.edu (Keith Johnson) Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 08:50:19 -0800 Subject: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages Message-ID: Hi Funksters, My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article raises a couple of issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered languages unit? Keith Johnson http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html From amnfn at well.com Thu Jan 20 17:38:15 2011 From: amnfn at well.com (A. Katz) Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 09:38:15 -0800 Subject: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Why not? If it helps preserve the language, and the speakers approve, then there should be no problem. On Thu, 20 Jan 2011, Keith Johnson wrote: > Hi Funksters, > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article raises a > couple of > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered languages > unit? > > Keith Johnson > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > From wsmith at csusb.edu Thu Jan 20 18:07:07 2011 From: wsmith at csusb.edu (Wendy Smith) Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 10:07:07 -0800 Subject: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages In-Reply-To: Message-ID: This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > Hi Funksters, > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > raises a couple of > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > languages > unit? > > Keith Johnson > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > > From lkpinette at comcast.net Thu Jan 20 18:15:49 2011 From: lkpinette at comcast.net (Luke Kundl Pinette) Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 03:15:49 +0900 Subject: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi Keith, I'm of two minds about this. Now the Rosetta Stone is not a good program. And I will first confess that I've had a vendetta against the Rosetta Stone because I feel that its entire marketing strategy, from premise to conclusion consists of propagating myths about language instruction: 1. Children learn languages effortlessly. 2. You can learn a language like a child does. 3. You should learn a language like a child does. 4. The Rosetta Stone's program resembles the way a child learns language. 5. Ergo you can learn a language effortlessly using the Rosetta Stone. Nonetheless it's a very effective marketing strategy. Most people have heard of the Rosetta Stone, whether they study languages or not, and quite a lot of them believe it's the best program on the market. It's not the unjustified self-promotion over the competition which bothers me (that's the whole point of marketing), but rather the fact that it fits too well with the attitude Americans tend to have about language learning. I've met far too many people who claim that they simply don't have the knack for learning languages, as their efforts while they were in school, at the local community college, and yes--the Rosetta Stone show. Having studied with some of said people in college, I've observed that most students in language classes believe that less than five hours a week in a language class or on a computer is sufficient to learn a language, and that if they can't they're simply unable to learn a language. In the time I studied Spanish and Arabic in a classroom, I could not find one person willing to speak the language outside of class except for native speakers. I've heard praise for a couple other programs (which I won't name), however the people who use these programs, myself included, recognize that they are a tool and not a teacher. Rosetta Stone claims to be a teacher, and I've never met a person who's tried Rosetta Stone and claimed success in it. It's either a bad program (usually heard from someone who eventually learned the language through more conventional means) or it's the user's own fault (from someone who hasn't). Of course the easiest way to learn a language is to immerse yourself, but endangered languages tend to be in a situation similar to that I experienced in the United States, where native speakers of the target language are hard to come by outside of formal classes. In situations like that it's absolutely essential to practice with other non-native speakers, which requires both will and resources. And the question is whether the Rosetta Stone's contribution to the latter outweighs any detrimental effect on the former. It's well established in psychology that when people find something hard and think that it will always be hard, they tend to give up. I've long suspected that telling hearing a program makes language easy, and then finding that it's not would encourage people to give up more easily than going into it with the assumption it will be a challenge. And while this would be a bad thing when we're talking Americans learning Arabic, it's a great deal worse when we're talking a language on the verge of extinction. But language is quite different from most of human psychology, and I don't think there's been any research on language specifically. The kind of people who buy the Rosetta Stone expecting a brain-translator-slug may not be the kind of people who are all that determined to learn a language in the first place, and the people who use the program to learn an endangered language will go into it with different expectations. They won't be using it because they think it's an easy way to attract Italian models, but rather because it's what's available. And I'd expect that these students will be using it as a tool and not a teacher. Language revitalization takes a good deal more dedication and savvy than learning one of the world's major tongues. The Rosetta Stone does record actual native speakers, and in that sense, when your options are limited, it would almost certainly be a useful tool. I'm not sure if there are other language companies who have endangered languages departments. Personally I'd like to see pretty much any company except the Rosetta Stone doing this, but even despite my dislike of the company I'm inclined to say it's probably beneficial on the balance. Regards, Luke On 1/21/11 1:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > Hi Funksters, > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > raises a couple of > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > languages > unit? > > Keith Johnson > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > > From tgivon at uoregon.edu Thu Jan 20 18:16:32 2011 From: tgivon at uoregon.edu (Tom Givon) Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 11:16:32 -0700 Subject: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already has. TG ============== On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > Hi Funksters, > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > raises a couple of > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > languages > unit? > > Keith Johnson > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > From mischlerj at nsula.edu Thu Jan 20 18:19:39 2011 From: mischlerj at nsula.edu (James J. Mischler) Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 12:19:39 -0600 Subject: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages In-Reply-To: <4D3879CB.6010503@csusb.edu> Message-ID: Wendy and all, I wonder if *any* program has been found, via controlled research study, to aid in the learning of a language. Wendy said that there are programs that are better than Rosetta Stone; what are they? Is there any data to support the view that the program(s) did in fact aid learning? Jim Mischler Assistant Professor Language & Communication Northwestern State University of Louisiana Natchitoches, LA -----Original Message----- From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [mailto:funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Wendy Smith Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:07 PM To: Keith Johnson Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > Hi Funksters, > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > raises a couple of > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > languages > unit? > > Keith Johnson > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > > From wsmith at csusb.edu Thu Jan 20 18:29:35 2011 From: wsmith at csusb.edu (Wendy Smith) Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 10:29:35 -0800 Subject: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages In-Reply-To: <285D95BE552E5A4F9C45A549C5763B3635D9480115@ex-mbx1.nsula.edu> Message-ID: no language programs can effect language acquisition or learning (in the case of the adult brain we say 'learning,' not acquisition). I have been using Pimsleur which I have found to be quite good in providing the sounds of the language and some useful conversation. It is still repetition and memory, which does not equate SLA. I am now repeating these dialogues in my sleep (!) but when I try to speak to a native speaker, it all goes out the window. I am counting on immersion--I will be in Belarus for 4-5 months as of Monday. (I know of no controlled study of any program--but it doesn't mean they haven't been done--I would check ACTFL for that information). On 1/20/2011 10:19 AM, James J. Mischler wrote: > Wendy and all, > > I wonder if *any* program has been found, via controlled research study, to aid in the learning of a language. Wendy said that there are programs that are better than Rosetta Stone; what are they? Is there any data to support the view that the program(s) did in fact aid learning? > > Jim Mischler > Assistant Professor > Language& Communication > Northwestern State University of Louisiana > Natchitoches, LA > > > -----Original Message----- > From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [mailto:funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Wendy Smith > Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:07 PM > To: Keith Johnson > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > > This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, > and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child > acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no > direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be > patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the > same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the > materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women > are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who > works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training > or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will > learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint > Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is > virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car > or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction > to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. > > On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >> Hi Funksters, >> >> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >> raises a couple of >> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >> languages >> unit? >> >> Keith Johnson >> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >> >> >> >> From bischoff.st at gmail.com Thu Jan 20 18:31:36 2011 From: bischoff.st at gmail.com (s.t. bischoff) Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 13:31:36 -0500 Subject: FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: The issue of Rosetta Stone and endangered languages seems ripe for controversy. The relationship can be easily exploited by Rosetta Stone. If a community provides data and RS controls the data the community may find itself at the mercy of the RS. For example, as I understand it, often RS provides the "service" to create the resources for "free". They charge a nominal fee for access to the first level lessons. However, that fee increases with advancing levels. Like most minority groups, endangered language communities are easy targets for exploitation (see the recent Coushatta casino scam). Additionally, there is a good deal of controversy regarding weather or not RS actually works. As I understand it, some researchers have done research on RS and the conclusion have been that it doesn't work (linguists working the software can judge for themselves)...the results cannot be released due to litigation. In short, these types of relationships can't help but raise some concerns...I wonder if communities (both endangered language and academic) are always savvy enough to protect themselves. Of course greater detail of the actual relationships that RS creates would be helpful in terms of understanding. On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 1:00 PM, wrote: > Send FUNKNET mailing list submissions to > funknet at mailman.rice.edu > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/funknet > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > funknet-request at mailman.rice.edu > > You can reach the person managing the list at > funknet-owner at mailman.rice.edu > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of FUNKNET digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > (Keith Johnson) > 2. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > (A. Katz) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 08:50:19 -0800 > From: Keith Johnson > Subject: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes > > Hi Funksters, > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > raises a couple of > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > languages > unit? > > Keith Johnson > > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 09:38:15 -0800 (PST) > From: "A. Katz" > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > To: Keith Johnson > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: > Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed > > Why not? If it helps preserve the language, and the speakers approve, then > there should be no problem. > > > > On Thu, 20 Jan 2011, Keith Johnson wrote: > > > Hi Funksters, > > > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article raises > a > > couple of > > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > languages > > unit? > > > > Keith Johnson > > > > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > > > > > End of FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 > *************************************** > From amnfn at well.com Thu Jan 20 19:12:17 2011 From: amnfn at well.com (A. Katz) Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 11:12:17 -0800 Subject: FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I think the issue of whether the RS program works is quite marginal to the question of whether RS or some other commercial program can help to preserve the resources of a language community for future generations. Let's grant for a moment that RS -- or any other computerized program -- cannot in and of itself cause someone to acquire a language that he cannot speak already. The question is: how are speakers of this language going to be damaged by the program? Surely their language isn't going to be "taken away from them." What they know, they know. What they are able to transmit to the next generation by natural means, they will. So what is really at issue is: will this help them to preserve language resources now in danger of being lost? Will it help keep the language on ice, in case of language death, so that it can be revived later, by people willing to put in the effort? Are there other issues? Is there any fear that these resources will not be available to future generations of would be speakers? Is someone concerned that the language will get "patented" and only RS will have the license to use it? --Aya From dubois at linguistics.ucsb.edu Fri Jan 21 01:48:25 2011 From: dubois at linguistics.ucsb.edu (John Du Bois) Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 17:48:25 -0800 Subject: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages In-Reply-To: <4D387C00.2050307@uoregon.edu> Message-ID: I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in an endangered language community. For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that work with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the last speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far as indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, and linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this specific legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for whatever reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on their language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language community, this can have a big negative impact. It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and to work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies for mitigating any negative effects. Jack Du Bois On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: > > > Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my > Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. > However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the > Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more > vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already > has. TG > > ============== > > > On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >> Hi Funksters, >> >> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >> raises a couple of >> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >> languages >> unit? >> >> Keith Johnson >> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >> >> >> > -- *************************************************** John W. Du Bois, Professor Department of Linguistics 3607 South Hall University of California, Santa Barbara Santa Barbara, California 93106-3100 USA *************************************************** From lkpinette at comcast.net Fri Jan 21 02:34:14 2011 From: lkpinette at comcast.net (Luke Kundl Pinette) Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:34:14 +0900 Subject: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages In-Reply-To: <285D95BE552E5A4F9C45A549C5763B3635D9480115@ex-mbx1.nsula.edu> Message-ID: James, So this gets us a bit off topic, but again I of course have to comment. I don't know about a controlled study. Before I decided on pragmatics I considered doing my thesis on second-language learning strategies, and did a fair bit of research to this end, and I didn't see any formal paper specifically mentioning language programs. I'd suspect there's something, but these programs are all designed so differently that a negative result on one wouldn't apply across programs. As I said earlier, no program can be a teacher. Until we design a program that can pass the Turing test, even if we imagine a program that can hold a conversation, it won't be able to teach subtle distinctions in semantics and pragmatics. Consider the difference in spoken English between "Whaddaya doing?" "Whacha doing?" and "Whacha up to?" and consider the fact that not only English, but every language has myriads of minor distinctions like this. There's three programs I know by name; I've had all of them recommended to me by friends and acquaintances: Rosetta Stone, Pimsleur, and Before You Know It. Rosetta Stone as I said was so awful out of the box, contradicting everything I knew about language learning and good pedagogy that I promptly returned it to my brother (who had been foolish enough to buy it and of course never used it). The two programs I've used are Pimsleur and Before You Know It. I like Pimsleur, it teaches grammar from the outset, and starts the way you would start a language class, and teaches you to speak in sentences from the start. I think it would be more useful if you have someone to practice with--the scripts it uses are actually pretty good, but if you don't have someone it's just rote memorization. And it's definitely not a quick way to learn a language. And if you know linguistics, and have broken down the morphology of the sentence less than ten minutes in, it becomes a bit tedious. It's still something I happily recommend to people I know, though I usually suggest they get it from the library, unless the site is having a sale (as I think they sometimes do). On the other hand if you've traveled much to a foreign country without speaking the language, you'll know that pointing, money, and a calculator will get you pretty far. A few words, social niceties like "hello," "thank you," and "I'm sorry" will get you even further, and if you're going right now it's useful to be able to pick which words you need. Before You Know It, which an acquaintance described as a set of computerized flashcards, is useful in this respect. I don't know anyone who's used the paid version, or even what that includes, but the free version is quite extensive. My biggest complaint is that the pronunciations given are generally not the way the speaker would say it. It's like if you paid an English speaker to ennunciate words, and they said "what-are-you-do-ing" "want-to" "ve-ge-ta-ble" and "com-for-ta-ble" every time. For example Koreans don't say "annyeonghaseyo" for "hello," but "anyeseyo" or even "yeseyo." And "thank you" is not "kamsahamnida" but "kamsamnida." Nonetheless, these are useful words. The Koreans understood what I was saying, even if they always cracked up when they heard me, and since I knew what the words sounded like in context I was able to figure out how they were actually pronounced. But if the paid version contained clips of the way people actually say the words, it would be well worth paying for. I think most of the lesser known products on the market are similar to one or the other of these. I've seen other computer programs which are flashcard based, and I inherited a few German records and tapes from my grandfather when he moved to Florida, and they're similar to Pimsleur. (Though I like Pimsleur's layout better.) That said though, when you view language programs as a tool to help study, you might as well ask whether there's any data to support the view that textbooks in fact aid learning. It depends on the program, the student, and the use the latter makes of the former. Regards, Luke On 1/21/11 3:19 AM, James J. Mischler wrote: > Wendy and all, > > I wonder if *any* program has been found, via controlled research study, to aid in the learning of a language. Wendy said that there are programs that are better than Rosetta Stone; what are they? Is there any data to support the view that the program(s) did in fact aid learning? > > Jim Mischler > Assistant Professor > Language& Communication > Northwestern State University of Louisiana > Natchitoches, LA > > > -----Original Message----- > From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [mailto:funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Wendy Smith > Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:07 PM > To: Keith Johnson > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > > This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, > and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child > acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no > direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be > patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the > same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the > materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women > are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who > works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training > or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will > learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint > Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is > virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car > or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction > to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. > > On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >> Hi Funksters, >> >> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >> raises a couple of >> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >> languages >> unit? >> >> Keith Johnson >> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >> >> >> >> From lkpinette at comcast.net Fri Jan 21 04:09:16 2011 From: lkpinette at comcast.net (Luke Kundl Pinette) Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 13:09:16 +0900 Subject: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages In-Reply-To: <4D38E5E9.9030402@linguistics.ucsb.edu> Message-ID: The question is, why is the Rosetta Stone doing this anyways? According to the article, Rosetta doesn't actually distribute the programs, just makes them. It doesn't say if it's turning a profit, a loss or selling them at cost (though the last is what one would infer from the article). If they're doing it for the PR, they'll probably try not to screw over native communities too badly, though of course you know what they say about the pavement used on the road to hell. If they're in it for the money, I wouldn't put it past them to add a clause like that. Then we've got a legal question on our hands. It's essentially monopolistic practice, particularly if they make a pattern of deliberately blocking competition for language programs in endangered languages. I suspect that if they were to try it, it would be possible to find some lawyer willing to pursue the issue, and when taken to court they would lose. It would certainly cause a lot of trouble in the meantime though. It sounds like nobody on this list has any illusions about the company. It's depressing to see that a linguist like Krauss, and one in such an important position has bought into Rosetta Stone's marketing, but again, unless another company steps up it doesn't sound like there's any options other than no language program. If Rosetta is not in fact inserting insidious clauses into the agreements with their informants, it's still probably better than nothing. Regards, Luke On 1/21/11 10:48 AM, John Du Bois wrote: > I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage > that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in > an endangered language community. > > For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that > work with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the > last speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far > as indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, > and linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this > specific legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for > whatever reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on > their language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language > community, this can have a big negative impact. > > It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered > language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and > to work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies > for mitigating any negative effects. > > Jack Du Bois > > On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: >> >> >> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my >> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. >> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the >> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more >> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already >> has. TG >> >> ============== >> >> >> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>> Hi Funksters, >>> >>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>> raises a couple of >>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>> languages >>> unit? >>> >>> Keith Johnson >>> >>> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>> >>> >>> >> > From c.gabrielatos at lancaster.ac.uk Fri Jan 21 11:09:08 2011 From: c.gabrielatos at lancaster.ac.uk (Gabrielatos, Costas) Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 03:09:08 -0800 Subject: Call for papers: Lancaster Postgraduate Conference in Linguistics and English Language Message-ID: THE SIXTH LANCASTER UNIVERSITY INTERNATIONAL POSTGRADUATE CONFERENCE IN LINGUISTICS AND LANGUAGE TEACHING Dear All, We are pleased to announce the Sixth Lancaster University International Postgraduate Conference in Linguistics and English Language (LAEL PG Conference) which will take place at Lancaster University's George Fox building, on Tuesday 12th of July 2011. This one-day conference is designed to give linguistics postgraduates from all research areas an opportunity to present and discuss their research in an informal and intellectually stimulating setting. This year's conference will be opened by Prof. Greg Myers (Lancaster University), and there will be guest plenary lectures by: Prof. Paul Kerswill (Lancaster University) Dr. Johnny Unger (Lancaster University) We invite postgraduate students to submit abstracts for oral and poster presentations on any area of linguistics, theoretical or applied (see below for abstract submission guidelines). Topics Include:   - Cognitive linguistics   - Corpus linguistics   - Critical discourse analysis   - Historical linguistics   - Literacy studies   - Pragmatics/semantics   - Phonetics/phonology   - Second language teaching/learning/assessment   - Sociolinguistics   - Syntax/morphology Stylistics   - Translation studies   - Other: please specify For further information, please visit the website: http://www.lancs.ac.uk/fass/events/laelpgconference/index.htm Key Dates Abstracts must be received by Friday 25 March 2011 Notification of acceptancewill be given on Tuesday 10 May 2011 Hope to hear from you all soon, Helen Faye West Janina Iwaniec Matteo Di Cristofaro Jonathon Adams Ibrahim Efe From tthornes at uca.edu Fri Jan 21 14:14:57 2011 From: tthornes at uca.edu (Tim Thornes) Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 08:14:57 -0600 Subject: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages Message-ID: I would agree with this sentiment as well as with the inherent potential of a company like this to really screw up relationships with members of an endangered language community. I mean, if Rosetta Stone as the "worldwide leader in language learning worldwide (sic)" (http://www.rosettastone.com/backnolang?pc=se2011&cid=se-gg&gclid=CPCPvsm8y6YCFQPsKgodqhCrHA) can't help us, why would I think some nerdy academic with a microphone and a laptop could? As one such, I am as capable as any big company of damaging relationships with community members, and I ought to know better. Is there any expectation that RS does? Best, Tim Tim Thornes, PhD Assistant Professor of Linguistics Department of Writing University of Central Arkansas 201 Donaghey Avenue Conway, Arkansas 72035 USA (501)450-5613 tthornes at uca.edu >>> John Du Bois 01/20/11 7:48 PM >>> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in an endangered language community. For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that work with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the last speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far as indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, and linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this specific legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for whatever reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on their language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language community, this can have a big negative impact. It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and to work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies for mitigating any negative effects. Jack Du Bois On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: > > > Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my > Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. > However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the > Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more > vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already > has. TG > > ============== > > > On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >> Hi Funksters, >> >> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >> raises a couple of >> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >> languages >> unit? >> >> Keith Johnson >> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >> >> >> > -- *************************************************** John W. Du Bois, Professor Department of Linguistics 3607 South Hall University of California, Santa Barbara Santa Barbara, California 93106-3100 USA *************************************************** From munro at ucla.edu Fri Jan 21 15:48:38 2011 From: munro at ucla.edu (Pamela Munro) Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 07:48:38 -0800 Subject: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages In-Reply-To: <4D394082020000870009B3F2@gwia1.uca.edu> Message-ID: All these suggestions are truly scary. Pam Tim Thornes wrote: > I would agree with this sentiment as well as with the inherent potential of a company like this to really screw up relationships with members of an endangered language community. I mean, if Rosetta Stone as the "worldwide leader in language learning worldwide (sic)" (http://www.rosettastone.com/backnolang?pc=se2011&cid=se-gg&gclid=CPCPvsm8y6YCFQPsKgodqhCrHA) can't help us, why would I think some nerdy academic with a microphone and a laptop could? > As one such, I am as capable as any big company of damaging relationships with community members, and I ought to know better. Is there any expectation that RS does? > Best, > Tim > > Tim Thornes, PhD > Assistant Professor of Linguistics > Department of Writing > University of Central Arkansas > 201 Donaghey Avenue > Conway, Arkansas 72035 > USA > (501)450-5613 > tthornes at uca.edu > > >>>> John Du Bois 01/20/11 7:48 PM >>> >>>> > I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage > that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in an > endangered language community. > > For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that work > with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the last > speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far as > indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, and > linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this specific > legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for whatever > reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on their > language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language > community, this can have a big negative impact. > > It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered > language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and to > work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies for > mitigating any negative effects. > > Jack Du Bois > > On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: > >> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my >> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. >> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the >> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more >> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already >> has. TG >> >> ============== >> >> >> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >> >>> Hi Funksters, >>> >>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>> raises a couple of >>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>> languages >>> unit? >>> >>> Keith Johnson >>> >>> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>> >>> >>> >>> > > -- Pamela Munro, Professor, Linguistics, UCLA UCLA Box 951543 Los Angeles, CA 90095-1543 http://www.linguistics.ucla.edu/people/munro/munro.htm From macw at cmu.edu Fri Jan 21 16:30:39 2011 From: macw at cmu.edu (Brian MacWhinney) Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:30:39 -0500 Subject: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages In-Reply-To: <4D3906EC.7030301@comcast.net> Message-ID: Folks, I share your low regard for Rosetta Stone, not so much for what they fail to deliver, but rather for the overstated claims they make. I know a couple of students who have worked with them on internships and, so far, there is no evidence of malicious practices vis a vis native communities. Despite this, I agree that it is likely that communities who collaborate with them will get led down the garden path and end up unwilling to participate later with other, more promising, approaches to language maintenance. But these are freely-formed relations between consenting parties, so nothing can militate against it. Regarding the wider issue of effectiveness of language learning programs, I find it strange that Luke has located nothing on this subject. Back in 1968, Paul Pimsleur already demonstrated the effectiveness of his method of graduated interval recall which is picked up, in an admittedly diluted form, by the current Pimsleur series. There are hundreds of studies distributed across six major journals demonstrating the relatively greater effectiveness of specific components of language instruction, from keyword method to corrective feedback. These effects have been demonstrated in both controlled experiments and, somewhat less convincingly, in classroom and online instruction. Nearly all of my own experimental work is now focused on tests of this type embedded within online tutors. Perhaps what Luke is referring to is the absence of evidence of the overall comparative effectiveness of the big commercial language programs such as Rosetta Stone or Pimsleur. In the cases of such full programs, it is extremely difficult to coordinate a decent experimental test, because it would require buy in from a large group of volunteers across a long period with careful controls for study time and so on. So, I think it is generally better to focus on demonstrations of the effects of individual components of programs, because these can be subject to reasonable experimental control. Of course, all of this leaves the naturalistic methods of language learning out in the cold, and that is wrong. In the end, the best way to advance this field will be to increase automatic data collection during the language learning process, within online, classroom, and naturalistic contexts. This is what I am working on. Regards, -- Brian MacWhinney On Jan 20, 2011, at 11:09 PM, Luke Kundl Pinette wrote: > The question is, why is the Rosetta Stone doing this anyways? According to the article, Rosetta doesn't actually distribute the programs, just makes them. It doesn't say if it's turning a profit, a loss or selling them at cost (though the last is what one would infer from the article). If they're doing it for the PR, they'll probably try not to screw over native communities too badly, though of course you know what they say about the pavement used on the road to hell. > > If they're in it for the money, I wouldn't put it past them to add a clause like that. Then we've got a legal question on our hands. It's essentially monopolistic practice, particularly if they make a pattern of deliberately blocking competition for language programs in endangered languages. I suspect that if they were to try it, it would be possible to find some lawyer willing to pursue the issue, and when taken to court they would lose. It would certainly cause a lot of trouble in the meantime though. > > It sounds like nobody on this list has any illusions about the company. It's depressing to see that a linguist like Krauss, and one in such an important position has bought into Rosetta Stone's marketing, but again, unless another company steps up it doesn't sound like there's any options other than no language program. If Rosetta is not in fact inserting insidious clauses into the agreements with their informants, it's still probably better than nothing. > > Regards, > Luke > > > On 1/21/11 10:48 AM, John Du Bois wrote: >> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage >> that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in >> an endangered language community. >> >> For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that >> work with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the >> last speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far >> as indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, >> and linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this >> specific legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for >> whatever reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on >> their language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language >> community, this can have a big negative impact. >> >> It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered >> language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and >> to work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies >> for mitigating any negative effects. >> >> Jack Du Bois >> >> On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: >>> >>> >>> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my >>> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. >>> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the >>> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more >>> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already >>> has. TG >>> >>> ============== >>> >>> >>> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>>> Hi Funksters, >>>> >>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>>> raises a couple of >>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>>> languages >>>> unit? >>>> >>>> Keith Johnson >>>> >>>> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> > > From phonosemantics at earthlink.net Fri Jan 21 16:33:26 2011 From: phonosemantics at earthlink.net (jess tauber) Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:33:26 -0500 Subject: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages Message-ID: Just minutes ago as I write this, on the television show 'The View', actor Ed Harris brought up his not so successful attempt to use Rosetta Stone, 'that thing you can get', to pick up a little Russian for his movie opening this week- eventually he had to utilize the services of a Bulgarian, in person. Maybe the public isn't so misinformed? Jess Tauber From tgivon at uoregon.edu Fri Jan 21 16:40:02 2011 From: tgivon at uoregon.edu (Tom Givon) Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 09:40:02 -0700 Subject: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages In-Reply-To: <32117937.1295627607528.JavaMail.root@wamui-hunyo.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: They still shell out C-notes by the bushel for this scam. RS does not make their money off satisfied customers, but off poor first-hit suckers. TG ============================ On 1/21/2011 9:33 AM, jess tauber wrote: > Just minutes ago as I write this, on the television show 'The View', actor Ed Harris brought up his not so successful attempt to use Rosetta Stone, 'that thing you can get', to pick up a little Russian for his movie opening this week- eventually he had to utilize the services of a Bulgarian, in person. > > Maybe the public isn't so misinformed? > > Jess Tauber From mithun at linguistics.ucsb.edu Fri Jan 21 16:57:58 2011 From: mithun at linguistics.ucsb.edu (Marianne Mithun) Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 08:57:58 -0800 Subject: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages In-Reply-To: <9A44FA72-E6DF-4498-A4A0-0A4C4E605BD7@cmu.edu> Message-ID: I finally have to weigh in here on another aspect of the issue specifically with respect to endangered languages. For communities in danger of losing their traditional languages, learning the heritage language isn't just about being able to order a meal in a restaurant or book a hotel room. It's often about something much deeper, about appreciating traditional ways of viewing the world, of categorizing concepts, of combining ideas, of interacting. And the Rosetta Stone system is one-size-fits-all. People are essentially asked to translate the model sentences into whatever language is at hand, and the results tend to be close to word-by-word translations. So yes, learners learn how to say 'boy' and 'run'. But they don't learn, for example, that ideas expressed by nouns in English are expressed in language X by verbs. Or that in many languages people don't tend to talk sentences consisting of Noun Verb Noun (or Noun Noun Verb). They don't learn about the glorious elaboration of semantic distinctions or domains that have no counterparts in the model language. They probably won't learn about evidentials. They are unlikely to learn about elaborate aspectual distinctions. They certainly won't learn different patterns of subordination or clause combining. For some situations, that may be fine. Heritage speakers just want to be able to use some phrases in everyday talk. And they don't have the time or interest for that kind of complexity. For others, it sort of defeats the whole purpose. Marianne Mithun --On Friday, January 21, 2011 11:30 AM -0500 Brian MacWhinney wrote: > Folks, > > I share your low regard for Rosetta Stone, not so much for what they > fail to deliver, but rather for the overstated claims they make. I know > a couple of students who have worked with them on internships and, so > far, there is no evidence of malicious practices vis a vis native > communities. Despite this, I agree that it is likely that communities who > collaborate with them will get led down the garden path and end up > unwilling to participate later with other, more promising, approaches to > language maintenance. But these are freely-formed relations between > consenting parties, so nothing can militate against it. Regarding > the wider issue of effectiveness of language learning programs, I find it > strange that Luke has located nothing on this subject. Back in 1968, > Paul Pimsleur already demonstrated the effectiveness of his method of > graduated interval recall which is picked up, in an admittedly diluted > form, by the current Pimsleur series. There are hundreds of studies > distributed across six major journals demonstrating the relatively > greater effectiveness of specific components of language instruction, > from keyword method to corrective feedback. These effects have been > demonstrated in both controlled experiments and, somewhat less > convincingly, in classroom and online instruction. Nearly all of my own > experimental work is now focused on tests of this type embedded within > online tutors. Perhaps what Luke is referring to is the absence of > evidence of the overall comparative effectiveness of the big commercial > language programs such as Rosetta Stone or Pimsleur. In the cases of > such full programs, it is extremely difficult to coordinate a decent > experimental test, because it would require buy in from a large group of > volunteers across a long period with careful controls for study time and > so on. So, I think it is generally better to focus on demonstrations of > the effects of individual components of programs, because these can be > subject to reasonable experimental control. Of course, all of this > leaves the naturalistic methods of language learning out in the cold, and > that is wrong. In the end, the best way to advance this field will be to > increase automatic data collection during the language learning process, > within online, classroom, and naturalistic contexts. This is what I am > working on. > > Regards, > > -- Brian MacWhinney > > On Jan 20, 2011, at 11:09 PM, Luke Kundl Pinette wrote: > >> The question is, why is the Rosetta Stone doing this anyways? According >> to the article, Rosetta doesn't actually distribute the programs, just >> makes them. It doesn't say if it's turning a profit, a loss or selling >> them at cost (though the last is what one would infer from the article). >> If they're doing it for the PR, they'll probably try not to screw over >> native communities too badly, though of course you know what they say >> about the pavement used on the road to hell. >> >> If they're in it for the money, I wouldn't put it past them to add a >> clause like that. Then we've got a legal question on our hands. It's >> essentially monopolistic practice, particularly if they make a pattern >> of deliberately blocking competition for language programs in endangered >> languages. I suspect that if they were to try it, it would be possible >> to find some lawyer willing to pursue the issue, and when taken to court >> they would lose. It would certainly cause a lot of trouble in the >> meantime though. >> >> It sounds like nobody on this list has any illusions about the company. >> It's depressing to see that a linguist like Krauss, and one in such an >> important position has bought into Rosetta Stone's marketing, but again, >> unless another company steps up it doesn't sound like there's any >> options other than no language program. If Rosetta is not in fact >> inserting insidious clauses into the agreements with their informants, >> it's still probably better than nothing. >> >> Regards, >> Luke >> >> >> On 1/21/11 10:48 AM, John Du Bois wrote: >>> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage >>> that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in >>> an endangered language community. >>> >>> For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that >>> work with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the >>> last speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far >>> as indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, >>> and linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this >>> specific legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for >>> whatever reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on >>> their language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language >>> community, this can have a big negative impact. >>> >>> It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered >>> language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and >>> to work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies >>> for mitigating any negative effects. >>> >>> Jack Du Bois >>> >>> On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my >>>> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. >>>> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the >>>> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more >>>> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already >>>> has. TG >>>> >>>> ============== >>>> >>>> >>>> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>>>> Hi Funksters, >>>>> >>>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>>>> raises a couple of >>>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>>>> languages >>>>> unit? >>>>> >>>>> Keith Johnson >>>>> >>>>> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-ros >>>>> etta.html >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >> > From bischoff.st at gmail.com Fri Jan 21 23:11:19 2011 From: bischoff.st at gmail.com (s.t. bischoff) Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 18:11:19 -0500 Subject: FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 17 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: The Center for Advanced Study of Language at UM College Park did a few studies regarding language programs like RS...you can learn about these studies at their website and download the official findings (I haven't read these myself): http://casl.umd.edu/node/541 In conversation I was told that the RS report was not inclusive of all findings because RS had blocked the report and was proceeding with litigation against CASL to prevent the release of the findings which could be damaging to RS. I can't verify the truth of this, but I have no reason to doubt the source. When Xerox released its FST toolkit (useful for creating automated syntactic, phonological, and morphological analyzers and thus things like spell/grammar checkers, language revitalization tools, etc.), some linguists took elements of the copyright notice to mean that "all data used with the toolkit" became the property of Xerox in part or whole. This led some linguists to work on the development of a similar open source FST toolkit, FOMA. I'm not a copyright lawyer so can't comment on the validity of the concern. Cheers, Shannon On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 1:00 PM, wrote: > Send FUNKNET mailing list submissions to > funknet at mailman.rice.edu > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/funknet > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > funknet-request at mailman.rice.edu > > You can reach the person managing the list at > funknet-owner at mailman.rice.edu > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of FUNKNET digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > (Wendy Smith) > 2. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > (Luke Kundl Pinette) > 3. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > (Tom Givon) > 4. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > (James J. Mischler) > 5. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > (Wendy Smith) > 6. Re: FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 (s.t. bischoff) > 7. Re: FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 (A. Katz) > 8. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > (John Du Bois) > 9. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > (Luke Kundl Pinette) > 10. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > (Luke Kundl Pinette) > 11. Call for papers: Lancaster Postgraduate Conference in > Linguistics and English Language (Gabrielatos, Costas) > 12. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > (Tim Thornes) > 13. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > (Pamela Munro) > 14. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > (Brian MacWhinney) > 15. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > (jess tauber) > 16. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > (Tom Givon) > 17. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > (Marianne Mithun) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 10:07:07 -0800 > From: Wendy Smith > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > To: Keith Johnson > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: <4D3879CB.6010503 at csusb.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, > and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child > acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no > direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be > patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the > same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the > materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women > are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who > works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training > or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will > learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint > Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is > virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car > or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction > to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. > > On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > > Hi Funksters, > > > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > > raises a couple of > > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > > languages > > unit? > > > > Keith Johnson > > > > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 03:15:49 +0900 > From: Luke Kundl Pinette > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > To: Keith Johnson , > funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: <4D387BD5.5020305 at comcast.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Hi Keith, > > I'm of two minds about this. > > Now the Rosetta Stone is not a good program. And I will first confess > that I've had a vendetta against the Rosetta Stone because I feel that > its entire marketing strategy, from premise to conclusion consists of > propagating myths about language instruction: > > 1. Children learn languages effortlessly. > 2. You can learn a language like a child does. > 3. You should learn a language like a child does. > 4. The Rosetta Stone's program resembles the way a child learns language. > 5. Ergo you can learn a language effortlessly using the Rosetta Stone. > > Nonetheless it's a very effective marketing strategy. Most people have > heard of the Rosetta Stone, whether they study languages or not, and > quite a lot of them believe it's the best program on the market. It's > not the unjustified self-promotion over the competition which bothers me > (that's the whole point of marketing), but rather the fact that it fits > too well with the attitude Americans tend to have about language learning. > > I've met far too many people who claim that they simply don't have the > knack for learning languages, as their efforts while they were in > school, at the local community college, and yes--the Rosetta Stone > show. Having studied with some of said people in college, I've observed > that most students in language classes believe that less than five hours > a week in a language class or on a computer is sufficient to learn a > language, and that if they can't they're simply unable to learn a > language. In the time I studied Spanish and Arabic in a classroom, I > could not find one person willing to speak the language outside of class > except for native speakers. > > I've heard praise for a couple other programs (which I won't name), > however the people who use these programs, myself included, recognize > that they are a tool and not a teacher. Rosetta Stone claims to be a > teacher, and I've never met a person who's tried Rosetta Stone and > claimed success in it. It's either a bad program (usually heard from > someone who eventually learned the language through more conventional > means) or it's the user's own fault (from someone who hasn't). > > Of course the easiest way to learn a language is to immerse yourself, > but endangered languages tend to be in a situation similar to that I > experienced in the United States, where native speakers of the target > language are hard to come by outside of formal classes. In situations > like that it's absolutely essential to practice with other non-native > speakers, which requires both will and resources. And the question is > whether the Rosetta Stone's contribution to the latter outweighs any > detrimental effect on the former. > > It's well established in psychology that when people find something hard > and think that it will always be hard, they tend to give up. I've long > suspected that telling hearing a program makes language easy, and then > finding that it's not would encourage people to give up more easily than > going into it with the assumption it will be a challenge. And while > this would be a bad thing when we're talking Americans learning Arabic, > it's a great deal worse when we're talking a language on the verge of > extinction. > > But language is quite different from most of human psychology, and I > don't think there's been any research on language specifically. The > kind of people who buy the Rosetta Stone expecting a > brain-translator-slug may not be the kind of people who are all that > determined to learn a language in the first place, and the people who > use the program to learn an endangered language will go into it with > different expectations. They won't be using it because they think it's > an easy way to attract Italian models, but rather because it's what's > available. And I'd expect that these students will be using it as a > tool and not a teacher. Language revitalization takes a good deal more > dedication and savvy than learning one of the world's major tongues. > > The Rosetta Stone does record actual native speakers, and in that sense, > when your options are limited, it would almost certainly be a useful > tool. I'm not sure if there are other language companies who have > endangered languages departments. Personally I'd like to see pretty > much any company except the Rosetta Stone doing this, but even despite > my dislike of the company I'm inclined to say it's probably beneficial > on the balance. > > Regards, > Luke > > > On 1/21/11 1:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > > Hi Funksters, > > > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > > raises a couple of > > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > > languages > > unit? > > > > Keith Johnson > > > > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 11:16:32 -0700 > From: Tom Givon > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: <4D387C00.2050307 at uoregon.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > > > Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my Ute > friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. However, > preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the Natives are > just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more vulnerable. I > hope they don't create more damage than history already has. TG > > ============== > > > On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > > Hi Funksters, > > > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > > raises a couple of > > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > > languages > > unit? > > > > Keith Johnson > > > > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 12:19:39 -0600 > From: "James J. Mischler" > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > To: Wendy Smith , Keith Johnson > > Cc: "funknet at mailman.rice.edu" > Message-ID: > <285D95BE552E5A4F9C45A549C5763B3635D9480115 at ex-mbx1.nsula.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Wendy and all, > > I wonder if *any* program has been found, via controlled research study, to > aid in the learning of a language. Wendy said that there are programs that > are better than Rosetta Stone; what are they? Is there any data to support > the view that the program(s) did in fact aid learning? > > Jim Mischler > Assistant Professor > Language & Communication > Northwestern State University of Louisiana > Natchitoches, LA > > > -----Original Message----- > From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [mailto: > funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Wendy Smith > Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:07 PM > To: Keith Johnson > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > > This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, > and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child > acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no > direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be > patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the > same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the > materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women > are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who > works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training > or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will > learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint > Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is > virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car > or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction > to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. > > On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > > Hi Funksters, > > > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > > raises a couple of > > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > > languages > > unit? > > > > Keith Johnson > > > > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 10:29:35 -0800 > From: Wendy Smith > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > To: "James J. Mischler" > Cc: Keith Johnson , > "funknet at mailman.rice.edu" > Message-ID: <4D387F0F.7070400 at csusb.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > no language programs can effect language acquisition or learning (in the > case of the adult brain we say 'learning,' not acquisition). I have been > using Pimsleur which I have found to be quite good in providing the > sounds of the language and some useful conversation. It is still > repetition and memory, which does not equate SLA. I am now repeating > these dialogues in my sleep (!) but when I try to speak to a native > speaker, it all goes out the window. I am counting on immersion--I will > be in Belarus for 4-5 months as of Monday. (I know of no controlled > study of any program--but it doesn't mean they haven't been done--I > would check ACTFL for that information). > > On 1/20/2011 10:19 AM, James J. Mischler wrote: > > Wendy and all, > > > > I wonder if *any* program has been found, via controlled research study, > to aid in the learning of a language. Wendy said that there are programs > that are better than Rosetta Stone; what are they? Is there any data to > support the view that the program(s) did in fact aid learning? > > > > Jim Mischler > > Assistant Professor > > Language& Communication > > Northwestern State University of Louisiana > > Natchitoches, LA > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [mailto: > funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Wendy Smith > > Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:07 PM > > To: Keith Johnson > > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > > > > This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, > > and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child > > acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no > > direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be > > patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the > > same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the > > materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women > > are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who > > works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training > > or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will > > learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint > > Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is > > virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car > > or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction > > to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. > > > > On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > >> Hi Funksters, > >> > >> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > >> raises a couple of > >> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > >> languages > >> unit? > >> > >> Keith Johnson > >> > >> > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 13:31:36 -0500 > From: "s.t. bischoff" > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: > > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > The issue of Rosetta Stone and endangered languages seems ripe for > controversy. The relationship can be easily exploited by Rosetta Stone. If > a > community provides data and RS controls the data the community may find > itself at the mercy of the RS. For example, as I understand it, often RS > provides the "service" to create the resources for "free". They charge a > nominal fee for access to the first level lessons. However, that fee > increases with advancing levels. Like most minority groups, endangered > language communities are easy targets for exploitation (see the recent > Coushatta casino scam). Additionally, there is a good deal of controversy > regarding weather or not RS actually works. As I understand it, some > researchers have done research on RS and the conclusion have been that it > doesn't work (linguists working the software can judge for > themselves)...the > results cannot be released due to litigation. In short, these types of > relationships can't help but raise some concerns...I wonder if communities > (both endangered language and academic) are always savvy enough to protect > themselves. Of course greater detail of the actual relationships that RS > creates would be helpful in terms of understanding. > > On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 1:00 PM, wrote: > > > Send FUNKNET mailing list submissions to > > funknet at mailman.rice.edu > > > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > > https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/funknet > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > > funknet-request at mailman.rice.edu > > > > You can reach the person managing the list at > > funknet-owner at mailman.rice.edu > > > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > > than "Re: Contents of FUNKNET digest..." > > > > > > Today's Topics: > > > > 1. Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > > (Keith Johnson) > > 2. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > > (A. Katz) > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Message: 1 > > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 08:50:19 -0800 > > From: Keith Johnson > > Subject: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > > languages > > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > > Message-ID: > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes > > > > Hi Funksters, > > > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > > raises a couple of > > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > > languages > > unit? > > > > Keith Johnson > > > > > > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Message: 2 > > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 09:38:15 -0800 (PST) > > From: "A. Katz" > > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > > languages > > To: Keith Johnson > > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > > Message-ID: > > Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed > > > > Why not? If it helps preserve the language, and the speakers approve, > then > > there should be no problem. > > > > > > > > On Thu, 20 Jan 2011, Keith Johnson wrote: > > > > > Hi Funksters, > > > > > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > raises > > a > > > couple of > > > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > > languages > > > unit? > > > > > > Keith Johnson > > > > > > > > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > > > > > > > > > > End of FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 > > *************************************** > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 11:12:17 -0800 (PST) > From: "A. Katz" > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 > To: "s.t. bischoff" > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: > Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed > > I think the issue of whether the RS program works is quite marginal to the > question of whether RS or some other commercial program can help to > preserve the resources of a language community for future generations. > > Let's grant for a moment that RS -- or any other computerized program -- > cannot in and of itself cause someone to acquire a language that he cannot > speak already. > > The question is: how are speakers of this language going to be damaged by > the program? Surely their language isn't going to be "taken away from > them." What they know, they know. What they are able to transmit to the > next generation by natural means, they will. So what is really at issue > is: will this help them to preserve language resources now in danger of > being lost? Will it help keep the language on ice, in case of language > death, so that it can be revived later, by people willing to put in the > effort? > > Are there other issues? Is there any fear that these resources will not be > available to future generations of would be speakers? Is someone > concerned that the language will get "patented" and only RS will have the > license to use it? > > > --Aya > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 8 > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 17:48:25 -0800 > From: John Du Bois > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > To: Tom Givon > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: <4D38E5E9.9030402 at linguistics.ucsb.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage > that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in an > endangered language community. > > For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that work > with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the last > speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far as > indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, and > linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this specific > legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for whatever > reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on their > language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language > community, this can have a big negative impact. > > It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered > language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and to > work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies for > mitigating any negative effects. > > Jack Du Bois > > On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: > > > > > > Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my > > Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. > > However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the > > Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more > > vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already > > has. TG > > > > ============== > > > > > > On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > >> Hi Funksters, > >> > >> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > >> raises a couple of > >> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > >> languages > >> unit? > >> > >> Keith Johnson > >> > >> > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > >> > >> > >> > > > > -- > > *************************************************** > John W. Du Bois, Professor > Department of Linguistics > 3607 South Hall > University of California, Santa Barbara > Santa Barbara, California 93106-3100 > USA > *************************************************** > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 9 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:34:14 +0900 > From: Luke Kundl Pinette > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to > endangered > languages > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: <4D38F0A6.1010605 at comcast.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > James, > So this gets us a bit off topic, but again I of course have to comment. > > I don't know about a controlled study. Before I decided on pragmatics I > considered doing my thesis on second-language learning strategies, and > did a fair bit of research to this end, and I didn't see any formal > paper specifically mentioning language programs. I'd suspect there's > something, but these programs are all designed so differently that a > negative result on one wouldn't apply across programs. > > As I said earlier, no program can be a teacher. Until we design a > program that can pass the Turing test, even if we imagine a program that > can hold a conversation, it won't be able to teach subtle distinctions > in semantics and pragmatics. Consider the difference in spoken English > between "Whaddaya doing?" "Whacha doing?" and "Whacha up to?" and > consider the fact that not only English, but every language has myriads > of minor distinctions like this. > > There's three programs I know by name; I've had all of them recommended > to me by friends and acquaintances: Rosetta Stone, Pimsleur, and Before > You Know It. Rosetta Stone as I said was so awful out of the box, > contradicting everything I knew about language learning and good > pedagogy that I promptly returned it to my brother (who had been foolish > enough to buy it and of course never used it). > > The two programs I've used are Pimsleur and Before You Know It. I like > Pimsleur, it teaches grammar from the outset, and starts the way you > would start a language class, and teaches you to speak in sentences from > the start. I think it would be more useful if you have someone to > practice with--the scripts it uses are actually pretty good, but if you > don't have someone it's just rote memorization. And it's definitely not > a quick way to learn a language. And if you know linguistics, and have > broken down the morphology of the sentence less than ten minutes in, it > becomes a bit tedious. It's still something I happily recommend to > people I know, though I usually suggest they get it from the library, > unless the site is having a sale (as I think they sometimes do). > > On the other hand if you've traveled much to a foreign country without > speaking the language, you'll know that pointing, money, and a > calculator will get you pretty far. A few words, social niceties like > "hello," "thank you," and "I'm sorry" will get you even further, and if > you're going right now it's useful to be able to pick which words you > need. Before You Know It, which an acquaintance described as a set of > computerized flashcards, is useful in this respect. I don't know anyone > who's used the paid version, or even what that includes, but the free > version is quite extensive. > > My biggest complaint is that the pronunciations given are generally not > the way the speaker would say it. It's like if you paid an English > speaker to ennunciate words, and they said "what-are-you-do-ing" > "want-to" "ve-ge-ta-ble" and "com-for-ta-ble" every time. For example > Koreans don't say "annyeonghaseyo" for "hello," but "anyeseyo" or even > "yeseyo." And "thank you" is not "kamsahamnida" but "kamsamnida." > Nonetheless, these are useful words. The Koreans understood what I was > saying, even if they always cracked up when they heard me, and since I > knew what the words sounded like in context I was able to figure out how > they were actually pronounced. But if the paid version contained clips > of the way people actually say the words, it would be well worth paying > for. > > I think most of the lesser known products on the market are similar to > one or the other of these. I've seen other computer programs which are > flashcard based, and I inherited a few German records and tapes from my > grandfather when he moved to Florida, and they're similar to Pimsleur. > (Though I like Pimsleur's layout better.) > > That said though, when you view language programs as a tool to help > study, you might as well ask whether there's any data to support the > view that textbooks in fact aid learning. It depends on the program, > the student, and the use the latter makes of the former. > > Regards, > Luke > > On 1/21/11 3:19 AM, James J. Mischler wrote: > > Wendy and all, > > > > I wonder if *any* program has been found, via controlled research study, > to aid in the learning of a language. Wendy said that there are programs > that are better than Rosetta Stone; what are they? Is there any data to > support the view that the program(s) did in fact aid learning? > > > > Jim Mischler > > Assistant Professor > > Language& Communication > > Northwestern State University of Louisiana > > Natchitoches, LA > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [mailto: > funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Wendy Smith > > Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:07 PM > > To: Keith Johnson > > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > > > > This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, > > and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child > > acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no > > direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be > > patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the > > same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the > > materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women > > are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who > > works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training > > or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will > > learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint > > Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is > > virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car > > or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction > > to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. > > > > On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > >> Hi Funksters, > >> > >> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > >> raises a couple of > >> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > >> languages > >> unit? > >> > >> Keith Johnson > >> > >> > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 10 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 13:09:16 +0900 > From: Luke Kundl Pinette > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to > endangered > languages > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: <4D3906EC.7030301 at comcast.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > The question is, why is the Rosetta Stone doing this anyways? According > to the article, Rosetta doesn't actually distribute the programs, just > makes them. It doesn't say if it's turning a profit, a loss or selling > them at cost (though the last is what one would infer from the article). > If they're doing it for the PR, they'll probably try not to screw over > native communities too badly, though of course you know what they say > about the pavement used on the road to hell. > > If they're in it for the money, I wouldn't put it past them to add a > clause like that. Then we've got a legal question on our hands. It's > essentially monopolistic practice, particularly if they make a pattern > of deliberately blocking competition for language programs in endangered > languages. I suspect that if they were to try it, it would be possible > to find some lawyer willing to pursue the issue, and when taken to court > they would lose. It would certainly cause a lot of trouble in the > meantime though. > > It sounds like nobody on this list has any illusions about the company. > It's depressing to see that a linguist like Krauss, and one in such an > important position has bought into Rosetta Stone's marketing, but again, > unless another company steps up it doesn't sound like there's any > options other than no language program. If Rosetta is not in fact > inserting insidious clauses into the agreements with their informants, > it's still probably better than nothing. > > Regards, > Luke > > > On 1/21/11 10:48 AM, John Du Bois wrote: > > I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage > > that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in > > an endangered language community. > > > > For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that > > work with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the > > last speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far > > as indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, > > and linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this > > specific legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for > > whatever reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on > > their language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language > > community, this can have a big negative impact. > > > > It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered > > language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and > > to work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies > > for mitigating any negative effects. > > > > Jack Du Bois > > > > On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: > >> > >> > >> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my > >> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. > >> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the > >> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more > >> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already > >> has. TG > >> > >> ============== > >> > >> > >> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > >>> Hi Funksters, > >>> > >>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > >>> raises a couple of > >>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > >>> languages > >>> unit? > >>> > >>> Keith Johnson > >>> > >>> > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 11 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 03:09:08 -0800 (PST) > From: "Gabrielatos, Costas" > Subject: [FUNKNET] Call for papers: Lancaster Postgraduate Conference > in Linguistics and English Language > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Cc: Helen West > Message-ID: <420317.74566.qm at web113306.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 > > THE SIXTH LANCASTER UNIVERSITY INTERNATIONAL POSTGRADUATE CONFERENCE > IN?LINGUISTICS AND LANGUAGE TEACHING > > Dear All, > > We are pleased to announce the Sixth Lancaster University International > Postgraduate Conference in Linguistics and English Language (LAEL PG > Conference) which will take place at Lancaster University's George Fox > building, > > on Tuesday 12th of July 2011. > > This one-day conference is designed to give linguistics postgraduates from > all > research areas an opportunity to present and discuss their research in > an informal and intellectually stimulating setting. > > This year's conference will be opened by Prof. Greg Myers (Lancaster > University), and there will be guest plenary lectures by: > Prof. Paul Kerswill (Lancaster University) > Dr. Johnny Unger (Lancaster University) > > We invite postgraduate students to submit abstracts for oral and poster > presentations on any area of linguistics, theoretical or applied (see below > for > abstract submission guidelines). > > Topics Include: > > ? - Cognitive linguistics > ? - Corpus linguistics > ? - Critical discourse analysis > ? - Historical linguistics > ? - Literacy studies > ? - Pragmatics/semantics > ? - Phonetics/phonology > ? - Second language teaching/learning/assessment > ? - Sociolinguistics > ? - Syntax/morphology Stylistics > ? - Translation studies > ? - Other: please specify > > For further information, please visit the website: > http://www.lancs.ac.uk/fass/events/laelpgconference/index.htm > > Key Dates > > Abstracts must be received by Friday 25 March 2011 > Notification of acceptancewill be given on Tuesday 10 May 2011 > > Hope to hear from you all soon, > > Helen Faye West > Janina Iwaniec > Matteo Di Cristofaro > Jonathon Adams > Ibrahim Efe > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 12 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 08:14:57 -0600 > From: "Tim Thornes" > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > To: , > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: <4D394082020000870009B3F2 at gwia1.uca.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > > I would agree with this sentiment as well as with the inherent potential of > a company like this to really screw up relationships with members of an > endangered language community. I mean, if Rosetta Stone as the "worldwide > leader in language learning worldwide (sic)" ( > http://www.rosettastone.com/backnolang?pc=se2011&cid=se-gg&gclid=CPCPvsm8y6YCFQPsKgodqhCrHA) > can't help us, why would I think some nerdy academic with a microphone and a > laptop could? > As one such, I am as capable as any big company of damaging relationships > with community members, and I ought to know better. Is there any > expectation that RS does? > Best, > Tim > > Tim Thornes, PhD > Assistant Professor of Linguistics > Department of Writing > University of Central Arkansas > 201 Donaghey Avenue > Conway, Arkansas 72035 > USA > (501)450-5613 > tthornes at uca.edu > > >>> John Du Bois 01/20/11 7:48 PM >>> > I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage > that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in an > endangered language community. > > For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that work > with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the last > speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far as > indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, and > linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this specific > legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for whatever > reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on their > language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language > community, this can have a big negative impact. > > It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered > language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and to > work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies for > mitigating any negative effects. > > Jack Du Bois > > On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: > > > > > > Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my > > Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. > > However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the > > Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more > > vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already > > has. TG > > > > ============== > > > > > > On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > >> Hi Funksters, > >> > >> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > >> raises a couple of > >> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > >> languages > >> unit? > >> > >> Keith Johnson > >> > >> > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > >> > >> > >> > > > > -- > > *************************************************** > John W. Du Bois, Professor > Department of Linguistics > 3607 South Hall > University of California, Santa Barbara > Santa Barbara, California 93106-3100 > USA > *************************************************** > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 13 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 07:48:38 -0800 > From: Pamela Munro > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > To: Tim Thornes > Cc: tgivon at uoregon.edu, dubois at linguistics.ucsb.edu, > funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: <4D39AAD6.7090508 at ucla.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > All these suggestions are truly scary. > > Pam > > Tim Thornes wrote: > > I would agree with this sentiment as well as with the inherent potential > of a company like this to really screw up relationships with members of an > endangered language community. I mean, if Rosetta Stone as the "worldwide > leader in language learning worldwide (sic)" ( > http://www.rosettastone.com/backnolang?pc=se2011&cid=se-gg&gclid=CPCPvsm8y6YCFQPsKgodqhCrHA) > can't help us, why would I think some nerdy academic with a microphone and a > laptop could? > > As one such, I am as capable as any big company of damaging relationships > with community members, and I ought to know better. Is there any > expectation that RS does? > > Best, > > Tim > > > > Tim Thornes, PhD > > Assistant Professor of Linguistics > > Department of Writing > > University of Central Arkansas > > 201 Donaghey Avenue > > Conway, Arkansas 72035 > > USA > > (501)450-5613 > > tthornes at uca.edu > > > > > >>>> John Du Bois 01/20/11 7:48 PM >>> > >>>> > > I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage > > that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in an > > endangered language community. > > > > For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that work > > with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the last > > speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far as > > indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, and > > linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this specific > > legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for whatever > > reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on their > > language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language > > community, this can have a big negative impact. > > > > It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered > > language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and to > > work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies for > > mitigating any negative effects. > > > > Jack Du Bois > > > > On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: > > > >> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my > >> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. > >> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the > >> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more > >> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already > >> has. TG > >> > >> ============== > >> > >> > >> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > >> > >>> Hi Funksters, > >>> > >>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > >>> raises a couple of > >>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > >>> languages > >>> unit? > >>> > >>> Keith Johnson > >>> > >>> > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > > > > > > -- > Pamela Munro, > Professor, Linguistics, UCLA > UCLA Box 951543 > Los Angeles, CA 90095-1543 > http://www.linguistics.ucla.edu/people/munro/munro.htm > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 14 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:30:39 -0500 > From: Brian MacWhinney > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to > endangered > languages > To: Funknet > Message-ID: <9A44FA72-E6DF-4498-A4A0-0A4C4E605BD7 at cmu.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > Folks, > > I share your low regard for Rosetta Stone, not so much for what they > fail to deliver, but rather for the overstated claims they make. I know a > couple of students who have worked with them on internships and, so far, > there is no evidence of malicious practices vis a vis native communities. > Despite this, I agree that it is likely that communities who collaborate > with them will get led down the garden path and end up unwilling to > participate later with other, more promising, approaches to language > maintenance. But these are freely-formed relations between consenting > parties, so nothing can militate against it. > Regarding the wider issue of effectiveness of language learning > programs, I find it strange that Luke has located nothing on this subject. > Back in 1968, Paul Pimsleur already demonstrated the effectiveness of his > method of graduated interval recall which is picked up, in an admittedly > diluted form, by the current Pimsleur series. There are hundreds of studies > distributed across six major journals demonstrating the relatively greater > effectiveness of specific components of language instruction, from keyword > method to corrective feedback. These effects have been demonstrated in both > controlled experiments and, somewhat less convincingly, in classroom and > online instruction. Nearly all of my own experimental work is now focused > on tests of this type embedded within online tutors. Perhaps what Luke is > referring to is the absence of evidence of the overall comparative > effectiveness of the big commercial language programs such as Rosetta Stone > or Pimsleur. In the cases of > such full programs, it is extremely difficult to coordinate a decent > experimental test, because it would require buy in from a large group of > volunteers across a long period with careful controls for study time and so > on. So, I think it is generally better to focus on demonstrations of the > effects of individual components of programs, because these can be subject > to reasonable experimental control. Of course, all of this leaves the > naturalistic methods of language learning out in the cold, and that is > wrong. In the end, the best way to advance this field will be to increase > automatic data collection during the language learning process, within > online, classroom, and naturalistic contexts. This is what I am working on. > > Regards, > > -- Brian MacWhinney > > On Jan 20, 2011, at 11:09 PM, Luke Kundl Pinette wrote: > > > The question is, why is the Rosetta Stone doing this anyways? According > to the article, Rosetta doesn't actually distribute the programs, just makes > them. It doesn't say if it's turning a profit, a loss or selling them at > cost (though the last is what one would infer from the article). If they're > doing it for the PR, they'll probably try not to screw over native > communities too badly, though of course you know what they say about the > pavement used on the road to hell. > > > > If they're in it for the money, I wouldn't put it past them to add a > clause like that. Then we've got a legal question on our hands. It's > essentially monopolistic practice, particularly if they make a pattern of > deliberately blocking competition for language programs in endangered > languages. I suspect that if they were to try it, it would be possible to > find some lawyer willing to pursue the issue, and when taken to court they > would lose. It would certainly cause a lot of trouble in the meantime > though. > > > > It sounds like nobody on this list has any illusions about the company. > It's depressing to see that a linguist like Krauss, and one in such an > important position has bought into Rosetta Stone's marketing, but again, > unless another company steps up it doesn't sound like there's any options > other than no language program. If Rosetta is not in fact inserting > insidious clauses into the agreements with their informants, it's still > probably better than nothing. > > > > Regards, > > Luke > > > > > > On 1/21/11 10:48 AM, John Du Bois wrote: > >> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage > >> that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in > >> an endangered language community. > >> > >> For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that > >> work with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the > >> last speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far > >> as indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, > >> and linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this > >> specific legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for > >> whatever reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on > >> their language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language > >> community, this can have a big negative impact. > >> > >> It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered > >> language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and > >> to work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies > >> for mitigating any negative effects. > >> > >> Jack Du Bois > >> > >> On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my > >>> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. > >>> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the > >>> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more > >>> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already > >>> has. TG > >>> > >>> ============== > >>> > >>> > >>> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > >>>> Hi Funksters, > >>>> > >>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > >>>> raises a couple of > >>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > >>>> languages > >>>> unit? > >>>> > >>>> Keith Johnson > >>>> > >>>> > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 15 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:33:26 -0500 (GMT-05:00) > From: jess tauber > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to > endangered > languages > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: > < > 32117937.1295627607528.JavaMail.root at wamui-hunyo.atl.sa.earthlink.net> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > Just minutes ago as I write this, on the television show 'The View', actor > Ed Harris brought up his not so successful attempt to use Rosetta Stone, > 'that thing you can get', to pick up a little Russian for his movie opening > this week- eventually he had to utilize the services of a Bulgarian, in > person. > > Maybe the public isn't so misinformed? > > Jess Tauber > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 16 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 09:40:02 -0700 > From: Tom Givon > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to > endangered > languages > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: <4D39B6E2.3030004 at uoregon.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > > They still shell out C-notes by the bushel for this scam. RS does not > make their money off satisfied customers, but off poor first-hit > suckers. TG > > ============================ > > > > > > > On 1/21/2011 9:33 AM, jess tauber wrote: > > Just minutes ago as I write this, on the television show 'The View', > actor Ed Harris brought up his not so successful attempt to use Rosetta > Stone, 'that thing you can get', to pick up a little Russian for his movie > opening this week- eventually he had to utilize the services of a Bulgarian, > in person. > > > > Maybe the public isn't so misinformed? > > > > Jess Tauber > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 17 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 08:57:58 -0800 > From: Marianne Mithun > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to > endangered > languages > To: Brian MacWhinney , Funknet > > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed > > I finally have to weigh in here on another aspect of the issue specifically > with respect to endangered languages. > > For communities in danger of losing their traditional languages, learning > the heritage language isn't just about being able to order a meal in a > restaurant or book a hotel room. It's often about something much deeper, > about appreciating traditional ways of viewing the world, of categorizing > concepts, of combining ideas, of interacting. And the Rosetta Stone system > is one-size-fits-all. People are essentially asked to translate the model > sentences into whatever language is at hand, and the results tend to be > close to word-by-word translations. So yes, learners learn how to say 'boy' > and 'run'. But they don't learn, for example, that ideas expressed by nouns > in English are expressed in language X by verbs. Or that in many languages > people don't tend to talk sentences consisting of Noun Verb Noun (or Noun > Noun Verb). They don't learn about the glorious elaboration of semantic > distinctions or domains that have no counterparts in the model language. > They probably won't learn about evidentials. They are unlikely to learn > about elaborate aspectual distinctions. They certainly won't learn > different patterns of subordination or clause combining. > > For some situations, that may be fine. Heritage speakers just want to be > able to use some phrases in everyday talk. And they don't have the time or > interest for that kind of complexity. For others, it sort of defeats the > whole purpose. > > Marianne Mithun > > > --On Friday, January 21, 2011 11:30 AM -0500 Brian MacWhinney > wrote: > > > Folks, > > > > I share your low regard for Rosetta Stone, not so much for what they > > fail to deliver, but rather for the overstated claims they make. I know > > a couple of students who have worked with them on internships and, so > > far, there is no evidence of malicious practices vis a vis native > > communities. Despite this, I agree that it is likely that communities who > > collaborate with them will get led down the garden path and end up > > unwilling to participate later with other, more promising, approaches to > > language maintenance. But these are freely-formed relations between > > consenting parties, so nothing can militate against it. Regarding > > the wider issue of effectiveness of language learning programs, I find it > > strange that Luke has located nothing on this subject. Back in 1968, > > Paul Pimsleur already demonstrated the effectiveness of his method of > > graduated interval recall which is picked up, in an admittedly diluted > > form, by the current Pimsleur series. There are hundreds of studies > > distributed across six major journals demonstrating the relatively > > greater effectiveness of specific components of language instruction, > > from keyword method to corrective feedback. These effects have been > > demonstrated in both controlled experiments and, somewhat less > > convincingly, in classroom and online instruction. Nearly all of my own > > experimental work is now focused on tests of this type embedded within > > online tutors. Perhaps what Luke is referring to is the absence of > > evidence of the overall comparative effectiveness of the big commercial > > language programs such as Rosetta Stone or Pimsleur. In the cases of > > such full programs, it is extremely difficult to coordinate a decent > > experimental test, because it would require buy in from a large group of > > volunteers across a long period with careful controls for study time and > > so on. So, I think it is generally better to focus on demonstrations of > > the effects of individual components of programs, because these can be > > subject to reasonable experimental control. Of course, all of this > > leaves the naturalistic methods of language learning out in the cold, and > > that is wrong. In the end, the best way to advance this field will be to > > increase automatic data collection during the language learning process, > > within online, classroom, and naturalistic contexts. This is what I am > > working on. > > > > Regards, > > > > -- Brian MacWhinney > > > > On Jan 20, 2011, at 11:09 PM, Luke Kundl Pinette wrote: > > > >> The question is, why is the Rosetta Stone doing this anyways? According > >> to the article, Rosetta doesn't actually distribute the programs, just > >> makes them. It doesn't say if it's turning a profit, a loss or selling > >> them at cost (though the last is what one would infer from the article). > >> If they're doing it for the PR, they'll probably try not to screw over > >> native communities too badly, though of course you know what they say > >> about the pavement used on the road to hell. > >> > >> If they're in it for the money, I wouldn't put it past them to add a > >> clause like that. Then we've got a legal question on our hands. It's > >> essentially monopolistic practice, particularly if they make a pattern > >> of deliberately blocking competition for language programs in endangered > >> languages. I suspect that if they were to try it, it would be possible > >> to find some lawyer willing to pursue the issue, and when taken to court > >> they would lose. It would certainly cause a lot of trouble in the > >> meantime though. > >> > >> It sounds like nobody on this list has any illusions about the company. > >> It's depressing to see that a linguist like Krauss, and one in such an > >> important position has bought into Rosetta Stone's marketing, but again, > >> unless another company steps up it doesn't sound like there's any > >> options other than no language program. If Rosetta is not in fact > >> inserting insidious clauses into the agreements with their informants, > >> it's still probably better than nothing. > >> > >> Regards, > >> Luke > >> > >> > >> On 1/21/11 10:48 AM, John Du Bois wrote: > >>> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage > >>> that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in > >>> an endangered language community. > >>> > >>> For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that > >>> work with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the > >>> last speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far > >>> as indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, > >>> and linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this > >>> specific legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for > >>> whatever reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on > >>> their language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language > >>> community, this can have a big negative impact. > >>> > >>> It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered > >>> language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and > >>> to work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies > >>> for mitigating any negative effects. > >>> > >>> Jack Du Bois > >>> > >>> On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my > >>>> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. > >>>> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the > >>>> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more > >>>> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already > >>>> has. TG > >>>> > >>>> ============== > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > >>>>> Hi Funksters, > >>>>> > >>>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > >>>>> raises a couple of > >>>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > >>>>> languages > >>>>> unit? > >>>>> > >>>>> Keith Johnson > >>>>> > >>>>> > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-ros > >>>>> etta.html > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > End of FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 17 > *************************************** > From bischoff.st at gmail.com Sat Jan 22 03:20:48 2011 From: bischoff.st at gmail.com (s.t. bischoff) Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 22:20:48 -0500 Subject: FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 17 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I should have added in my previous post...can anyone "confirm" or "deny" the claims I noted: (1) There is some sort of litigation involving RS and CASL over research involving RS (2) Xeorox's Finite State Tool Kit copyright can be interpreted as indicating data used in the tool kit is property of Xerox to one degree or another. Also, this reminds me of an issue I have thought about having worked with facsimiles of unpublished texts. Does anyone know who owns legacy materials such as unpublished field notes or manuscripts with data from endangered languages or other types of languages? For example, texts collected in the 19th or early 20th century (or earlier) in the US recording myths and tales. Could these be construed as heritage objects that "must be returned" to the community? Has anyone ever had to deal with this issue? We've seen in recent years museums returning important objects to communities...I wonder if this has come up in terms of language. Also, if a linguist records a narrative or myth...who has the "copyright" to it, if anyone? The linguist, the speaker, the community, the tribal council? Cheers, Shannon On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 1:00 PM, wrote: > Send FUNKNET mailing list submissions to > funknet at mailman.rice.edu > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/funknet > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > funknet-request at mailman.rice.edu > > You can reach the person managing the list at > funknet-owner at mailman.rice.edu > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of FUNKNET digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > (Wendy Smith) > 2. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > (Luke Kundl Pinette) > 3. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > (Tom Givon) > 4. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > (James J. Mischler) > 5. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > (Wendy Smith) > 6. Re: FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 (s.t. bischoff) > 7. Re: FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 (A. Katz) > 8. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > (John Du Bois) > 9. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > (Luke Kundl Pinette) > 10. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > (Luke Kundl Pinette) > 11. Call for papers: Lancaster Postgraduate Conference in > Linguistics and English Language (Gabrielatos, Costas) > 12. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > (Tim Thornes) > 13. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > (Pamela Munro) > 14. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > (Brian MacWhinney) > 15. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > (jess tauber) > 16. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > (Tom Givon) > 17. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > (Marianne Mithun) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 10:07:07 -0800 > From: Wendy Smith > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > To: Keith Johnson > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: <4D3879CB.6010503 at csusb.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, > and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child > acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no > direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be > patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the > same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the > materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women > are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who > works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training > or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will > learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint > Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is > virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car > or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction > to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. > > On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > > Hi Funksters, > > > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > > raises a couple of > > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > > languages > > unit? > > > > Keith Johnson > > > > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 03:15:49 +0900 > From: Luke Kundl Pinette > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > To: Keith Johnson , > funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: <4D387BD5.5020305 at comcast.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Hi Keith, > > I'm of two minds about this. > > Now the Rosetta Stone is not a good program. And I will first confess > that I've had a vendetta against the Rosetta Stone because I feel that > its entire marketing strategy, from premise to conclusion consists of > propagating myths about language instruction: > > 1. Children learn languages effortlessly. > 2. You can learn a language like a child does. > 3. You should learn a language like a child does. > 4. The Rosetta Stone's program resembles the way a child learns language. > 5. Ergo you can learn a language effortlessly using the Rosetta Stone. > > Nonetheless it's a very effective marketing strategy. Most people have > heard of the Rosetta Stone, whether they study languages or not, and > quite a lot of them believe it's the best program on the market. It's > not the unjustified self-promotion over the competition which bothers me > (that's the whole point of marketing), but rather the fact that it fits > too well with the attitude Americans tend to have about language learning. > > I've met far too many people who claim that they simply don't have the > knack for learning languages, as their efforts while they were in > school, at the local community college, and yes--the Rosetta Stone > show. Having studied with some of said people in college, I've observed > that most students in language classes believe that less than five hours > a week in a language class or on a computer is sufficient to learn a > language, and that if they can't they're simply unable to learn a > language. In the time I studied Spanish and Arabic in a classroom, I > could not find one person willing to speak the language outside of class > except for native speakers. > > I've heard praise for a couple other programs (which I won't name), > however the people who use these programs, myself included, recognize > that they are a tool and not a teacher. Rosetta Stone claims to be a > teacher, and I've never met a person who's tried Rosetta Stone and > claimed success in it. It's either a bad program (usually heard from > someone who eventually learned the language through more conventional > means) or it's the user's own fault (from someone who hasn't). > > Of course the easiest way to learn a language is to immerse yourself, > but endangered languages tend to be in a situation similar to that I > experienced in the United States, where native speakers of the target > language are hard to come by outside of formal classes. In situations > like that it's absolutely essential to practice with other non-native > speakers, which requires both will and resources. And the question is > whether the Rosetta Stone's contribution to the latter outweighs any > detrimental effect on the former. > > It's well established in psychology that when people find something hard > and think that it will always be hard, they tend to give up. I've long > suspected that telling hearing a program makes language easy, and then > finding that it's not would encourage people to give up more easily than > going into it with the assumption it will be a challenge. And while > this would be a bad thing when we're talking Americans learning Arabic, > it's a great deal worse when we're talking a language on the verge of > extinction. > > But language is quite different from most of human psychology, and I > don't think there's been any research on language specifically. The > kind of people who buy the Rosetta Stone expecting a > brain-translator-slug may not be the kind of people who are all that > determined to learn a language in the first place, and the people who > use the program to learn an endangered language will go into it with > different expectations. They won't be using it because they think it's > an easy way to attract Italian models, but rather because it's what's > available. And I'd expect that these students will be using it as a > tool and not a teacher. Language revitalization takes a good deal more > dedication and savvy than learning one of the world's major tongues. > > The Rosetta Stone does record actual native speakers, and in that sense, > when your options are limited, it would almost certainly be a useful > tool. I'm not sure if there are other language companies who have > endangered languages departments. Personally I'd like to see pretty > much any company except the Rosetta Stone doing this, but even despite > my dislike of the company I'm inclined to say it's probably beneficial > on the balance. > > Regards, > Luke > > > On 1/21/11 1:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > > Hi Funksters, > > > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > > raises a couple of > > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > > languages > > unit? > > > > Keith Johnson > > > > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 11:16:32 -0700 > From: Tom Givon > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: <4D387C00.2050307 at uoregon.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > > > Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my Ute > friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. However, > preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the Natives are > just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more vulnerable. I > hope they don't create more damage than history already has. TG > > ============== > > > On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > > Hi Funksters, > > > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > > raises a couple of > > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > > languages > > unit? > > > > Keith Johnson > > > > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 12:19:39 -0600 > From: "James J. Mischler" > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > To: Wendy Smith , Keith Johnson > > Cc: "funknet at mailman.rice.edu" > Message-ID: > <285D95BE552E5A4F9C45A549C5763B3635D9480115 at ex-mbx1.nsula.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Wendy and all, > > I wonder if *any* program has been found, via controlled research study, to > aid in the learning of a language. Wendy said that there are programs that > are better than Rosetta Stone; what are they? Is there any data to support > the view that the program(s) did in fact aid learning? > > Jim Mischler > Assistant Professor > Language & Communication > Northwestern State University of Louisiana > Natchitoches, LA > > > -----Original Message----- > From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [mailto: > funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Wendy Smith > Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:07 PM > To: Keith Johnson > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > > This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, > and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child > acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no > direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be > patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the > same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the > materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women > are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who > works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training > or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will > learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint > Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is > virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car > or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction > to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. > > On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > > Hi Funksters, > > > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > > raises a couple of > > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > > languages > > unit? > > > > Keith Johnson > > > > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 10:29:35 -0800 > From: Wendy Smith > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > To: "James J. Mischler" > Cc: Keith Johnson , > "funknet at mailman.rice.edu" > Message-ID: <4D387F0F.7070400 at csusb.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > no language programs can effect language acquisition or learning (in the > case of the adult brain we say 'learning,' not acquisition). I have been > using Pimsleur which I have found to be quite good in providing the > sounds of the language and some useful conversation. It is still > repetition and memory, which does not equate SLA. I am now repeating > these dialogues in my sleep (!) but when I try to speak to a native > speaker, it all goes out the window. I am counting on immersion--I will > be in Belarus for 4-5 months as of Monday. (I know of no controlled > study of any program--but it doesn't mean they haven't been done--I > would check ACTFL for that information). > > On 1/20/2011 10:19 AM, James J. Mischler wrote: > > Wendy and all, > > > > I wonder if *any* program has been found, via controlled research study, > to aid in the learning of a language. Wendy said that there are programs > that are better than Rosetta Stone; what are they? Is there any data to > support the view that the program(s) did in fact aid learning? > > > > Jim Mischler > > Assistant Professor > > Language& Communication > > Northwestern State University of Louisiana > > Natchitoches, LA > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [mailto: > funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Wendy Smith > > Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:07 PM > > To: Keith Johnson > > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > > > > This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, > > and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child > > acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no > > direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be > > patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the > > same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the > > materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women > > are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who > > works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training > > or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will > > learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint > > Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is > > virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car > > or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction > > to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. > > > > On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > >> Hi Funksters, > >> > >> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > >> raises a couple of > >> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > >> languages > >> unit? > >> > >> Keith Johnson > >> > >> > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 13:31:36 -0500 > From: "s.t. bischoff" > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: > > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > The issue of Rosetta Stone and endangered languages seems ripe for > controversy. The relationship can be easily exploited by Rosetta Stone. If > a > community provides data and RS controls the data the community may find > itself at the mercy of the RS. For example, as I understand it, often RS > provides the "service" to create the resources for "free". They charge a > nominal fee for access to the first level lessons. However, that fee > increases with advancing levels. Like most minority groups, endangered > language communities are easy targets for exploitation (see the recent > Coushatta casino scam). Additionally, there is a good deal of controversy > regarding weather or not RS actually works. As I understand it, some > researchers have done research on RS and the conclusion have been that it > doesn't work (linguists working the software can judge for > themselves)...the > results cannot be released due to litigation. In short, these types of > relationships can't help but raise some concerns...I wonder if communities > (both endangered language and academic) are always savvy enough to protect > themselves. Of course greater detail of the actual relationships that RS > creates would be helpful in terms of understanding. > > On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 1:00 PM, wrote: > > > Send FUNKNET mailing list submissions to > > funknet at mailman.rice.edu > > > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > > https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/funknet > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > > funknet-request at mailman.rice.edu > > > > You can reach the person managing the list at > > funknet-owner at mailman.rice.edu > > > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > > than "Re: Contents of FUNKNET digest..." > > > > > > Today's Topics: > > > > 1. Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > > (Keith Johnson) > > 2. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > > (A. Katz) > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Message: 1 > > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 08:50:19 -0800 > > From: Keith Johnson > > Subject: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > > languages > > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > > Message-ID: > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes > > > > Hi Funksters, > > > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > > raises a couple of > > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > > languages > > unit? > > > > Keith Johnson > > > > > > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Message: 2 > > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 09:38:15 -0800 (PST) > > From: "A. Katz" > > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > > languages > > To: Keith Johnson > > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > > Message-ID: > > Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed > > > > Why not? If it helps preserve the language, and the speakers approve, > then > > there should be no problem. > > > > > > > > On Thu, 20 Jan 2011, Keith Johnson wrote: > > > > > Hi Funksters, > > > > > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > raises > > a > > > couple of > > > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > > languages > > > unit? > > > > > > Keith Johnson > > > > > > > > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > > > > > > > > > > End of FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 > > *************************************** > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 11:12:17 -0800 (PST) > From: "A. Katz" > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 > To: "s.t. bischoff" > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: > Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed > > I think the issue of whether the RS program works is quite marginal to the > question of whether RS or some other commercial program can help to > preserve the resources of a language community for future generations. > > Let's grant for a moment that RS -- or any other computerized program -- > cannot in and of itself cause someone to acquire a language that he cannot > speak already. > > The question is: how are speakers of this language going to be damaged by > the program? Surely their language isn't going to be "taken away from > them." What they know, they know. What they are able to transmit to the > next generation by natural means, they will. So what is really at issue > is: will this help them to preserve language resources now in danger of > being lost? Will it help keep the language on ice, in case of language > death, so that it can be revived later, by people willing to put in the > effort? > > Are there other issues? Is there any fear that these resources will not be > available to future generations of would be speakers? Is someone > concerned that the language will get "patented" and only RS will have the > license to use it? > > > --Aya > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 8 > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 17:48:25 -0800 > From: John Du Bois > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > To: Tom Givon > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: <4D38E5E9.9030402 at linguistics.ucsb.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage > that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in an > endangered language community. > > For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that work > with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the last > speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far as > indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, and > linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this specific > legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for whatever > reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on their > language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language > community, this can have a big negative impact. > > It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered > language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and to > work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies for > mitigating any negative effects. > > Jack Du Bois > > On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: > > > > > > Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my > > Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. > > However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the > > Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more > > vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already > > has. TG > > > > ============== > > > > > > On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > >> Hi Funksters, > >> > >> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > >> raises a couple of > >> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > >> languages > >> unit? > >> > >> Keith Johnson > >> > >> > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > >> > >> > >> > > > > -- > > *************************************************** > John W. Du Bois, Professor > Department of Linguistics > 3607 South Hall > University of California, Santa Barbara > Santa Barbara, California 93106-3100 > USA > *************************************************** > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 9 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:34:14 +0900 > From: Luke Kundl Pinette > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to > endangered > languages > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: <4D38F0A6.1010605 at comcast.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > James, > So this gets us a bit off topic, but again I of course have to comment. > > I don't know about a controlled study. Before I decided on pragmatics I > considered doing my thesis on second-language learning strategies, and > did a fair bit of research to this end, and I didn't see any formal > paper specifically mentioning language programs. I'd suspect there's > something, but these programs are all designed so differently that a > negative result on one wouldn't apply across programs. > > As I said earlier, no program can be a teacher. Until we design a > program that can pass the Turing test, even if we imagine a program that > can hold a conversation, it won't be able to teach subtle distinctions > in semantics and pragmatics. Consider the difference in spoken English > between "Whaddaya doing?" "Whacha doing?" and "Whacha up to?" and > consider the fact that not only English, but every language has myriads > of minor distinctions like this. > > There's three programs I know by name; I've had all of them recommended > to me by friends and acquaintances: Rosetta Stone, Pimsleur, and Before > You Know It. Rosetta Stone as I said was so awful out of the box, > contradicting everything I knew about language learning and good > pedagogy that I promptly returned it to my brother (who had been foolish > enough to buy it and of course never used it). > > The two programs I've used are Pimsleur and Before You Know It. I like > Pimsleur, it teaches grammar from the outset, and starts the way you > would start a language class, and teaches you to speak in sentences from > the start. I think it would be more useful if you have someone to > practice with--the scripts it uses are actually pretty good, but if you > don't have someone it's just rote memorization. And it's definitely not > a quick way to learn a language. And if you know linguistics, and have > broken down the morphology of the sentence less than ten minutes in, it > becomes a bit tedious. It's still something I happily recommend to > people I know, though I usually suggest they get it from the library, > unless the site is having a sale (as I think they sometimes do). > > On the other hand if you've traveled much to a foreign country without > speaking the language, you'll know that pointing, money, and a > calculator will get you pretty far. A few words, social niceties like > "hello," "thank you," and "I'm sorry" will get you even further, and if > you're going right now it's useful to be able to pick which words you > need. Before You Know It, which an acquaintance described as a set of > computerized flashcards, is useful in this respect. I don't know anyone > who's used the paid version, or even what that includes, but the free > version is quite extensive. > > My biggest complaint is that the pronunciations given are generally not > the way the speaker would say it. It's like if you paid an English > speaker to ennunciate words, and they said "what-are-you-do-ing" > "want-to" "ve-ge-ta-ble" and "com-for-ta-ble" every time. For example > Koreans don't say "annyeonghaseyo" for "hello," but "anyeseyo" or even > "yeseyo." And "thank you" is not "kamsahamnida" but "kamsamnida." > Nonetheless, these are useful words. The Koreans understood what I was > saying, even if they always cracked up when they heard me, and since I > knew what the words sounded like in context I was able to figure out how > they were actually pronounced. But if the paid version contained clips > of the way people actually say the words, it would be well worth paying > for. > > I think most of the lesser known products on the market are similar to > one or the other of these. I've seen other computer programs which are > flashcard based, and I inherited a few German records and tapes from my > grandfather when he moved to Florida, and they're similar to Pimsleur. > (Though I like Pimsleur's layout better.) > > That said though, when you view language programs as a tool to help > study, you might as well ask whether there's any data to support the > view that textbooks in fact aid learning. It depends on the program, > the student, and the use the latter makes of the former. > > Regards, > Luke > > On 1/21/11 3:19 AM, James J. Mischler wrote: > > Wendy and all, > > > > I wonder if *any* program has been found, via controlled research study, > to aid in the learning of a language. Wendy said that there are programs > that are better than Rosetta Stone; what are they? Is there any data to > support the view that the program(s) did in fact aid learning? > > > > Jim Mischler > > Assistant Professor > > Language& Communication > > Northwestern State University of Louisiana > > Natchitoches, LA > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [mailto: > funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Wendy Smith > > Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:07 PM > > To: Keith Johnson > > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > > > > This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, > > and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child > > acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no > > direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be > > patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the > > same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the > > materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women > > are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who > > works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training > > or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will > > learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint > > Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is > > virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car > > or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction > > to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. > > > > On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > >> Hi Funksters, > >> > >> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > >> raises a couple of > >> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > >> languages > >> unit? > >> > >> Keith Johnson > >> > >> > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 10 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 13:09:16 +0900 > From: Luke Kundl Pinette > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to > endangered > languages > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: <4D3906EC.7030301 at comcast.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > The question is, why is the Rosetta Stone doing this anyways? According > to the article, Rosetta doesn't actually distribute the programs, just > makes them. It doesn't say if it's turning a profit, a loss or selling > them at cost (though the last is what one would infer from the article). > If they're doing it for the PR, they'll probably try not to screw over > native communities too badly, though of course you know what they say > about the pavement used on the road to hell. > > If they're in it for the money, I wouldn't put it past them to add a > clause like that. Then we've got a legal question on our hands. It's > essentially monopolistic practice, particularly if they make a pattern > of deliberately blocking competition for language programs in endangered > languages. I suspect that if they were to try it, it would be possible > to find some lawyer willing to pursue the issue, and when taken to court > they would lose. It would certainly cause a lot of trouble in the > meantime though. > > It sounds like nobody on this list has any illusions about the company. > It's depressing to see that a linguist like Krauss, and one in such an > important position has bought into Rosetta Stone's marketing, but again, > unless another company steps up it doesn't sound like there's any > options other than no language program. If Rosetta is not in fact > inserting insidious clauses into the agreements with their informants, > it's still probably better than nothing. > > Regards, > Luke > > > On 1/21/11 10:48 AM, John Du Bois wrote: > > I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage > > that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in > > an endangered language community. > > > > For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that > > work with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the > > last speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far > > as indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, > > and linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this > > specific legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for > > whatever reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on > > their language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language > > community, this can have a big negative impact. > > > > It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered > > language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and > > to work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies > > for mitigating any negative effects. > > > > Jack Du Bois > > > > On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: > >> > >> > >> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my > >> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. > >> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the > >> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more > >> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already > >> has. TG > >> > >> ============== > >> > >> > >> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > >>> Hi Funksters, > >>> > >>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > >>> raises a couple of > >>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > >>> languages > >>> unit? > >>> > >>> Keith Johnson > >>> > >>> > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 11 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 03:09:08 -0800 (PST) > From: "Gabrielatos, Costas" > Subject: [FUNKNET] Call for papers: Lancaster Postgraduate Conference > in Linguistics and English Language > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Cc: Helen West > Message-ID: <420317.74566.qm at web113306.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 > > THE SIXTH LANCASTER UNIVERSITY INTERNATIONAL POSTGRADUATE CONFERENCE > IN?LINGUISTICS AND LANGUAGE TEACHING > > Dear All, > > We are pleased to announce the Sixth Lancaster University International > Postgraduate Conference in Linguistics and English Language (LAEL PG > Conference) which will take place at Lancaster University's George Fox > building, > > on Tuesday 12th of July 2011. > > This one-day conference is designed to give linguistics postgraduates from > all > research areas an opportunity to present and discuss their research in > an informal and intellectually stimulating setting. > > This year's conference will be opened by Prof. Greg Myers (Lancaster > University), and there will be guest plenary lectures by: > Prof. Paul Kerswill (Lancaster University) > Dr. Johnny Unger (Lancaster University) > > We invite postgraduate students to submit abstracts for oral and poster > presentations on any area of linguistics, theoretical or applied (see below > for > abstract submission guidelines). > > Topics Include: > > ? - Cognitive linguistics > ? - Corpus linguistics > ? - Critical discourse analysis > ? - Historical linguistics > ? - Literacy studies > ? - Pragmatics/semantics > ? - Phonetics/phonology > ? - Second language teaching/learning/assessment > ? - Sociolinguistics > ? - Syntax/morphology Stylistics > ? - Translation studies > ? - Other: please specify > > For further information, please visit the website: > http://www.lancs.ac.uk/fass/events/laelpgconference/index.htm > > Key Dates > > Abstracts must be received by Friday 25 March 2011 > Notification of acceptancewill be given on Tuesday 10 May 2011 > > Hope to hear from you all soon, > > Helen Faye West > Janina Iwaniec > Matteo Di Cristofaro > Jonathon Adams > Ibrahim Efe > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 12 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 08:14:57 -0600 > From: "Tim Thornes" > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > To: , > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: <4D394082020000870009B3F2 at gwia1.uca.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > > I would agree with this sentiment as well as with the inherent potential of > a company like this to really screw up relationships with members of an > endangered language community. I mean, if Rosetta Stone as the "worldwide > leader in language learning worldwide (sic)" ( > http://www.rosettastone.com/backnolang?pc=se2011&cid=se-gg&gclid=CPCPvsm8y6YCFQPsKgodqhCrHA) > can't help us, why would I think some nerdy academic with a microphone and a > laptop could? > As one such, I am as capable as any big company of damaging relationships > with community members, and I ought to know better. Is there any > expectation that RS does? > Best, > Tim > > Tim Thornes, PhD > Assistant Professor of Linguistics > Department of Writing > University of Central Arkansas > 201 Donaghey Avenue > Conway, Arkansas 72035 > USA > (501)450-5613 > tthornes at uca.edu > > >>> John Du Bois 01/20/11 7:48 PM >>> > I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage > that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in an > endangered language community. > > For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that work > with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the last > speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far as > indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, and > linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this specific > legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for whatever > reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on their > language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language > community, this can have a big negative impact. > > It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered > language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and to > work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies for > mitigating any negative effects. > > Jack Du Bois > > On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: > > > > > > Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my > > Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. > > However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the > > Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more > > vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already > > has. TG > > > > ============== > > > > > > On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > >> Hi Funksters, > >> > >> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > >> raises a couple of > >> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > >> languages > >> unit? > >> > >> Keith Johnson > >> > >> > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > >> > >> > >> > > > > -- > > *************************************************** > John W. Du Bois, Professor > Department of Linguistics > 3607 South Hall > University of California, Santa Barbara > Santa Barbara, California 93106-3100 > USA > *************************************************** > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 13 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 07:48:38 -0800 > From: Pamela Munro > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > To: Tim Thornes > Cc: tgivon at uoregon.edu, dubois at linguistics.ucsb.edu, > funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: <4D39AAD6.7090508 at ucla.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > All these suggestions are truly scary. > > Pam > > Tim Thornes wrote: > > I would agree with this sentiment as well as with the inherent potential > of a company like this to really screw up relationships with members of an > endangered language community. I mean, if Rosetta Stone as the "worldwide > leader in language learning worldwide (sic)" ( > http://www.rosettastone.com/backnolang?pc=se2011&cid=se-gg&gclid=CPCPvsm8y6YCFQPsKgodqhCrHA) > can't help us, why would I think some nerdy academic with a microphone and a > laptop could? > > As one such, I am as capable as any big company of damaging relationships > with community members, and I ought to know better. Is there any > expectation that RS does? > > Best, > > Tim > > > > Tim Thornes, PhD > > Assistant Professor of Linguistics > > Department of Writing > > University of Central Arkansas > > 201 Donaghey Avenue > > Conway, Arkansas 72035 > > USA > > (501)450-5613 > > tthornes at uca.edu > > > > > >>>> John Du Bois 01/20/11 7:48 PM >>> > >>>> > > I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage > > that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in an > > endangered language community. > > > > For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that work > > with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the last > > speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far as > > indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, and > > linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this specific > > legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for whatever > > reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on their > > language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language > > community, this can have a big negative impact. > > > > It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered > > language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and to > > work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies for > > mitigating any negative effects. > > > > Jack Du Bois > > > > On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: > > > >> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my > >> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. > >> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the > >> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more > >> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already > >> has. TG > >> > >> ============== > >> > >> > >> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > >> > >>> Hi Funksters, > >>> > >>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > >>> raises a couple of > >>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > >>> languages > >>> unit? > >>> > >>> Keith Johnson > >>> > >>> > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > > > > > > -- > Pamela Munro, > Professor, Linguistics, UCLA > UCLA Box 951543 > Los Angeles, CA 90095-1543 > http://www.linguistics.ucla.edu/people/munro/munro.htm > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 14 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:30:39 -0500 > From: Brian MacWhinney > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to > endangered > languages > To: Funknet > Message-ID: <9A44FA72-E6DF-4498-A4A0-0A4C4E605BD7 at cmu.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > Folks, > > I share your low regard for Rosetta Stone, not so much for what they > fail to deliver, but rather for the overstated claims they make. I know a > couple of students who have worked with them on internships and, so far, > there is no evidence of malicious practices vis a vis native communities. > Despite this, I agree that it is likely that communities who collaborate > with them will get led down the garden path and end up unwilling to > participate later with other, more promising, approaches to language > maintenance. But these are freely-formed relations between consenting > parties, so nothing can militate against it. > Regarding the wider issue of effectiveness of language learning > programs, I find it strange that Luke has located nothing on this subject. > Back in 1968, Paul Pimsleur already demonstrated the effectiveness of his > method of graduated interval recall which is picked up, in an admittedly > diluted form, by the current Pimsleur series. There are hundreds of studies > distributed across six major journals demonstrating the relatively greater > effectiveness of specific components of language instruction, from keyword > method to corrective feedback. These effects have been demonstrated in both > controlled experiments and, somewhat less convincingly, in classroom and > online instruction. Nearly all of my own experimental work is now focused > on tests of this type embedded within online tutors. Perhaps what Luke is > referring to is the absence of evidence of the overall comparative > effectiveness of the big commercial language programs such as Rosetta Stone > or Pimsleur. In the cases of > such full programs, it is extremely difficult to coordinate a decent > experimental test, because it would require buy in from a large group of > volunteers across a long period with careful controls for study time and so > on. So, I think it is generally better to focus on demonstrations of the > effects of individual components of programs, because these can be subject > to reasonable experimental control. Of course, all of this leaves the > naturalistic methods of language learning out in the cold, and that is > wrong. In the end, the best way to advance this field will be to increase > automatic data collection during the language learning process, within > online, classroom, and naturalistic contexts. This is what I am working on. > > Regards, > > -- Brian MacWhinney > > On Jan 20, 2011, at 11:09 PM, Luke Kundl Pinette wrote: > > > The question is, why is the Rosetta Stone doing this anyways? According > to the article, Rosetta doesn't actually distribute the programs, just makes > them. It doesn't say if it's turning a profit, a loss or selling them at > cost (though the last is what one would infer from the article). If they're > doing it for the PR, they'll probably try not to screw over native > communities too badly, though of course you know what they say about the > pavement used on the road to hell. > > > > If they're in it for the money, I wouldn't put it past them to add a > clause like that. Then we've got a legal question on our hands. It's > essentially monopolistic practice, particularly if they make a pattern of > deliberately blocking competition for language programs in endangered > languages. I suspect that if they were to try it, it would be possible to > find some lawyer willing to pursue the issue, and when taken to court they > would lose. It would certainly cause a lot of trouble in the meantime > though. > > > > It sounds like nobody on this list has any illusions about the company. > It's depressing to see that a linguist like Krauss, and one in such an > important position has bought into Rosetta Stone's marketing, but again, > unless another company steps up it doesn't sound like there's any options > other than no language program. If Rosetta is not in fact inserting > insidious clauses into the agreements with their informants, it's still > probably better than nothing. > > > > Regards, > > Luke > > > > > > On 1/21/11 10:48 AM, John Du Bois wrote: > >> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage > >> that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in > >> an endangered language community. > >> > >> For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that > >> work with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the > >> last speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far > >> as indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, > >> and linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this > >> specific legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for > >> whatever reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on > >> their language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language > >> community, this can have a big negative impact. > >> > >> It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered > >> language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and > >> to work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies > >> for mitigating any negative effects. > >> > >> Jack Du Bois > >> > >> On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my > >>> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. > >>> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the > >>> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more > >>> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already > >>> has. TG > >>> > >>> ============== > >>> > >>> > >>> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > >>>> Hi Funksters, > >>>> > >>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > >>>> raises a couple of > >>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > >>>> languages > >>>> unit? > >>>> > >>>> Keith Johnson > >>>> > >>>> > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 15 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:33:26 -0500 (GMT-05:00) > From: jess tauber > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to > endangered > languages > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: > < > 32117937.1295627607528.JavaMail.root at wamui-hunyo.atl.sa.earthlink.net> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > Just minutes ago as I write this, on the television show 'The View', actor > Ed Harris brought up his not so successful attempt to use Rosetta Stone, > 'that thing you can get', to pick up a little Russian for his movie opening > this week- eventually he had to utilize the services of a Bulgarian, in > person. > > Maybe the public isn't so misinformed? > > Jess Tauber > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 16 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 09:40:02 -0700 > From: Tom Givon > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to > endangered > languages > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: <4D39B6E2.3030004 at uoregon.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > > They still shell out C-notes by the bushel for this scam. RS does not > make their money off satisfied customers, but off poor first-hit > suckers. TG > > ============================ > > > > > > > On 1/21/2011 9:33 AM, jess tauber wrote: > > Just minutes ago as I write this, on the television show 'The View', > actor Ed Harris brought up his not so successful attempt to use Rosetta > Stone, 'that thing you can get', to pick up a little Russian for his movie > opening this week- eventually he had to utilize the services of a Bulgarian, > in person. > > > > Maybe the public isn't so misinformed? > > > > Jess Tauber > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 17 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 08:57:58 -0800 > From: Marianne Mithun > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to > endangered > languages > To: Brian MacWhinney , Funknet > > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed > > I finally have to weigh in here on another aspect of the issue specifically > with respect to endangered languages. > > For communities in danger of losing their traditional languages, learning > the heritage language isn't just about being able to order a meal in a > restaurant or book a hotel room. It's often about something much deeper, > about appreciating traditional ways of viewing the world, of categorizing > concepts, of combining ideas, of interacting. And the Rosetta Stone system > is one-size-fits-all. People are essentially asked to translate the model > sentences into whatever language is at hand, and the results tend to be > close to word-by-word translations. So yes, learners learn how to say 'boy' > and 'run'. But they don't learn, for example, that ideas expressed by nouns > in English are expressed in language X by verbs. Or that in many languages > people don't tend to talk sentences consisting of Noun Verb Noun (or Noun > Noun Verb). They don't learn about the glorious elaboration of semantic > distinctions or domains that have no counterparts in the model language. > They probably won't learn about evidentials. They are unlikely to learn > about elaborate aspectual distinctions. They certainly won't learn > different patterns of subordination or clause combining. > > For some situations, that may be fine. Heritage speakers just want to be > able to use some phrases in everyday talk. And they don't have the time or > interest for that kind of complexity. For others, it sort of defeats the > whole purpose. > > Marianne Mithun > > > --On Friday, January 21, 2011 11:30 AM -0500 Brian MacWhinney > wrote: > > > Folks, > > > > I share your low regard for Rosetta Stone, not so much for what they > > fail to deliver, but rather for the overstated claims they make. I know > > a couple of students who have worked with them on internships and, so > > far, there is no evidence of malicious practices vis a vis native > > communities. Despite this, I agree that it is likely that communities who > > collaborate with them will get led down the garden path and end up > > unwilling to participate later with other, more promising, approaches to > > language maintenance. But these are freely-formed relations between > > consenting parties, so nothing can militate against it. Regarding > > the wider issue of effectiveness of language learning programs, I find it > > strange that Luke has located nothing on this subject. Back in 1968, > > Paul Pimsleur already demonstrated the effectiveness of his method of > > graduated interval recall which is picked up, in an admittedly diluted > > form, by the current Pimsleur series. There are hundreds of studies > > distributed across six major journals demonstrating the relatively > > greater effectiveness of specific components of language instruction, > > from keyword method to corrective feedback. These effects have been > > demonstrated in both controlled experiments and, somewhat less > > convincingly, in classroom and online instruction. Nearly all of my own > > experimental work is now focused on tests of this type embedded within > > online tutors. Perhaps what Luke is referring to is the absence of > > evidence of the overall comparative effectiveness of the big commercial > > language programs such as Rosetta Stone or Pimsleur. In the cases of > > such full programs, it is extremely difficult to coordinate a decent > > experimental test, because it would require buy in from a large group of > > volunteers across a long period with careful controls for study time and > > so on. So, I think it is generally better to focus on demonstrations of > > the effects of individual components of programs, because these can be > > subject to reasonable experimental control. Of course, all of this > > leaves the naturalistic methods of language learning out in the cold, and > > that is wrong. In the end, the best way to advance this field will be to > > increase automatic data collection during the language learning process, > > within online, classroom, and naturalistic contexts. This is what I am > > working on. > > > > Regards, > > > > -- Brian MacWhinney > > > > On Jan 20, 2011, at 11:09 PM, Luke Kundl Pinette wrote: > > > >> The question is, why is the Rosetta Stone doing this anyways? According > >> to the article, Rosetta doesn't actually distribute the programs, just > >> makes them. It doesn't say if it's turning a profit, a loss or selling > >> them at cost (though the last is what one would infer from the article). > >> If they're doing it for the PR, they'll probably try not to screw over > >> native communities too badly, though of course you know what they say > >> about the pavement used on the road to hell. > >> > >> If they're in it for the money, I wouldn't put it past them to add a > >> clause like that. Then we've got a legal question on our hands. It's > >> essentially monopolistic practice, particularly if they make a pattern > >> of deliberately blocking competition for language programs in endangered > >> languages. I suspect that if they were to try it, it would be possible > >> to find some lawyer willing to pursue the issue, and when taken to court > >> they would lose. It would certainly cause a lot of trouble in the > >> meantime though. > >> > >> It sounds like nobody on this list has any illusions about the company. > >> It's depressing to see that a linguist like Krauss, and one in such an > >> important position has bought into Rosetta Stone's marketing, but again, > >> unless another company steps up it doesn't sound like there's any > >> options other than no language program. If Rosetta is not in fact > >> inserting insidious clauses into the agreements with their informants, > >> it's still probably better than nothing. > >> > >> Regards, > >> Luke > >> > >> > >> On 1/21/11 10:48 AM, John Du Bois wrote: > >>> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage > >>> that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in > >>> an endangered language community. > >>> > >>> For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that > >>> work with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the > >>> last speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far > >>> as indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, > >>> and linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this > >>> specific legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for > >>> whatever reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on > >>> their language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language > >>> community, this can have a big negative impact. > >>> > >>> It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered > >>> language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and > >>> to work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies > >>> for mitigating any negative effects. > >>> > >>> Jack Du Bois > >>> > >>> On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my > >>>> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. > >>>> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the > >>>> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more > >>>> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already > >>>> has. TG > >>>> > >>>> ============== > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > >>>>> Hi Funksters, > >>>>> > >>>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > >>>>> raises a couple of > >>>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > >>>>> languages > >>>>> unit? > >>>>> > >>>>> Keith Johnson > >>>>> > >>>>> > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-ros > >>>>> etta.html > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > End of FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 17 > *************************************** > From tgivon at uoregon.edu Sat Jan 22 04:33:35 2011 From: tgivon at uoregon.edu (Tom Givon) Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 21:33:35 -0700 Subject: RS Message-ID: I am forwarding a letter from Katharine Nielson from the U. of Maryland (). It speaks for itself. Y'all have fun y'hear. TG ================== On 1/21/2011 6:49 PM, Katharine Nielson wrote: > Ah, my old friend Rosetta Stone. I tried to conduct an empirical study with 150 volunteers who agreed to use RS according to manufacturer's recommendations for about 6 months. These were all highly motivated adult learners who were granted free access to the software in their workplace. I say "tried" because our overwhelming finding was of severe participant attrition. 32 volunteers persisted with the software for more than 10 hours and only 21 made it through to the first scheduled assessment. After the first test, which was designed to be given 1/4 of the way through the study, the drop-our rate became even more dramatic, and just one participant finished the complete study protocol. > > This crazy attrition is probably mostly a product of the uselessness of these computer-mediated, self-study programs that tout themselves as "language learning solutions." We found similar results with a similar study of Auralog TELL ME MORE. > > The other work I did with RS was to "critically evaluate" the software in light of the questionable claims put forth by the company's marketing department. We basically said that there was no way that using Rosetta Stone alone could possibly result in much successful language acquisition given the lack of genuine input, the exposure to a handful of scripted, unrealistic dialogues, and the lack of opportunities for output and interaction. Another PhD student and I spent many, many hours going through all of the Arabic and Spanish lessons in Version 2 and Version 3 of Rosetta Stone in order to write the comparative review. > > I read through the thread you forwarded, and it might be worth noting that in my experience, RS is very trigger-happy with the lawyers. They hired Skadden Arps (one of the biggest law firms in DC) to come after the University of Maryland after they got hold of the technical reports I wrote, and the end result is that CASL is not permitted to distribute them and I am not supposed to talk about them. I believe these Rosetta Stone technical reports are actually available through the CASL website, but I have been told not to distribute the link. > > Feel free to forward this response to the list if you think it would be helpful to anyone. > > Thanks for getting in touch with me! > > Katie From amnfn at well.com Sat Jan 22 14:33:45 2011 From: amnfn at well.com (A. Katz) Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2011 06:33:45 -0800 Subject: FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 17 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Fri, 21 Jan 2011, s.t. bischoff wrote: > Also, this reminds me of an issue I have thought about having worked with > facsimiles of unpublished texts. Does anyone know who owns legacy materials > such as unpublished field notes or manuscripts with data from endangered > languages or other types of languages? For example, texts collected in the > 19th or early 20th century (or earlier) in the US recording myths and > tales. Could these be construed as heritage objects that "must be returned" > to the community? Has anyone ever had to deal with this issue? We've seen > in recent years museums returning important objects to communities...I > wonder if this has come up in terms of language. Also, if a linguist records > a narrative or myth...who has the "copyright" to it, if anyone? The > linguist, the speaker, the community, the tribal council? > > Cheers, > Shannon Copyright is for the arrangement of words in a sequence, as it pertains to texts. You cannot copyright an idea. In the case of oral texts that were created centuries ago by unknown individual authors, a person cannot obtain copyright over them just by writing them down, because writing them down is not creating a new sequence. So... nobody has copyright in such oral texts -- not the natives and not the people who copy them down for the natives -- they are in the public domain, as long as authorship was finished long before the informant gave the linguist a recital of the text. If you have field notes that were taken down during a period that is still under copyright protection, then a facsimile of the written notes might be under copyright to the person who jotted them down or their heirs, but the actual text, which is an abstract sequence of words, in not within copyright. --Aya > > On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 1:00 PM, wrote: > >> Send FUNKNET mailing list submissions to >> funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> >> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >> https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/funknet >> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >> funknet-request at mailman.rice.edu >> >> You can reach the person managing the list at >> funknet-owner at mailman.rice.edu >> >> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >> than "Re: Contents of FUNKNET digest..." >> >> >> Today's Topics: >> >> 1. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >> (Wendy Smith) >> 2. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >> (Luke Kundl Pinette) >> 3. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >> (Tom Givon) >> 4. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >> (James J. Mischler) >> 5. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >> (Wendy Smith) >> 6. Re: FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 (s.t. bischoff) >> 7. Re: FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 (A. Katz) >> 8. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >> (John Du Bois) >> 9. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> (Luke Kundl Pinette) >> 10. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> (Luke Kundl Pinette) >> 11. Call for papers: Lancaster Postgraduate Conference in >> Linguistics and English Language (Gabrielatos, Costas) >> 12. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >> (Tim Thornes) >> 13. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >> (Pamela Munro) >> 14. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> (Brian MacWhinney) >> 15. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> (jess tauber) >> 16. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> (Tom Givon) >> 17. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> (Marianne Mithun) >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Message: 1 >> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 10:07:07 -0800 >> From: Wendy Smith >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> To: Keith Johnson >> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: <4D3879CB.6010503 at csusb.edu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, >> and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child >> acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no >> direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be >> patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the >> same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the >> materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women >> are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who >> works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training >> or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will >> learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint >> Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is >> virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car >> or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction >> to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. >> >> On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>> Hi Funksters, >>> >>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>> raises a couple of >>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>> languages >>> unit? >>> >>> Keith Johnson >>> >>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 2 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 03:15:49 +0900 >> From: Luke Kundl Pinette >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> To: Keith Johnson , >> funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: <4D387BD5.5020305 at comcast.net> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> Hi Keith, >> >> I'm of two minds about this. >> >> Now the Rosetta Stone is not a good program. And I will first confess >> that I've had a vendetta against the Rosetta Stone because I feel that >> its entire marketing strategy, from premise to conclusion consists of >> propagating myths about language instruction: >> >> 1. Children learn languages effortlessly. >> 2. You can learn a language like a child does. >> 3. You should learn a language like a child does. >> 4. The Rosetta Stone's program resembles the way a child learns language. >> 5. Ergo you can learn a language effortlessly using the Rosetta Stone. >> >> Nonetheless it's a very effective marketing strategy. Most people have >> heard of the Rosetta Stone, whether they study languages or not, and >> quite a lot of them believe it's the best program on the market. It's >> not the unjustified self-promotion over the competition which bothers me >> (that's the whole point of marketing), but rather the fact that it fits >> too well with the attitude Americans tend to have about language learning. >> >> I've met far too many people who claim that they simply don't have the >> knack for learning languages, as their efforts while they were in >> school, at the local community college, and yes--the Rosetta Stone >> show. Having studied with some of said people in college, I've observed >> that most students in language classes believe that less than five hours >> a week in a language class or on a computer is sufficient to learn a >> language, and that if they can't they're simply unable to learn a >> language. In the time I studied Spanish and Arabic in a classroom, I >> could not find one person willing to speak the language outside of class >> except for native speakers. >> >> I've heard praise for a couple other programs (which I won't name), >> however the people who use these programs, myself included, recognize >> that they are a tool and not a teacher. Rosetta Stone claims to be a >> teacher, and I've never met a person who's tried Rosetta Stone and >> claimed success in it. It's either a bad program (usually heard from >> someone who eventually learned the language through more conventional >> means) or it's the user's own fault (from someone who hasn't). >> >> Of course the easiest way to learn a language is to immerse yourself, >> but endangered languages tend to be in a situation similar to that I >> experienced in the United States, where native speakers of the target >> language are hard to come by outside of formal classes. In situations >> like that it's absolutely essential to practice with other non-native >> speakers, which requires both will and resources. And the question is >> whether the Rosetta Stone's contribution to the latter outweighs any >> detrimental effect on the former. >> >> It's well established in psychology that when people find something hard >> and think that it will always be hard, they tend to give up. I've long >> suspected that telling hearing a program makes language easy, and then >> finding that it's not would encourage people to give up more easily than >> going into it with the assumption it will be a challenge. And while >> this would be a bad thing when we're talking Americans learning Arabic, >> it's a great deal worse when we're talking a language on the verge of >> extinction. >> >> But language is quite different from most of human psychology, and I >> don't think there's been any research on language specifically. The >> kind of people who buy the Rosetta Stone expecting a >> brain-translator-slug may not be the kind of people who are all that >> determined to learn a language in the first place, and the people who >> use the program to learn an endangered language will go into it with >> different expectations. They won't be using it because they think it's >> an easy way to attract Italian models, but rather because it's what's >> available. And I'd expect that these students will be using it as a >> tool and not a teacher. Language revitalization takes a good deal more >> dedication and savvy than learning one of the world's major tongues. >> >> The Rosetta Stone does record actual native speakers, and in that sense, >> when your options are limited, it would almost certainly be a useful >> tool. I'm not sure if there are other language companies who have >> endangered languages departments. Personally I'd like to see pretty >> much any company except the Rosetta Stone doing this, but even despite >> my dislike of the company I'm inclined to say it's probably beneficial >> on the balance. >> >> Regards, >> Luke >> >> >> On 1/21/11 1:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>> Hi Funksters, >>> >>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>> raises a couple of >>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>> languages >>> unit? >>> >>> Keith Johnson >>> >>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 3 >> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 11:16:32 -0700 >> From: Tom Givon >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: <4D387C00.2050307 at uoregon.edu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> >> >> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my Ute >> friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. However, >> preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the Natives are >> just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more vulnerable. I >> hope they don't create more damage than history already has. TG >> >> ============== >> >> >> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>> Hi Funksters, >>> >>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>> raises a couple of >>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>> languages >>> unit? >>> >>> Keith Johnson >>> >>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 4 >> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 12:19:39 -0600 >> From: "James J. Mischler" >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> To: Wendy Smith , Keith Johnson >> >> Cc: "funknet at mailman.rice.edu" >> Message-ID: >> <285D95BE552E5A4F9C45A549C5763B3635D9480115 at ex-mbx1.nsula.edu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >> >> Wendy and all, >> >> I wonder if *any* program has been found, via controlled research study, to >> aid in the learning of a language. Wendy said that there are programs that >> are better than Rosetta Stone; what are they? Is there any data to support >> the view that the program(s) did in fact aid learning? >> >> Jim Mischler >> Assistant Professor >> Language & Communication >> Northwestern State University of Louisiana >> Natchitoches, LA >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [mailto: >> funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Wendy Smith >> Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:07 PM >> To: Keith Johnson >> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> >> This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, >> and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child >> acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no >> direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be >> patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the >> same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the >> materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women >> are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who >> works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training >> or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will >> learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint >> Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is >> virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car >> or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction >> to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. >> >> On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>> Hi Funksters, >>> >>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>> raises a couple of >>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>> languages >>> unit? >>> >>> Keith Johnson >>> >>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 5 >> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 10:29:35 -0800 >> From: Wendy Smith >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> To: "James J. Mischler" >> Cc: Keith Johnson , >> "funknet at mailman.rice.edu" >> Message-ID: <4D387F0F.7070400 at csusb.edu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> no language programs can effect language acquisition or learning (in the >> case of the adult brain we say 'learning,' not acquisition). I have been >> using Pimsleur which I have found to be quite good in providing the >> sounds of the language and some useful conversation. It is still >> repetition and memory, which does not equate SLA. I am now repeating >> these dialogues in my sleep (!) but when I try to speak to a native >> speaker, it all goes out the window. I am counting on immersion--I will >> be in Belarus for 4-5 months as of Monday. (I know of no controlled >> study of any program--but it doesn't mean they haven't been done--I >> would check ACTFL for that information). >> >> On 1/20/2011 10:19 AM, James J. Mischler wrote: >>> Wendy and all, >>> >>> I wonder if *any* program has been found, via controlled research study, >> to aid in the learning of a language. Wendy said that there are programs >> that are better than Rosetta Stone; what are they? Is there any data to >> support the view that the program(s) did in fact aid learning? >>> >>> Jim Mischler >>> Assistant Professor >>> Language& Communication >>> Northwestern State University of Louisiana >>> Natchitoches, LA >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [mailto: >> funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Wendy Smith >>> Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:07 PM >>> To: Keith Johnson >>> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >>> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >>> >>> This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, >>> and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child >>> acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no >>> direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be >>> patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the >>> same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the >>> materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women >>> are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who >>> works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training >>> or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will >>> learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint >>> Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is >>> virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car >>> or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction >>> to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. >>> >>> On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>>> Hi Funksters, >>>> >>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>>> raises a couple of >>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>>> languages >>>> unit? >>>> >>>> Keith Johnson >>>> >>>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 6 >> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 13:31:36 -0500 >> From: "s.t. bischoff" >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 >> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: >> >>> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 >> >> The issue of Rosetta Stone and endangered languages seems ripe for >> controversy. The relationship can be easily exploited by Rosetta Stone. If >> a >> community provides data and RS controls the data the community may find >> itself at the mercy of the RS. For example, as I understand it, often RS >> provides the "service" to create the resources for "free". They charge a >> nominal fee for access to the first level lessons. However, that fee >> increases with advancing levels. Like most minority groups, endangered >> language communities are easy targets for exploitation (see the recent >> Coushatta casino scam). Additionally, there is a good deal of controversy >> regarding weather or not RS actually works. As I understand it, some >> researchers have done research on RS and the conclusion have been that it >> doesn't work (linguists working the software can judge for >> themselves)...the >> results cannot be released due to litigation. In short, these types of >> relationships can't help but raise some concerns...I wonder if communities >> (both endangered language and academic) are always savvy enough to protect >> themselves. Of course greater detail of the actual relationships that RS >> creates would be helpful in terms of understanding. >> >> On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 1:00 PM, wrote: >> >>> Send FUNKNET mailing list submissions to >>> funknet at mailman.rice.edu >>> >>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >>> https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/funknet >>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >>> funknet-request at mailman.rice.edu >>> >>> You can reach the person managing the list at >>> funknet-owner at mailman.rice.edu >>> >>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >>> than "Re: Contents of FUNKNET digest..." >>> >>> >>> Today's Topics: >>> >>> 1. Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >>> (Keith Johnson) >>> 2. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >>> (A. Katz) >>> >>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> Message: 1 >>> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 08:50:19 -0800 >>> From: Keith Johnson >>> Subject: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >>> languages >>> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >>> Message-ID: >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes >>> >>> Hi Funksters, >>> >>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>> raises a couple of >>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>> languages >>> unit? >>> >>> Keith Johnson >>> >>> >>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> Message: 2 >>> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 09:38:15 -0800 (PST) >>> From: "A. Katz" >>> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >>> languages >>> To: Keith Johnson >>> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >>> Message-ID: >>> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed >>> >>> Why not? If it helps preserve the language, and the speakers approve, >> then >>> there should be no problem. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, 20 Jan 2011, Keith Johnson wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Funksters, >>>> >>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >> raises >>> a >>>> couple of >>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>> languages >>>> unit? >>>> >>>> Keith Johnson >>>> >>>> >>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> End of FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 >>> *************************************** >>> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 7 >> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 11:12:17 -0800 (PST) >> From: "A. Katz" >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 >> To: "s.t. bischoff" >> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: >> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed >> >> I think the issue of whether the RS program works is quite marginal to the >> question of whether RS or some other commercial program can help to >> preserve the resources of a language community for future generations. >> >> Let's grant for a moment that RS -- or any other computerized program -- >> cannot in and of itself cause someone to acquire a language that he cannot >> speak already. >> >> The question is: how are speakers of this language going to be damaged by >> the program? Surely their language isn't going to be "taken away from >> them." What they know, they know. What they are able to transmit to the >> next generation by natural means, they will. So what is really at issue >> is: will this help them to preserve language resources now in danger of >> being lost? Will it help keep the language on ice, in case of language >> death, so that it can be revived later, by people willing to put in the >> effort? >> >> Are there other issues? Is there any fear that these resources will not be >> available to future generations of would be speakers? Is someone >> concerned that the language will get "patented" and only RS will have the >> license to use it? >> >> >> --Aya >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 8 >> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 17:48:25 -0800 >> From: John Du Bois >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> To: Tom Givon >> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: <4D38E5E9.9030402 at linguistics.ucsb.edu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage >> that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in an >> endangered language community. >> >> For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that work >> with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the last >> speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far as >> indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, and >> linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this specific >> legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for whatever >> reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on their >> language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language >> community, this can have a big negative impact. >> >> It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered >> language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and to >> work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies for >> mitigating any negative effects. >> >> Jack Du Bois >> >> On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: >>> >>> >>> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my >>> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. >>> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the >>> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more >>> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already >>> has. TG >>> >>> ============== >>> >>> >>> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>>> Hi Funksters, >>>> >>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>>> raises a couple of >>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>>> languages >>>> unit? >>>> >>>> Keith Johnson >>>> >>>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> -- >> >> *************************************************** >> John W. Du Bois, Professor >> Department of Linguistics >> 3607 South Hall >> University of California, Santa Barbara >> Santa Barbara, California 93106-3100 >> USA >> *************************************************** >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 9 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:34:14 +0900 >> From: Luke Kundl Pinette >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to >> endangered >> languages >> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: <4D38F0A6.1010605 at comcast.net> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> James, >> So this gets us a bit off topic, but again I of course have to comment. >> >> I don't know about a controlled study. Before I decided on pragmatics I >> considered doing my thesis on second-language learning strategies, and >> did a fair bit of research to this end, and I didn't see any formal >> paper specifically mentioning language programs. I'd suspect there's >> something, but these programs are all designed so differently that a >> negative result on one wouldn't apply across programs. >> >> As I said earlier, no program can be a teacher. Until we design a >> program that can pass the Turing test, even if we imagine a program that >> can hold a conversation, it won't be able to teach subtle distinctions >> in semantics and pragmatics. Consider the difference in spoken English >> between "Whaddaya doing?" "Whacha doing?" and "Whacha up to?" and >> consider the fact that not only English, but every language has myriads >> of minor distinctions like this. >> >> There's three programs I know by name; I've had all of them recommended >> to me by friends and acquaintances: Rosetta Stone, Pimsleur, and Before >> You Know It. Rosetta Stone as I said was so awful out of the box, >> contradicting everything I knew about language learning and good >> pedagogy that I promptly returned it to my brother (who had been foolish >> enough to buy it and of course never used it). >> >> The two programs I've used are Pimsleur and Before You Know It. I like >> Pimsleur, it teaches grammar from the outset, and starts the way you >> would start a language class, and teaches you to speak in sentences from >> the start. I think it would be more useful if you have someone to >> practice with--the scripts it uses are actually pretty good, but if you >> don't have someone it's just rote memorization. And it's definitely not >> a quick way to learn a language. And if you know linguistics, and have >> broken down the morphology of the sentence less than ten minutes in, it >> becomes a bit tedious. It's still something I happily recommend to >> people I know, though I usually suggest they get it from the library, >> unless the site is having a sale (as I think they sometimes do). >> >> On the other hand if you've traveled much to a foreign country without >> speaking the language, you'll know that pointing, money, and a >> calculator will get you pretty far. A few words, social niceties like >> "hello," "thank you," and "I'm sorry" will get you even further, and if >> you're going right now it's useful to be able to pick which words you >> need. Before You Know It, which an acquaintance described as a set of >> computerized flashcards, is useful in this respect. I don't know anyone >> who's used the paid version, or even what that includes, but the free >> version is quite extensive. >> >> My biggest complaint is that the pronunciations given are generally not >> the way the speaker would say it. It's like if you paid an English >> speaker to ennunciate words, and they said "what-are-you-do-ing" >> "want-to" "ve-ge-ta-ble" and "com-for-ta-ble" every time. For example >> Koreans don't say "annyeonghaseyo" for "hello," but "anyeseyo" or even >> "yeseyo." And "thank you" is not "kamsahamnida" but "kamsamnida." >> Nonetheless, these are useful words. The Koreans understood what I was >> saying, even if they always cracked up when they heard me, and since I >> knew what the words sounded like in context I was able to figure out how >> they were actually pronounced. But if the paid version contained clips >> of the way people actually say the words, it would be well worth paying >> for. >> >> I think most of the lesser known products on the market are similar to >> one or the other of these. I've seen other computer programs which are >> flashcard based, and I inherited a few German records and tapes from my >> grandfather when he moved to Florida, and they're similar to Pimsleur. >> (Though I like Pimsleur's layout better.) >> >> That said though, when you view language programs as a tool to help >> study, you might as well ask whether there's any data to support the >> view that textbooks in fact aid learning. It depends on the program, >> the student, and the use the latter makes of the former. >> >> Regards, >> Luke >> >> On 1/21/11 3:19 AM, James J. Mischler wrote: >>> Wendy and all, >>> >>> I wonder if *any* program has been found, via controlled research study, >> to aid in the learning of a language. Wendy said that there are programs >> that are better than Rosetta Stone; what are they? Is there any data to >> support the view that the program(s) did in fact aid learning? >>> >>> Jim Mischler >>> Assistant Professor >>> Language& Communication >>> Northwestern State University of Louisiana >>> Natchitoches, LA >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [mailto: >> funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Wendy Smith >>> Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:07 PM >>> To: Keith Johnson >>> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >>> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >>> >>> This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, >>> and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child >>> acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no >>> direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be >>> patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the >>> same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the >>> materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women >>> are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who >>> works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training >>> or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will >>> learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint >>> Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is >>> virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car >>> or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction >>> to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. >>> >>> On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>>> Hi Funksters, >>>> >>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>>> raises a couple of >>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>>> languages >>>> unit? >>>> >>>> Keith Johnson >>>> >>>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 10 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 13:09:16 +0900 >> From: Luke Kundl Pinette >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to >> endangered >> languages >> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: <4D3906EC.7030301 at comcast.net> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> The question is, why is the Rosetta Stone doing this anyways? According >> to the article, Rosetta doesn't actually distribute the programs, just >> makes them. It doesn't say if it's turning a profit, a loss or selling >> them at cost (though the last is what one would infer from the article). >> If they're doing it for the PR, they'll probably try not to screw over >> native communities too badly, though of course you know what they say >> about the pavement used on the road to hell. >> >> If they're in it for the money, I wouldn't put it past them to add a >> clause like that. Then we've got a legal question on our hands. It's >> essentially monopolistic practice, particularly if they make a pattern >> of deliberately blocking competition for language programs in endangered >> languages. I suspect that if they were to try it, it would be possible >> to find some lawyer willing to pursue the issue, and when taken to court >> they would lose. It would certainly cause a lot of trouble in the >> meantime though. >> >> It sounds like nobody on this list has any illusions about the company. >> It's depressing to see that a linguist like Krauss, and one in such an >> important position has bought into Rosetta Stone's marketing, but again, >> unless another company steps up it doesn't sound like there's any >> options other than no language program. If Rosetta is not in fact >> inserting insidious clauses into the agreements with their informants, >> it's still probably better than nothing. >> >> Regards, >> Luke >> >> >> On 1/21/11 10:48 AM, John Du Bois wrote: >>> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage >>> that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in >>> an endangered language community. >>> >>> For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that >>> work with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the >>> last speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far >>> as indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, >>> and linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this >>> specific legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for >>> whatever reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on >>> their language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language >>> community, this can have a big negative impact. >>> >>> It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered >>> language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and >>> to work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies >>> for mitigating any negative effects. >>> >>> Jack Du Bois >>> >>> On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my >>>> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. >>>> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the >>>> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more >>>> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already >>>> has. TG >>>> >>>> ============== >>>> >>>> >>>> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>>>> Hi Funksters, >>>>> >>>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>>>> raises a couple of >>>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>>>> languages >>>>> unit? >>>>> >>>>> Keith Johnson >>>>> >>>>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 11 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 03:09:08 -0800 (PST) >> From: "Gabrielatos, Costas" >> Subject: [FUNKNET] Call for papers: Lancaster Postgraduate Conference >> in Linguistics and English Language >> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Cc: Helen West >> Message-ID: <420317.74566.qm at web113306.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 >> >> THE SIXTH LANCASTER UNIVERSITY INTERNATIONAL POSTGRADUATE CONFERENCE >> IN?LINGUISTICS AND LANGUAGE TEACHING >> >> Dear All, >> >> We are pleased to announce the Sixth Lancaster University International >> Postgraduate Conference in Linguistics and English Language (LAEL PG >> Conference) which will take place at Lancaster University's George Fox >> building, >> >> on Tuesday 12th of July 2011. >> >> This one-day conference is designed to give linguistics postgraduates from >> all >> research areas an opportunity to present and discuss their research in >> an informal and intellectually stimulating setting. >> >> This year's conference will be opened by Prof. Greg Myers (Lancaster >> University), and there will be guest plenary lectures by: >> Prof. Paul Kerswill (Lancaster University) >> Dr. Johnny Unger (Lancaster University) >> >> We invite postgraduate students to submit abstracts for oral and poster >> presentations on any area of linguistics, theoretical or applied (see below >> for >> abstract submission guidelines). >> >> Topics Include: >> >> ? - Cognitive linguistics >> ? - Corpus linguistics >> ? - Critical discourse analysis >> ? - Historical linguistics >> ? - Literacy studies >> ? - Pragmatics/semantics >> ? - Phonetics/phonology >> ? - Second language teaching/learning/assessment >> ? - Sociolinguistics >> ? - Syntax/morphology Stylistics >> ? - Translation studies >> ? - Other: please specify >> >> For further information, please visit the website: >> http://www.lancs.ac.uk/fass/events/laelpgconference/index.htm >> >> Key Dates >> >> Abstracts must be received by Friday 25 March 2011 >> Notification of acceptancewill be given on Tuesday 10 May 2011 >> >> Hope to hear from you all soon, >> >> Helen Faye West >> Janina Iwaniec >> Matteo Di Cristofaro >> Jonathon Adams >> Ibrahim Efe >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 12 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 08:14:57 -0600 >> From: "Tim Thornes" >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> To: , >> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: <4D394082020000870009B3F2 at gwia1.uca.edu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII >> >> I would agree with this sentiment as well as with the inherent potential of >> a company like this to really screw up relationships with members of an >> endangered language community. I mean, if Rosetta Stone as the "worldwide >> leader in language learning worldwide (sic)" ( >> http://www.rosettastone.com/backnolang?pc=se2011&cid=se-gg&gclid=CPCPvsm8y6YCFQPsKgodqhCrHA) >> can't help us, why would I think some nerdy academic with a microphone and a >> laptop could? >> As one such, I am as capable as any big company of damaging relationships >> with community members, and I ought to know better. Is there any >> expectation that RS does? >> Best, >> Tim >> >> Tim Thornes, PhD >> Assistant Professor of Linguistics >> Department of Writing >> University of Central Arkansas >> 201 Donaghey Avenue >> Conway, Arkansas 72035 >> USA >> (501)450-5613 >> tthornes at uca.edu >> >>>>> John Du Bois 01/20/11 7:48 PM >>> >> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage >> that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in an >> endangered language community. >> >> For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that work >> with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the last >> speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far as >> indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, and >> linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this specific >> legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for whatever >> reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on their >> language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language >> community, this can have a big negative impact. >> >> It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered >> language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and to >> work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies for >> mitigating any negative effects. >> >> Jack Du Bois >> >> On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: >>> >>> >>> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my >>> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. >>> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the >>> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more >>> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already >>> has. TG >>> >>> ============== >>> >>> >>> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>>> Hi Funksters, >>>> >>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>>> raises a couple of >>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>>> languages >>>> unit? >>>> >>>> Keith Johnson >>>> >>>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> -- >> >> *************************************************** >> John W. Du Bois, Professor >> Department of Linguistics >> 3607 South Hall >> University of California, Santa Barbara >> Santa Barbara, California 93106-3100 >> USA >> *************************************************** >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 13 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 07:48:38 -0800 >> From: Pamela Munro >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> To: Tim Thornes >> Cc: tgivon at uoregon.edu, dubois at linguistics.ucsb.edu, >> funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: <4D39AAD6.7090508 at ucla.edu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> All these suggestions are truly scary. >> >> Pam >> >> Tim Thornes wrote: >>> I would agree with this sentiment as well as with the inherent potential >> of a company like this to really screw up relationships with members of an >> endangered language community. I mean, if Rosetta Stone as the "worldwide >> leader in language learning worldwide (sic)" ( >> http://www.rosettastone.com/backnolang?pc=se2011&cid=se-gg&gclid=CPCPvsm8y6YCFQPsKgodqhCrHA) >> can't help us, why would I think some nerdy academic with a microphone and a >> laptop could? >>> As one such, I am as capable as any big company of damaging relationships >> with community members, and I ought to know better. Is there any >> expectation that RS does? >>> Best, >>> Tim >>> >>> Tim Thornes, PhD >>> Assistant Professor of Linguistics >>> Department of Writing >>> University of Central Arkansas >>> 201 Donaghey Avenue >>> Conway, Arkansas 72035 >>> USA >>> (501)450-5613 >>> tthornes at uca.edu >>> >>> >>>>>> John Du Bois 01/20/11 7:48 PM >>> >>>>>> >>> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage >>> that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in an >>> endangered language community. >>> >>> For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that work >>> with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the last >>> speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far as >>> indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, and >>> linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this specific >>> legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for whatever >>> reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on their >>> language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language >>> community, this can have a big negative impact. >>> >>> It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered >>> language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and to >>> work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies for >>> mitigating any negative effects. >>> >>> Jack Du Bois >>> >>> On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: >>> >>>> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my >>>> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. >>>> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the >>>> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more >>>> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already >>>> has. TG >>>> >>>> ============== >>>> >>>> >>>> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Funksters, >>>>> >>>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>>>> raises a couple of >>>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>>>> languages >>>>> unit? >>>>> >>>>> Keith Johnson >>>>> >>>>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >> >> -- >> Pamela Munro, >> Professor, Linguistics, UCLA >> UCLA Box 951543 >> Los Angeles, CA 90095-1543 >> http://www.linguistics.ucla.edu/people/munro/munro.htm >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 14 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:30:39 -0500 >> From: Brian MacWhinney >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to >> endangered >> languages >> To: Funknet >> Message-ID: <9A44FA72-E6DF-4498-A4A0-0A4C4E605BD7 at cmu.edu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >> >> Folks, >> >> I share your low regard for Rosetta Stone, not so much for what they >> fail to deliver, but rather for the overstated claims they make. I know a >> couple of students who have worked with them on internships and, so far, >> there is no evidence of malicious practices vis a vis native communities. >> Despite this, I agree that it is likely that communities who collaborate >> with them will get led down the garden path and end up unwilling to >> participate later with other, more promising, approaches to language >> maintenance. But these are freely-formed relations between consenting >> parties, so nothing can militate against it. >> Regarding the wider issue of effectiveness of language learning >> programs, I find it strange that Luke has located nothing on this subject. >> Back in 1968, Paul Pimsleur already demonstrated the effectiveness of his >> method of graduated interval recall which is picked up, in an admittedly >> diluted form, by the current Pimsleur series. There are hundreds of studies >> distributed across six major journals demonstrating the relatively greater >> effectiveness of specific components of language instruction, from keyword >> method to corrective feedback. These effects have been demonstrated in both >> controlled experiments and, somewhat less convincingly, in classroom and >> online instruction. Nearly all of my own experimental work is now focused >> on tests of this type embedded within online tutors. Perhaps what Luke is >> referring to is the absence of evidence of the overall comparative >> effectiveness of the big commercial language programs such as Rosetta Stone >> or Pimsleur. In the cases of >> such full programs, it is extremely difficult to coordinate a decent >> experimental test, because it would require buy in from a large group of >> volunteers across a long period with careful controls for study time and so >> on. So, I think it is generally better to focus on demonstrations of the >> effects of individual components of programs, because these can be subject >> to reasonable experimental control. Of course, all of this leaves the >> naturalistic methods of language learning out in the cold, and that is >> wrong. In the end, the best way to advance this field will be to increase >> automatic data collection during the language learning process, within >> online, classroom, and naturalistic contexts. This is what I am working on. >> >> Regards, >> >> -- Brian MacWhinney >> >> On Jan 20, 2011, at 11:09 PM, Luke Kundl Pinette wrote: >> >>> The question is, why is the Rosetta Stone doing this anyways? According >> to the article, Rosetta doesn't actually distribute the programs, just makes >> them. It doesn't say if it's turning a profit, a loss or selling them at >> cost (though the last is what one would infer from the article). If they're >> doing it for the PR, they'll probably try not to screw over native >> communities too badly, though of course you know what they say about the >> pavement used on the road to hell. >>> >>> If they're in it for the money, I wouldn't put it past them to add a >> clause like that. Then we've got a legal question on our hands. It's >> essentially monopolistic practice, particularly if they make a pattern of >> deliberately blocking competition for language programs in endangered >> languages. I suspect that if they were to try it, it would be possible to >> find some lawyer willing to pursue the issue, and when taken to court they >> would lose. It would certainly cause a lot of trouble in the meantime >> though. >>> >>> It sounds like nobody on this list has any illusions about the company. >> It's depressing to see that a linguist like Krauss, and one in such an >> important position has bought into Rosetta Stone's marketing, but again, >> unless another company steps up it doesn't sound like there's any options >> other than no language program. If Rosetta is not in fact inserting >> insidious clauses into the agreements with their informants, it's still >> probably better than nothing. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Luke >>> >>> >>> On 1/21/11 10:48 AM, John Du Bois wrote: >>>> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage >>>> that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in >>>> an endangered language community. >>>> >>>> For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that >>>> work with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the >>>> last speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far >>>> as indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, >>>> and linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this >>>> specific legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for >>>> whatever reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on >>>> their language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language >>>> community, this can have a big negative impact. >>>> >>>> It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered >>>> language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and >>>> to work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies >>>> for mitigating any negative effects. >>>> >>>> Jack Du Bois >>>> >>>> On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my >>>>> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. >>>>> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the >>>>> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more >>>>> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already >>>>> has. TG >>>>> >>>>> ============== >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>>>>> Hi Funksters, >>>>>> >>>>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>>>>> raises a couple of >>>>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>>>>> languages >>>>>> unit? >>>>>> >>>>>> Keith Johnson >>>>>> >>>>>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 15 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:33:26 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >> From: jess tauber >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to >> endangered >> languages >> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: >> < >> 32117937.1295627607528.JavaMail.root at wamui-hunyo.atl.sa.earthlink.net> >> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 >> >> Just minutes ago as I write this, on the television show 'The View', actor >> Ed Harris brought up his not so successful attempt to use Rosetta Stone, >> 'that thing you can get', to pick up a little Russian for his movie opening >> this week- eventually he had to utilize the services of a Bulgarian, in >> person. >> >> Maybe the public isn't so misinformed? >> >> Jess Tauber >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 16 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 09:40:02 -0700 >> From: Tom Givon >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to >> endangered >> languages >> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: <4D39B6E2.3030004 at uoregon.edu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> >> They still shell out C-notes by the bushel for this scam. RS does not >> make their money off satisfied customers, but off poor first-hit >> suckers. TG >> >> ============================ >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On 1/21/2011 9:33 AM, jess tauber wrote: >>> Just minutes ago as I write this, on the television show 'The View', >> actor Ed Harris brought up his not so successful attempt to use Rosetta >> Stone, 'that thing you can get', to pick up a little Russian for his movie >> opening this week- eventually he had to utilize the services of a Bulgarian, >> in person. >>> >>> Maybe the public isn't so misinformed? >>> >>> Jess Tauber >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 17 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 08:57:58 -0800 >> From: Marianne Mithun >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to >> endangered >> languages >> To: Brian MacWhinney , Funknet >> >> Message-ID: >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed >> >> I finally have to weigh in here on another aspect of the issue specifically >> with respect to endangered languages. >> >> For communities in danger of losing their traditional languages, learning >> the heritage language isn't just about being able to order a meal in a >> restaurant or book a hotel room. It's often about something much deeper, >> about appreciating traditional ways of viewing the world, of categorizing >> concepts, of combining ideas, of interacting. And the Rosetta Stone system >> is one-size-fits-all. People are essentially asked to translate the model >> sentences into whatever language is at hand, and the results tend to be >> close to word-by-word translations. So yes, learners learn how to say 'boy' >> and 'run'. But they don't learn, for example, that ideas expressed by nouns >> in English are expressed in language X by verbs. Or that in many languages >> people don't tend to talk sentences consisting of Noun Verb Noun (or Noun >> Noun Verb). They don't learn about the glorious elaboration of semantic >> distinctions or domains that have no counterparts in the model language. >> They probably won't learn about evidentials. They are unlikely to learn >> about elaborate aspectual distinctions. They certainly won't learn >> different patterns of subordination or clause combining. >> >> For some situations, that may be fine. Heritage speakers just want to be >> able to use some phrases in everyday talk. And they don't have the time or >> interest for that kind of complexity. For others, it sort of defeats the >> whole purpose. >> >> Marianne Mithun >> >> >> --On Friday, January 21, 2011 11:30 AM -0500 Brian MacWhinney >> wrote: >> >>> Folks, >>> >>> I share your low regard for Rosetta Stone, not so much for what they >>> fail to deliver, but rather for the overstated claims they make. I know >>> a couple of students who have worked with them on internships and, so >>> far, there is no evidence of malicious practices vis a vis native >>> communities. Despite this, I agree that it is likely that communities who >>> collaborate with them will get led down the garden path and end up >>> unwilling to participate later with other, more promising, approaches to >>> language maintenance. But these are freely-formed relations between >>> consenting parties, so nothing can militate against it. Regarding >>> the wider issue of effectiveness of language learning programs, I find it >>> strange that Luke has located nothing on this subject. Back in 1968, >>> Paul Pimsleur already demonstrated the effectiveness of his method of >>> graduated interval recall which is picked up, in an admittedly diluted >>> form, by the current Pimsleur series. There are hundreds of studies >>> distributed across six major journals demonstrating the relatively >>> greater effectiveness of specific components of language instruction, >>> from keyword method to corrective feedback. These effects have been >>> demonstrated in both controlled experiments and, somewhat less >>> convincingly, in classroom and online instruction. Nearly all of my own >>> experimental work is now focused on tests of this type embedded within >>> online tutors. Perhaps what Luke is referring to is the absence of >>> evidence of the overall comparative effectiveness of the big commercial >>> language programs such as Rosetta Stone or Pimsleur. In the cases of >>> such full programs, it is extremely difficult to coordinate a decent >>> experimental test, because it would require buy in from a large group of >>> volunteers across a long period with careful controls for study time and >>> so on. So, I think it is generally better to focus on demonstrations of >>> the effects of individual components of programs, because these can be >>> subject to reasonable experimental control. Of course, all of this >>> leaves the naturalistic methods of language learning out in the cold, and >>> that is wrong. In the end, the best way to advance this field will be to >>> increase automatic data collection during the language learning process, >>> within online, classroom, and naturalistic contexts. This is what I am >>> working on. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> -- Brian MacWhinney >>> >>> On Jan 20, 2011, at 11:09 PM, Luke Kundl Pinette wrote: >>> >>>> The question is, why is the Rosetta Stone doing this anyways? According >>>> to the article, Rosetta doesn't actually distribute the programs, just >>>> makes them. It doesn't say if it's turning a profit, a loss or selling >>>> them at cost (though the last is what one would infer from the article). >>>> If they're doing it for the PR, they'll probably try not to screw over >>>> native communities too badly, though of course you know what they say >>>> about the pavement used on the road to hell. >>>> >>>> If they're in it for the money, I wouldn't put it past them to add a >>>> clause like that. Then we've got a legal question on our hands. It's >>>> essentially monopolistic practice, particularly if they make a pattern >>>> of deliberately blocking competition for language programs in endangered >>>> languages. I suspect that if they were to try it, it would be possible >>>> to find some lawyer willing to pursue the issue, and when taken to court >>>> they would lose. It would certainly cause a lot of trouble in the >>>> meantime though. >>>> >>>> It sounds like nobody on this list has any illusions about the company. >>>> It's depressing to see that a linguist like Krauss, and one in such an >>>> important position has bought into Rosetta Stone's marketing, but again, >>>> unless another company steps up it doesn't sound like there's any >>>> options other than no language program. If Rosetta is not in fact >>>> inserting insidious clauses into the agreements with their informants, >>>> it's still probably better than nothing. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Luke >>>> >>>> >>>> On 1/21/11 10:48 AM, John Du Bois wrote: >>>>> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage >>>>> that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in >>>>> an endangered language community. >>>>> >>>>> For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that >>>>> work with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the >>>>> last speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far >>>>> as indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, >>>>> and linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this >>>>> specific legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for >>>>> whatever reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on >>>>> their language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language >>>>> community, this can have a big negative impact. >>>>> >>>>> It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered >>>>> language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and >>>>> to work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies >>>>> for mitigating any negative effects. >>>>> >>>>> Jack Du Bois >>>>> >>>>> On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my >>>>>> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. >>>>>> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the >>>>>> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more >>>>>> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already >>>>>> has. TG >>>>>> >>>>>> ============== >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>>>>>> Hi Funksters, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>>>>>> raises a couple of >>>>>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>>>>>> languages >>>>>>> unit? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Keith Johnson >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-ros >>>>>>> etta.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> End of FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 17 >> *************************************** >> > > From delancey at uoregon.edu Sat Jan 22 14:47:39 2011 From: delancey at uoregon.edu (scott delancey) Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2011 06:47:39 -0800 Subject: FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 17 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 22:20:48 -0500, "s.t. bischoff" wrote: > Also, if a linguist records > a narrative or myth...who has the "copyright" to it, if anyone? The > linguist, the speaker, the community, the tribal council? I don't know the lawyer legalities (I doubt if the issues have been extensively tested in court) but as both a practical and an ethical matter these are questions you need to negotiate with the tribe before you collect anything. And get it in writing. And in detail. -- Scott DeLancey Department of Linguistics University of Oregon 1290 Eugene, OR 97403-1290, USA 541-346-3901 From macw at cmu.edu Sun Jan 23 02:19:13 2011 From: macw at cmu.edu (Brian MacWhinney) Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2011 21:19:13 -0500 Subject: FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 17 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Shannon, If you click through and download the fact sheet at the CASL site, you will find no evidence of anything that looks like an actual empirical study in the sense of something with a control condition and outcomes measures. There appears to be a good reason for this. The programs that were evaluated were simply not appropriate for the target learners in terms of level or coverage. Regarding FST, I believe that you may be right about the copyright issue. When we started on the path of building morphological analyzers for the CHILDES and TalkBank databases, one of our early ideas was to simply make use of FST as an "off the shelf" technology. However, we then found that the various grammars built with FST were not publicly available, often because of copyright issues. This is why we built the MOR system as an alternative. We have developed MOR grammars for 12 languages and used them to tag large segments of the CHILDES and TalkBank databases. These grammars and the code that runs MOR are all open source, thereby avoiding this type of problem. -- Brian MacWhinney On Jan 21, 2011, at 6:11 PM, s.t. bischoff wrote: > The Center for Advanced Study of Language at UM College Park did a few > studies regarding language programs like RS...you can learn about these > studies at their website and download the official findings (I haven't read > these myself): > > http://casl.umd.edu/node/541 > > In conversation I was told that the RS report was not inclusive of all > findings because RS had blocked the report and was proceeding with > litigation against CASL to prevent the release of the findings which could > be damaging to RS. I can't verify the truth of this, but I have no reason to > doubt the source. > > When Xerox released its FST toolkit (useful for creating automated > syntactic, phonological, and morphological analyzers and thus things like > spell/grammar checkers, language revitalization tools, etc.), some linguists > took elements of the copyright notice to mean that "all data used with the > toolkit" became the property of Xerox in part or whole. This led some > linguists to work on the development of a similar open source FST toolkit, > FOMA. I'm not a copyright lawyer so can't comment on the validity of the > concern. > > Cheers, > Shannon > > > On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 1:00 PM, wrote: > >> Send FUNKNET mailing list submissions to >> funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> >> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >> https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/funknet >> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >> funknet-request at mailman.rice.edu >> >> You can reach the person managing the list at >> funknet-owner at mailman.rice.edu >> >> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >> than "Re: Contents of FUNKNET digest..." >> >> >> Today's Topics: >> >> 1. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >> (Wendy Smith) >> 2. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >> (Luke Kundl Pinette) >> 3. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >> (Tom Givon) >> 4. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >> (James J. Mischler) >> 5. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >> (Wendy Smith) >> 6. Re: FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 (s.t. bischoff) >> 7. Re: FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 (A. Katz) >> 8. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >> (John Du Bois) >> 9. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> (Luke Kundl Pinette) >> 10. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> (Luke Kundl Pinette) >> 11. Call for papers: Lancaster Postgraduate Conference in >> Linguistics and English Language (Gabrielatos, Costas) >> 12. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >> (Tim Thornes) >> 13. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >> (Pamela Munro) >> 14. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> (Brian MacWhinney) >> 15. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> (jess tauber) >> 16. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> (Tom Givon) >> 17. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> (Marianne Mithun) >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Message: 1 >> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 10:07:07 -0800 >> From: Wendy Smith >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> To: Keith Johnson >> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: <4D3879CB.6010503 at csusb.edu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, >> and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child >> acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no >> direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be >> patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the >> same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the >> materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women >> are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who >> works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training >> or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will >> learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint >> Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is >> virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car >> or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction >> to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. >> >> On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>> Hi Funksters, >>> >>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>> raises a couple of >>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>> languages >>> unit? >>> >>> Keith Johnson >>> >>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 2 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 03:15:49 +0900 >> From: Luke Kundl Pinette >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> To: Keith Johnson , >> funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: <4D387BD5.5020305 at comcast.net> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> Hi Keith, >> >> I'm of two minds about this. >> >> Now the Rosetta Stone is not a good program. And I will first confess >> that I've had a vendetta against the Rosetta Stone because I feel that >> its entire marketing strategy, from premise to conclusion consists of >> propagating myths about language instruction: >> >> 1. Children learn languages effortlessly. >> 2. You can learn a language like a child does. >> 3. You should learn a language like a child does. >> 4. The Rosetta Stone's program resembles the way a child learns language. >> 5. Ergo you can learn a language effortlessly using the Rosetta Stone. >> >> Nonetheless it's a very effective marketing strategy. Most people have >> heard of the Rosetta Stone, whether they study languages or not, and >> quite a lot of them believe it's the best program on the market. It's >> not the unjustified self-promotion over the competition which bothers me >> (that's the whole point of marketing), but rather the fact that it fits >> too well with the attitude Americans tend to have about language learning. >> >> I've met far too many people who claim that they simply don't have the >> knack for learning languages, as their efforts while they were in >> school, at the local community college, and yes--the Rosetta Stone >> show. Having studied with some of said people in college, I've observed >> that most students in language classes believe that less than five hours >> a week in a language class or on a computer is sufficient to learn a >> language, and that if they can't they're simply unable to learn a >> language. In the time I studied Spanish and Arabic in a classroom, I >> could not find one person willing to speak the language outside of class >> except for native speakers. >> >> I've heard praise for a couple other programs (which I won't name), >> however the people who use these programs, myself included, recognize >> that they are a tool and not a teacher. Rosetta Stone claims to be a >> teacher, and I've never met a person who's tried Rosetta Stone and >> claimed success in it. It's either a bad program (usually heard from >> someone who eventually learned the language through more conventional >> means) or it's the user's own fault (from someone who hasn't). >> >> Of course the easiest way to learn a language is to immerse yourself, >> but endangered languages tend to be in a situation similar to that I >> experienced in the United States, where native speakers of the target >> language are hard to come by outside of formal classes. In situations >> like that it's absolutely essential to practice with other non-native >> speakers, which requires both will and resources. And the question is >> whether the Rosetta Stone's contribution to the latter outweighs any >> detrimental effect on the former. >> >> It's well established in psychology that when people find something hard >> and think that it will always be hard, they tend to give up. I've long >> suspected that telling hearing a program makes language easy, and then >> finding that it's not would encourage people to give up more easily than >> going into it with the assumption it will be a challenge. And while >> this would be a bad thing when we're talking Americans learning Arabic, >> it's a great deal worse when we're talking a language on the verge of >> extinction. >> >> But language is quite different from most of human psychology, and I >> don't think there's been any research on language specifically. The >> kind of people who buy the Rosetta Stone expecting a >> brain-translator-slug may not be the kind of people who are all that >> determined to learn a language in the first place, and the people who >> use the program to learn an endangered language will go into it with >> different expectations. They won't be using it because they think it's >> an easy way to attract Italian models, but rather because it's what's >> available. And I'd expect that these students will be using it as a >> tool and not a teacher. Language revitalization takes a good deal more >> dedication and savvy than learning one of the world's major tongues. >> >> The Rosetta Stone does record actual native speakers, and in that sense, >> when your options are limited, it would almost certainly be a useful >> tool. I'm not sure if there are other language companies who have >> endangered languages departments. Personally I'd like to see pretty >> much any company except the Rosetta Stone doing this, but even despite >> my dislike of the company I'm inclined to say it's probably beneficial >> on the balance. >> >> Regards, >> Luke >> >> >> On 1/21/11 1:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>> Hi Funksters, >>> >>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>> raises a couple of >>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>> languages >>> unit? >>> >>> Keith Johnson >>> >>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 3 >> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 11:16:32 -0700 >> From: Tom Givon >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: <4D387C00.2050307 at uoregon.edu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> >> >> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my Ute >> friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. However, >> preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the Natives are >> just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more vulnerable. I >> hope they don't create more damage than history already has. TG >> >> ============== >> >> >> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>> Hi Funksters, >>> >>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>> raises a couple of >>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>> languages >>> unit? >>> >>> Keith Johnson >>> >>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 4 >> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 12:19:39 -0600 >> From: "James J. Mischler" >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> To: Wendy Smith , Keith Johnson >> >> Cc: "funknet at mailman.rice.edu" >> Message-ID: >> <285D95BE552E5A4F9C45A549C5763B3635D9480115 at ex-mbx1.nsula.edu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >> >> Wendy and all, >> >> I wonder if *any* program has been found, via controlled research study, to >> aid in the learning of a language. Wendy said that there are programs that >> are better than Rosetta Stone; what are they? Is there any data to support >> the view that the program(s) did in fact aid learning? >> >> Jim Mischler >> Assistant Professor >> Language & Communication >> Northwestern State University of Louisiana >> Natchitoches, LA >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [mailto: >> funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Wendy Smith >> Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:07 PM >> To: Keith Johnson >> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> >> This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, >> and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child >> acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no >> direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be >> patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the >> same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the >> materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women >> are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who >> works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training >> or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will >> learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint >> Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is >> virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car >> or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction >> to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. >> >> On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>> Hi Funksters, >>> >>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>> raises a couple of >>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>> languages >>> unit? >>> >>> Keith Johnson >>> >>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 5 >> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 10:29:35 -0800 >> From: Wendy Smith >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> To: "James J. Mischler" >> Cc: Keith Johnson , >> "funknet at mailman.rice.edu" >> Message-ID: <4D387F0F.7070400 at csusb.edu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> no language programs can effect language acquisition or learning (in the >> case of the adult brain we say 'learning,' not acquisition). I have been >> using Pimsleur which I have found to be quite good in providing the >> sounds of the language and some useful conversation. It is still >> repetition and memory, which does not equate SLA. I am now repeating >> these dialogues in my sleep (!) but when I try to speak to a native >> speaker, it all goes out the window. I am counting on immersion--I will >> be in Belarus for 4-5 months as of Monday. (I know of no controlled >> study of any program--but it doesn't mean they haven't been done--I >> would check ACTFL for that information). >> >> On 1/20/2011 10:19 AM, James J. Mischler wrote: >>> Wendy and all, >>> >>> I wonder if *any* program has been found, via controlled research study, >> to aid in the learning of a language. Wendy said that there are programs >> that are better than Rosetta Stone; what are they? Is there any data to >> support the view that the program(s) did in fact aid learning? >>> >>> Jim Mischler >>> Assistant Professor >>> Language& Communication >>> Northwestern State University of Louisiana >>> Natchitoches, LA >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [mailto: >> funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Wendy Smith >>> Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:07 PM >>> To: Keith Johnson >>> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >>> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >>> >>> This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, >>> and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child >>> acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no >>> direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be >>> patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the >>> same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the >>> materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women >>> are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who >>> works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training >>> or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will >>> learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint >>> Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is >>> virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car >>> or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction >>> to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. >>> >>> On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>>> Hi Funksters, >>>> >>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>>> raises a couple of >>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>>> languages >>>> unit? >>>> >>>> Keith Johnson >>>> >>>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 6 >> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 13:31:36 -0500 >> From: "s.t. bischoff" >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 >> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: >> >>> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 >> >> The issue of Rosetta Stone and endangered languages seems ripe for >> controversy. The relationship can be easily exploited by Rosetta Stone. If >> a >> community provides data and RS controls the data the community may find >> itself at the mercy of the RS. For example, as I understand it, often RS >> provides the "service" to create the resources for "free". They charge a >> nominal fee for access to the first level lessons. However, that fee >> increases with advancing levels. Like most minority groups, endangered >> language communities are easy targets for exploitation (see the recent >> Coushatta casino scam). Additionally, there is a good deal of controversy >> regarding weather or not RS actually works. As I understand it, some >> researchers have done research on RS and the conclusion have been that it >> doesn't work (linguists working the software can judge for >> themselves)...the >> results cannot be released due to litigation. In short, these types of >> relationships can't help but raise some concerns...I wonder if communities >> (both endangered language and academic) are always savvy enough to protect >> themselves. Of course greater detail of the actual relationships that RS >> creates would be helpful in terms of understanding. >> >> On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 1:00 PM, wrote: >> >>> Send FUNKNET mailing list submissions to >>> funknet at mailman.rice.edu >>> >>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >>> https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/funknet >>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >>> funknet-request at mailman.rice.edu >>> >>> You can reach the person managing the list at >>> funknet-owner at mailman.rice.edu >>> >>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >>> than "Re: Contents of FUNKNET digest..." >>> >>> >>> Today's Topics: >>> >>> 1. Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >>> (Keith Johnson) >>> 2. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >>> (A. Katz) >>> >>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> Message: 1 >>> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 08:50:19 -0800 >>> From: Keith Johnson >>> Subject: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >>> languages >>> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >>> Message-ID: >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes >>> >>> Hi Funksters, >>> >>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>> raises a couple of >>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>> languages >>> unit? >>> >>> Keith Johnson >>> >>> >>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> Message: 2 >>> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 09:38:15 -0800 (PST) >>> From: "A. Katz" >>> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >>> languages >>> To: Keith Johnson >>> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >>> Message-ID: >>> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed >>> >>> Why not? If it helps preserve the language, and the speakers approve, >> then >>> there should be no problem. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, 20 Jan 2011, Keith Johnson wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Funksters, >>>> >>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >> raises >>> a >>>> couple of >>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>> languages >>>> unit? >>>> >>>> Keith Johnson >>>> >>>> >>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> End of FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 >>> *************************************** >>> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 7 >> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 11:12:17 -0800 (PST) >> From: "A. Katz" >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 >> To: "s.t. bischoff" >> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: >> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed >> >> I think the issue of whether the RS program works is quite marginal to the >> question of whether RS or some other commercial program can help to >> preserve the resources of a language community for future generations. >> >> Let's grant for a moment that RS -- or any other computerized program -- >> cannot in and of itself cause someone to acquire a language that he cannot >> speak already. >> >> The question is: how are speakers of this language going to be damaged by >> the program? Surely their language isn't going to be "taken away from >> them." What they know, they know. What they are able to transmit to the >> next generation by natural means, they will. So what is really at issue >> is: will this help them to preserve language resources now in danger of >> being lost? Will it help keep the language on ice, in case of language >> death, so that it can be revived later, by people willing to put in the >> effort? >> >> Are there other issues? Is there any fear that these resources will not be >> available to future generations of would be speakers? Is someone >> concerned that the language will get "patented" and only RS will have the >> license to use it? >> >> >> --Aya >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 8 >> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 17:48:25 -0800 >> From: John Du Bois >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> To: Tom Givon >> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: <4D38E5E9.9030402 at linguistics.ucsb.edu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage >> that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in an >> endangered language community. >> >> For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that work >> with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the last >> speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far as >> indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, and >> linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this specific >> legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for whatever >> reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on their >> language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language >> community, this can have a big negative impact. >> >> It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered >> language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and to >> work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies for >> mitigating any negative effects. >> >> Jack Du Bois >> >> On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: >>> >>> >>> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my >>> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. >>> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the >>> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more >>> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already >>> has. TG >>> >>> ============== >>> >>> >>> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>>> Hi Funksters, >>>> >>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>>> raises a couple of >>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>>> languages >>>> unit? >>>> >>>> Keith Johnson >>>> >>>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> -- >> >> *************************************************** >> John W. Du Bois, Professor >> Department of Linguistics >> 3607 South Hall >> University of California, Santa Barbara >> Santa Barbara, California 93106-3100 >> USA >> *************************************************** >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 9 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:34:14 +0900 >> From: Luke Kundl Pinette >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to >> endangered >> languages >> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: <4D38F0A6.1010605 at comcast.net> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> James, >> So this gets us a bit off topic, but again I of course have to comment. >> >> I don't know about a controlled study. Before I decided on pragmatics I >> considered doing my thesis on second-language learning strategies, and >> did a fair bit of research to this end, and I didn't see any formal >> paper specifically mentioning language programs. I'd suspect there's >> something, but these programs are all designed so differently that a >> negative result on one wouldn't apply across programs. >> >> As I said earlier, no program can be a teacher. Until we design a >> program that can pass the Turing test, even if we imagine a program that >> can hold a conversation, it won't be able to teach subtle distinctions >> in semantics and pragmatics. Consider the difference in spoken English >> between "Whaddaya doing?" "Whacha doing?" and "Whacha up to?" and >> consider the fact that not only English, but every language has myriads >> of minor distinctions like this. >> >> There's three programs I know by name; I've had all of them recommended >> to me by friends and acquaintances: Rosetta Stone, Pimsleur, and Before >> You Know It. Rosetta Stone as I said was so awful out of the box, >> contradicting everything I knew about language learning and good >> pedagogy that I promptly returned it to my brother (who had been foolish >> enough to buy it and of course never used it). >> >> The two programs I've used are Pimsleur and Before You Know It. I like >> Pimsleur, it teaches grammar from the outset, and starts the way you >> would start a language class, and teaches you to speak in sentences from >> the start. I think it would be more useful if you have someone to >> practice with--the scripts it uses are actually pretty good, but if you >> don't have someone it's just rote memorization. And it's definitely not >> a quick way to learn a language. And if you know linguistics, and have >> broken down the morphology of the sentence less than ten minutes in, it >> becomes a bit tedious. It's still something I happily recommend to >> people I know, though I usually suggest they get it from the library, >> unless the site is having a sale (as I think they sometimes do). >> >> On the other hand if you've traveled much to a foreign country without >> speaking the language, you'll know that pointing, money, and a >> calculator will get you pretty far. A few words, social niceties like >> "hello," "thank you," and "I'm sorry" will get you even further, and if >> you're going right now it's useful to be able to pick which words you >> need. Before You Know It, which an acquaintance described as a set of >> computerized flashcards, is useful in this respect. I don't know anyone >> who's used the paid version, or even what that includes, but the free >> version is quite extensive. >> >> My biggest complaint is that the pronunciations given are generally not >> the way the speaker would say it. It's like if you paid an English >> speaker to ennunciate words, and they said "what-are-you-do-ing" >> "want-to" "ve-ge-ta-ble" and "com-for-ta-ble" every time. For example >> Koreans don't say "annyeonghaseyo" for "hello," but "anyeseyo" or even >> "yeseyo." And "thank you" is not "kamsahamnida" but "kamsamnida." >> Nonetheless, these are useful words. The Koreans understood what I was >> saying, even if they always cracked up when they heard me, and since I >> knew what the words sounded like in context I was able to figure out how >> they were actually pronounced. But if the paid version contained clips >> of the way people actually say the words, it would be well worth paying >> for. >> >> I think most of the lesser known products on the market are similar to >> one or the other of these. I've seen other computer programs which are >> flashcard based, and I inherited a few German records and tapes from my >> grandfather when he moved to Florida, and they're similar to Pimsleur. >> (Though I like Pimsleur's layout better.) >> >> That said though, when you view language programs as a tool to help >> study, you might as well ask whether there's any data to support the >> view that textbooks in fact aid learning. It depends on the program, >> the student, and the use the latter makes of the former. >> >> Regards, >> Luke >> >> On 1/21/11 3:19 AM, James J. Mischler wrote: >>> Wendy and all, >>> >>> I wonder if *any* program has been found, via controlled research study, >> to aid in the learning of a language. Wendy said that there are programs >> that are better than Rosetta Stone; what are they? Is there any data to >> support the view that the program(s) did in fact aid learning? >>> >>> Jim Mischler >>> Assistant Professor >>> Language& Communication >>> Northwestern State University of Louisiana >>> Natchitoches, LA >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [mailto: >> funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Wendy Smith >>> Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:07 PM >>> To: Keith Johnson >>> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >>> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >>> >>> This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, >>> and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child >>> acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no >>> direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be >>> patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the >>> same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the >>> materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women >>> are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who >>> works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training >>> or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will >>> learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint >>> Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is >>> virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car >>> or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction >>> to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. >>> >>> On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>>> Hi Funksters, >>>> >>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>>> raises a couple of >>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>>> languages >>>> unit? >>>> >>>> Keith Johnson >>>> >>>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 10 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 13:09:16 +0900 >> From: Luke Kundl Pinette >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to >> endangered >> languages >> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: <4D3906EC.7030301 at comcast.net> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> The question is, why is the Rosetta Stone doing this anyways? According >> to the article, Rosetta doesn't actually distribute the programs, just >> makes them. It doesn't say if it's turning a profit, a loss or selling >> them at cost (though the last is what one would infer from the article). >> If they're doing it for the PR, they'll probably try not to screw over >> native communities too badly, though of course you know what they say >> about the pavement used on the road to hell. >> >> If they're in it for the money, I wouldn't put it past them to add a >> clause like that. Then we've got a legal question on our hands. It's >> essentially monopolistic practice, particularly if they make a pattern >> of deliberately blocking competition for language programs in endangered >> languages. I suspect that if they were to try it, it would be possible >> to find some lawyer willing to pursue the issue, and when taken to court >> they would lose. It would certainly cause a lot of trouble in the >> meantime though. >> >> It sounds like nobody on this list has any illusions about the company. >> It's depressing to see that a linguist like Krauss, and one in such an >> important position has bought into Rosetta Stone's marketing, but again, >> unless another company steps up it doesn't sound like there's any >> options other than no language program. If Rosetta is not in fact >> inserting insidious clauses into the agreements with their informants, >> it's still probably better than nothing. >> >> Regards, >> Luke >> >> >> On 1/21/11 10:48 AM, John Du Bois wrote: >>> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage >>> that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in >>> an endangered language community. >>> >>> For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that >>> work with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the >>> last speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far >>> as indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, >>> and linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this >>> specific legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for >>> whatever reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on >>> their language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language >>> community, this can have a big negative impact. >>> >>> It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered >>> language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and >>> to work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies >>> for mitigating any negative effects. >>> >>> Jack Du Bois >>> >>> On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my >>>> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. >>>> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the >>>> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more >>>> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already >>>> has. TG >>>> >>>> ============== >>>> >>>> >>>> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>>>> Hi Funksters, >>>>> >>>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>>>> raises a couple of >>>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>>>> languages >>>>> unit? >>>>> >>>>> Keith Johnson >>>>> >>>>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 11 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 03:09:08 -0800 (PST) >> From: "Gabrielatos, Costas" >> Subject: [FUNKNET] Call for papers: Lancaster Postgraduate Conference >> in Linguistics and English Language >> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Cc: Helen West >> Message-ID: <420317.74566.qm at web113306.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 >> >> THE SIXTH LANCASTER UNIVERSITY INTERNATIONAL POSTGRADUATE CONFERENCE >> IN?LINGUISTICS AND LANGUAGE TEACHING >> >> Dear All, >> >> We are pleased to announce the Sixth Lancaster University International >> Postgraduate Conference in Linguistics and English Language (LAEL PG >> Conference) which will take place at Lancaster University's George Fox >> building, >> >> on Tuesday 12th of July 2011. >> >> This one-day conference is designed to give linguistics postgraduates from >> all >> research areas an opportunity to present and discuss their research in >> an informal and intellectually stimulating setting. >> >> This year's conference will be opened by Prof. Greg Myers (Lancaster >> University), and there will be guest plenary lectures by: >> Prof. Paul Kerswill (Lancaster University) >> Dr. Johnny Unger (Lancaster University) >> >> We invite postgraduate students to submit abstracts for oral and poster >> presentations on any area of linguistics, theoretical or applied (see below >> for >> abstract submission guidelines). >> >> Topics Include: >> >> ? - Cognitive linguistics >> ? - Corpus linguistics >> ? - Critical discourse analysis >> ? - Historical linguistics >> ? - Literacy studies >> ? - Pragmatics/semantics >> ? - Phonetics/phonology >> ? - Second language teaching/learning/assessment >> ? - Sociolinguistics >> ? - Syntax/morphology Stylistics >> ? - Translation studies >> ? - Other: please specify >> >> For further information, please visit the website: >> http://www.lancs.ac.uk/fass/events/laelpgconference/index.htm >> >> Key Dates >> >> Abstracts must be received by Friday 25 March 2011 >> Notification of acceptancewill be given on Tuesday 10 May 2011 >> >> Hope to hear from you all soon, >> >> Helen Faye West >> Janina Iwaniec >> Matteo Di Cristofaro >> Jonathon Adams >> Ibrahim Efe >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 12 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 08:14:57 -0600 >> From: "Tim Thornes" >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> To: , >> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: <4D394082020000870009B3F2 at gwia1.uca.edu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII >> >> I would agree with this sentiment as well as with the inherent potential of >> a company like this to really screw up relationships with members of an >> endangered language community. I mean, if Rosetta Stone as the "worldwide >> leader in language learning worldwide (sic)" ( >> http://www.rosettastone.com/backnolang?pc=se2011&cid=se-gg&gclid=CPCPvsm8y6YCFQPsKgodqhCrHA) >> can't help us, why would I think some nerdy academic with a microphone and a >> laptop could? >> As one such, I am as capable as any big company of damaging relationships >> with community members, and I ought to know better. Is there any >> expectation that RS does? >> Best, >> Tim >> >> Tim Thornes, PhD >> Assistant Professor of Linguistics >> Department of Writing >> University of Central Arkansas >> 201 Donaghey Avenue >> Conway, Arkansas 72035 >> USA >> (501)450-5613 >> tthornes at uca.edu >> >>>>> John Du Bois 01/20/11 7:48 PM >>> >> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage >> that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in an >> endangered language community. >> >> For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that work >> with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the last >> speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far as >> indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, and >> linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this specific >> legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for whatever >> reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on their >> language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language >> community, this can have a big negative impact. >> >> It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered >> language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and to >> work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies for >> mitigating any negative effects. >> >> Jack Du Bois >> >> On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: >>> >>> >>> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my >>> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. >>> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the >>> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more >>> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already >>> has. TG >>> >>> ============== >>> >>> >>> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>>> Hi Funksters, >>>> >>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>>> raises a couple of >>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>>> languages >>>> unit? >>>> >>>> Keith Johnson >>>> >>>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> -- >> >> *************************************************** >> John W. Du Bois, Professor >> Department of Linguistics >> 3607 South Hall >> University of California, Santa Barbara >> Santa Barbara, California 93106-3100 >> USA >> *************************************************** >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 13 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 07:48:38 -0800 >> From: Pamela Munro >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> To: Tim Thornes >> Cc: tgivon at uoregon.edu, dubois at linguistics.ucsb.edu, >> funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: <4D39AAD6.7090508 at ucla.edu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> All these suggestions are truly scary. >> >> Pam >> >> Tim Thornes wrote: >>> I would agree with this sentiment as well as with the inherent potential >> of a company like this to really screw up relationships with members of an >> endangered language community. I mean, if Rosetta Stone as the "worldwide >> leader in language learning worldwide (sic)" ( >> http://www.rosettastone.com/backnolang?pc=se2011&cid=se-gg&gclid=CPCPvsm8y6YCFQPsKgodqhCrHA) >> can't help us, why would I think some nerdy academic with a microphone and a >> laptop could? >>> As one such, I am as capable as any big company of damaging relationships >> with community members, and I ought to know better. Is there any >> expectation that RS does? >>> Best, >>> Tim >>> >>> Tim Thornes, PhD >>> Assistant Professor of Linguistics >>> Department of Writing >>> University of Central Arkansas >>> 201 Donaghey Avenue >>> Conway, Arkansas 72035 >>> USA >>> (501)450-5613 >>> tthornes at uca.edu >>> >>> >>>>>> John Du Bois 01/20/11 7:48 PM >>> >>>>>> >>> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage >>> that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in an >>> endangered language community. >>> >>> For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that work >>> with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the last >>> speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far as >>> indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, and >>> linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this specific >>> legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for whatever >>> reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on their >>> language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language >>> community, this can have a big negative impact. >>> >>> It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered >>> language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and to >>> work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies for >>> mitigating any negative effects. >>> >>> Jack Du Bois >>> >>> On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: >>> >>>> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my >>>> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. >>>> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the >>>> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more >>>> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already >>>> has. TG >>>> >>>> ============== >>>> >>>> >>>> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Funksters, >>>>> >>>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>>>> raises a couple of >>>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>>>> languages >>>>> unit? >>>>> >>>>> Keith Johnson >>>>> >>>>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >> >> -- >> Pamela Munro, >> Professor, Linguistics, UCLA >> UCLA Box 951543 >> Los Angeles, CA 90095-1543 >> http://www.linguistics.ucla.edu/people/munro/munro.htm >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 14 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:30:39 -0500 >> From: Brian MacWhinney >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to >> endangered >> languages >> To: Funknet >> Message-ID: <9A44FA72-E6DF-4498-A4A0-0A4C4E605BD7 at cmu.edu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >> >> Folks, >> >> I share your low regard for Rosetta Stone, not so much for what they >> fail to deliver, but rather for the overstated claims they make. I know a >> couple of students who have worked with them on internships and, so far, >> there is no evidence of malicious practices vis a vis native communities. >> Despite this, I agree that it is likely that communities who collaborate >> with them will get led down the garden path and end up unwilling to >> participate later with other, more promising, approaches to language >> maintenance. But these are freely-formed relations between consenting >> parties, so nothing can militate against it. >> Regarding the wider issue of effectiveness of language learning >> programs, I find it strange that Luke has located nothing on this subject. >> Back in 1968, Paul Pimsleur already demonstrated the effectiveness of his >> method of graduated interval recall which is picked up, in an admittedly >> diluted form, by the current Pimsleur series. There are hundreds of studies >> distributed across six major journals demonstrating the relatively greater >> effectiveness of specific components of language instruction, from keyword >> method to corrective feedback. These effects have been demonstrated in both >> controlled experiments and, somewhat less convincingly, in classroom and >> online instruction. Nearly all of my own experimental work is now focused >> on tests of this type embedded within online tutors. Perhaps what Luke is >> referring to is the absence of evidence of the overall comparative >> effectiveness of the big commercial language programs such as Rosetta Stone >> or Pimsleur. In the cases of >> such full programs, it is extremely difficult to coordinate a decent >> experimental test, because it would require buy in from a large group of >> volunteers across a long period with careful controls for study time and so >> on. So, I think it is generally better to focus on demonstrations of the >> effects of individual components of programs, because these can be subject >> to reasonable experimental control. Of course, all of this leaves the >> naturalistic methods of language learning out in the cold, and that is >> wrong. In the end, the best way to advance this field will be to increase >> automatic data collection during the language learning process, within >> online, classroom, and naturalistic contexts. This is what I am working on. >> >> Regards, >> >> -- Brian MacWhinney >> >> On Jan 20, 2011, at 11:09 PM, Luke Kundl Pinette wrote: >> >>> The question is, why is the Rosetta Stone doing this anyways? According >> to the article, Rosetta doesn't actually distribute the programs, just makes >> them. It doesn't say if it's turning a profit, a loss or selling them at >> cost (though the last is what one would infer from the article). If they're >> doing it for the PR, they'll probably try not to screw over native >> communities too badly, though of course you know what they say about the >> pavement used on the road to hell. >>> >>> If they're in it for the money, I wouldn't put it past them to add a >> clause like that. Then we've got a legal question on our hands. It's >> essentially monopolistic practice, particularly if they make a pattern of >> deliberately blocking competition for language programs in endangered >> languages. I suspect that if they were to try it, it would be possible to >> find some lawyer willing to pursue the issue, and when taken to court they >> would lose. It would certainly cause a lot of trouble in the meantime >> though. >>> >>> It sounds like nobody on this list has any illusions about the company. >> It's depressing to see that a linguist like Krauss, and one in such an >> important position has bought into Rosetta Stone's marketing, but again, >> unless another company steps up it doesn't sound like there's any options >> other than no language program. If Rosetta is not in fact inserting >> insidious clauses into the agreements with their informants, it's still >> probably better than nothing. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Luke >>> >>> >>> On 1/21/11 10:48 AM, John Du Bois wrote: >>>> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage >>>> that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in >>>> an endangered language community. >>>> >>>> For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that >>>> work with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the >>>> last speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far >>>> as indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, >>>> and linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this >>>> specific legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for >>>> whatever reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on >>>> their language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language >>>> community, this can have a big negative impact. >>>> >>>> It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered >>>> language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and >>>> to work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies >>>> for mitigating any negative effects. >>>> >>>> Jack Du Bois >>>> >>>> On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my >>>>> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. >>>>> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the >>>>> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more >>>>> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already >>>>> has. TG >>>>> >>>>> ============== >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>>>>> Hi Funksters, >>>>>> >>>>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>>>>> raises a couple of >>>>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>>>>> languages >>>>>> unit? >>>>>> >>>>>> Keith Johnson >>>>>> >>>>>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 15 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:33:26 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >> From: jess tauber >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to >> endangered >> languages >> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: >> < >> 32117937.1295627607528.JavaMail.root at wamui-hunyo.atl.sa.earthlink.net> >> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 >> >> Just minutes ago as I write this, on the television show 'The View', actor >> Ed Harris brought up his not so successful attempt to use Rosetta Stone, >> 'that thing you can get', to pick up a little Russian for his movie opening >> this week- eventually he had to utilize the services of a Bulgarian, in >> person. >> >> Maybe the public isn't so misinformed? >> >> Jess Tauber >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 16 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 09:40:02 -0700 >> From: Tom Givon >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to >> endangered >> languages >> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: <4D39B6E2.3030004 at uoregon.edu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> >> They still shell out C-notes by the bushel for this scam. RS does not >> make their money off satisfied customers, but off poor first-hit >> suckers. TG >> >> ============================ >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On 1/21/2011 9:33 AM, jess tauber wrote: >>> Just minutes ago as I write this, on the television show 'The View', >> actor Ed Harris brought up his not so successful attempt to use Rosetta >> Stone, 'that thing you can get', to pick up a little Russian for his movie >> opening this week- eventually he had to utilize the services of a Bulgarian, >> in person. >>> >>> Maybe the public isn't so misinformed? >>> >>> Jess Tauber >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 17 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 08:57:58 -0800 >> From: Marianne Mithun >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to >> endangered >> languages >> To: Brian MacWhinney , Funknet >> >> Message-ID: >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed >> >> I finally have to weigh in here on another aspect of the issue specifically >> with respect to endangered languages. >> >> For communities in danger of losing their traditional languages, learning >> the heritage language isn't just about being able to order a meal in a >> restaurant or book a hotel room. It's often about something much deeper, >> about appreciating traditional ways of viewing the world, of categorizing >> concepts, of combining ideas, of interacting. And the Rosetta Stone system >> is one-size-fits-all. People are essentially asked to translate the model >> sentences into whatever language is at hand, and the results tend to be >> close to word-by-word translations. So yes, learners learn how to say 'boy' >> and 'run'. But they don't learn, for example, that ideas expressed by nouns >> in English are expressed in language X by verbs. Or that in many languages >> people don't tend to talk sentences consisting of Noun Verb Noun (or Noun >> Noun Verb). They don't learn about the glorious elaboration of semantic >> distinctions or domains that have no counterparts in the model language. >> They probably won't learn about evidentials. They are unlikely to learn >> about elaborate aspectual distinctions. They certainly won't learn >> different patterns of subordination or clause combining. >> >> For some situations, that may be fine. Heritage speakers just want to be >> able to use some phrases in everyday talk. And they don't have the time or >> interest for that kind of complexity. For others, it sort of defeats the >> whole purpose. >> >> Marianne Mithun >> >> >> --On Friday, January 21, 2011 11:30 AM -0500 Brian MacWhinney >> wrote: >> >>> Folks, >>> >>> I share your low regard for Rosetta Stone, not so much for what they >>> fail to deliver, but rather for the overstated claims they make. I know >>> a couple of students who have worked with them on internships and, so >>> far, there is no evidence of malicious practices vis a vis native >>> communities. Despite this, I agree that it is likely that communities who >>> collaborate with them will get led down the garden path and end up >>> unwilling to participate later with other, more promising, approaches to >>> language maintenance. But these are freely-formed relations between >>> consenting parties, so nothing can militate against it. Regarding >>> the wider issue of effectiveness of language learning programs, I find it >>> strange that Luke has located nothing on this subject. Back in 1968, >>> Paul Pimsleur already demonstrated the effectiveness of his method of >>> graduated interval recall which is picked up, in an admittedly diluted >>> form, by the current Pimsleur series. There are hundreds of studies >>> distributed across six major journals demonstrating the relatively >>> greater effectiveness of specific components of language instruction, >>> from keyword method to corrective feedback. These effects have been >>> demonstrated in both controlled experiments and, somewhat less >>> convincingly, in classroom and online instruction. Nearly all of my own >>> experimental work is now focused on tests of this type embedded within >>> online tutors. Perhaps what Luke is referring to is the absence of >>> evidence of the overall comparative effectiveness of the big commercial >>> language programs such as Rosetta Stone or Pimsleur. In the cases of >>> such full programs, it is extremely difficult to coordinate a decent >>> experimental test, because it would require buy in from a large group of >>> volunteers across a long period with careful controls for study time and >>> so on. So, I think it is generally better to focus on demonstrations of >>> the effects of individual components of programs, because these can be >>> subject to reasonable experimental control. Of course, all of this >>> leaves the naturalistic methods of language learning out in the cold, and >>> that is wrong. In the end, the best way to advance this field will be to >>> increase automatic data collection during the language learning process, >>> within online, classroom, and naturalistic contexts. This is what I am >>> working on. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> -- Brian MacWhinney >>> >>> On Jan 20, 2011, at 11:09 PM, Luke Kundl Pinette wrote: >>> >>>> The question is, why is the Rosetta Stone doing this anyways? According >>>> to the article, Rosetta doesn't actually distribute the programs, just >>>> makes them. It doesn't say if it's turning a profit, a loss or selling >>>> them at cost (though the last is what one would infer from the article). >>>> If they're doing it for the PR, they'll probably try not to screw over >>>> native communities too badly, though of course you know what they say >>>> about the pavement used on the road to hell. >>>> >>>> If they're in it for the money, I wouldn't put it past them to add a >>>> clause like that. Then we've got a legal question on our hands. It's >>>> essentially monopolistic practice, particularly if they make a pattern >>>> of deliberately blocking competition for language programs in endangered >>>> languages. I suspect that if they were to try it, it would be possible >>>> to find some lawyer willing to pursue the issue, and when taken to court >>>> they would lose. It would certainly cause a lot of trouble in the >>>> meantime though. >>>> >>>> It sounds like nobody on this list has any illusions about the company. >>>> It's depressing to see that a linguist like Krauss, and one in such an >>>> important position has bought into Rosetta Stone's marketing, but again, >>>> unless another company steps up it doesn't sound like there's any >>>> options other than no language program. If Rosetta is not in fact >>>> inserting insidious clauses into the agreements with their informants, >>>> it's still probably better than nothing. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Luke >>>> >>>> >>>> On 1/21/11 10:48 AM, John Du Bois wrote: >>>>> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage >>>>> that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in >>>>> an endangered language community. >>>>> >>>>> For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that >>>>> work with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the >>>>> last speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far >>>>> as indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, >>>>> and linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this >>>>> specific legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for >>>>> whatever reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on >>>>> their language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language >>>>> community, this can have a big negative impact. >>>>> >>>>> It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered >>>>> language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and >>>>> to work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies >>>>> for mitigating any negative effects. >>>>> >>>>> Jack Du Bois >>>>> >>>>> On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my >>>>>> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. >>>>>> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the >>>>>> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more >>>>>> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already >>>>>> has. TG >>>>>> >>>>>> ============== >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>>>>>> Hi Funksters, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>>>>>> raises a couple of >>>>>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>>>>>> languages >>>>>>> unit? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Keith Johnson >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-ros >>>>>>> etta.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> End of FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 17 >> *************************************** >> > From bat2 at rice.edu Sun Jan 23 05:59:20 2011 From: bat2 at rice.edu (Bethany Townsend) Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2011 23:59:20 -0600 Subject: FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 17 Message-ID: Paul Newman has written about copyright law and field situations: http://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/html/10125/1724/newman.html Bethany Townsend Ph.D. Student, Rice University Dept. of Linguistics, MS 23 P.O. Box 1892 Houston, TX 77251-1892 USA From language at sprynet.com Mon Jan 24 23:14:01 2011 From: language at sprynet.com (alex gross) Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2011 18:14:01 -0500 Subject: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages Message-ID: Of course the main problem concerning Rosetta Stone has not been remotely addressed here, nor did I expect it to be. Had linguists continued on the intersecting paths of Whorf, Sapir, Bloomfield, and Hayakawa during the Sixties, the entire Rosetta Stone encroachment would have never come about. Descriptivist linguists showed sensitivity to Native American languages and regarded them as views of reality in many ways as valid as our own, creating a close unity between Native American speakers and the scholars who studied them. Our profession would then have been in a position to explain to them why Rosetta Stone could not truly help them. And the aim of the Semanticist movement was to create an ongoing and far-reaching critique of American trends in politics, advertising, and religion, which could have led to a heightened consciousness of the many ways language can lead us astray and why simplistic tools like Rosetta Stone are of limited use. But instead the profession has squandered the enormous prestige enjoyed by linguistics 50 years ago in pompous and demonstrably false proclamations about universal grammar, deep structure, and hard wiring, not to mention endless feuding between angry factions over the details of this monumental failure. As I pointed out in an earlier post: So-called "mainstream linguistics" ends up being on about the same level of credibility as all those TV ads for "Rosetta Stone." Just as they claim you can "learn a language," without bothering to mention whether by "learn" they mean read, speak, understand what is spoken back to you, translate in either direction, or simply pick up the general sense, so "mainstream linguistics" stakes out vast fields of competence but never comes remotely near actually achieving them. Yes, Rosetta Stone has engaged in outrageously false claims on behalf of its so-called method for a number of years now. But many mainstream linguists have engaged in equally noxious rhetoric about the alleged triumph of their supposed breakthroughs or about the imminent advent of MT and automatic language systems they have championed. And they have continued to do so despite ample evidence to the contrary over at least the last four decades. And yet other linguists , who have been perfectly aware that these claims were overstated, have chosen to remain silent. It is not the slightest bit surprising that the guiding force of so-called mainstream linguistics stems from the same era that also handed us the notion that man can "conquer" the planet, that highways can "conquer" the wilderness, that cities can "conquer" landscape, that modernity can "conquer" traditional ways. Indeed, the main thrust of language study today is still centered on the eminently falsifiable doctrine that language itself can be conquered and open the way to some ill-defined realm where deep knowledge of "grammar" can give rise to deep knowledge of reality. All the best to every one! alex ************************************************************** The principal purpose of language is not communication but to persuade ourselves that we know what we are talking about, when quite often we do not. ************************************************************** ----- Original Message ----- From: "Keith Johnson" To: Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 11:50 AM Subject: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > Hi Funksters, > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article raises > a couple of > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > languages > unit? > > Keith Johnson > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > From mike_cahill at sil.org Tue Jan 25 19:42:12 2011 From: mike_cahill at sil.org (Mike Cahill) Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 13:42:12 -0600 Subject: Orthographies for Unwritten Languages Symposium materials posted Message-ID: The abstracts, handouts, and PowerPoints for the LSA Symposium on Developing Orthographies for Unwritten Languages are now posted at: http://www.sil.org/linguistics/2011LSASymposium/ . Papers were divided between general concept papers (non-linguistic factors in orthographies, phonological depth and orthographies, tone and orthographies), and specific case studies from different areas of the world (Mexico, California, Nepal, and southeast Asia). Mike Cahill From paul at benjamins.com Wed Jan 26 23:10:11 2011 From: paul at benjamins.com (Paul Peranteau) Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 18:10:11 -0500 Subject: New Benjamins title: Amiridze et al. - Fillers, Pauses and Placeholders Message-ID: Fillers, Pauses and Placeholders Edited by Nino Amiridze, Boyd H. Davis and Margaret Maclagan Utrecht University & University of Jena / University of North Carolina - Charlotte / University of Canterbury Typological Studies in Language 93 2010. vii, 224 pp. Hardbound: 978 90 272 0674 9 / EUR 99.00 / USD 149.00 e-Book – Available from e-book platforms 978 90 272 8776 2 / EUR 99.00 / USD 149.00 Fillers are items that speakers insert in spontaneous speech as a repair strategy. Types of fillers include hesitation markers and placeholders. Both are used to fill pauses that arise during planning problems or in lexical retrieval failure. However, while hesitation markers may not bear any resemblance to lexical items they replace, placeholders typically share some morphosyntactic properties with the target form. Additionally, fillers can function as a pragmatic tool, in order to replace lexical items that the speaker wants to avoid mentioning for some reason. The present volume is the first collection on the topic of fillers and will be a useful reference work for future investigations on the topic. It consists of typological surveys and in-depth studies exploring the form and use of fillers across languages and sections of different populations, including cognitively impaired speakers. The volume will be interesting to typologists and linguists working in discourse studies. Table of contents Acknowledgements vii Introduction Barbara A. Fox 1–10 Parameters for typological variation of placeholders Vera I. Podlesskaya 11–32 A cross-linguistic exploration of demonstratives in interaction: With particular reference to the context of word-formulation trouble Makoto Hayashi and Kyung-Eun Yoon 33–66 Placeholder verbs in Modern Georgian Nino Amiridze 67–94 From interrogatives to placeholders in Udi and Agul spontaneous narratives Dmitry Ganenkov, Yury Lander and Timur Maisak 95–118 Fillers and placeholders in Nahavaq Laura Dimock 119–138 The interactional profile of a placeholder: The Estonian demonstrative see Leelo Keevallik 139–172 Fillers and their relevance in describing Sliammon Salish Honoré Watanabe 173–188 Pauses, fillers, placeholders and formulaicity in Alzheimer’s discourse: Gluing relationships as impairment increases Boyd H. Davis and Margaret Maclagan 189–216 Language index 217 Name index 219–220 Subject index 221–224 -- John Benjamins Publishing 763 N 24th Street Philadelphia PA USA Ph: 215 769-3444 Fax: 215 769-3446 From paul at benjamins.com Wed Jan 26 23:12:41 2011 From: paul at benjamins.com (Paul Peranteau) Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 18:12:41 -0500 Subject: New Benjamins title: Stathi et al. - Grammaticalization Message-ID: Grammaticalization. Current views and issues. Edited by Katerina Stathi, Elke Gehweiler and Ekkehard König Free University Berlin Studies in Language Companion Series 119 2010. vii, 379 pp. Hardbound: 978 90 272 0586 5 / EUR 99.00 / USD 149.00 e-Book – Available from e-book platforms 978 90 272 8800 4 / EUR 99.00 / USD 149.00 This volume contains a selection of papers on grammaticalization from a broad perspective. Some of the papers focus on basic concepts in grammaticalization research such as the concept of 'grammar' as the endpoint of grammaticalization processes, erosion, (uni)directionality, the relation between grammaticalization and constructions, subjectification, and the relation between grammaticalization and analogy. Other papers shed a critical light on grammaticalization as an explanatory parameter in language change. New case studies of micro-processes of grammaticalization complete the selection. The empirical evidence for (and against) grammaticalization comes from diverse domains: subject control, clitics, reciprocal markers, pronouns and agreement markers, gender markers, auxiliaries, aspectual categories, intensifying adjectives and determiners, and pragmatic markers. The languages covered include English and its varieties, German, Dutch, Italian, Spanish, French, Slavonic languages, and Turkish. The book will be valuable to scholars working on grammaticalization and language change as well as to those interested in individual languages. Table of contents Table of contents v–vi Preface vii Introduction Katerina Stathi, Elke Gehweiler and Ekkehard König 01–14 Part I Basic questions On some problem areas in grammaticalization studies Gabriele Diewald 17–50 Issues in constructional approaches to grammaticalization in English Graeme Trousdale 51–72 Reconsidering erosion in grammaticalization: Evidence from cliticization René Schiering 73–100 Grammaticalization, subjectification and objectification Svenja Kranich 101–122 Degrammaticalization: Three common controversies Muriel Norde 123–150 Degrammaticalization and obsolescent morphology: Evidence from Slavonic David Willis 151–178 Part II Grammaticalization and the explanation of language change An analogical approach to grammaticalization Olga Fischer 181–220 Does grammaticalisation need analogy? Different pathways on the ‘pronoun/agreement marker’-cline Gunther De Vogelaer 221–240 What grammaticalisation can reveal about same-subject control Debra Ziegeler 241–272 How the Latin neuter pronominal forms became markers of non-individuation in Spanish Elisabeth Stark and Natascha Pomino 273–294 Part III Case studies of micro-processes of grammaticalization The Grammaticalization of the German adjectives lauter (and eitel) Elke Gehweiler 297–322 Is German gehören an auxiliary? The grammaticalization of the construction gehören + participle II Katerina Stathi 323–342 Micro-processes of grammaticalization: The case of Italian l’un l’altro Letizia Vezzosi 343–372 List of contributors 373–374 Index 375–380 -- John Benjamins Publishing 763 N 24th Street Philadelphia PA USA Ph: 215 769-3444 Fax: 215 769-3446 From falonso at dfm.ulpgc.es Thu Jan 27 23:27:35 2011 From: falonso at dfm.ulpgc.es (Francisco Alonso Almeida) Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2011 23:27:35 +0000 Subject: CFP: Panel Corpus design, compilation and types (CILC3) Message-ID: III International Conference on Corpus Linguistics (CILC3) 07-Apr-2011 - 09-Apr-2011 Polytechnic University of Valencia, Spain Conference website: http://www.upv.es/contenidos/CILC2011/indexi.html CFP: Panel Corpus design, compilation and types Call Deadline: 07-Feb-2011 Proposal submission: http://www.upv.es/contenidos/CILC2011/info/764072normali.html For more information on this panel, please contact: Francisco Alonso (falonso at dfm.ulpgc.es). Conference Organisers: Marisa Carrió Pastor Ana Botella Trelis Miguel Ángel Candel Mora Luz Gil Salom Penny Mac Donald Lightbound Carmen Soler Monreal Keith Stuart From caterina.mauri at unipv.it Mon Jan 31 15:39:09 2011 From: caterina.mauri at unipv.it (Caterina Mauri) Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 16:39:09 +0100 Subject: Deadline approaching - Pavia, May 2011 - Workshop on "GRADUALNESS IN CHANGE AND ITS RELATION TO SYNCHRONIC VARIATION AND USE" Message-ID: ** WE APOLOGIZE FOR CROSS-POSTING ** ------------------------ International workshop on: "GRADUALNESS IN CHANGE AND ITS RELATION TO SYNCHRONIC VARIATION AND USE" Pavia (Italy), 30-31 May 2011 Workshop URL: https://sites.google.com/site/workshoppavia2011/ ------------------------ DESCRIPTION: The workshop aims to contribute to the discussion on the factors at play in diachronic change and to investigate the relationship between diachronic gradualness and synchronic variation, integrating the current views on linguistic variation and language use. Special attention will be devoted to theoretical and methodological issues concerning i) how the study of language change can benefit from the most recent achievements in linguistic theories and ii) how the explanations of synchronic variation may be found in diachronic processes, discussing whether diachronic gradualness and synchronic variation may be analyzed through the same lenses and by means of the same theoretical instruments. Furthermore, the workshop also wants to address the question of the impact of contact on linguistic change. Language contact may indeed be seen as a special type of synchronic phenomenon that may last in time and may gradually lead to diachronic change, triggering or influencing the development of particular constructions in neighbouring languages. INVITED SPEAKERS: Olga Fischer (University of Amsterdam): ---- Topic: On the role of analogy in processes of language change Béatrice Lamiroy (University of Leuven): ---- Topic: The pace of grammaticalization in Romance languages Graeme Trousdale (University of Edinburgh): ---- Topic: Diachronic construction grammar and gradualness in language change Johan van der Auwera (University of Antwerp): ----- Topic: On diachronic semantic maps The workshop will also accommodate four contributions from the project members (t.b.a) on the effects of contact and interference within the macro-geographic-area of the Mediterranean. CALL FOR PAPERS: Authors are invited to submit a one-page abstract, keeping in mind that the slot for their communication will last 40 min. including discussion. Abstracts should be anonymous and should be sent as attachments in PDF format to: gradualness.workshop at gmail.com. Author(s) name(s) and affiliation should be indicated in the corpus of the e-mail. The abstracts will be anonimously reviewed by two members of the Scientific Committee. Besides theoretical issues, the exam of specific examples and the description of general patterns will also be welcome. Topics of interest include: • what kind of factors trigger the grammaticalization processes • the relation of grammaticalization to other mechanisms of language change such as reanalysis and analogy • the relationship between synchronic variation and grammatical change • the interaction between frequency, entrenchment and use • the possibility of multiple source constructions in language change • the role of language contact in grammatical change • how particular diachronic phenomena may be analyzed in the light of the most recent linguistic theories (e.g. construction grammar) • diachronic explanations for synchronic patterns of variation • ….. IMPORTANT DATES: Deadline for submission: 10 February 2011 Notification of acceptance 10 March 2011 ORGANIZERS AND CONTACT: Anna Giacalone Ramat - annaram (at) unipv.it Caterina Mauri - caterina.mauri (at) unipv.it Piera Molinelli - piera.molinelli (at) unibg.it For any questions and for submissions, please write to gradualness.workshop at gmail.com SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE: Pierluigi Cuzzolin (University of Bergamo), Chiara Fedriani (University of Pavia), Chiara Ghezzi (University of Pavia), Anna Giacalone Ramat (University of Pavia), Gianguido Manzelli (University of Pavia), Caterina Mauri (University of Pavia), Piera Molinelli (University of Bergamo), Paolo Ramat (IUSS Institute), Andrea Sansò (Insubria University - Como), Federica Venier (University of Bergamo) --- Caterina Mauri Dept. of Theoretical and Applied Linguistics University of Pavia Strada Nuova 65 27100 Pavia Italy Email: caterina.mauri at unipv.it Homepage: http://lettere.unipv.it/diplinguistica/docenti.php?&id=1114 From jrubba at calpoly.edu Sat Jan 1 23:34:13 2011 From: jrubba at calpoly.edu (Johanna Rubba) Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2011 15:34:13 -0800 Subject: Query about language-related media articles Message-ID: Hello, everyone, I would like to compile a list of shortish readings about language for my introduction to linguistics students (and perhaps for use in other courses, as well). Of course, I would like them to be linguistically sound. The topics should be ones that would interest the general reader who is in the process of gaining new insights and new information about language. The articles should be accessible to the general reader. The length I have in mind is, say, the typical length of a New Yorker or Atlantic Monthly feature article. It would be helpful if the articles were accessible full-text online, including through library databases. Some examples I can think of from my own reading habits include a NYer article about Dan Everett's work on Pirah?, an Atl. Monthly one about growing official-language movements for Celtic languages in England, something somewhere about language evolution, something somewhere about language in Neanderthals -- so the topic range is pretty wide open. They don't have to be recent, as long as the content is sound. Newspaper articles would be too short. But if you have some that have a reference to a longer work, it would be helpful to pass that on. If you have some in mind, could you send along the bibliographic information plus a very short summary of the article (1-3 sentences)? I will post a summary of my responses to the list. Thank you, and Happy 2011 to you all! Dr. Johanna Rubba, Ph. D. Professor, Linguistics Linguistics Minor Advisor English Dept. Cal Poly State University San Luis Obispo San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 Ofc. tel. : 805-756-2184 Dept. tel.: 805-756-2596 Dept. fax: 805-756-6374 E-mail: jrubba at calpoly.edu URL: http://cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba From john at research.haifa.ac.il Mon Jan 3 15:12:36 2011 From: john at research.haifa.ac.il (john at research.haifa.ac.il) Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2011 17:12:36 +0200 Subject: Help with Moroccan/Algerian Arabic In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dear Funknetters, I need some information about spoken Moroccan/Algerian Arabic (for example the pronunciation of the /q/, which is apparently realized as [g] with certain words). Might any of you be able to give some basic information or suggest someone who can? (Jeff Heath seems to be incommunicado). Thanks, John ------------------------------------------------------------------------ This message was sent using IMP, the Webmail Program of Haifa University From ceford at wisc.edu Tue Jan 4 02:30:44 2011 From: ceford at wisc.edu (Cecilia E. Ford) Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2011 20:30:44 -0600 Subject: approaches to text analysis Message-ID: I teach a regular course on grammar in use, centering on language in interaction. I would like to include some coverage of analyzing written text and am interested in suggestions of approaches that would work for a mixed graduate/undergraduate class. Any suggestions on textbooks, articles, chapters, introductory essays or the like? thanks,Ceci -- Cecilia E. Ford Nancy C. Hoefs Professor of English Professor of Sociology University of Wisconsin-Madison UW Interaction Interest Group (UWIIG): http://uwiig.blogspot.com/ Ford website: http://mendota.english.wisc.edu/~ceford/ Be GREEN, keep it on the SCREEN From jrubba at calpoly.edu Tue Jan 4 02:48:07 2011 From: jrubba at calpoly.edu (Johanna Rubba) Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2011 18:48:07 -0800 Subject: approaches to text analysis In-Reply-To: <7460ce131e465.4d2231f4@wiscmail.wisc.edu> Message-ID: Here is a rather basic one by Raphael Salkie: http://www.amazon.com/Text-Discourse-Analysis-Language-Workbooks/dp/0415092787 This is also worth a look. It's intended for language education (ESL, particularly), but I think you'll find it very rich. Evelyn Hatch: http://www.amazon.com/Discourse-Language-Education-Cambridge-Teaching/dp/0521426057/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1294109083&sr=1-1 On Jan 3, 2011, at 6:30 PM, Cecilia E. Ford wrote: I teach a regular course on grammar in use, centering on language in interaction. I would like to include some coverage of analyzing written text and am interested in suggestions of approaches that would work for a mixed graduate/undergraduate class. Any suggestions on textbooks, articles, chapters, introductory essays or the like? thanks,Ceci -- Cecilia E. Ford Nancy C. Hoefs Professor of English Professor of Sociology University of Wisconsin-Madison UW Interaction Interest Group (UWIIG): http://uwiig.blogspot.com/ Ford website: http://mendota.english.wisc.edu/~ceford/ Be GREEN, keep it on the SCREEN Dr. Johanna Rubba, Professor, Linguistics Linguistics Minor Advisor English Department California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo E-mail: jrubba at calpoly.edu Tel.: 805.756.2184 Dept. Ofc. Tel.: 805.756.2596 Dept. Fax: 805.756.6374 URL: http://www.cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba From ceford at wisc.edu Tue Jan 4 02:55:05 2011 From: ceford at wisc.edu (Cecilia E. Ford) Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2011 20:55:05 -0600 Subject: approaches to text analysis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Thank you. I have the Hatch book and can use it right off the shelf. From what I can recall, it is better than Salkie because it goes into verb forms and clause constrution, not just cohesive devices. It covers written and spoken language, but I think it has parts that are primarily about writing. great! Ceci On 01/03/11, Johanna Rubba wrote: > Here is a rather basic one by Raphael Salkie: > > http://www.amazon.com/Text-Discourse-Analysis-Language-Workbooks/dp/0415092787 > > This is also worth a look. It's intended for language education (ESL, particularly), but I think you'll find it very rich. Evelyn Hatch: > > http://www.amazon.com/Discourse-Language-Education-Cambridge-Teaching/dp/0521426057/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1294109083&sr=1-1 > > > On Jan 3, 2011, at 6:30 PM, Cecilia E. Ford wrote: > > I teach a regular course on grammar in use, centering on language in interaction. I would like to include some coverage of analyzing written text and am interested in suggestions of approaches that would work for a mixed graduate/undergraduate class.? Any suggestions on textbooks, articles, chapters, introductory essays or the like? > thanks,Ceci > -- > Cecilia E. Ford > Nancy C. Hoefs Professor of English > Professor of Sociology > University of Wisconsin-Madison > > UW Interaction Interest Group (UWIIG):?? http://uwiig.blogspot.com/ > > Ford website:?? http://mendota.english.wisc.edu/~ceford/ > > > > > > Be GREEN, keep it on the SCREEN > > Dr. Johanna Rubba, Professor, Linguistics > Linguistics Minor Advisor > English Department > California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo > E-mail: jrubba at calpoly.edu > Tel.: 805.756.2184 > Dept. Ofc. Tel.: 805.756.2596 > Dept. Fax: 805.756.6374 > URL: http://www.cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba -- Cecilia E. Ford Nancy C. Hoefs Professor of English Professor of Sociology University of Wisconsin-Madison UW Interaction Interest Group (UWIIG): http://uwiig.blogspot.com/ Ford website: http://mendota.english.wisc.edu/~ceford/ Be GREEN, keep it on the SCREEN From wsmith at csusb.edu Tue Jan 4 03:11:03 2011 From: wsmith at csusb.edu (Wendy Smith) Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2011 19:11:03 -0800 Subject: approaches to text analysis In-Reply-To: <732081df1ef2d.4d2237a9@wiscmail.wisc.edu> Message-ID: Hi Cece, Make sure you use the book by Hatch with Anne Lazarton as co-author. Wendy On 1/3/2011 6:55 PM, Cecilia E. Ford wrote: > Thank you. I have the Hatch book and can use it right off the shelf. From what I can recall, it is better than Salkie because it goes into verb forms and clause constrution, not just cohesive devices. It covers written and spoken language, but I think it has parts that are primarily about writing. > great! > Ceci > > On 01/03/11, Johanna Rubba wrote: > >> Here is a rather basic one by Raphael Salkie: >> >> http://www.amazon.com/Text-Discourse-Analysis-Language-Workbooks/dp/0415092787 >> >> This is also worth a look. It's intended for language education (ESL, particularly), but I think you'll find it very rich. Evelyn Hatch: >> >> http://www.amazon.com/Discourse-Language-Education-Cambridge-Teaching/dp/0521426057/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1294109083&sr=1-1 >> >> >> On Jan 3, 2011, at 6:30 PM, Cecilia E. Ford wrote: >> >> I teach a regular course on grammar in use, centering on language in interaction. I would like to include some coverage of analyzing written text and am interested in suggestions of approaches that would work for a mixed graduate/undergraduate class. Any suggestions on textbooks, articles, chapters, introductory essays or the like? >> thanks,Ceci >> -- >> Cecilia E. Ford >> Nancy C. Hoefs Professor of English >> Professor of Sociology >> University of Wisconsin-Madison >> >> UW Interaction Interest Group (UWIIG): http://uwiig.blogspot.com/ >> >> Ford website: http://mendota.english.wisc.edu/~ceford/ >> >> >> >> >> >> Be GREEN, keep it on the SCREEN >> >> Dr. Johanna Rubba, Professor, Linguistics >> Linguistics Minor Advisor >> English Department >> California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo >> E-mail: jrubba at calpoly.edu >> Tel.: 805.756.2184 >> Dept. Ofc. Tel.: 805.756.2596 >> Dept. Fax: 805.756.6374 >> URL: http://www.cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba From T.J.M.Sanders at uu.nl Tue Jan 4 09:39:12 2011 From: T.J.M.Sanders at uu.nl (Sanders, Ted) Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 10:39:12 +0100 Subject: approaches to text analysis In-Reply-To: <732081df1ef2d.4d2237a9@wiscmail.wisc.edu> Message-ID: Hi Ceci In addition: Jan Renkema has edited a 2009 volume with Benjamins "Disocurse, of course" which has several interesting contributions for your purpose (by Maite Taboada, Max Louwerse, Ted Sanders & Wilbert Spooren, for instance). I guess this could function as the introdoctory chapters you mention, but it could easily be extended with original research papers, to which the chapters point. Best wishes, Ted -------------------------------------------------------- Ted Sanders Departement Nederlandse Taal en Cultuur / Utrecht institute of Linguistics UiL OTS Universiteit Utrecht Trans 10 NL-3512 JK Utrecht The Netherlands T +31 30 2536080 / 8000 F +31 30 2536000 E T.J.M.Sanders at uu.nl http://www.let.uu.nl/~ted.sanders/personal/index.php ------------------------------------------------------ -----Original Message----- From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [mailto:funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Cecilia E. Ford Sent: dinsdag 4 januari 2011 3:55 To: Johanna Rubba Cc: funknet Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] approaches to text analysis Thank you. I have the Hatch book and can use it right off the shelf. >>From what I can recall, it is better than Salkie because it goes into verb forms and clause constrution, not just cohesive devices. It covers written and spoken language, but I think it has parts that are primarily about writing. great! Ceci On 01/03/11, Johanna Rubba wrote: > Here is a rather basic one by Raphael Salkie: > > http://www.amazon.com/Text-Discourse-Analysis-Language-Workbooks/dp/04 > 15092787 > > This is also worth a look. It's intended for language education (ESL, particularly), but I think you'll find it very rich. Evelyn Hatch: > > http://www.amazon.com/Discourse-Language-Education-Cambridge-Teaching/ > dp/0521426057/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1294109083&sr=1-1 > > > On Jan 3, 2011, at 6:30 PM, Cecilia E. Ford wrote: > > I teach a regular course on grammar in use, centering on language in interaction. I would like to include some coverage of analyzing written text and am interested in suggestions of approaches that would work for a mixed graduate/undergraduate class.? Any suggestions on textbooks, articles, chapters, introductory essays or the like? > thanks,Ceci > -- > Cecilia E. Ford > Nancy C. Hoefs Professor of English > Professor of Sociology > University of Wisconsin-Madison > > UW Interaction Interest Group (UWIIG):?? http://uwiig.blogspot.com/ > > Ford website:?? http://mendota.english.wisc.edu/~ceford/ > > > > > > Be GREEN, keep it on the SCREEN > > Dr. Johanna Rubba, Professor, Linguistics Linguistics Minor Advisor > English Department California Polytechnic State University, San Luis > Obispo > E-mail: jrubba at calpoly.edu > Tel.: 805.756.2184 > Dept. Ofc. Tel.: 805.756.2596 > Dept. Fax: 805.756.6374 > URL: http://www.cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba -- Cecilia E. Ford Nancy C. Hoefs Professor of English Professor of Sociology University of Wisconsin-Madison UW Interaction Interest Group (UWIIG): http://uwiig.blogspot.com/ Ford website: http://mendota.english.wisc.edu/~ceford/ Be GREEN, keep it on the SCREEN From hancock at albany.edu Tue Jan 4 14:35:32 2011 From: hancock at albany.edu (hancock at albany.edu) Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 09:35:32 -0500 Subject: approaches to text analysis Message-ID: > For a course in "Writing, Reading, and Language," I am using (for the first time) "Exploring English Language: from Formal to Functional", Coffin, Donohue, and North, Routledge 2009. It takes an admittedly SFL perspective, though it starts with a more traditional orientation. What I especially like are the large numbers of texts and a great many interactive exercises built in. When I taught the class last semester, I used Kolln's Rhetorical Grammar and The Longman Student Grammar (Biber et. al.). I was surprised that my students found the Longman (a corpus based grammar) much more useful, and so I am ordering it again. Biber's contention is that language features co-occur within genres for functional reasons. The book examines language frequencies and patterns in speech, fiction, newswriting, and academic writing. That's a very broad brush, but a useful base to work from. I teach this as a "writing intensive" course out of the linguistics department. Students try out the genres as they explore them. There has been a good deal of discourse analysis out of SFL. Genre and text are the central focus of a language curriculum in the schools. If language is what it is because of what it does (a central tenet, I think, of a functional perspective), then discourse analysis should be more central than it is to language study in the schools. There is a growing argument for this. I recommend Terry Locke's "Beyond The Grammar Wars" (Routledge, 2010) for an international conversation. Craig > Hi Ceci > In addition: > Jan Renkema has edited a 2009 volume with Benjamins "Disocurse, of course" > which has several interesting contributions for your purpose (by Maite > Taboada, Max Louwerse, Ted Sanders & Wilbert Spooren, for instance). I > guess this could function as the introdoctory chapters you mention, but it > could easily be extended with original research papers, to which the > chapters point. > > Best wishes, > Ted > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > Ted Sanders > Departement Nederlandse Taal en Cultuur / > Utrecht institute of Linguistics UiL OTS > Universiteit Utrecht > Trans 10 > NL-3512 JK Utrecht > The Netherlands > T +31 30 2536080 / 8000 > F +31 30 2536000 > E T.J.M.Sanders at uu.nl > http://www.let.uu.nl/~ted.sanders/personal/index.php > ------------------------------------------------------ > > -----Original Message----- > From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu > [mailto:funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Cecilia E. Ford > Sent: dinsdag 4 januari 2011 3:55 > To: Johanna Rubba > Cc: funknet > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] approaches to text analysis > > Thank you. I have the Hatch book and can use it right off the shelf. >From > what I can recall, it is better than Salkie because it goes into verb > forms and clause constrution, not just cohesive devices. It covers written > and spoken language, but I think it has parts that are primarily about > writing. > great! > Ceci > > On 01/03/11, Johanna Rubba wrote: > >> Here is a rather basic one by Raphael Salkie: >> >> http://www.amazon.com/Text-Discourse-Analysis-Language-Workbooks/dp/04 >> 15092787 >> >> This is also worth a look. It's intended for language education (ESL, >> particularly), but I think you'll find it very rich. Evelyn Hatch: >> >> http://www.amazon.com/Discourse-Language-Education-Cambridge-Teaching/ >> dp/0521426057/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1294109083&sr=1-1 >> >> >> On Jan 3, 2011, at 6:30 PM, Cecilia E. Ford wrote: >> >> I teach a regular course on grammar in use, centering on language in >> interaction. I would like to include some coverage of analyzing written >> text and am interested in suggestions of approaches that would work for >> a mixed graduate/undergraduate class.? Any suggestions on textbooks, >> articles, chapters, introductory essays or the like? >> thanks,Ceci >> -- >> Cecilia E. Ford >> Nancy C. Hoefs Professor of English >> Professor of Sociology >> University of Wisconsin-Madison >> >> UW Interaction Interest Group (UWIIG):?? http://uwiig.blogspot.com/ >> >> Ford website:?? http://mendota.english.wisc.edu/~ceford/ >> >> >> >> >> >> Be GREEN, keep it on the SCREEN >> >> Dr. Johanna Rubba, Professor, Linguistics Linguistics Minor Advisor >> English Department California Polytechnic State University, San Luis >> Obispo >> E-mail: jrubba at calpoly.edu >> Tel.: 805.756.2184 >> Dept. Ofc. Tel.: 805.756.2596 >> Dept. Fax: 805.756.6374 >> URL: http://www.cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba > -- > Cecilia E. Ford > Nancy C. Hoefs Professor of English > Professor of Sociology > University of Wisconsin-Madison > > UW Interaction Interest Group (UWIIG): http://uwiig.blogspot.com/ > > Ford website: http://mendota.english.wisc.edu/~ceford/ > > > > > > Be GREEN, keep it on the SCREEN > From amnfn at well.com Wed Jan 5 14:21:29 2011 From: amnfn at well.com (A. Katz) Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 06:21:29 -0800 Subject: Project Bow Summer Internship; A request for collaboration and grad student sharing Message-ID: Fellow funknetters, The purpose of this email is twofold: first, to announce the new summer internship with Project Bow, which has an April 15 application deadline, and might be of interest to some of your students. Here is the link: http://pin.primate.wisc.edu/jobs/listings/258 The second purpose is to address those of you who are tenured professors in linguistics and cognitive science and who have an active research program. Have you ever been interested in investigating ape language? Did you give it up when you realized there was no funding for it, apes are now banned from most academic campuses, and there are all sorts of Federal laws making it virtually impossible to do anything without the supervision of a special committee and complying with lots of red tape requirements? If this applies to you, consider this: I have an ape language program already in progress. Collaborating with me will not cost you anything in your research budget. You have something that I want: graduate students whose time is paid for by stipends. I have something that you and your students want: access to an enculturated, linguistically sophisticated chimpanzee. My internship program allows young people to begin participating in the project, but it is not something that they can continue with and make a lifetime commitment to, because there are no institutional funds for us. You have the institutional funds. Please look into the possibility of allowing some of your graduate students to write their doctoral dissertation about Bow. This is a wonderful opportunity for all of us to collaborate! Best, --Aya Katz http://hubpages.com/hub/What-Constitutes-Proof-in-Ape-Language-Studies From agreenwood at utpress.utoronto.ca Wed Jan 5 21:05:12 2011 From: agreenwood at utpress.utoronto.ca (Greenwood, Audrey) Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 21:05:12 +0000 Subject: Now available - The Canadian Journal of Linguistics 55 (3), November 2010 Message-ID: The Canadian Journal of Linguistics / La revue canadienne de linguistique 55(3), November/novembre 2010 is now available at http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/toc/cjl.55.3.html Noun incorporation as symmetry breaking Michael Barrie Abstract:This article proposes a novel account of noun incorporation in Northern Iroquoian. It is proposed that there is no special mechanism for noun incorporation and that this phenomenon falls out naturally from the geometry of the phrase structure under Moro?s theory of Dynamic Antisymmetry. In a nutshell, when the verbal head and the nominal head undergoMerge, they form a point of symmetric c-command,which is resolved by the nominal head moving to the specifier of the verb phrase. Further, it is proposed that, in noun incorporation constructions with a full DP double, the incorporated noun and the DP form a constituent, which is merged in theta-position. R?sum?:Cet article propose une nouvelle description de l?incorporation nominale dans l?iroquo?en du Nord. Il est propos? qu?il n?y a aucun m?canisme particulier en mati?re d?incorporation nominale et que ce ph?nom?ne d?coule naturellement de la g?om?trie de la syntaxe selon la th?orie de l?Antisym?trie dynamique de Moro. En un mot, la fusion (Merge) des t?tes verbale et nominale forme un point de c-commande sym?trique qui se voit r?soudre par le d?placement de la t?te nominale au sp?cifieur du syntagme verbal. De plus, j?avance que le nom incorpor? dans les constructions ayant un sd double forme avec celui-ci un constituent qui est fusionn? en position th?matique. http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.barrie.pdf Omission des d?terminants : Contraintes d?alternances rythmiques ou contraintes li?es aux niveaux sup?rieurs de la structure prosodique Roseline Fr?chette Marie Labelle R?sum?:Cet article vise ? d?terminer si l?omission des d?terminants chez des enfants de deux ans est contrainte au niveau du pied ou si elle est contrainte par les diff?rents niveaux de la hi?rarchie prosodique. Neuf enfants francophones ?g?s de 24 ? 31 mois ont particip? ? une t?che de r?p?tition de 54 phrases de quatre ou cinq mots de la forme suivante ?Pronomv sn? r?parties en trois conditions : a) d?t + nom monosyllabique; b) d?t + nom bisyllabique; c) d?t + adjectif monosyllabique + nom monosyllabique. Les r?sultats d?montrent 1) plus d?omission du d?terminant dans la condition b que dans la condition a; 2) plus d?omission du d?terminant en c qu?en b. Il est d?montr? que l?omission du d?terminant ne s?explique pas par une contrainte d?alternance rythmique de bas niveau et que le niveau de la structure prosodique auquel doit s?attacher le d?terminant joue un r?le dans l?omission des d?terminants. Abstract:This article focuses on whether determiner omission by two-year-old children is constrained at the level of the prosodic foot or whether it is a function of the different levels of the prosodic hierarchy. Nine French-speaking children aged 2;0 to 2;7 were asked to repeat 54 four-or five-word sentences of the form ?Pronoun V NP? with three conditions: a) det + monosyllabic noun; b) det + bisyllabic noun; c) det + monosyllabic adjective + monosyllabic noun. The results show 1) more determiner omission in condition b than in a; 2) more determiner omission in c than in b. It is shown that determiner omission is not accounted for by a low-level stress-alternation constraint and that the level of prosodic structure to which the determiner is attached plays a role in determiner omission. http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.frechette.pdf Redefining what matters: Syntactic explanation in American linguistics, 1955?1970 Janet Martin-Nielsen Abstract:The postwar decades are well known for having brought dramatic change to American linguistics on many fronts. This paper explores an internally focused aspect of this change: conditions of explanation. The two questions at stake are, firstly, what counts as explanation in linguistics? and, secondly, how is this decided? I argue that transformational grammarians dominated the setting of explanatory criteria in 1960s American syntax, and that this dominance was essential to the overall success of that theory. Importantly, rival grammarians were forced to devote as much time and effort to fitting their theories to the transformational criteria as they were to advancing their own explanatory priorities. By successfully naming the conditions for explanation, transformationalists provided their own supporters with significant questions to pursue and, simultaneously, drew energy away from rivals. This monopoly over explanatory criteria was central to the dominant position transformational grammar established in the American academic linguistics community. R?sum?:Les d?cennies de l?apr?s-guerre ont ?t? caract?ris?es par des changements importants dans la linguistique am?ricaine. Cet article explore un aspect interne de ces changements : les conditions d?explication.Deux questions sont en jeu ici : premi?rement, en quoi consiste l?explication en linguistique? et en deuxi?me lieu : Comment d?cide-t-on en quoi consiste l?explication? Je soutiens que les grammairiens transformationnels ont impos? le choix des crit?res d?explication de la syntaxe am?ricaine au cours des ann?es 1960 et que cette domination ?tait essentielle au succ?s global de la grammaire transformationnelle. Les grammairiens rivaux ont d? consacrer autant de temps et d?effort ? adapter leurs th?ories aux crit?res transformationnels qu?? avancer leur propres priorit?s d?explication. En r?ussissant ? d?finir les crit?res d?explication, les transformationalistes ont nourri leur propres partisans de questions importantes ? poursuivre en m?me temps qu?ils ont drain? les ?nergies de leurs rivaux. Ce monopole des crit?res d?explication ?tait central ? la position dominante que la grammaire transformationelle a ?tablie dans la communaut? linguistique universitaire am?ricaine. http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.martin-nielsen.pdf Some remarks on subject positions and the architecture of the left periphery in Spanish Bernhard P?ll This article reexamines the puzzling issue of where subjects, lexical and null, are located in Spanish and offers a novel explanation for the incompatibility of preverbal lexical subjects with fronted focussed constituents. Both Specip and the left periphery appear to be potential landing sites for subjects, according to discourse-pragmatic factors. Assuming that pro is a clitic, it is argued that the aforementioned incompatibility can be captured by a simple rule: Specip must be empty for focus fronting to occur. This is the case with pro, which adjoins to Infl, or with postverbal subjects since they remain in Specvp. From this analysis it follows that: 1) the subject field in Spanish is less articulated than is generally assumed, 2) the differences between Spanish and other null subject languages with respect to the availability of preverbal subjets can be reduced to this rule and a different ordering of focus and topic phrases, and 3) it is unnecessary to posit two different topic positions. R?sum?:Cet article examine l??pineuse question de la position pr?verbale occup?e par le sujet lexical en espagnol et offre une nouvelle explication pour la contrainte sur la cooccurrence de sujets lexicaux et de constituants focalis?s en position pr?verbale. S?agissant des positions sujet, il appara?t que tant le sp?cifieur de si que la p?riph?rie gauche peuvent servir comme cible de mouvement, en fonction de param?tres discursifs. En pr?sumant que pro est un clitique, je soutiens qu?il est possible de ramener la contrainte ci-dessus ? la r?gle suivante : le mouvement d?items focalis?s vers la p?riph?rie gauche requiert que le sp?cifieur de si soit vide. C?est le cas avec pro (attach? ? la t?te de si) et ?galement avec les sujets postverbaux. Il s?ensuit que 1) la structure des positions sujet en espagnol est moins complexe qu?on ne l?affirme souvent, 2) les diff?rences entre l?espagnol et d?autres langues ? sujet nul quant ? la possibilit? de sujets pr?verbaux se r?duisent ? la r?gle mentionn?e de m?me qu?? une structure diff?rente de la p?riph?rie gauche, et 3) il n?est pas n?cessaire de postuler deux positions diff?rentes pour les topiques. http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.poll.pdf The Canadian Shift in Toronto Rebecca Roeder Lidia-Gabriela Jarmasz Abstract:This study provides the first wide-scale, apparent time, instrumental description of the Canadian Shift in mainstream Toronto English. In contrast with some previous findings, the Toronto data suggest that for the last 70 years or more the shift has not affected the high front lax vowel (I). We observe that the movement of the non-high front lax vowels (?) and (?) involves both lowering and retraction in Toronto English, although retraction is the primary direction of more recent change and the shift appears to be slowing down. Our findings also suggest that continued retraction of the vowel resulting from the low back merger is involved in the final stage of the shift. We do not find evidence of a chain shift but instead propose that a parallel shift is occurring and make reference to Vowel Dispersion Theory in our discussion. R?sum?:Cette ?tude pr?sente la premi?re description instrumentale en temps apparent de grande envergure du Canadian Shift dans l?anglais courant de Toronto. En contraste avec certains r?sultats ant?rieurs, les donn?es de Toronto sugg?rent qu?au cours des 70 derni?res ann?es ou plus, cette mutation n?a pas touch? la voyelle haute ant?rieure rel?ch?e (I). Nous observons que le mouvement des voyelles ant?rieures rel?ch?es non hautes (?) et (?) implique ? la fois abaissement et post?riorisation, bien que cette derni?re repr?sente la direction principale du changement plus r?cent; de plus, nous observons que la mutation semble ralentir. Nos r?sultats sugg?rent ?galement que la post?riorisation continue de la voyelle qui provient de la fusion des voyelles post?rieures basses est impliqu?e dans la derni?re ?tape de la mutation. Ne trouvant aucune preuve de mutation en cha?ne, nous proposons plut?t que le Canadian Shift est unemutation en parall?le. Nous invoquons la th?orie de la dispersion des voyelles dans notre discussion. http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.roeder.pdf Honorific agreement in Japanese Hideki Kishimoto http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.kishimoto.pdf One-replacement and the label-less theory of adjuncts Yosuke Sato http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.sato.pdf Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics and second language acquisition (review) Engin Arik http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.arik.pdf The locative syntax of experiencers (review) Marco Nicolis http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.nicolis.pdf L?enfant dans la langue (review) Nelleke Strik http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.strik.pdf Pragmatics and grammar (review) Dorota Zielinska http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.zielinska.pdf The Canadian Journal of Linguistics publishes articles of original research in linguistics in both English and French. The articles deal with linguistic theory, linguistic description of English, French and a variety of other natural languages, phonetics, phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics, historical linguistics, sociolinguistics, psycholinguistics, first and second language acquisition, and other areas of interest to linguists. For more information, please contact: University of Toronto Press - Journals Division, 5201 Dufferin St., Toronto, ON M3H 5T8 Tel: (416) 667-7810 Fax: (416) 667-7881 email: journals at utpress.utoronto.ca UTP Journals on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/utpjournals Join us for advance notice of tables of contents of forthcoming issues, author and editor commentaries and insights, calls for papers and advice on publishing in our journals. Become a fan and receive free access to articles weekly through UTPJournals focus. From tgivon at uoregon.edu Wed Jan 5 21:30:40 2011 From: tgivon at uoregon.edu (Tom Givon) Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 14:30:40 -0700 Subject: Now available - The Canadian Journal of Linguistics 55 (3), November 2010 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Isn't this beautiful? It just falls out, naturally, from a geometry, and a theory of Dynamic Antisymmetry, no less. Wow! TG ============ On 1/5/2011 2:05 PM, Greenwood, Audrey wrote: > The Canadian Journal of Linguistics / La revue canadienne de linguistique > 55(3), November/novembre 2010 is now available at http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/toc/cjl.55.3.html > > > > Noun incorporation as symmetry breaking > Michael Barrie > > Abstract:This article proposes a novel account of noun incorporation in Northern Iroquoian. It is proposed that there is no special mechanism for noun incorporation and that this phenomenon falls out naturally from the geometry of the phrase structure under Moro???s theory of Dynamic Antisymmetry. In a nutshell, when the verbal head and the nominal head undergoMerge, they form a point of symmetric c-command,which is resolved by the nominal head moving to the specifier of the verb phrase. Further, it is proposed that, in noun incorporation constructions with a full DP double, the incorporated noun and the DP form a constituent, which is merged in theta-position. > > R??sum??:Cet article propose une nouvelle description de l???incorporation nominale dans l???iroquo??en du Nord. Il est propos?? qu???il n???y a aucun m??canisme particulier en mati??re d???incorporation nominale et que ce ph??nom??ne d??coule naturellement de la g??om??trie de la syntaxe selon la th??orie de l???Antisym??trie dynamique de Moro. En un mot, la fusion (Merge) des t??tes verbale et nominale forme un point de c-commande sym??trique qui se voit r??soudre par le d??placement de la t??te nominale au sp??cifieur du syntagme verbal. De plus, j???avance que le nom incorpor?? dans les constructions ayant un sd double forme avec celui-ci un constituent qui est fusionn?? en position th??matique. http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.barrie.pdf > > > > Omission des d??terminants : Contraintes d???alternances rythmiques ou contraintes li??es aux niveaux sup??rieurs de la structure prosodique > Roseline Fr??chette > Marie Labelle > > R??sum??:Cet article vise ? d??terminer si l???omission des d??terminants chez des enfants de deux ans est contrainte au niveau du pied ou si elle est contrainte par les diff??rents niveaux de la hi??rarchie prosodique. Neuf enfants francophones ??g??s de 24 ? 31 mois ont particip?? ? une t??che de r??p??tition de 54 phrases de quatre ou cinq mots de la forme suivante ??Pronomv sn?? r??parties en trois conditions : a) d??t + nom monosyllabique; b) d??t + nom bisyllabique; c) d??t + adjectif monosyllabique + nom monosyllabique. Les r??sultats d??montrent 1) plus d???omission du d??terminant dans la condition b que dans la condition a; 2) plus d???omission du d??terminant en c qu???en b. Il est d??montr?? que l???omission du d??terminant ne s???explique pas par une contrainte d???alternance rythmique de bas niveau et que le niveau de la structure prosodique auquel doit s???attacher le d??terminant joue un r??le dans l???omission des d??terminants. > > Abstract:This article focuses on whether determiner omission by two-year-old children is constrained at the level of the prosodic foot or whether it is a function of the different levels of the prosodic hierarchy. Nine French-speaking children aged 2;0 to 2;7 were asked to repeat 54 four-or five-word sentences of the form ???Pronoun V NP??? with three conditions: a) det + monosyllabic noun; b) det + bisyllabic noun; c) det + monosyllabic adjective + monosyllabic noun. The results show 1) more determiner omission in condition b than in a; 2) more determiner omission in c than in b. It is shown that determiner omission is not accounted for by a low-level stress-alternation constraint and that the level of prosodic structure to which the determiner is attached plays a role in determiner omission. > http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.frechette.pdf > > > > Redefining what matters: Syntactic explanation in American linguistics, 1955???1970 > Janet Martin-Nielsen > > Abstract:The postwar decades are well known for having brought dramatic change to American linguistics on many fronts. This paper explores an internally focused aspect of this change: conditions of explanation. The two questions at stake are, firstly, what counts as explanation in linguistics? and, secondly, how is this decided? I argue that transformational grammarians dominated the setting of explanatory criteria in 1960s American syntax, and that this dominance was essential to the overall success of that theory. Importantly, rival grammarians were forced to devote as much time and effort to fitting their theories to the transformational criteria as they were to advancing their own explanatory priorities. By successfully naming the conditions for explanation, transformationalists provided their own supporters with significant questions to pursue and, simultaneously, drew energy away from rivals. This monopoly over explanatory criteria was central to the dominant position transformational grammar established in the American academic linguistics community. > > R??sum??:Les d??cennies de l???apr??s-guerre ont ??t?? caract??ris??es par des changements importants dans la linguistique am??ricaine. Cet article explore un aspect interne de ces changements : les conditions d???explication.Deux questions sont en jeu ici : premi??rement, en quoi consiste l???explication en linguistique? et en deuxi??me lieu : Comment d??cide-t-on en quoi consiste l???explication? Je soutiens que les grammairiens transformationnels ont impos?? le choix des crit??res d???explication de la syntaxe am??ricaine au cours des ann??es 1960 et que cette domination ??tait essentielle au succ??s global de la grammaire transformationnelle. Les grammairiens rivaux ont d?? consacrer autant de temps et d???effort ? adapter leurs th??ories aux crit??res transformationnels qu???? avancer leur propres priorit??s d???explication. En r??ussissant ? d??finir les crit??res d???explication, les transformationalistes ont nourri leur propres partisans de questions importantes ? poursuivre en m??me temps qu???ils ont drain?? les ??nergies de leurs rivaux. Ce monopole des crit??res d???explication ??tait central ? la position dominante que la grammaire transformationelle a ??tablie dans la communaut?? linguistique universitaire am??ricaine. > http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.martin-nielsen.pdf > > > > Some remarks on subject positions and the architecture of the left periphery in Spanish > Bernhard P??ll > > This article reexamines the puzzling issue of where subjects, lexical and null, are located in Spanish and offers a novel explanation for the incompatibility of preverbal lexical subjects with fronted focussed constituents. Both Specip and the left periphery appear to be potential landing sites for subjects, according to discourse-pragmatic factors. Assuming that pro is a clitic, it is argued that the aforementioned incompatibility can be captured by a simple rule: Specip must be empty for focus fronting to occur. This is the case with pro, which adjoins to Infl, or with postverbal subjects since they remain in Specvp. From this analysis it follows that: 1) the subject field in Spanish is less articulated than is generally assumed, 2) the differences between Spanish and other null subject languages with respect to the availability of preverbal subjets can be reduced to this rule and a different ordering of focus and topic phrases, and 3) it is unnecessary to posit two different topic positions. > > R??sum??:Cet article examine l?????pineuse question de la position pr??verbale occup??e par le sujet lexical en espagnol et offre une nouvelle explication pour la contrainte sur la cooccurrence de sujets lexicaux et de constituants focalis??s en position pr??verbale. S???agissant des positions sujet, il appara??t que tant le sp??cifieur de si que la p??riph??rie gauche peuvent servir comme cible de mouvement, en fonction de param??tres discursifs. En pr??sumant que pro est un clitique, je soutiens qu???il est possible de ramener la contrainte ci-dessus ? la r??gle suivante : le mouvement d???items focalis??s vers la p??riph??rie gauche requiert que le sp??cifieur de si soit vide. C???est le cas avec pro (attach?? ? la t??te de si) et ??galement avec les sujets postverbaux. Il s???ensuit que 1) la structure des positions sujet en espagnol est moins complexe qu???on ne l???affirme souvent, 2) les diff??rences entre l???espagnol et d???autres langues ? sujet nul quant ? la possibilit?? de sujets pr??verbaux se r??duisent ? la r??gle mentionn??e de m??me qu???? une structure diff??rente de la p??riph??rie gauche, et 3) il n???est pas n??cessaire de postuler deux positions diff??rentes pour les topiques. > http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.poll.pdf > > > > The Canadian Shift in Toronto > Rebecca Roeder > Lidia-Gabriela Jarmasz > > Abstract:This study provides the first wide-scale, apparent time, instrumental description of the Canadian Shift in mainstream Toronto English. In contrast with some previous findings, the Toronto data suggest that for the last 70 years or more the shift has not affected the high front lax vowel (I). We observe that the movement of the non-high front lax vowels (??) and (??) involves both lowering and retraction in Toronto English, although retraction is the primary direction of more recent change and the shift appears to be slowing down. Our findings also suggest that continued retraction of the vowel resulting from the low back merger is involved in the final stage of the shift. We do not find evidence of a chain shift but instead propose that a parallel shift is occurring and make reference to Vowel Dispersion Theory in our discussion. > > R??sum??:Cette ??tude pr??sente la premi??re description instrumentale en temps apparent de grande envergure du Canadian Shift dans l???anglais courant de Toronto. En contraste avec certains r??sultats ant??rieurs, les donn??es de Toronto sugg??rent qu???au cours des 70 derni??res ann??es ou plus, cette mutation n???a pas touch?? la voyelle haute ant??rieure rel??ch??e (I). Nous observons que le mouvement des voyelles ant??rieures rel??ch??es non hautes (??) et (??) implique ? la fois abaissement et post??riorisation, bien que cette derni??re repr??sente la direction principale du changement plus r??cent; de plus, nous observons que la mutation semble ralentir. Nos r??sultats sugg??rent ??galement que la post??riorisation continue de la voyelle qui provient de la fusion des voyelles post??rieures basses est impliqu??e dans la derni??re ??tape de la mutation. Ne trouvant aucune preuve de mutation en cha??ne, nous proposons plut??t que le Canadian Shift est unemutation en parall??le. Nous invoquons la th??orie de la dispersion des voyelles dans notre discussion. > http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.roeder.pdf > > > > Honorific agreement in Japanese > Hideki Kishimoto > http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.kishimoto.pdf > > > > One-replacement and the label-less theory of adjuncts > Yosuke Sato > http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.sato.pdf > > > > Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics and second language acquisition (review) > Engin Arik > http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.arik.pdf > > > > The locative syntax of experiencers (review) > Marco Nicolis > http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.nicolis.pdf > > > > L???enfant dans la langue (review) > Nelleke Strik > http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.strik.pdf > > > > Pragmatics and grammar (review) > Dorota Zielinska > http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.zielinska.pdf > > > The Canadian Journal of Linguistics publishes articles of original research in linguistics in both English and French. The articles deal with linguistic theory, linguistic description of English, French and a variety of other natural languages, phonetics, phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics, historical linguistics, sociolinguistics, psycholinguistics, first and second language acquisition, and other areas of interest to linguists. > > > For more information, please contact: University of Toronto Press - Journals Division, 5201 Dufferin St., Toronto, ON M3H 5T8 Tel: (416) 667-7810 Fax: (416) 667-7881 email: journals at utpress.utoronto.ca > > > UTP Journals on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/utpjournals > Join us for advance notice of tables of contents of forthcoming issues, author and editor commentaries and insights, calls for papers and advice on publishing in our journals. Become a fan and receive free access to articles weekly through UTPJournals focus. > > From mark at polymathix.com Wed Jan 5 22:00:20 2011 From: mark at polymathix.com (Mark P. Line) Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 16:00:20 -0600 Subject: Now available - The Canadian Journal of Linguistics 55 (3), November 2010 In-Reply-To: <4D24E300.80902@uoregon.edu> Message-ID: So, what would be the procedure for falsifying the claims in that paper? I'm pretty sure I don't have a clue as to how to show that something doesn't really merge in theta-position. -- Mark Tom Givon wrote: > > Isn't this beautiful? It just falls out, naturally, from a geometry, and > a theory of Dynamic Antisymmetry, no less. Wow! TG > > ============ > > > On 1/5/2011 2:05 PM, Greenwood, Audrey wrote: >> The Canadian Journal of Linguistics / La revue canadienne de >> linguistique >> 55(3), November/novembre 2010 is now available at >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/toc/cjl.55.3.html >> >> >> >> Noun incorporation as symmetry breaking >> Michael Barrie >> >> Abstract:This article proposes a novel account of noun incorporation in >> Northern Iroquoian. It is proposed that there is no special mechanism >> for noun incorporation and that this phenomenon falls out naturally from >> the geometry of the phrase structure under Moro???s theory of Dynamic >> Antisymmetry. In a nutshell, when the verbal head and the nominal head >> undergoMerge, they form a point of symmetric c-command,which is resolved >> by the nominal head moving to the specifier of the verb phrase. Further, >> it is proposed that, in noun incorporation constructions with a full DP >> double, the incorporated noun and the DP form a constituent, which is >> merged in theta-position. >> >> R??sum??:Cet article propose une nouvelle description de >> l???incorporation nominale dans l???iroquo??en du Nord. Il est propos?? >> qu???il n???y a aucun m??canisme particulier en mati??re >> d???incorporation nominale et que ce ph??nom??ne d??coule naturellement >> de la g??om??trie de la syntaxe selon la th??orie de l???Antisym??trie >> dynamique de Moro. En un mot, la fusion (Merge) des t??tes verbale et >> nominale forme un point de c-commande sym??trique qui se voit r??soudre >> par le d??placement de la t??te nominale au sp??cifieur du syntagme >> verbal. De plus, j???avance que le nom incorpor?? dans les constructions >> ayant un sd double forme avec celui-ci un constituent qui est fusionn?? >> en position th??matique. >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.barrie.pdf >> >> >> >> Omission des d??terminants : Contraintes d???alternances rythmiques ou >> contraintes li??es aux niveaux sup??rieurs de la structure prosodique >> Roseline Fr??chette >> Marie Labelle >> >> R??sum??:Cet article vise ? d??terminer si l???omission des >> d??terminants chez des enfants de deux ans est contrainte au niveau du >> pied ou si elle est contrainte par les diff??rents niveaux de la >> hi??rarchie prosodique. Neuf enfants francophones ??g??s de 24 ? 31 >> mois ont particip?? ? une t??che de r??p??tition de 54 phrases de >> quatre ou cinq mots de la forme suivante ??Pronomv sn?? r??parties en >> trois conditions : a) d??t + nom monosyllabique; b) d??t + nom >> bisyllabique; c) d??t + adjectif monosyllabique + nom monosyllabique. >> Les r??sultats d??montrent 1) plus d???omission du d??terminant dans la >> condition b que dans la condition a; 2) plus d???omission du >> d??terminant en c qu???en b. Il est d??montr?? que l???omission du >> d??terminant ne s???explique pas par une contrainte d???alternance >> rythmique de bas niveau et que le niveau de la structure prosodique >> auquel doit s???attacher le d??terminant joue un r??le dans l???omission >> des d??terminants. >> >> Abstract:This article focuses on whether determiner omission by >> two-year-old children is constrained at the level of the prosodic foot >> or whether it is a function of the different levels of the prosodic >> hierarchy. Nine French-speaking children aged 2;0 to 2;7 were asked to >> repeat 54 four-or five-word sentences of the form ???Pronoun V NP??? >> with three conditions: a) det + monosyllabic noun; b) det + bisyllabic >> noun; c) det + monosyllabic adjective + monosyllabic noun. The results >> show 1) more determiner omission in condition b than in a; 2) more >> determiner omission in c than in b. It is shown that determiner omission >> is not accounted for by a low-level stress-alternation constraint and >> that the level of prosodic structure to which the determiner is attached >> plays a role in determiner omission. >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.frechette.pdf >> >> >> >> Redefining what matters: Syntactic explanation in American linguistics, >> 1955???1970 >> Janet Martin-Nielsen >> >> Abstract:The postwar decades are well known for having brought dramatic >> change to American linguistics on many fronts. This paper explores an >> internally focused aspect of this change: conditions of explanation. The >> two questions at stake are, firstly, what counts as explanation in >> linguistics? and, secondly, how is this decided? I argue that >> transformational grammarians dominated the setting of explanatory >> criteria in 1960s American syntax, and that this dominance was essential >> to the overall success of that theory. Importantly, rival grammarians >> were forced to devote as much time and effort to fitting their theories >> to the transformational criteria as they were to advancing their own >> explanatory priorities. By successfully naming the conditions for >> explanation, transformationalists provided their own supporters with >> significant questions to pursue and, simultaneously, drew energy away >> from rivals. This monopoly over explanatory criteria was central to the >> dominant position transformational grammar established in the American >> academic linguistics community. >> >> R??sum??:Les d??cennies de l???apr??s-guerre ont ??t?? caract??ris??es >> par des changements importants dans la linguistique am??ricaine. Cet >> article explore un aspect interne de ces changements : les conditions >> d???explication.Deux questions sont en jeu ici : premi??rement, en quoi >> consiste l???explication en linguistique? et en deuxi??me lieu : Comment >> d??cide-t-on en quoi consiste l???explication? Je soutiens que les >> grammairiens transformationnels ont impos?? le choix des crit??res >> d???explication de la syntaxe am??ricaine au cours des ann??es 1960 et >> que cette domination ??tait essentielle au succ??s global de la >> grammaire transformationnelle. Les grammairiens rivaux ont d?? consacrer >> autant de temps et d???effort ? adapter leurs th??ories aux crit??res >> transformationnels qu???? avancer leur propres priorit??s >> d???explication. En r??ussissant ? d??finir les crit??res >> d???explication, les transformationalistes ont nourri leur propres >> partisans de questions importantes ? poursuivre en m??me temps qu???ils >> ont drain?? les ??nergies de leurs rivaux. Ce monopole des crit??res >> d???explication ??tait central ? la position dominante que la grammaire >> transformationelle a ??tablie dans la communaut?? linguistique >> universitaire am??ricaine. >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.martin-nielsen.pdf >> >> >> >> Some remarks on subject positions and the architecture of the left >> periphery in Spanish >> Bernhard P??ll >> >> This article reexamines the puzzling issue of where subjects, lexical >> and null, are located in Spanish and offers a novel explanation for the >> incompatibility of preverbal lexical subjects with fronted focussed >> constituents. Both Specip and the left periphery appear to be potential >> landing sites for subjects, according to discourse-pragmatic factors. >> Assuming that pro is a clitic, it is argued that the aforementioned >> incompatibility can be captured by a simple rule: Specip must be empty >> for focus fronting to occur. This is the case with pro, which adjoins to >> Infl, or with postverbal subjects since they remain in Specvp. From this >> analysis it follows that: 1) the subject field in Spanish is less >> articulated than is generally assumed, 2) the differences between >> Spanish and other null subject languages with respect to the >> availability of preverbal subjets can be reduced to this rule and a >> different ordering of focus and topic phrases, and 3) it is unnecessary >> to posit two different topic positions. >> >> R??sum??:Cet article examine l?????pineuse question de la position >> pr??verbale occup??e par le sujet lexical en espagnol et offre une >> nouvelle explication pour la contrainte sur la cooccurrence de sujets >> lexicaux et de constituants focalis??s en position pr??verbale. >> S???agissant des positions sujet, il appara??t que tant le sp??cifieur >> de si que la p??riph??rie gauche peuvent servir comme cible de >> mouvement, en fonction de param??tres discursifs. En pr??sumant que pro >> est un clitique, je soutiens qu???il est possible de ramener la >> contrainte ci-dessus ? la r??gle suivante : le mouvement d???items >> focalis??s vers la p??riph??rie gauche requiert que le sp??cifieur de si >> soit vide. C???est le cas avec pro (attach?? ? la t??te de si) et >> ??galement avec les sujets postverbaux. Il s???ensuit que 1) la >> structure des positions sujet en espagnol est moins complexe qu???on ne >> l???affirme souvent, 2) les diff??rences entre l???espagnol et >> d???autres langues ? sujet nul quant ? la possibilit?? de sujets >> pr??verbaux se r??duisent ? la r??gle mentionn??e de m??me qu???? une >> structure diff??rente de la p??riph??rie gauche, et 3) il n???est pas >> n??cessaire de postuler deux positions diff??rentes pour les topiques. >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.poll.pdf >> >> >> >> The Canadian Shift in Toronto >> Rebecca Roeder >> Lidia-Gabriela Jarmasz >> >> Abstract:This study provides the first wide-scale, apparent time, >> instrumental description of the Canadian Shift in mainstream Toronto >> English. In contrast with some previous findings, the Toronto data >> suggest that for the last 70 years or more the shift has not affected >> the high front lax vowel (I). We observe that the movement of the >> non-high front lax vowels (??) and (??) involves both lowering and >> retraction in Toronto English, although retraction is the primary >> direction of more recent change and the shift appears to be slowing >> down. Our findings also suggest that continued retraction of the vowel >> resulting from the low back merger is involved in the final stage of the >> shift. We do not find evidence of a chain shift but instead propose that >> a parallel shift is occurring and make reference to Vowel Dispersion >> Theory in our discussion. >> >> R??sum??:Cette ??tude pr??sente la premi??re description instrumentale >> en temps apparent de grande envergure du Canadian Shift dans l???anglais >> courant de Toronto. En contraste avec certains r??sultats ant??rieurs, >> les donn??es de Toronto sugg??rent qu???au cours des 70 derni??res >> ann??es ou plus, cette mutation n???a pas touch?? la voyelle haute >> ant??rieure rel??ch??e (I). Nous observons que le mouvement des voyelles >> ant??rieures rel??ch??es non hautes (??) et (??) implique ? la fois >> abaissement et post??riorisation, bien que cette derni??re repr??sente >> la direction principale du changement plus r??cent; de plus, nous >> observons que la mutation semble ralentir. Nos r??sultats sugg??rent >> ??galement que la post??riorisation continue de la voyelle qui provient >> de la fusion des voyelles post??rieures basses est impliqu??e dans la >> derni??re ??tape de la mutation. Ne trouvant aucune preuve de mutation >> en cha??ne, nous proposons plut??t que le Canadian Shift est unemutation >> en parall??le. Nous invoquons la th??orie de la dispersion des voyelles >> dans notre discussion. >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.roeder.pdf >> >> >> >> Honorific agreement in Japanese >> Hideki Kishimoto >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.kishimoto.pdf >> >> >> >> One-replacement and the label-less theory of adjuncts >> Yosuke Sato >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.sato.pdf >> >> >> >> Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics and second language acquisition >> (review) >> Engin Arik >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.arik.pdf >> >> >> >> The locative syntax of experiencers (review) >> Marco Nicolis >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.nicolis.pdf >> >> >> >> L???enfant dans la langue (review) >> Nelleke Strik >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.strik.pdf >> >> >> >> Pragmatics and grammar (review) >> Dorota Zielinska >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.zielinska.pdf >> >> >> The Canadian Journal of Linguistics publishes articles of original >> research in linguistics in both English and French. The articles deal >> with linguistic theory, linguistic description of English, French and a >> variety of other natural languages, phonetics, phonology, morphology, >> syntax, semantics, historical linguistics, sociolinguistics, >> psycholinguistics, first and second language acquisition, and other >> areas of interest to linguists. >> >> >> For more information, please contact: University of Toronto Press - >> Journals Division, 5201 Dufferin St., Toronto, ON M3H 5T8 Tel: (416) >> 667-7810 Fax: (416) 667-7881 email: >> journals at utpress.utoronto.ca >> >> >> UTP Journals on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/utpjournals >> Join us for advance notice of tables of contents of forthcoming issues, >> author and editor commentaries and insights, calls for papers and advice >> on publishing in our journals. Become a fan and receive free access to >> articles weekly through UTPJournals focus. >> >> > > > > -- Mark Mark P. Line Bartlesville, OK From smyth at utsc.utoronto.ca Wed Jan 5 22:41:35 2011 From: smyth at utsc.utoronto.ca (Ron Smyth) Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 17:41:35 -0500 Subject: Now available - The Canadian Journal of Linguistics 55 (3), November 2010 In-Reply-To: <8024474f5e11cf0c33c196d77a045deb.squirrel@sm.webmail.pair.com> Message-ID: Tom and Mark: On the rare occasions when I read such a paper I see the theoretical constructs as a way to express generalizations about structures (as opposed to taking the theoretical apparatus too seriously). I don't think people should be so sarcastic without first looking at the paper to see what other value it might have for non-theoreticians. If it has some insight about noun incorporation structures -- e.g. something that a psycholinguist, sociolinguist or historical linguist would be interested to know about -- then I don't get too upset about the formalisms. Often the distributional facts that come up because of the pursuit of a theoretical issue are all that I really find valuable in these papers. I stopped worrying about this approximately 30 years ago, and instead I just mine the theoretical literature for different purposes. Of course if the paper is just taking something that's already understood at some level and fitting it into the current week's framework, then I'm not interested (and I let those who are interested love it if they want to). Moreoever if you had read the paper and come up with some great alternative functional explanation, you would have earned the right to dismiss this as theoretical drivel, but I don't see any of that in this thread. Theoretical papers are always falsifiable in the sense that counter-examples can upset the applecart. What you are questioning is much broader than that, but this has been an issue since the early 1970s, so as far as Barrie's paper is concerned, there's nothing that we can't see see every day. It's been going on for 50 years. I'm sorry that you didn't read down to the bottom of the CJL posting. One of the papers is about evidence in linguistics and how the transformational paradigm managed to hijack everyone's agenda; another is a fairly concrete article on vowel changes in Canadian English; another is about possible prosodic explanations for kids' ability to produce noun phrases. Why no sarcastic comments about those abstracts? What purpose does this kind of sarcasm serve, especially when it is so superficial and confined to funknet where the author is unlikely to see it? ron ============================================================================== Ron Smyth, Associate Professor Linguistics & Psychology University of Toronto =========================================================================== On Wed, 5 Jan 2011, Mark P. Line wrote: > So, what would be the procedure for falsifying the claims in that paper? > > I'm pretty sure I don't have a clue as to how to show that something > doesn't really merge in theta-position. > > -- Mark > > > > Tom Givon wrote: > > > > Isn't this beautiful? It just falls out, naturally, from a geometry, and > > a theory of Dynamic Antisymmetry, no less. Wow! TG > > > > ============ > > > > > > On 1/5/2011 2:05 PM, Greenwood, Audrey wrote: > >> The Canadian Journal of Linguistics / La revue canadienne de > >> linguistique > >> 55(3), November/novembre 2010 is now available at > >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/toc/cjl.55.3.html > >> > >> > >> > >> Noun incorporation as symmetry breaking > >> Michael Barrie > >> > >> Abstract:This article proposes a novel account of noun incorporation in > >> Northern Iroquoian. It is proposed that there is no special mechanism > >> for noun incorporation and that this phenomenon falls out naturally from > >> the geometry of the phrase structure under Moro???s theory of Dynamic > >> Antisymmetry. In a nutshell, when the verbal head and the nominal head > >> undergoMerge, they form a point of symmetric c-command,which is resolved > >> by the nominal head moving to the specifier of the verb phrase. Further, > >> it is proposed that, in noun incorporation constructions with a full DP > >> double, the incorporated noun and the DP form a constituent, which is > >> merged in theta-position. > >> > >> R??sum??:Cet article propose une nouvelle description de > >> l???incorporation nominale dans l???iroquo??en du Nord. Il est propos?? > >> qu???il n???y a aucun m??canisme particulier en mati??re > >> d???incorporation nominale et que ce ph??nom??ne d??coule naturellement > >> de la g??om??trie de la syntaxe selon la th??orie de l???Antisym??trie > >> dynamique de Moro. En un mot, la fusion (Merge) des t??tes verbale et > >> nominale forme un point de c-commande sym??trique qui se voit r??soudre > >> par le d??placement de la t??te nominale au sp??cifieur du syntagme > >> verbal. De plus, j???avance que le nom incorpor?? dans les constructions > >> ayant un sd double forme avec celui-ci un constituent qui est fusionn?? > >> en position th??matique. > >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.barrie.pdf > >> > >> > >> > >> Omission des d??terminants : Contraintes d???alternances rythmiques ou > >> contraintes li??es aux niveaux sup??rieurs de la structure prosodique > >> Roseline Fr??chette > >> Marie Labelle > >> > >> R??sum??:Cet article vise ? d??terminer si l???omission des > >> d??terminants chez des enfants de deux ans est contrainte au niveau du > >> pied ou si elle est contrainte par les diff??rents niveaux de la > >> hi??rarchie prosodique. Neuf enfants francophones ??g??s de 24 ? 31 > >> mois ont particip?? ? une t??che de r??p??tition de 54 phrases de > >> quatre ou cinq mots de la forme suivante ??Pronomv sn?? r??parties en > >> trois conditions : a) d??t + nom monosyllabique; b) d??t + nom > >> bisyllabique; c) d??t + adjectif monosyllabique + nom monosyllabique. > >> Les r??sultats d??montrent 1) plus d???omission du d??terminant dans la > >> condition b que dans la condition a; 2) plus d???omission du > >> d??terminant en c qu???en b. Il est d??montr?? que l???omission du > >> d??terminant ne s???explique pas par une contrainte d???alternance > >> rythmique de bas niveau et que le niveau de la structure prosodique > >> auquel doit s???attacher le d??terminant joue un r??le dans l???omission > >> des d??terminants. > >> > >> Abstract:This article focuses on whether determiner omission by > >> two-year-old children is constrained at the level of the prosodic foot > >> or whether it is a function of the different levels of the prosodic > >> hierarchy. Nine French-speaking children aged 2;0 to 2;7 were asked to > >> repeat 54 four-or five-word sentences of the form ???Pronoun V NP??? > >> with three conditions: a) det + monosyllabic noun; b) det + bisyllabic > >> noun; c) det + monosyllabic adjective + monosyllabic noun. The results > >> show 1) more determiner omission in condition b than in a; 2) more > >> determiner omission in c than in b. It is shown that determiner omission > >> is not accounted for by a low-level stress-alternation constraint and > >> that the level of prosodic structure to which the determiner is attached > >> plays a role in determiner omission. > >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.frechette.pdf > >> > >> > >> > >> Redefining what matters: Syntactic explanation in American linguistics, > >> 1955???1970 > >> Janet Martin-Nielsen > >> > >> Abstract:The postwar decades are well known for having brought dramatic > >> change to American linguistics on many fronts. This paper explores an > >> internally focused aspect of this change: conditions of explanation. The > >> two questions at stake are, firstly, what counts as explanation in > >> linguistics? and, secondly, how is this decided? I argue that > >> transformational grammarians dominated the setting of explanatory > >> criteria in 1960s American syntax, and that this dominance was essential > >> to the overall success of that theory. Importantly, rival grammarians > >> were forced to devote as much time and effort to fitting their theories > >> to the transformational criteria as they were to advancing their own > >> explanatory priorities. By successfully naming the conditions for > >> explanation, transformationalists provided their own supporters with > >> significant questions to pursue and, simultaneously, drew energy away > >> from rivals. This monopoly over explanatory criteria was central to the > >> dominant position transformational grammar established in the American > >> academic linguistics community. > >> > >> R??sum??:Les d??cennies de l???apr??s-guerre ont ??t?? caract??ris??es > >> par des changements importants dans la linguistique am??ricaine. Cet > >> article explore un aspect interne de ces changements : les conditions > >> d???explication.Deux questions sont en jeu ici : premi??rement, en quoi > >> consiste l???explication en linguistique? et en deuxi??me lieu : Comment > >> d??cide-t-on en quoi consiste l???explication? Je soutiens que les > >> grammairiens transformationnels ont impos?? le choix des crit??res > >> d???explication de la syntaxe am??ricaine au cours des ann??es 1960 et > >> que cette domination ??tait essentielle au succ??s global de la > >> grammaire transformationnelle. Les grammairiens rivaux ont d?? consacrer > >> autant de temps et d???effort ? adapter leurs th??ories aux crit??res > >> transformationnels qu???? avancer leur propres priorit??s > >> d???explication. En r??ussissant ? d??finir les crit??res > >> d???explication, les transformationalistes ont nourri leur propres > >> partisans de questions importantes ? poursuivre en m??me temps qu???ils > >> ont drain?? les ??nergies de leurs rivaux. Ce monopole des crit??res > >> d???explication ??tait central ? la position dominante que la grammaire > >> transformationelle a ??tablie dans la communaut?? linguistique > >> universitaire am??ricaine. > >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.martin-nielsen.pdf > >> > >> > >> > >> Some remarks on subject positions and the architecture of the left > >> periphery in Spanish > >> Bernhard P??ll > >> > >> This article reexamines the puzzling issue of where subjects, lexical > >> and null, are located in Spanish and offers a novel explanation for the > >> incompatibility of preverbal lexical subjects with fronted focussed > >> constituents. Both Specip and the left periphery appear to be potential > >> landing sites for subjects, according to discourse-pragmatic factors. > >> Assuming that pro is a clitic, it is argued that the aforementioned > >> incompatibility can be captured by a simple rule: Specip must be empty > >> for focus fronting to occur. This is the case with pro, which adjoins to > >> Infl, or with postverbal subjects since they remain in Specvp. From this > >> analysis it follows that: 1) the subject field in Spanish is less > >> articulated than is generally assumed, 2) the differences between > >> Spanish and other null subject languages with respect to the > >> availability of preverbal subjets can be reduced to this rule and a > >> different ordering of focus and topic phrases, and 3) it is unnecessary > >> to posit two different topic positions. > >> > >> R??sum??:Cet article examine l?????pineuse question de la position > >> pr??verbale occup??e par le sujet lexical en espagnol et offre une > >> nouvelle explication pour la contrainte sur la cooccurrence de sujets > >> lexicaux et de constituants focalis??s en position pr??verbale. > >> S???agissant des positions sujet, il appara??t que tant le sp??cifieur > >> de si que la p??riph??rie gauche peuvent servir comme cible de > >> mouvement, en fonction de param??tres discursifs. En pr??sumant que pro > >> est un clitique, je soutiens qu???il est possible de ramener la > >> contrainte ci-dessus ? la r??gle suivante : le mouvement d???items > >> focalis??s vers la p??riph??rie gauche requiert que le sp??cifieur de si > >> soit vide. C???est le cas avec pro (attach?? ? la t??te de si) et > >> ??galement avec les sujets postverbaux. Il s???ensuit que 1) la > >> structure des positions sujet en espagnol est moins complexe qu???on ne > >> l???affirme souvent, 2) les diff??rences entre l???espagnol et > >> d???autres langues ? sujet nul quant ? la possibilit?? de sujets > >> pr??verbaux se r??duisent ? la r??gle mentionn??e de m??me qu???? une > >> structure diff??rente de la p??riph??rie gauche, et 3) il n???est pas > >> n??cessaire de postuler deux positions diff??rentes pour les topiques. > >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.poll.pdf > >> > >> > >> > >> The Canadian Shift in Toronto > >> Rebecca Roeder > >> Lidia-Gabriela Jarmasz > >> > >> Abstract:This study provides the first wide-scale, apparent time, > >> instrumental description of the Canadian Shift in mainstream Toronto > >> English. In contrast with some previous findings, the Toronto data > >> suggest that for the last 70 years or more the shift has not affected > >> the high front lax vowel (I). We observe that the movement of the > >> non-high front lax vowels (??) and (??) involves both lowering and > >> retraction in Toronto English, although retraction is the primary > >> direction of more recent change and the shift appears to be slowing > >> down. Our findings also suggest that continued retraction of the vowel > >> resulting from the low back merger is involved in the final stage of the > >> shift. We do not find evidence of a chain shift but instead propose that > >> a parallel shift is occurring and make reference to Vowel Dispersion > >> Theory in our discussion. > >> > >> R??sum??:Cette ??tude pr??sente la premi??re description instrumentale > >> en temps apparent de grande envergure du Canadian Shift dans l???anglais > >> courant de Toronto. En contraste avec certains r??sultats ant??rieurs, > >> les donn??es de Toronto sugg??rent qu???au cours des 70 derni??res > >> ann??es ou plus, cette mutation n???a pas touch?? la voyelle haute > >> ant??rieure rel??ch??e (I). Nous observons que le mouvement des voyelles > >> ant??rieures rel??ch??es non hautes (??) et (??) implique ? la fois > >> abaissement et post??riorisation, bien que cette derni??re repr??sente > >> la direction principale du changement plus r??cent; de plus, nous > >> observons que la mutation semble ralentir. Nos r??sultats sugg??rent > >> ??galement que la post??riorisation continue de la voyelle qui provient > >> de la fusion des voyelles post??rieures basses est impliqu??e dans la > >> derni??re ??tape de la mutation. Ne trouvant aucune preuve de mutation > >> en cha??ne, nous proposons plut??t que le Canadian Shift est unemutation > >> en parall??le. Nous invoquons la th??orie de la dispersion des voyelles > >> dans notre discussion. > >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.roeder.pdf > >> > >> > >> > >> Honorific agreement in Japanese > >> Hideki Kishimoto > >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.kishimoto.pdf > >> > >> > >> > >> One-replacement and the label-less theory of adjuncts > >> Yosuke Sato > >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.sato.pdf > >> > >> > >> > >> Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics and second language acquisition > >> (review) > >> Engin Arik > >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.arik.pdf > >> > >> > >> > >> The locative syntax of experiencers (review) > >> Marco Nicolis > >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.nicolis.pdf > >> > >> > >> > >> L???enfant dans la langue (review) > >> Nelleke Strik > >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.strik.pdf > >> > >> > >> > >> Pragmatics and grammar (review) > >> Dorota Zielinska > >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.zielinska.pdf > >> > >> > >> The Canadian Journal of Linguistics publishes articles of original > >> research in linguistics in both English and French. The articles deal > >> with linguistic theory, linguistic description of English, French and a > >> variety of other natural languages, phonetics, phonology, morphology, > >> syntax, semantics, historical linguistics, sociolinguistics, > >> psycholinguistics, first and second language acquisition, and other > >> areas of interest to linguists. > >> > >> > >> For more information, please contact: University of Toronto Press - > >> Journals Division, 5201 Dufferin St., Toronto, ON M3H 5T8 Tel: (416) > >> 667-7810 Fax: (416) 667-7881 email: > >> journals at utpress.utoronto.ca > >> > >> > >> UTP Journals on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/utpjournals > >> Join us for advance notice of tables of contents of forthcoming issues, > >> author and editor commentaries and insights, calls for papers and advice > >> on publishing in our journals. Become a fan and receive free access to > >> articles weekly through UTPJournals focus. > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > -- Mark > > Mark P. Line > Bartlesville, OK > From tgivon at uoregon.edu Wed Jan 5 23:20:48 2011 From: tgivon at uoregon.edu (Tom Givon) Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 16:20:48 -0700 Subject: Now available - The Canadian Journal of Linguistics 55 (3), November 2010 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dear Ron, Thanks. Perhaps one should bear in mind that I've been exposed to this kind of lit, on its multiple permutations and from close quarters, since 1964, and can by now predict every quirk and gambit. The book of Ecclesiastes may perhaps express my cynicism better. As for hijacking, the notion of 'theory' was hijacked just as early. And for the record, I am a theoretician. Best, TG ============= On 1/5/2011 3:41 PM, Ron Smyth wrote: > Tom and Mark: On the rare occasions when I read such a paper I see the > theoretical constructs as a way to express generalizations about > structures (as opposed to taking the theoretical apparatus too seriously). > I don't think people should be so sarcastic without first looking at the > paper to see what other value it might have for non-theoreticians. If it > has some insight about noun incorporation structures -- e.g. something > that a psycholinguist, sociolinguist or historical linguist would be > interested to know about -- then I don't get too upset about the > formalisms. Often the distributional facts that come up because of the > pursuit of a theoretical issue are all that I really find valuable in > these papers. > > I stopped worrying about this approximately 30 years ago, and instead I > just mine the theoretical literature for different purposes. Of course if > the paper is just taking something that's already understood at some level > and fitting it into the current week's framework, then I'm not interested > (and I let those who are interested love it if they want to). Moreoever > if you had read the paper and come up with some great alternative > functional explanation, you would have earned the right to dismiss this as > theoretical drivel, but I don't see any of that in this thread. > > Theoretical papers are always falsifiable in the sense that > counter-examples can upset the applecart. What you are questioning is > much broader than that, but this has been an issue since the early 1970s, > so as far as Barrie's paper is concerned, there's nothing that we can't > see see every day. It's been going on for 50 years. > > I'm sorry that you didn't read down to the bottom of the CJL posting. > One of the papers is about evidence in linguistics and how the > transformational paradigm managed to hijack everyone's agenda; another is > a fairly concrete article on vowel changes in Canadian English; another is > about possible prosodic explanations for kids' ability to produce noun > phrases. Why no sarcastic comments about those abstracts? What purpose > does this kind of sarcasm serve, especially when it is so superficial and > confined to funknet where the author is unlikely to see it? > ron > > =============================================================================== > Ron Smyth, Associate Professor > Linguistics& Psychology > University of Toronto > ============================================================================ > > On Wed, 5 Jan 2011, Mark P. Line wrote: > >> So, what would be the procedure for falsifying the claims in that paper? >> >> I'm pretty sure I don't have a clue as to how to show that something >> doesn't really merge in theta-position. >> >> -- Mark >> >> >> >> Tom Givon wrote: >>> Isn't this beautiful? It just falls out, naturally, from a geometry, and >>> a theory of Dynamic Antisymmetry, no less. Wow! TG >>> >>> ============ >>> >>> >>> On 1/5/2011 2:05 PM, Greenwood, Audrey wrote: >>>> The Canadian Journal of Linguistics / La revue canadienne de >>>> linguistique >>>> 55(3), November/novembre 2010 is now available at >>>> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/toc/cjl.55.3.html >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Noun incorporation as symmetry breaking >>>> Michael Barrie >>>> >>>> Abstract:This article proposes a novel account of noun incorporation in >>>> Northern Iroquoian. It is proposed that there is no special mechanism >>>> for noun incorporation and that this phenomenon falls out naturally from >>>> the geometry of the phrase structure under Moro???s theory of Dynamic >>>> Antisymmetry. In a nutshell, when the verbal head and the nominal head >>>> undergoMerge, they form a point of symmetric c-command,which is resolved >>>> by the nominal head moving to the specifier of the verb phrase. Further, >>>> it is proposed that, in noun incorporation constructions with a full DP >>>> double, the incorporated noun and the DP form a constituent, which is >>>> merged in theta-position. >>>> >>>> R??sum??:Cet article propose une nouvelle description de >>>> l???incorporation nominale dans l???iroquo??en du Nord. Il est propos?? >>>> qu???il n???y a aucun m??canisme particulier en mati??re >>>> d???incorporation nominale et que ce ph??nom??ne d??coule naturellement >>>> de la g??om??trie de la syntaxe selon la th??orie de l???Antisym??trie >>>> dynamique de Moro. En un mot, la fusion (Merge) des t??tes verbale et >>>> nominale forme un point de c-commande sym??trique qui se voit r??soudre >>>> par le d??placement de la t??te nominale au sp??cifieur du syntagme >>>> verbal. De plus, j???avance que le nom incorpor?? dans les constructions >>>> ayant un sd double forme avec celui-ci un constituent qui est fusionn?? >>>> en position th??matique. >>>> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.barrie.pdf >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Omission des d??terminants : Contraintes d???alternances rythmiques ou >>>> contraintes li??es aux niveaux sup??rieurs de la structure prosodique >>>> Roseline Fr??chette >>>> Marie Labelle >>>> >>>> R??sum??:Cet article vise ? d??terminer si l???omission des >>>> d??terminants chez des enfants de deux ans est contrainte au niveau du >>>> pied ou si elle est contrainte par les diff??rents niveaux de la >>>> hi??rarchie prosodique. Neuf enfants francophones ??g??s de 24 ? 31 >>>> mois ont particip?? ? une t??che de r??p??tition de 54 phrases de >>>> quatre ou cinq mots de la forme suivante ??Pronomv sn?? r??parties en >>>> trois conditions : a) d??t + nom monosyllabique; b) d??t + nom >>>> bisyllabique; c) d??t + adjectif monosyllabique + nom monosyllabique. >>>> Les r??sultats d??montrent 1) plus d???omission du d??terminant dans la >>>> condition b que dans la condition a; 2) plus d???omission du >>>> d??terminant en c qu???en b. Il est d??montr?? que l???omission du >>>> d??terminant ne s???explique pas par une contrainte d???alternance >>>> rythmique de bas niveau et que le niveau de la structure prosodique >>>> auquel doit s???attacher le d??terminant joue un r??le dans l???omission >>>> des d??terminants. >>>> >>>> Abstract:This article focuses on whether determiner omission by >>>> two-year-old children is constrained at the level of the prosodic foot >>>> or whether it is a function of the different levels of the prosodic >>>> hierarchy. Nine French-speaking children aged 2;0 to 2;7 were asked to >>>> repeat 54 four-or five-word sentences of the form ???Pronoun V NP??? >>>> with three conditions: a) det + monosyllabic noun; b) det + bisyllabic >>>> noun; c) det + monosyllabic adjective + monosyllabic noun. The results >>>> show 1) more determiner omission in condition b than in a; 2) more >>>> determiner omission in c than in b. It is shown that determiner omission >>>> is not accounted for by a low-level stress-alternation constraint and >>>> that the level of prosodic structure to which the determiner is attached >>>> plays a role in determiner omission. >>>> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.frechette.pdf >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Redefining what matters: Syntactic explanation in American linguistics, >>>> 1955???1970 >>>> Janet Martin-Nielsen >>>> >>>> Abstract:The postwar decades are well known for having brought dramatic >>>> change to American linguistics on many fronts. This paper explores an >>>> internally focused aspect of this change: conditions of explanation. The >>>> two questions at stake are, firstly, what counts as explanation in >>>> linguistics? and, secondly, how is this decided? I argue that >>>> transformational grammarians dominated the setting of explanatory >>>> criteria in 1960s American syntax, and that this dominance was essential >>>> to the overall success of that theory. Importantly, rival grammarians >>>> were forced to devote as much time and effort to fitting their theories >>>> to the transformational criteria as they were to advancing their own >>>> explanatory priorities. By successfully naming the conditions for >>>> explanation, transformationalists provided their own supporters with >>>> significant questions to pursue and, simultaneously, drew energy away >>>> from rivals. This monopoly over explanatory criteria was central to the >>>> dominant position transformational grammar established in the American >>>> academic linguistics community. >>>> >>>> R??sum??:Les d??cennies de l???apr??s-guerre ont ??t?? caract??ris??es >>>> par des changements importants dans la linguistique am??ricaine. Cet >>>> article explore un aspect interne de ces changements : les conditions >>>> d???explication.Deux questions sont en jeu ici : premi??rement, en quoi >>>> consiste l???explication en linguistique? et en deuxi??me lieu : Comment >>>> d??cide-t-on en quoi consiste l???explication? Je soutiens que les >>>> grammairiens transformationnels ont impos?? le choix des crit??res >>>> d???explication de la syntaxe am??ricaine au cours des ann??es 1960 et >>>> que cette domination ??tait essentielle au succ??s global de la >>>> grammaire transformationnelle. Les grammairiens rivaux ont d?? consacrer >>>> autant de temps et d???effort ? adapter leurs th??ories aux crit??res >>>> transformationnels qu???? avancer leur propres priorit??s >>>> d???explication. En r??ussissant ? d??finir les crit??res >>>> d???explication, les transformationalistes ont nourri leur propres >>>> partisans de questions importantes ? poursuivre en m??me temps qu???ils >>>> ont drain?? les ??nergies de leurs rivaux. Ce monopole des crit??res >>>> d???explication ??tait central ? la position dominante que la grammaire >>>> transformationelle a ??tablie dans la communaut?? linguistique >>>> universitaire am??ricaine. >>>> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.martin-nielsen.pdf >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Some remarks on subject positions and the architecture of the left >>>> periphery in Spanish >>>> Bernhard P??ll >>>> >>>> This article reexamines the puzzling issue of where subjects, lexical >>>> and null, are located in Spanish and offers a novel explanation for the >>>> incompatibility of preverbal lexical subjects with fronted focussed >>>> constituents. Both Specip and the left periphery appear to be potential >>>> landing sites for subjects, according to discourse-pragmatic factors. >>>> Assuming that pro is a clitic, it is argued that the aforementioned >>>> incompatibility can be captured by a simple rule: Specip must be empty >>>> for focus fronting to occur. This is the case with pro, which adjoins to >>>> Infl, or with postverbal subjects since they remain in Specvp. From this >>>> analysis it follows that: 1) the subject field in Spanish is less >>>> articulated than is generally assumed, 2) the differences between >>>> Spanish and other null subject languages with respect to the >>>> availability of preverbal subjets can be reduced to this rule and a >>>> different ordering of focus and topic phrases, and 3) it is unnecessary >>>> to posit two different topic positions. >>>> >>>> R??sum??:Cet article examine l?????pineuse question de la position >>>> pr??verbale occup??e par le sujet lexical en espagnol et offre une >>>> nouvelle explication pour la contrainte sur la cooccurrence de sujets >>>> lexicaux et de constituants focalis??s en position pr??verbale. >>>> S???agissant des positions sujet, il appara??t que tant le sp??cifieur >>>> de si que la p??riph??rie gauche peuvent servir comme cible de >>>> mouvement, en fonction de param??tres discursifs. En pr??sumant que pro >>>> est un clitique, je soutiens qu???il est possible de ramener la >>>> contrainte ci-dessus ? la r??gle suivante : le mouvement d???items >>>> focalis??s vers la p??riph??rie gauche requiert que le sp??cifieur de si >>>> soit vide. C???est le cas avec pro (attach?? ? la t??te de si) et >>>> ??galement avec les sujets postverbaux. Il s???ensuit que 1) la >>>> structure des positions sujet en espagnol est moins complexe qu???on ne >>>> l???affirme souvent, 2) les diff??rences entre l???espagnol et >>>> d???autres langues ? sujet nul quant ? la possibilit?? de sujets >>>> pr??verbaux se r??duisent ? la r??gle mentionn??e de m??me qu???? une >>>> structure diff??rente de la p??riph??rie gauche, et 3) il n???est pas >>>> n??cessaire de postuler deux positions diff??rentes pour les topiques. >>>> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.poll.pdf >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> The Canadian Shift in Toronto >>>> Rebecca Roeder >>>> Lidia-Gabriela Jarmasz >>>> >>>> Abstract:This study provides the first wide-scale, apparent time, >>>> instrumental description of the Canadian Shift in mainstream Toronto >>>> English. In contrast with some previous findings, the Toronto data >>>> suggest that for the last 70 years or more the shift has not affected >>>> the high front lax vowel (I). We observe that the movement of the >>>> non-high front lax vowels (??) and (??) involves both lowering and >>>> retraction in Toronto English, although retraction is the primary >>>> direction of more recent change and the shift appears to be slowing >>>> down. Our findings also suggest that continued retraction of the vowel >>>> resulting from the low back merger is involved in the final stage of the >>>> shift. We do not find evidence of a chain shift but instead propose that >>>> a parallel shift is occurring and make reference to Vowel Dispersion >>>> Theory in our discussion. >>>> >>>> R??sum??:Cette ??tude pr??sente la premi??re description instrumentale >>>> en temps apparent de grande envergure du Canadian Shift dans l???anglais >>>> courant de Toronto. En contraste avec certains r??sultats ant??rieurs, >>>> les donn??es de Toronto sugg??rent qu???au cours des 70 derni??res >>>> ann??es ou plus, cette mutation n???a pas touch?? la voyelle haute >>>> ant??rieure rel??ch??e (I). Nous observons que le mouvement des voyelles >>>> ant??rieures rel??ch??es non hautes (??) et (??) implique ? la fois >>>> abaissement et post??riorisation, bien que cette derni??re repr??sente >>>> la direction principale du changement plus r??cent; de plus, nous >>>> observons que la mutation semble ralentir. Nos r??sultats sugg??rent >>>> ??galement que la post??riorisation continue de la voyelle qui provient >>>> de la fusion des voyelles post??rieures basses est impliqu??e dans la >>>> derni??re ??tape de la mutation. Ne trouvant aucune preuve de mutation >>>> en cha??ne, nous proposons plut??t que le Canadian Shift est unemutation >>>> en parall??le. Nous invoquons la th??orie de la dispersion des voyelles >>>> dans notre discussion. >>>> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.roeder.pdf >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Honorific agreement in Japanese >>>> Hideki Kishimoto >>>> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.kishimoto.pdf >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> One-replacement and the label-less theory of adjuncts >>>> Yosuke Sato >>>> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.sato.pdf >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics and second language acquisition >>>> (review) >>>> Engin Arik >>>> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.arik.pdf >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> The locative syntax of experiencers (review) >>>> Marco Nicolis >>>> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.nicolis.pdf >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> L???enfant dans la langue (review) >>>> Nelleke Strik >>>> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.strik.pdf >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Pragmatics and grammar (review) >>>> Dorota Zielinska >>>> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.zielinska.pdf >>>> >>>> >>>> The Canadian Journal of Linguistics publishes articles of original >>>> research in linguistics in both English and French. The articles deal >>>> with linguistic theory, linguistic description of English, French and a >>>> variety of other natural languages, phonetics, phonology, morphology, >>>> syntax, semantics, historical linguistics, sociolinguistics, >>>> psycholinguistics, first and second language acquisition, and other >>>> areas of interest to linguists. >>>> >>>> >>>> For more information, please contact: University of Toronto Press - >>>> Journals Division, 5201 Dufferin St., Toronto, ON M3H 5T8 Tel: (416) >>>> 667-7810 Fax: (416) 667-7881 email: >>>> journals at utpress.utoronto.ca >>>> >>>> >>>> UTP Journals on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/utpjournals >>>> Join us for advance notice of tables of contents of forthcoming issues, >>>> author and editor commentaries and insights, calls for papers and advice >>>> on publishing in our journals. Become a fan and receive free access to >>>> articles weekly through UTPJournals focus. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> -- Mark >> >> Mark P. Line >> Bartlesville, OK >> From smyth at utsc.utoronto.ca Thu Jan 6 00:22:11 2011 From: smyth at utsc.utoronto.ca (Ron Smyth) Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 19:22:11 -0500 Subject: theoretician In-Reply-To: <4D24FCD0.2090308@uoregon.edu> Message-ID: Touche re my use of the word "theoretician". Blame it on frequency in the input; it is used so often to refer to generative grammarians alone. No branch of linguistics is without theory, nor is any flavour of any of those branches without theory. ron ============================================================================== Ron Smyth, Associate Professor Linguistics & Psychology University of Toronto =========================================================================== From mark at polymathix.com Thu Jan 6 14:27:49 2011 From: mark at polymathix.com (Mark P. Line) Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 08:27:49 -0600 Subject: Now available - The Canadian Journal of Linguistics 55 (3), November 2010 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Oh, it's just a kind of payback. There was continuous sarcasm (and worse) when I said I wanted to do empirical linguistics on the basis of a large natural corpus, or when I said I didn't think trying to elicit *un*grammatical forms or grammaticality judgments from informants was methodologically viable. You had to have been there, Ron. More substantively, I'm simply not prepared to follow somebody's arcane abstractions about abstractions about abstractions about introspections and then pretend that my reverse-engieerred interpretations of those introspections are in fact data that I should be considering. The very thought of it is beyond ludicrous. And I reserve the right to make fun of anybody who's in that game and calls herself a linguist. They can bloody well call themselves philosophers of language, because that's what they are. Harrumph. Harrumph, I say. -- Mark Mark P. Line Ron Smyth wrote: > Tom and Mark: On the rare occasions when I read such a paper I see the > theoretical constructs as a way to express generalizations about > structures (as opposed to taking the theoretical apparatus too seriously). > I don't think people should be so sarcastic without first looking at the > paper to see what other value it might have for non-theoreticians. If it > has some insight about noun incorporation structures -- e.g. something > that a psycholinguist, sociolinguist or historical linguist would be > interested to know about -- then I don't get too upset about the > formalisms. Often the distributional facts that come up because of the > pursuit of a theoretical issue are all that I really find valuable in > these papers. > > I stopped worrying about this approximately 30 years ago, and instead I > just mine the theoretical literature for different purposes. Of course if > the paper is just taking something that's already understood at some level > and fitting it into the current week's framework, then I'm not interested > (and I let those who are interested love it if they want to). Moreoever > if you had read the paper and come up with some great alternative > functional explanation, you would have earned the right to dismiss this as > theoretical drivel, but I don't see any of that in this thread. > > Theoretical papers are always falsifiable in the sense that > counter-examples can upset the applecart. What you are questioning is > much broader than that, but this has been an issue since the early 1970s, > so as far as Barrie's paper is concerned, there's nothing that we can't > see see every day. It's been going on for 50 years. > > I'm sorry that you didn't read down to the bottom of the CJL posting. > One of the papers is about evidence in linguistics and how the > transformational paradigm managed to hijack everyone's agenda; another is > a fairly concrete article on vowel changes in Canadian English; another is > about possible prosodic explanations for kids' ability to produce noun > phrases. Why no sarcastic comments about those abstracts? What purpose > does this kind of sarcasm serve, especially when it is so superficial and > confined to funknet where the author is unlikely to see it? > ron > > =============================================================================== > Ron Smyth, Associate Professor > Linguistics & Psychology > University of Toronto > ============================================================================ > > On Wed, 5 Jan 2011, Mark P. Line wrote: > >> So, what would be the procedure for falsifying the claims in that paper? >> >> I'm pretty sure I don't have a clue as to how to show that something >> doesn't really merge in theta-position. >> >> -- Mark >> >> >> >> Tom Givon wrote: >> > >> > Isn't this beautiful? It just falls out, naturally, from a geometry, >> and >> > a theory of Dynamic Antisymmetry, no less. Wow! TG >> > >> > ============ >> > >> > >> > On 1/5/2011 2:05 PM, Greenwood, Audrey wrote: >> >> The Canadian Journal of Linguistics / La revue canadienne de >> >> linguistique >> >> 55(3), November/novembre 2010 is now available at >> >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/toc/cjl.55.3.html >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Noun incorporation as symmetry breaking >> >> Michael Barrie >> >> >> >> Abstract:This article proposes a novel account of noun incorporation >> in >> >> Northern Iroquoian. It is proposed that there is no special mechanism >> >> for noun incorporation and that this phenomenon falls out naturally >> from >> >> the geometry of the phrase structure under Moro???s theory of Dynamic >> >> Antisymmetry. In a nutshell, when the verbal head and the nominal >> head >> >> undergoMerge, they form a point of symmetric c-command,which is >> resolved >> >> by the nominal head moving to the specifier of the verb phrase. >> Further, >> >> it is proposed that, in noun incorporation constructions with a full >> DP >> >> double, the incorporated noun and the DP form a constituent, which is >> >> merged in theta-position. >> >> >> >> R??sum??:Cet article propose une nouvelle description de >> >> l???incorporation nominale dans l???iroquo??en du Nord. Il est >> propos?? >> >> qu???il n???y a aucun m??canisme particulier en mati??re >> >> d???incorporation nominale et que ce ph??nom??ne d??coule >> naturellement >> >> de la g??om??trie de la syntaxe selon la th??orie de >> l???Antisym??trie >> >> dynamique de Moro. En un mot, la fusion (Merge) des t??tes verbale et >> >> nominale forme un point de c-commande sym??trique qui se voit >> r??soudre >> >> par le d??placement de la t??te nominale au sp??cifieur du syntagme >> >> verbal. De plus, j???avance que le nom incorpor?? dans les >> constructions >> >> ayant un sd double forme avec celui-ci un constituent qui est >> fusionn?? >> >> en position th??matique. >> >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.barrie.pdf >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Omission des d??terminants : Contraintes d???alternances rythmiques >> ou >> >> contraintes li??es aux niveaux sup??rieurs de la structure prosodique >> >> Roseline Fr??chette >> >> Marie Labelle >> >> >> >> R??sum??:Cet article vise ? d??terminer si l???omission des >> >> d??terminants chez des enfants de deux ans est contrainte au niveau >> du >> >> pied ou si elle est contrainte par les diff??rents niveaux de la >> >> hi??rarchie prosodique. Neuf enfants francophones ??g??s de 24 ? 31 >> >> mois ont particip?? ? une t??che de r??p??tition de 54 phrases de >> >> quatre ou cinq mots de la forme suivante ??Pronomv sn?? r??parties en >> >> trois conditions : a) d??t + nom monosyllabique; b) d??t + nom >> >> bisyllabique; c) d??t + adjectif monosyllabique + nom monosyllabique. >> >> Les r??sultats d??montrent 1) plus d???omission du d??terminant dans >> la >> >> condition b que dans la condition a; 2) plus d???omission du >> >> d??terminant en c qu???en b. Il est d??montr?? que l???omission du >> >> d??terminant ne s???explique pas par une contrainte d???alternance >> >> rythmique de bas niveau et que le niveau de la structure prosodique >> >> auquel doit s???attacher le d??terminant joue un r??le dans >> l???omission >> >> des d??terminants. >> >> >> >> Abstract:This article focuses on whether determiner omission by >> >> two-year-old children is constrained at the level of the prosodic >> foot >> >> or whether it is a function of the different levels of the prosodic >> >> hierarchy. Nine French-speaking children aged 2;0 to 2;7 were asked >> to >> >> repeat 54 four-or five-word sentences of the form ???Pronoun V NP??? >> >> with three conditions: a) det + monosyllabic noun; b) det + >> bisyllabic >> >> noun; c) det + monosyllabic adjective + monosyllabic noun. The >> results >> >> show 1) more determiner omission in condition b than in a; 2) more >> >> determiner omission in c than in b. It is shown that determiner >> omission >> >> is not accounted for by a low-level stress-alternation constraint and >> >> that the level of prosodic structure to which the determiner is >> attached >> >> plays a role in determiner omission. >> >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.frechette.pdf >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Redefining what matters: Syntactic explanation in American >> linguistics, >> >> 1955???1970 >> >> Janet Martin-Nielsen >> >> >> >> Abstract:The postwar decades are well known for having brought >> dramatic >> >> change to American linguistics on many fronts. This paper explores an >> >> internally focused aspect of this change: conditions of explanation. >> The >> >> two questions at stake are, firstly, what counts as explanation in >> >> linguistics? and, secondly, how is this decided? I argue that >> >> transformational grammarians dominated the setting of explanatory >> >> criteria in 1960s American syntax, and that this dominance was >> essential >> >> to the overall success of that theory. Importantly, rival grammarians >> >> were forced to devote as much time and effort to fitting their >> theories >> >> to the transformational criteria as they were to advancing their own >> >> explanatory priorities. By successfully naming the conditions for >> >> explanation, transformationalists provided their own supporters with >> >> significant questions to pursue and, simultaneously, drew energy away >> >> from rivals. This monopoly over explanatory criteria was central to >> the >> >> dominant position transformational grammar established in the >> American >> >> academic linguistics community. >> >> >> >> R??sum??:Les d??cennies de l???apr??s-guerre ont ??t?? >> caract??ris??es >> >> par des changements importants dans la linguistique am??ricaine. Cet >> >> article explore un aspect interne de ces changements : les conditions >> >> d???explication.Deux questions sont en jeu ici : premi??rement, en >> quoi >> >> consiste l???explication en linguistique? et en deuxi??me lieu : >> Comment >> >> d??cide-t-on en quoi consiste l???explication? Je soutiens que les >> >> grammairiens transformationnels ont impos?? le choix des crit??res >> >> d???explication de la syntaxe am??ricaine au cours des ann??es 1960 >> et >> >> que cette domination ??tait essentielle au succ??s global de la >> >> grammaire transformationnelle. Les grammairiens rivaux ont d?? >> consacrer >> >> autant de temps et d???effort ? adapter leurs th??ories aux >> crit??res >> >> transformationnels qu???? avancer leur propres priorit??s >> >> d???explication. En r??ussissant ? d??finir les crit??res >> >> d???explication, les transformationalistes ont nourri leur propres >> >> partisans de questions importantes ? poursuivre en m??me temps >> qu???ils >> >> ont drain?? les ??nergies de leurs rivaux. Ce monopole des crit??res >> >> d???explication ??tait central ? la position dominante que la >> grammaire >> >> transformationelle a ??tablie dans la communaut?? linguistique >> >> universitaire am??ricaine. >> >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.martin-nielsen.pdf >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Some remarks on subject positions and the architecture of the left >> >> periphery in Spanish >> >> Bernhard P??ll >> >> >> >> This article reexamines the puzzling issue of where subjects, lexical >> >> and null, are located in Spanish and offers a novel explanation for >> the >> >> incompatibility of preverbal lexical subjects with fronted focussed >> >> constituents. Both Specip and the left periphery appear to be >> potential >> >> landing sites for subjects, according to discourse-pragmatic factors. >> >> Assuming that pro is a clitic, it is argued that the aforementioned >> >> incompatibility can be captured by a simple rule: Specip must be >> empty >> >> for focus fronting to occur. This is the case with pro, which adjoins >> to >> >> Infl, or with postverbal subjects since they remain in Specvp. From >> this >> >> analysis it follows that: 1) the subject field in Spanish is less >> >> articulated than is generally assumed, 2) the differences between >> >> Spanish and other null subject languages with respect to the >> >> availability of preverbal subjets can be reduced to this rule and a >> >> different ordering of focus and topic phrases, and 3) it is >> unnecessary >> >> to posit two different topic positions. >> >> >> >> R??sum??:Cet article examine l?????pineuse question de la position >> >> pr??verbale occup??e par le sujet lexical en espagnol et offre une >> >> nouvelle explication pour la contrainte sur la cooccurrence de sujets >> >> lexicaux et de constituants focalis??s en position pr??verbale. >> >> S???agissant des positions sujet, il appara??t que tant le >> sp??cifieur >> >> de si que la p??riph??rie gauche peuvent servir comme cible de >> >> mouvement, en fonction de param??tres discursifs. En pr??sumant que >> pro >> >> est un clitique, je soutiens qu???il est possible de ramener la >> >> contrainte ci-dessus ? la r??gle suivante : le mouvement d???items >> >> focalis??s vers la p??riph??rie gauche requiert que le sp??cifieur de >> si >> >> soit vide. C???est le cas avec pro (attach?? ? la t??te de si) et >> >> ??galement avec les sujets postverbaux. Il s???ensuit que 1) la >> >> structure des positions sujet en espagnol est moins complexe qu???on >> ne >> >> l???affirme souvent, 2) les diff??rences entre l???espagnol et >> >> d???autres langues ? sujet nul quant ? la possibilit?? de sujets >> >> pr??verbaux se r??duisent ? la r??gle mentionn??e de m??me qu???? >> une >> >> structure diff??rente de la p??riph??rie gauche, et 3) il n???est pas >> >> n??cessaire de postuler deux positions diff??rentes pour les >> topiques. >> >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.poll.pdf >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> The Canadian Shift in Toronto >> >> Rebecca Roeder >> >> Lidia-Gabriela Jarmasz >> >> >> >> Abstract:This study provides the first wide-scale, apparent time, >> >> instrumental description of the Canadian Shift in mainstream Toronto >> >> English. In contrast with some previous findings, the Toronto data >> >> suggest that for the last 70 years or more the shift has not affected >> >> the high front lax vowel (I). We observe that the movement of the >> >> non-high front lax vowels (??) and (??) involves both lowering and >> >> retraction in Toronto English, although retraction is the primary >> >> direction of more recent change and the shift appears to be slowing >> >> down. Our findings also suggest that continued retraction of the >> vowel >> >> resulting from the low back merger is involved in the final stage of >> the >> >> shift. We do not find evidence of a chain shift but instead propose >> that >> >> a parallel shift is occurring and make reference to Vowel Dispersion >> >> Theory in our discussion. >> >> >> >> R??sum??:Cette ??tude pr??sente la premi??re description >> instrumentale >> >> en temps apparent de grande envergure du Canadian Shift dans >> l???anglais >> >> courant de Toronto. En contraste avec certains r??sultats >> ant??rieurs, >> >> les donn??es de Toronto sugg??rent qu???au cours des 70 derni??res >> >> ann??es ou plus, cette mutation n???a pas touch?? la voyelle haute >> >> ant??rieure rel??ch??e (I). Nous observons que le mouvement des >> voyelles >> >> ant??rieures rel??ch??es non hautes (??) et (??) implique ? la fois >> >> abaissement et post??riorisation, bien que cette derni??re >> repr??sente >> >> la direction principale du changement plus r??cent; de plus, nous >> >> observons que la mutation semble ralentir. Nos r??sultats sugg??rent >> >> ??galement que la post??riorisation continue de la voyelle qui >> provient >> >> de la fusion des voyelles post??rieures basses est impliqu??e dans la >> >> derni??re ??tape de la mutation. Ne trouvant aucune preuve de >> mutation >> >> en cha??ne, nous proposons plut??t que le Canadian Shift est >> unemutation >> >> en parall??le. Nous invoquons la th??orie de la dispersion des >> voyelles >> >> dans notre discussion. >> >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.roeder.pdf >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Honorific agreement in Japanese >> >> Hideki Kishimoto >> >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.kishimoto.pdf >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> One-replacement and the label-less theory of adjuncts >> >> Yosuke Sato >> >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.sato.pdf >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics and second language acquisition >> >> (review) >> >> Engin Arik >> >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.arik.pdf >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> The locative syntax of experiencers (review) >> >> Marco Nicolis >> >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.nicolis.pdf >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> L???enfant dans la langue (review) >> >> Nelleke Strik >> >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.strik.pdf >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Pragmatics and grammar (review) >> >> Dorota Zielinska >> >> http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/canadian_journal_of_linguistics/v055/55.3.zielinska.pdf >> >> >> >> >> >> The Canadian Journal of Linguistics publishes articles of original >> >> research in linguistics in both English and French. The articles deal >> >> with linguistic theory, linguistic description of English, French and >> a >> >> variety of other natural languages, phonetics, phonology, morphology, >> >> syntax, semantics, historical linguistics, sociolinguistics, >> >> psycholinguistics, first and second language acquisition, and other >> >> areas of interest to linguists. >> >> >> >> >> >> For more information, please contact: University of Toronto Press - >> >> Journals Division, 5201 Dufferin St., Toronto, ON M3H 5T8 Tel: (416) >> >> 667-7810 Fax: (416) 667-7881 email: >> >> journals at utpress.utoronto.ca >> >> >> >> >> >> UTP Journals on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/utpjournals >> >> Join us for advance notice of tables of contents of forthcoming >> issues, >> >> author and editor commentaries and insights, calls for papers and >> advice >> >> on publishing in our journals. Become a fan and receive free access >> to >> >> articles weekly through UTPJournals focus. >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> -- Mark >> >> Mark P. Line >> Bartlesville, OK >> > > -- Mark Mark P. Line Bartlesville, OK From mark at polymathix.com Thu Jan 6 14:35:43 2011 From: mark at polymathix.com (Mark P. Line) Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 08:35:43 -0600 Subject: theoretician In-Reply-To: Message-ID: So that gives you an idea of the kind of subliminal and sometimes unintentional discrimination non-Chomskyan theoreticians are exposed to, at the drop of a hat, even today, this 6th day of January, 2011. Maybe that will help you excuse the occasional sarcasm at the expense of the discriminatrices behind their collective backs. -- Mark Mark P. Line Ron Smyth wrote: > Touche re my use of the word "theoretician". Blame it on frequency in the > input; it is used so often to refer to generative grammarians alone. No > branch of linguistics is without theory, nor is any flavour of any of > those branches without theory. > > ron > > =============================================================================== > Ron Smyth, Associate Professor > Linguistics & Psychology > University of Toronto > ============================================================================ > > > -- Mark Mark P. Line Bartlesville, OK From bradley.mcdonnell at gmail.com Fri Jan 7 22:06:31 2011 From: bradley.mcdonnell at gmail.com (Bradley McDonnell) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2011 14:06:31 -0800 Subject: CALL FOR PAPERS: Workshop on American Indigenous Languages Message-ID: CALL FOR PAPERS Workshop on American Indigenous Languages Santa Barbara, CA April 15th- 16th, 2011 The Linguistics department at the University of California, Santa Barbara announces its 14th Annual Workshop on American Indigenous Languages (WAIL), which provides a forum for the discussion of theoretical, descriptive, and practical studies of the indigenous languages of the Americas. This year's conference will feature a keynote address by Nora England (UT Austin). Anonymous abstracts are invited for talks on any topic relevant to the study of language in the Americas. Talks will be 20 minutes, followed by 10 minutes for discussion. Abstracts should be 500 words or less (excluding examples and/or references) and can be submitted online at http://linguistlist.org/confcustom/wail2011. Hard copy submissions will be accepted from those who do not have internet access. Individuals may submit abstracts for one single-authored and one co-authored paper. Please indicate your source(s) and type(s) of data in the abstract (e.g. recordings, texts, conversational, elicited, narrative, etc.). For co-authored papers, please indicate who plans to present the paper as well as who will be in attendance. *Online submissions:* Abstracts can be submitted online at http://linguistlist.org/confcustom/wail2011 in PDF format. *For hard copy submissions:* Please send four copies of your abstract, along with a 3x5 card with the following information: (1) your name; (2) affiliation; (3) mailing address; (4) phone number; (5) email address; (6) title of your paper; (7) whether your submission is for the general session or the Special Panel. Send hard copy submissions to: Workshop on American Indigenous Languages Attn: Stephanie Morse or Elliott Hoey Department of Linguistics University of California, Santa Barbara Santa Barbara, CA 93106 DEADLINE FOR RECEIPT OF ABSTRACTS: *January 21**st**, 2011* Notification of acceptance will be by email no later than February 14th, 2011. General Information: Santa Barbara is situated on the Pacific Ocean near the Santa Y?ez Mountains. The UCSB campus is located near the Santa Barbara airport. Participants may also fly into LAX airport in Los Angeles, which is approximately 90 miles southeast of the campus. Shuttle buses run between LAX and Santa Barbara. Information about hotel accommodations will be posted on our website (http://orgs.sa.ucsb.edu/nailsg/). For further information contact the conference coordinators, Stephanie Morse or Elliott Hoey, at wail.ucsb at gmail.com, or check out our website at http://orgs.sa.ucsb.edu/nailsg/ From dan at daneverett.org Sat Jan 8 16:38:26 2011 From: dan at daneverett.org (Daniel Everett) Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2011 11:38:26 -0500 Subject: Affixal quantification Message-ID: Folks, I am interested in compiling a bibliography for studies of affixal quantification. In particular, I am looking for discussions of this in grammars from different parts of the world. If you know of such works and would be willing to suggest some references, I would be grateful. Sincerely, Dan Everett ************************* Daniel L. Everett Dean of Arts and Sciences 308 Morison Hall Bentley University 175 Forest Street Waltham, MA 02452 Office Phone: 781-891-2131 Fax: 781-891-2125 From sepkit at utu.fi Mon Jan 10 07:53:25 2011 From: sepkit at utu.fi (=?iso-8859-1?B?IlNlcHBvIEtpdHRpbOQi?=) Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 09:53:25 +0200 Subject: Second call for papers: Variation and typology (Helsinki, 25.-27.8.2011) Message-ID: (apologies for multiple postings) Variation and Typology: New trends in Syntactic Research Helsinki, August 25?27, 2011 In recent years, theoretical discussion around syntactic issues has been characterized by a growing interest towards variation, both dialectal and cross-linguistic. Typological considerations have proven to be essential even for research on individual languages. On the other hand, detailed studies of variation within languages (e.g. studies of dialectical variation) and variation across closely related languages have attracted more interest among typologists. One consequence of this has been that the focus in dialect research has shifted from phonological and morphological towards syntactic questions. Whether this will turn out to be a mere adjustment in attention or a major paradigm shift, a broadened perspective is welcome and also necessary. In order for new approaches to emerge, old ones need to be combined in novel ways. This symposium offers a forum for scholars interested in syntactic questions within typology and variation (and combinations thereof) and willing to contribute to this collective shift of focus. The goal of the symposium is to approach the concept of variation from a broader perspective for gaining new insights into what variation (in its different forms) can reveal about language. Basically, variation can be seen both language-internal (e.g. dialects, sociolects etc.) and cross-linguistic (typological variation).There are numerous studies of both of these, but only quite recently has there been real effort to combine these two aspects of variation (e.g. Kortmann 2004, Nevalainen et al. 2006, Barbiers et al. 2008). Special attention will be given to the oft-neglected areas which fall between the foci of linguistic typology and variation studies within syntax when these are seen as separate fields of study. The question we would like to be addressed is briefly: what do we gai n by studying variation both within and across languages. Put another way, what are the implications of variation studies and language typology to one another? We heartily welcome papers related to the overall enterprise. Possible topics for talks include, but, as usual, are not restricted to, the following: ? dialect syntax vs. syntactic typology: what is the relation between cross-linguistic variation and dialectal variation? ? accounting for variation in syntactic theory: rigid rules, fuzzy templates, or something else? ? implications of language variation to typological data selection & research: what is the ?best variant? of a language to be presented in reference grammars? What are the consequences of relying on standard language data in cross-linguistic research? And what is the significance of having vs. not having variation data available to the grammarian? ? how to take into account variation in typological research in syntax? - case studies of variation within and across languages (e.g. clause combining, use of reflexive pronouns, possessive constructions, argument marking, word order variations, etc. etc. within and across languages) - methodological contributions to variation: to what extent do we need different machinery for dealing with different types of variation, and to what extent are we dealing with ?just variation?? - variation and marginal constructions: do we need a distinction between core and periphery in grammar? Does this involve a distinction between common and dialectal variants? Are certain constructions marginal both in dialects and across languages? - borderline between dialectal and typological variation: e.g. issues of dealing with closely related languages, distinguishing between dialects vs. languages, spontaneous vs. contact-induced variation, etc. - qualitative methods in typology and dialect studies For more information please visit the webpage of the symposium at: http://www.linguistics.fi/variation Invited speakers: Balthasar Bickel (University of Leipzig) Joan Bresnan (Stanford University) Marja-Liisa Helasvuo (University of Turku) Scientific committee Sjef Barbiers (University of Amsterdam) Hans Boas (University of Texas, Austin) Hannele Forsberg (University of Eastern Finland) Bernd Kortmann (University of Freiburg) Ekkehard K?nig (Freie Universit?t Berlin) Michel Launey (University of Paris 7) Silvia Luraghi (University of Pavia) Jan-Ola ?stman (University of Helsinki) Cecilia Poletto (University of Padova) St?phane Robert (CNRS) Anna Siewierska (University of Lancaster) Jussi Ylikoski (University of Helsinki) Organizing committee Seppo Kittil? (University of Helsinki) Aki Kyr?l?inen (University of Turku) Meri Larjavaara (?bo Akademi University) Jaakko Leino (Research Institute for the Languages of Finland) Alexandre Nikolaev (University of Eastern Finland) Maria Vilkuna (Research Institute for the Languages of Finland) Abstract submission Please send your abstract to typ-variation /at/ helsinki.fi no later than March 1, 2011. The length of abstracts should not exceed 500 words (excluding data and references). Abstracts will be evaluated by the members of the scientific committee and also by the organizing committee. Letters of acceptance will be sent by March 31, 2011. The abstracts themselves must be anonymous, but the body of the message should include the following information: Name of the participant Title of presentation Affiliation E-mail address Whether the paper is meant as a section paper, a poster, or a workshop Workshops The symposium will include a workshop on Finnish and Finnic dialect syntax. Proposals for all workshops should be submitted no later than February 11, 2011. Notification of acceptance will be given by March 7, 2011. These one-day workshops will run in parallel sessions with the main conference program. Alternatively, the first day of the symposium may be dedicated to workshops. The symposium organizers will provide the lecture rooms and other facilities, but the workshop organizers will be responsible for the organization of their workshops (choosing the speakers etc.). Key dates: ? Deadline for abstract submission: March 1, 2011 ? Notification of acceptance: March 31, 2011 ? Proposals for workshops: February 11, 2011 ? Notification of acceptance of workshops: March 7, 2011 Activities: ? Presentations by the invited speakers ? Presentations by other participants ? Posters ? Workshops Registration The registration deadline is August 5, 2011. An on-line registration form to the symposium will appear on the webpage of the symposium after the evaluation of abstracts. Registration fees General: 100 Euro Members of the association: 80 Euro Undergraduate students: 50 Euro Finnish participants are requested to pay the registration fee to the SKY bank account when they register for the conference (bank account number 174530-71243 (Nordea)). Participants from abroad are likewise requested to pay in advance by bank transfer, if at all possible, to the SKY bank account in Finland (Bank: Nordea; IBAN: FI76 1745 3000 0712 43, BIC: NDEAFIHH). However, we may also accept payment IN CASH (only in Euros; moreover, we CANNOT accept credit cards of any sort) upon arrival in case bank transfer is not possible. If you have paid via bank transfer from abroad, we would kindly ask you to bring a COPY of the original transaction receipt with you and present it upon registration. References Barbiers, Sjef & Olaf Koeneman & Marika Lekakou & Margreet van der Ham (eds.) 2008. Microvariation in syntactic doubling. Syntax and Semantics, volume 36. Bingley: Emerald. Kortmann, Bernd (ed.) 2004. Dialectology meets typology: dialect grammar from a cross-linguistic perspective. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Nevalainen, Terttu & Juhani Klemola & Mikko Laitinen (eds.) 2006. Types of variation: diachronic, dialectical and typological interfaces. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. From dan at daneverett.org Mon Jan 10 18:57:06 2011 From: dan at daneverett.org (Daniel Everett) Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 13:57:06 -0500 Subject: vocal tract images Message-ID: I am looking for images of the human vocal tract, for infants and for adults, that can be either downloaded for free or purchased. Any help would be much-appreciated. Dan Everett From d.trenkic.96 at cantab.net Mon Jan 10 19:18:25 2011 From: d.trenkic.96 at cantab.net (Danijela Trenkic) Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 19:18:25 -0000 Subject: the 'well known secret' Message-ID: Hi, I'm just catching up with the debate from 31 December started by Tom on the 'well known secret' that teaching foreign langauges should start early, and on Helen Neville's studies on the neurology of the critical period. It is true that Neville's studies show different cortical activations in early and late bilinguals, however in those studies (as far as I am aware) proficiency levels (and / or the amount of exposure) were not tightly controlled for. When proficiency levels of early and late bilinguals are kept constant, the difference in cortical activation disappears (see Perani et al 1998, Brain, http://brain.oxfordjournals.org/content/121/10/1841.abstract). But more importantly (for the debate on when one should start teaching foreign languages in school), the type of research that finds cortical differences of early vs late bilinguals (and other research, that, more generally, finds clear advantages for early over late bilinguals) is almost invariably based on immersion / naturalistic learners (especially in the case of early bilinguals). Unfortunately, you cannot extrapolate from that that teaching foreign languages early in school (for an hour or so a week, with no opportunity for any out-of-class exposure) would produce the same effect, or bypass the supposed critical period problem. There is plenty of research to suggest that, as far as foreign languages in schools are concerned, adolescent learners have an edge over child learners (see Carmen Munoz's article "Symmetries and asymmetries of age effects in naturalistic and instructed L2 learning", Applied Linguistics, 2008). So if you can afford to teach languages for just a few years in school, then, yes, doing it between 12-16 (or 16-20) may well be better than teaching it to 7-12 year olds. Danijela P.S. Having said all this, I'd better add that I'm not against early foreign language instruction in principle - just against the inappropriate application of research. Clearly, the earlier you start, the more input you'll have (and that ought to be a good thing) IF you stick with it. But that is a big IF. The UK experience suggests that the majority of students will opt out of languages at the first available opportunity. From BartlettT at cardiff.ac.uk Mon Jan 10 23:02:32 2011 From: BartlettT at cardiff.ac.uk (Tom Bartlett) Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 23:02:32 +0000 Subject: New eries on Text and Social Context - Proposals sought Message-ID: We are pleased to announce a new series from Equinox books that will be of interest to all those working within functional linguistic frameworks that seek to interrelate textual and lexicogrammatical features with aspects of social life in a motivated and systematic way. The series outline follows. Potential contributors should contact the series editors with an outline of the proposed work: Tom Bartlett bartlettt at cardiff.ac..uk Alison Moore amoore at uow.edu.aus Geoff Thompson Geoff9 at liverpool.ac.uk Text and Social Context The purpose of the series is to provide in-depth accounts of language use in social life that interrelate fine-grained analysis of texts and extensive analysis of the sociocultural context in which the texts are produced and interpreted. The series thus aims to bring together and consolidate the strengths of various sociolinguistic, textual and critical discourse approaches to linguistic analysis that are often treated in isolation. The series will draw explicitly on functional accounts of language-as-action in specific social contexts in order both to analyse the social meaning of situated texts and to test and develop the theory against these accounts. Books in this series will provide a fuller and more adequate description of the social context than is often afforded by existing textual studies and equal prominence will therefore be given to descriptions of context, drawing on methods from disciplines such as ethnography, sociology and psychology, and to the language produced. Titles will be expected to discuss not only significant patterns of linguistic choices in texts and their role in construing the context in which the texts function, but also the dynamics of language production and uptake. Thus they will typically present and discuss (in any appropriate sequence): (i) a broad account of the context of the study; (ii) a functional linguistic account of the area of language in focus; (iii) analyses of language-in-use in the specific context, drawing on disciplines such as ethnography, sociology and psychology to enhance the interpretation of the linguistic analysis; (iv) suggested theoretical developments to the theory in light of the analyses. The books might also present (v) suggestions for linguistic intervention in the context described. The books in this series are mainly addressed to researchers, postgraduate students and teachers working within all areas of language in social life, though they will also be of use in specialist undergraduate study From tristanpurvis at gmail.com Tue Jan 11 03:18:36 2011 From: tristanpurvis at gmail.com (Tristan Purvis) Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 22:18:36 -0500 Subject: Fwd: 42nd Annual Conference on African Linguistics (ACAL) - 2nd Call for Papers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: 42nd ACAL Organizing Committee <42ndacal at gmail.com> Date: Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 11:02 AM Subject: 42nd Annual Conference on African Linguistics (ACAL) - 2nd Call for Papers To: Africanist/Linguist Friends of ACAL <42ndacal at gmail.com> *Apologies for cross-postings.* ** *Please be reminded that the deadline for submissions for the 42nd Annual Conference on African Linguistics is January 14, 2011: * http://acal2011.umd.edu/*.* *Details about registration will be available on the event website in the first week of January (apologies for the delay): http://acal2011.umd.edu/registration*. ** ==================================================================== 42nd Annual Conference on African Linguistics (ACAL) University of Maryland, College Park, MD June 10-12, 2011 http://acal2011.umd.edu/ ======================================================== 2nd Call for Papers || Deadline: January 14, 2011 ======================================================== The 42nd Annual Conference on African Linguistics (ACAL) will be held on June 10-12 at the University of Maryland, College Park. The theme of this year?s conference is 'African Languages in Context.' The organizers of ACAL 42 would like to invite papers that address the conference theme, or any other topic relating to African languages and linguistics. Please check our website for the most current information regarding submission of abstracts: http://acal2011.umd.edu/callforpapers Invited Speakers: * Professor Enoch Aboh, University of Amsterdam * Professor Vicki Carstens, University of Missouri * Professor Samuel Gyasi Obeng, Indiana University * Professor David Odden, Ohio State University ---------------------- Paper Topics Priority consideration will be given to papers that specifically address the conference theme and then to papers addressing the following subfields or combinations thereof; however, related topics are also welcome. - Computational linguistics - Historical linguistics - Language acquisition (i.e., first, second, or additional language) - Language pedagogy - Lexicography - Morphology - Neurolinguistics - Phonetics - Phonology - Pidgin and Creole languages - Pragmatics - Semantics - Sociolinguistics (e.g., code-switching, language contact in Africa and in the African Diaspora, language endangerment, bi- or multi-lingualism, language in African literature, and language planning, spread, use, and variation) - Syntax - Tonology Submission Guidelines We invite anonymous abstracts for 20-minute individual papers (additional time will be allowed for questions). All abstracts should be in English with glosses or translations for words or examples in any other language. Each abstract, including the title and any data in figures or tables, must not exceed 500 words. The 500-word abstract should be single-spaced and in a font no smaller than 11 pt. A separate page should accompany the abstract with name, institutional affiliation, and contact information, including e-mail address and abstract title. Abstracts must be submitted as a PDF or Microsoft Word document. Abstracts containing special characters must be submitted in a PDF format, preferably as an e-mail attachment. Individuals who do not have regular access to e-mail may submit one copy of their abstract by regular mail on a compact disc. Faxes will not be accepted. In the text of your email, please include the following information (we recommend you paste the following fields in the body of your email): Title (e.g., Mr., Ms., Mrs., Dr., etc): Given name (first name): Family name (last name): Suffix (e.g., Jr., III, etc): Institution: Title of presentation: Email address to be included in program: Electronic Submissions To submit abstracts electronically, please send your abstracts to: * 42ndACAL at gmail.com* Postal Mail Submissions To mail a compact disc containing your abstract, please use the following address: ACAL 42 Organizing Committee c/o Tristan Purvis 7005 52nd Ave College Park, MD 20740 Deadline The deadline for receipt of abstracts is January 14, 2011. Please be advised that late submissions may not be considered. Because of visa requirements, prospective international participants are urged to submit their abstracts at the earliest date possible. Participants will be notified of the acceptance of their proposal by February 28, 2011. From amnfn at well.com Tue Jan 11 21:59:02 2011 From: amnfn at well.com (A. Katz) Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2011 13:59:02 -0800 Subject: the 'well known secret' In-Reply-To: <44741.10.0.7.178.1294687105.squirrel@webmail.cantab.net> Message-ID: I think that while total immersion has more chances of producing a native speaker-like proficiency before the critical age than after, the deciding factor of how much of the potential for learning a new language is realized in any given person of whatever age is the degree to which the social situation subjects the person to a dominant language viewpoint. I elaborate more on this idea in the following essay: http://hubpages.com/hub/How-to-Learn-a-Foreign-Language-Issues-in-Second-Language-Acquisition-and-Pedagogy I have found that resistance by monolinguals to internalizing their first foreign language is high, and these observations also carry over to the attitude toward language universals by linguists who have never experienced total immersion in a second language. --Aya On Mon, 10 Jan 2011, Danijela Trenkic wrote: > Hi, > > I'm just catching up with the debate from 31 December started by Tom on > the 'well known secret' that teaching foreign langauges should start > early, and on Helen Neville's studies on the neurology of the critical > period. > > It is true that Neville's studies show different cortical activations in > early and late bilinguals, however in those studies (as far as I am aware) > proficiency levels (and / or the amount of exposure) were not tightly > controlled for. When proficiency levels of early and late bilinguals are > kept constant, the difference in cortical activation disappears (see > Perani et al 1998, Brain, > http://brain.oxfordjournals.org/content/121/10/1841.abstract). > > But more importantly (for the debate on when one should start teaching > foreign languages in school), the type of research that finds cortical > differences of early vs late bilinguals (and other research, that, more > generally, finds clear advantages for early over late bilinguals) is > almost invariably based on immersion / naturalistic learners (especially > in the case of early bilinguals). > > Unfortunately, you cannot extrapolate from that that teaching foreign > languages early in school (for an hour or so a week, with no opportunity > for any out-of-class exposure) would produce the same effect, or bypass > the supposed critical period problem. There is plenty of research to > suggest that, as far as foreign languages in schools are concerned, > adolescent learners have an edge over child learners (see Carmen Munoz's > article "Symmetries and asymmetries of age effects in naturalistic and > instructed L2 learning", Applied Linguistics, 2008). So if you can afford > to teach languages for just a few years in school, then, yes, doing it > between 12-16 (or 16-20) may well be better than teaching it to 7-12 year > olds. > > Danijela > > P.S. > > Having said all this, I'd better add that I'm not against early foreign > language instruction in principle - just against the inappropriate > application of research. Clearly, the earlier you start, the more input > you'll have (and that ought to be a good thing) IF you stick with it. But > that is a big IF. The UK experience suggests that the majority of students > will opt out of languages at the first available opportunity. > > From anne_mariedevlin at hotmail.com Wed Jan 12 01:23:56 2011 From: anne_mariedevlin at hotmail.com (anne marie devlin) Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 01:23:56 +0000 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age Message-ID: Just to add to the debate on teaching foreign languages at an early age. The Munoz article mentioned earlier is part of a much larger project entitled the Barcelona Age Factor (BAF). Although Munoz did suggest that early foreign language teaching produced no long term results, she did say that intense exposure to a foreign language at an early age does have a long term impact. So the question is not necessarily whether to introduce foreign languages at an early stage, but how much exposure is necessary to have a long term impact. As an interesting aside re: monolinguals and their resistance to their 1st FL, it's worth pointing out that Munoz's informants are bilingual Catalan/Spanish speakers, so the resistance towards a first foreign language may also be common to bilinguals. AMD From tgivon at uoregon.edu Wed Jan 12 01:42:38 2011 From: tgivon at uoregon.edu (Tom Givon) Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2011 18:42:38 -0700 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Well, maybe it is also worth mentioning that when you get into Catalunia, you get into thick layers of language politics and liberation ideology. So sometimes it is not all that easy to tell when the science ends and something else begins. Of course, Catalunia is not the only place where this can be observed. But once you get into the convoluted relations between a dominant/imperial language and an indigenous/liberation language, it becomes harder to do simple science. People have all kinds of axes to grind. Our earlier discussion last year about the Israeli-Arabic situation certainly overlapped with these issues. I am not so worried about the oft-subconscious effect of socio-linguistic factors on SLA. This should be studied as part of science. It is the deliberate ideologs that scare me. Best, TG ============ On 1/11/2011 6:23 PM, anne marie devlin wrote: > Just to add to the debate on teaching foreign languages at an early age. The Munoz article mentioned earlier is part of a much larger project entitled the Barcelona Age Factor (BAF). Although Munoz did suggest that early foreign language teaching produced no long term results, she did say that intense exposure to a foreign language at an early age does have a long term impact. So the question is not necessarily whether to introduce foreign languages at an early stage, but how much exposure is necessary to have a long term impact. As an interesting aside re: monolinguals and their resistance to their 1st FL, it's worth pointing out that Munoz's informants are bilingual Catalan/Spanish speakers, so the resistance towards a first foreign language may also be common to bilinguals. > AMD From moorej at ucsd.edu Wed Jan 12 04:58:45 2011 From: moorej at ucsd.edu (Moore, John) Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2011 20:58:45 -0800 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: <4D2D070E.3050608@uoregon.edu> Message-ID: Against my better judgement I feel I should add a rejoinder to this; anything said in this domain is bound to bother many, if not all. The linguistic situation in Catalunya is, indeed complex. However, to refer to Catalan as 'liberation' and Spanish (or Castellano) as 'imperial' over-simplifies. Catalan is, of course, the indigenous language of the region which was strenuously repressed during the Franco period. Spanish, is also clearly the national language that was imposed, also during that period. However, since around the 1950s, there was a significant internal migration of of Spanish-speaking Andalucians to Catalunya, who formed a guest-worker-like Spanish-speaking underclass. This leads to the question: how much of many Catalans' aversion to Spanish is because of historical repression, and how much is due to old-fashion prejudice against an under-class? John ________________________________________ From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Tom Givon [tgivon at uoregon.edu] Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 5:42 PM To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] teaching foreign languages at an early age Well, maybe it is also worth mentioning that when you get into Catalunia, you get into thick layers of language politics and liberation ideology. So sometimes it is not all that easy to tell when the science ends and something else begins. Of course, Catalunia is not the only place where this can be observed. But once you get into the convoluted relations between a dominant/imperial language and an indigenous/liberation language, it becomes harder to do simple science. People have all kinds of axes to grind. Our earlier discussion last year about the Israeli-Arabic situation certainly overlapped with these issues. I am not so worried about the oft-subconscious effect of socio-linguistic factors on SLA. This should be studied as part of science. It is the deliberate ideologs that scare me. Best, TG From tgivon at uoregon.edu Wed Jan 12 11:25:18 2011 From: tgivon at uoregon.edu (Tom Givon) Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 04:25:18 -0700 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: <2DDBB3E58272D646A9066A2A59BC57822130B25DD4@MBX5.AD.UCSD.EDU> Message-ID: I suppose I should have indicated by some graphemic means that I was using the terms 'imperial' and 'liberation' tongue in cheek. I think they pretty much characterize the ideological position of many of my Catalan friends. But as is the case in at least one other region in Spain, the ideological/national aspirations of one group cut into the legitimate rights of another. Internal migration ('imperialism' to some) in Spain has made all AutonomIas linguistically mixed. It is fun to speak Anzaluz with the taxistas in Barcelona, and once you get them going, they will tell you their tale of woes about Catalan linguistic nationalism. It is not that in Anzaluzia people don't poke fun at the way NorteNos speak, but at least they don't curtail their civil rights. These are all subtle details of multilingualism (tho Andaluz is not recognized as a language). My point remains tho, that once you get in the midst of ideological nationalist zealotry, science becomes murky. Best, TG ========= On 1/11/2011 9:58 PM, Moore, John wrote: > Against my better judgement I feel I should add a rejoinder to this; anything said in this domain is bound to bother many, if not all. The linguistic situation in Catalunya is, indeed complex. However, to refer to Catalan as 'liberation' and Spanish (or Castellano) as 'imperial' over-simplifies. Catalan is, of course, the indigenous language of the region which was strenuously repressed during the Franco period. Spanish, is also clearly the national language that was imposed, also during that period. However, since around the 1950s, there was a significant internal migration of of Spanish-speaking Andalucians to Catalunya, who formed a guest-worker-like Spanish-speaking underclass. This leads to the question: how much of many Catalans' aversion to Spanish is because of historical repression, and how much is due to old-fashion prejudice against an under-class? > > John > ________________________________________ > From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Tom Givon [tgivon at uoregon.edu] > Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 5:42 PM > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] teaching foreign languages at an early age > > Well, maybe it is also worth mentioning that when you get into > Catalunia, you get into thick layers of language politics and liberation > ideology. So sometimes it is not all that easy to tell when the science > ends and something else begins. Of course, Catalunia is not the only > place where this can be observed. But once you get into the convoluted > relations between a dominant/imperial language and an > indigenous/liberation language, it becomes harder to do simple science. > People have all kinds of axes to grind. Our earlier discussion last year > about the Israeli-Arabic situation certainly overlapped with these > issues. I am not so worried about the oft-subconscious effect of > socio-linguistic factors on SLA. This should be studied as part of > science. It is the deliberate ideologs that scare me. Best, TG > From dcyr at yorku.ca Wed Jan 12 12:46:29 2011 From: dcyr at yorku.ca (Danielle E. Cyr) Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 07:46:29 -0500 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: <4D2D8F9E.5020803@uoregon.edu> Message-ID: In Canada, an officially bilingual country, many if not most of the French as a Second Language (FSL) students enrol in these programs for political reasons. Indeed most of our students are first or second generation immigrants. They REALLY aim at becoming the "perfect" citizens, thus at becoming bilingual. However, all are not equally talented for learning a SL. Some end up at the end of their undergraduate studies with a middle and high school background of French core courses and four years in departments of French Studies with very little command of spoken French and even less of written French. Others come out brilliantly fluent in both. They all had the same motivation at the onset. Once, in a undergraduate course - Linguistics applied to the teaching of FSL (a course for future FSL teachers)- a student had the idea of having all her classmates to go through a basic multiple intelligences test. Between 1/3 and 1/2 of the class had not languaging as their major form of intelligence. I was too busy teaching overload during that year and FSL not being my main research area, I did not think of searching for correlations between the test results and the student performance in FSL. Yet the idea of my message here is that talent is a big factor that is hard to measure although it has to be taken into account. Talmy I agree with you that invoking talent might look like drifting away from science. However, there must be methodologies for taking it into account: the heredity factor, family members as role models, broad educational history, etc. These methodologies should also be used for detecting good (FSL) teachers. I say so because in the same class I refer to above, more than half of the students had grand-parents, parents, older siblings, uncles /aunts etc who were also teachers. Excellence in languaging and teaching it might be something partly "gifted" at birth and reinforce by role models, educational orientations, etc. Science should find a way to account for that. Best, Danielle Quoting Tom Givon : > > I suppose I should have indicated by some graphemic means that I was > using the terms 'imperial' and 'liberation' tongue in cheek. I think > they pretty much characterize the ideological position of many of my > Catalan friends. But as is the case in at least one other region in > Spain, the ideological/national aspirations of one group cut into the > legitimate rights of another. Internal migration ('imperialism' to some) > in Spain has made all AutonomIas linguistically mixed. It is fun to > speak Anzaluz with the taxistas in Barcelona, and once you get them > going, they will tell you their tale of woes about Catalan linguistic > nationalism. It is not that in Anzaluzia people don't poke fun at the > way NorteNos speak, but at least they don't curtail their civil rights. > These are all subtle details of multilingualism (tho Andaluz is not > recognized as a language). My point remains tho, that once you get in > the midst of ideological nationalist zealotry, science becomes murky. > Best, TG > > ========= > > > On 1/11/2011 9:58 PM, Moore, John wrote: > > Against my better judgement I feel I should add a rejoinder to this; > anything said in this domain is bound to bother many, if not all. The > linguistic situation in Catalunya is, indeed complex. However, to refer to > Catalan as 'liberation' and Spanish (or Castellano) as 'imperial' > over-simplifies. Catalan is, of course, the indigenous language of the > region which was strenuously repressed during the Franco period. Spanish, is > also clearly the national language that was imposed, also during that period. > However, since around the 1950s, there was a significant internal migration > of of Spanish-speaking Andalucians to Catalunya, who formed a > guest-worker-like Spanish-speaking underclass. This leads to the question: > how much of many Catalans' aversion to Spanish is because of historical > repression, and how much is due to old-fashion prejudice against an > under-class? > > > > John > > ________________________________________ > > From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] > On Behalf Of Tom Givon [tgivon at uoregon.edu] > > Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 5:42 PM > > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] teaching foreign languages at an early age > > > > Well, maybe it is also worth mentioning that when you get into > > Catalunia, you get into thick layers of language politics and liberation > > ideology. So sometimes it is not all that easy to tell when the science > > ends and something else begins. Of course, Catalunia is not the only > > place where this can be observed. But once you get into the convoluted > > relations between a dominant/imperial language and an > > indigenous/liberation language, it becomes harder to do simple science. > > People have all kinds of axes to grind. Our earlier discussion last year > > about the Israeli-Arabic situation certainly overlapped with these > > issues. I am not so worried about the oft-subconscious effect of > > socio-linguistic factors on SLA. This should be studied as part of > > science. It is the deliberate ideologs that scare me. Best, TG > > > > "The only hope we have as human beings is to learn each other's languages. Only then can we truly hope to understand one another." Professor Danielle E. Cyr Department of French Studies York University Toronto, ON, Canada, M3J 1P3 Tel. 1.416.736.2100 #310180 FAX. 1.416.736.5924 dcyr at yorku.ca From Elise.Karkkainen at oulu.fi Wed Jan 12 12:57:55 2011 From: Elise.Karkkainen at oulu.fi (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Elise_K=E4rkk=E4inen?=) Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 14:57:55 +0200 Subject: 2nd call for papers: Social Action Formats, Oulu, Finland 17-19 May 2011 Message-ID: (apologies for cross-postings) SECOND CALL FOR PAPERS International workshop "Social Action Formats: Conversational Patterns in Embodied Face-to-Face Interaction" University of Oulu, Finland, 17-19 May 2011 Website: Email: SAF2011 (at) oulu.fi Recently, conversation analysis and other related areas of research have begun to pay serious attention to interaction as fully material and embodied (cf. ICCA10 conference theme "Multimodal Interaction"). We welcome presentations to this international workshop that examine language and body behavior together as complementary aspects of talk-in-interaction, examining how speakers deploy the grammatical, lexico-semantic, prosodic, and embodied practices (gestures, head shakes, gaze and the body) in the moment-by-moment construction of situated social actions (cf. M. Goodwin 1980, C. Goodwin 2000). On this view, language is not an autonomous (grammatical) system, but a set of practices and resources within the sequential organization of social interaction. The workshop specifically aims to explore the notion of 'social action formats', or conversational patterns for routinely enacting particular activities and actions in interaction (Fox 2000, 2007, Ford et al. 2003, Couper-Kuhlen and Thompson 2005, 2008, Curl 2006). Social action formats can be broadly understood as recurrent conversational patterns or turn-constructional formats which originate in the interactional needs of participants in talk-in-interaction, and in which language and embodiment may be variously present. We invite presentations that explore social action formats within and across languages and cultures, by focusing on the complex relations among grammatical form, sequential organization and embodiment. Presenters will have either: 30 minutes for a presentation and 10 minutes for discussion or 40 minutes for a data session: presentation/discussion of research and data The workshop format allows for in-depth exploration of data by the invited speakers, the presenters, and the audience. The workshop has two invited speakers: Professor Cecilia Ford (University of Wisconsin, Madison) Professor Barbara Fox (University of Colorado) Their extensive research on language and social interaction provide a foundation for much current work on positionally sensitive linguistic and embodied practices. The theoretical starting points to naturally occurring interaction in different settings may include conversation analysis, interactional linguistics, multimodal interaction analysis, and related fields of study that use video recordings of social interactions as their data. Possible topics for papers include (but are not limited to) the following: - What are conversational patterns or 'social action formats'? How can we identify and define them? - Do we begin with language (and traditional linguistic and grammatical categories) or with social action when searching for conversational patterns in interaction? - What are the limits of social action formats and their relationship to units such as intonation units, clauses, or constructions with varying degrees of open and fixed slots? - How do the different modalities and the material world figure in the construction of social action formats at the level of single and extended turns at talk? - Are there formats which are constructed only through embodied action? - Does embodiment extend over sequences of social actions and how? If it does, what are the implications for the participants and the organization of interaction? Participation Proposals for papers or data sessions should be submitted as abstracts of about 500 words, including bibliographic references, diagrams and tables. The proposals should be sent as email attachments to by 31 January 2011. Please include the name and affiliation of author(s) and the title of the paper in the abstract. Authors will be notified about acceptance by mid-February 2011. Important deadlines 31 January 2011 - Deadline for the submission of proposals mid-February 2011 - Information about the decisions of the review process 17-19 May 2011 - International workshop Venue Conference center Lasaretti Registration fees There will be no registration fee for the workshop. Organizing committee Project "Social Action Formats" Elise K?rkk?inen Tiina Keisanen Marika Sutinen For further questions please contact the organizers at SAF2011 (at) oulu.fi References Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth and Sandra Thompson 2005. A linguistic practice for retracting overstatements: 'Concessive repair'. In Hakulinen, Auli and Margret Selting (eds.), Syntax and Lexis in Conversation: Studies on the use of linguistic resources in talk-in-interaction. 257-288. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth and Sandra Thompson 2008. On assessing situations and events in conversation: 'Extraposition' and its relatives. Discourse Studies 10(4): 443-467. Curl Traci 2006. Offers of assistance: Constraints on syntactic design. Journal of Pragmatics 38(8), 1257-1280. Ford, Cecilia, Barbara Fox and Sandra Thompson 2003. Social interaction and grammar. In Tomasello, M. (ed.). The new psychology of language. Cognitive and functional approaches to language structure, 119-144. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum. Fox, Barbara 2000. Micro-syntax in conversation. Paper presented at the Interactional Linguistics Conference, Spa. Fox, Barbara 2007. Principles shaping grammatical practices: an exploration. Discourse Studies 9(3): 299-318. Goodwin, Charles 2000. Action and embodiment within situated human interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 32, 1489-1522. Goodwin, Marjorie Harness 1980. Processes of mutual monitoring implicated in the production of description sequences. Sociological Inquiry, 50, 303-317. From tgivon at uoregon.edu Wed Jan 12 13:45:22 2011 From: tgivon at uoregon.edu (Tom Givon) Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 06:45:22 -0700 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: <1294836389.4d2da2a5efaa4@mymail.yorku.ca> Message-ID: Actually, I have always thought that 'talent', or whatever you want to call an inherent/innate variable, was a huge predictive factor in post-puberty SLA. But notice that it is much less relevant in natural child-language acquisition, where everybody becomes fluent fairly quickly, albeit with well-known induividual variation. My own informal cumulative observation over the years has been that ca. 5% of the population can learn a 2nd (or 3rd, or 4th) language fluently popst-puberty. As for the rest, it's a struggle, sheer drudgery. TG ========= On 1/12/2011 5:46 AM, Danielle E. Cyr wrote: > In Canada, an officially bilingual country, many if not most of the French as a > Second Language (FSL) students enrol in these programs for political reasons. > Indeed most of our students are first or second generation immigrants. They > REALLY aim at becoming the "perfect" citizens, thus at becoming bilingual. > > However, all are not equally talented for learning a SL. Some end up at the end > of their undergraduate studies with a middle and high school background of > French core courses and four years in departments of French Studies with very > little command of spoken French and even less of written French. Others come > out brilliantly fluent in both. They all had the same motivation at the onset. > > Once, in a undergraduate course - Linguistics applied to the teaching of FSL (a > course for future FSL teachers)- a student had the idea of having all her > classmates to go through a basic multiple intelligences test. Between 1/3 and > 1/2 of the class had not languaging as their major form of intelligence. > > I was too busy teaching overload during that year and FSL not being my main > research area, I did not think of searching for correlations between the test > results and the student performance in FSL. > > Yet the idea of my message here is that talent is a big factor that is hard to > measure although it has to be taken into account. > > Talmy I agree with you that invoking talent might look like drifting away from > science. However, there must be methodologies for taking it into account: the > heredity factor, family members as role models, broad educational history, etc. > These methodologies should also be used for detecting good (FSL) teachers. I say > so because in the same class I refer to above, more than half of the students > had grand-parents, parents, older siblings, uncles /aunts etc who were also > teachers. > > Excellence in languaging and teaching it might be something partly "gifted" at > birth and reinforce by role models, educational orientations, etc. Science > should find a way to account for that. > > > Best, > Danielle > > > Quoting Tom Givon: > >> I suppose I should have indicated by some graphemic means that I was >> using the terms 'imperial' and 'liberation' tongue in cheek. I think >> they pretty much characterize the ideological position of many of my >> Catalan friends. But as is the case in at least one other region in >> Spain, the ideological/national aspirations of one group cut into the >> legitimate rights of another. Internal migration ('imperialism' to some) >> in Spain has made all AutonomIas linguistically mixed. It is fun to >> speak Anzaluz with the taxistas in Barcelona, and once you get them >> going, they will tell you their tale of woes about Catalan linguistic >> nationalism. It is not that in Anzaluzia people don't poke fun at the >> way NorteNos speak, but at least they don't curtail their civil rights. >> These are all subtle details of multilingualism (tho Andaluz is not >> recognized as a language). My point remains tho, that once you get in >> the midst of ideological nationalist zealotry, science becomes murky. >> Best, TG >> >> ========= >> >> >> On 1/11/2011 9:58 PM, Moore, John wrote: >>> Against my better judgement I feel I should add a rejoinder to this; >> anything said in this domain is bound to bother many, if not all. The >> linguistic situation in Catalunya is, indeed complex. However, to refer to >> Catalan as 'liberation' and Spanish (or Castellano) as 'imperial' >> over-simplifies. Catalan is, of course, the indigenous language of the >> region which was strenuously repressed during the Franco period. Spanish, is >> also clearly the national language that was imposed, also during that period. >> However, since around the 1950s, there was a significant internal migration >> of of Spanish-speaking Andalucians to Catalunya, who formed a >> guest-worker-like Spanish-speaking underclass. This leads to the question: >> how much of many Catalans' aversion to Spanish is because of historical >> repression, and how much is due to old-fashion prejudice against an >> under-class? >>> John >>> ________________________________________ >>> From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] >> On Behalf Of Tom Givon [tgivon at uoregon.edu] >>> Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 5:42 PM >>> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >>> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] teaching foreign languages at an early age >>> >>> Well, maybe it is also worth mentioning that when you get into >>> Catalunia, you get into thick layers of language politics and liberation >>> ideology. So sometimes it is not all that easy to tell when the science >>> ends and something else begins. Of course, Catalunia is not the only >>> place where this can be observed. But once you get into the convoluted >>> relations between a dominant/imperial language and an >>> indigenous/liberation language, it becomes harder to do simple science. >>> People have all kinds of axes to grind. Our earlier discussion last year >>> about the Israeli-Arabic situation certainly overlapped with these >>> issues. I am not so worried about the oft-subconscious effect of >>> socio-linguistic factors on SLA. This should be studied as part of >>> science. It is the deliberate ideologs that scare me. Best, TG >>> >> > > "The only hope we have as human beings is to learn each other's languages. Only > then can we truly hope to understand one another." > > Professor Danielle E. Cyr > Department of French Studies > York University > Toronto, ON, Canada, M3J 1P3 > Tel. 1.416.736.2100 #310180 > FAX. 1.416.736.5924 > dcyr at yorku.ca From amnfn at well.com Wed Jan 12 14:25:17 2011 From: amnfn at well.com (A. Katz) Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 06:25:17 -0800 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: <4D2DB072.9010106@uoregon.edu> Message-ID: It's nice to see people recognizing that there is such a thing as talent, after years of the pretense that all native speakers of a language have equal proficiency, and that everything depends on exposure. However, I think we also have to recognize that the degree of difficulty post puberty in the acquisition of fluency in a new language depends not only on the level of exposure and the specific internal motivation of the learner, but also on the extent to which the new language differs from the languages that learner acquired fluency in, pre-puberty. It can't be very hard to learn Spanish, if you already speak Portuguese, or to pick up Italian if you already speak Spanish, but when the languages are not closely related, and also not typologically similar, it's more of a challenge. I found that picking up Russian post puberty was easy, because somehow there's a structural similarity to Hebrew, but also because I had a good teacher. German was harder to become fluent in, even though it's related to English, and I spoke English fluently. Picking up a tone language in middle age for the very first time is really hard. Sometimes what we think is talent has a little more to do with similarity to a familiar language. We piggy back what we can onto existing structures in the brain, building new ones only when absolutely necessary. --Aya On Wed, 12 Jan 2011, Tom Givon wrote: > > Actually, I have always thought that 'talent', or whatever you want to call > an inherent/innate variable, was a huge predictive factor in post-puberty > SLA. But notice that it is much less relevant in natural child-language > acquisition, where everybody becomes fluent fairly quickly, albeit with > well-known induividual variation. My own informal cumulative observation over > the years has been that ca. 5% of the population can learn a 2nd (or 3rd, or > 4th) language fluently popst-puberty. As for the rest, it's a struggle, sheer > drudgery. TG > > ========= > > > On 1/12/2011 5:46 AM, Danielle E. Cyr wrote: >> In Canada, an officially bilingual country, many if not most of the French >> as a >> Second Language (FSL) students enrol in these programs for political >> reasons. >> Indeed most of our students are first or second generation immigrants. They >> REALLY aim at becoming the "perfect" citizens, thus at becoming bilingual. >> >> However, all are not equally talented for learning a SL. Some end up at the >> end >> of their undergraduate studies with a middle and high school background of >> French core courses and four years in departments of French Studies with >> very >> little command of spoken French and even less of written French. Others >> come >> out brilliantly fluent in both. They all had the same motivation at the >> onset. >> >> Once, in a undergraduate course - Linguistics applied to the teaching of >> FSL (a >> course for future FSL teachers)- a student had the idea of having all her >> classmates to go through a basic multiple intelligences test. Between 1/3 >> and >> 1/2 of the class had not languaging as their major form of intelligence. >> >> I was too busy teaching overload during that year and FSL not being my main >> research area, I did not think of searching for correlations between the >> test >> results and the student performance in FSL. >> >> Yet the idea of my message here is that talent is a big factor that is hard >> to >> measure although it has to be taken into account. >> >> Talmy I agree with you that invoking talent might look like drifting away >> from >> science. However, there must be methodologies for taking it into account: >> the >> heredity factor, family members as role models, broad educational history, >> etc. >> These methodologies should also be used for detecting good (FSL) teachers. >> I say >> so because in the same class I refer to above, more than half of the >> students >> had grand-parents, parents, older siblings, uncles /aunts etc who were also >> teachers. >> >> Excellence in languaging and teaching it might be something partly "gifted" >> at >> birth and reinforce by role models, educational orientations, etc. Science >> should find a way to account for that. >> >> >> Best, >> Danielle >> >> >> Quoting Tom Givon: >> >>> I suppose I should have indicated by some graphemic means that I was >>> using the terms 'imperial' and 'liberation' tongue in cheek. I think >>> they pretty much characterize the ideological position of many of my >>> Catalan friends. But as is the case in at least one other region in >>> Spain, the ideological/national aspirations of one group cut into the >>> legitimate rights of another. Internal migration ('imperialism' to some) >>> in Spain has made all AutonomIas linguistically mixed. It is fun to >>> speak Anzaluz with the taxistas in Barcelona, and once you get them >>> going, they will tell you their tale of woes about Catalan linguistic >>> nationalism. It is not that in Anzaluzia people don't poke fun at the >>> way NorteNos speak, but at least they don't curtail their civil rights. >>> These are all subtle details of multilingualism (tho Andaluz is not >>> recognized as a language). My point remains tho, that once you get in >>> the midst of ideological nationalist zealotry, science becomes murky. >>> Best, TG >>> >>> ========= >>> >>> >>> On 1/11/2011 9:58 PM, Moore, John wrote: >>>> Against my better judgement I feel I should add a rejoinder to this; >>> anything said in this domain is bound to bother many, if not all. The >>> linguistic situation in Catalunya is, indeed complex. However, to refer >>> to >>> Catalan as 'liberation' and Spanish (or Castellano) as 'imperial' >>> over-simplifies. Catalan is, of course, the indigenous language of the >>> region which was strenuously repressed during the Franco period. Spanish, >>> is >>> also clearly the national language that was imposed, also during that >>> period. >>> However, since around the 1950s, there was a significant internal >>> migration >>> of of Spanish-speaking Andalucians to Catalunya, who formed a >>> guest-worker-like Spanish-speaking underclass. This leads to the >>> question: >>> how much of many Catalans' aversion to Spanish is because of historical >>> repression, and how much is due to old-fashion prejudice against an >>> under-class? >>>> John >>>> ________________________________________ >>>> From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] >>> On Behalf Of Tom Givon [tgivon at uoregon.edu] >>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 5:42 PM >>>> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >>>> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] teaching foreign languages at an early age >>>> >>>> Well, maybe it is also worth mentioning that when you get into >>>> Catalunia, you get into thick layers of language politics and liberation >>>> ideology. So sometimes it is not all that easy to tell when the science >>>> ends and something else begins. Of course, Catalunia is not the only >>>> place where this can be observed. But once you get into the convoluted >>>> relations between a dominant/imperial language and an >>>> indigenous/liberation language, it becomes harder to do simple science. >>>> People have all kinds of axes to grind. Our earlier discussion last year >>>> about the Israeli-Arabic situation certainly overlapped with these >>>> issues. I am not so worried about the oft-subconscious effect of >>>> socio-linguistic factors on SLA. This should be studied as part of >>>> science. It is the deliberate ideologs that scare me. Best, TG >>>> >>> >> >> "The only hope we have as human beings is to learn each other's languages. >> Only >> then can we truly hope to understand one another." >> >> Professor Danielle E. Cyr >> Department of French Studies >> York University >> Toronto, ON, Canada, M3J 1P3 >> Tel. 1.416.736.2100 #310180 >> FAX. 1.416.736.5924 >> dcyr at yorku.ca > > From moorej at ucsd.edu Wed Jan 12 18:05:36 2011 From: moorej at ucsd.edu (Moore, John) Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 10:05:36 -0800 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: <4D2D8F9E.5020803@uoregon.edu> Message-ID: For the past three summers, and, I hope, again this summer I take a group of undergraduates to Cadiz on a study abroad program, where I give a course on Spanish dialectology and another on flamenco. I'm pretty sure most students, especially the many Latino Heritage Spanish speakers, probably think Andaluz should be considered a separate language :-) This program is open to all students anywhere, in case anyone may have interested students - we're still accepting applications (shameless self-promotion). John -----Original Message----- From: Tom Givon [mailto:tgivon at uoregon.edu] ... tho Andaluz is not recognized as a language From caterina.mauri at unipv.it Fri Jan 14 09:59:39 2011 From: caterina.mauri at unipv.it (Caterina Mauri) Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2011 10:59:39 +0100 Subject: 2nd call for papers - Pavia, May 2011 - Workshop on "GRADUALNESS IN CHANGE AND ITS RELATION TO SYNCHRONIC VARIATION AND USE" Message-ID: ** WE APOLOGIZE FOR CROSS-POSTING ** ------------------------ International workshop on: "GRADUALNESS IN CHANGE AND ITS RELATION TO SYNCHRONIC VARIATION AND USE" Pavia (Italy), 30-31 May 2011 Workshop URL: https://sites.google.com/site/workshoppavia2011/ ------------------------ DESCRIPTION: The workshop aims to contribute to the discussion on the factors at play in diachronic change and to investigate the relationship between diachronic gradualness and synchronic variation, integrating the current views on linguistic variation and language use. Special attention will be devoted to theoretical and methodological issues concerning i) how the study of language change can benefit from the most recent achievements in linguistic theories and ii) how the explanations of synchronic variation may be found in diachronic processes, discussing whether diachronic gradualness and synchronic variation may be analyzed through the same lenses and by means of the same theoretical instruments. Furthermore, the workshop also wants to address the question of the impact of contact on linguistic change. Language contact may indeed be seen as a special type of synchronic phenomenon that may last in time and may gradually lead to diachronic change, triggering or influencing the development of particular constructions in neighbouring languages. INVITED SPEAKERS: Olga Fischer (University of Amsterdam): ---- Topic: On the role of analogy in processes of language change B?atrice Lamiroy (University of Leuven): ---- Topic: The pace of grammaticalization in Romance languages Graeme Trousdale (University of Edinburgh): ---- Topic: Diachronic construction grammar and gradualness in language change Johan van der Auwera (University of Antwerp): ----- Topic: On diachronic semantic maps The workshop will also accommodate four contributions from the project members (t.b.a) on the effects of contact and interference within the macro-geographic-area of the Mediterranean. CALL FOR PAPERS: Authors are invited to submit a one-page abstract, keeping in mind that the slot for their communication will last 40 min. including discussion. Abstracts should be anonymous and should be sent as attachments in PDF format to: gradualness.workshop at gmail.com. Author(s) name(s) and affiliation should be indicated in the corpus of the e-mail. The abstracts will be anonimously reviewed by two members of the Scientific Committee. Besides theoretical issues, the exam of specific examples and the description of general patterns will also be welcome. Topics of interest include: ? what kind of factors trigger the grammaticalization processes ? the relation of grammaticalization to other mechanisms of language change such as reanalysis and analogy ? the relationship between synchronic variation and grammatical change ? the interaction between frequency, entrenchment and use ? the possibility of multiple source constructions in language change ? the role of language contact in grammatical change ? how particular diachronic phenomena may be analyzed in the light of the most recent linguistic theories (e.g. construction grammar) ? diachronic explanations for synchronic patterns of variation ? ?.. IMPORTANT DATES: Deadline for submission: 10 February 2011 Notification of acceptance 10 March 2011 ORGANIZERS AND CONTACT: Anna Giacalone Ramat - annaram (at) unipv.it Caterina Mauri - caterina.mauri (at) unipv.it Piera Molinelli - piera.molinelli (at) unibg.it For any questions and for submissions, please write to gradualness.workshop at gmail.com SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE: Pierluigi Cuzzolin (University of Bergamo), Chiara Fedriani (University of Pavia), Chiara Ghezzi (University of Pavia), Anna Giacalone Ramat (University of Pavia), Gianguido Manzelli (University of Pavia), Caterina Mauri (University of Pavia), Piera Molinelli (University of Bergamo), Paolo Ramat (IUSS Institute), Andrea Sans? (Insubria University - Como), Federica Venier (University of Bergamo) From bischoff.st at gmail.com Fri Jan 14 14:43:05 2011 From: bischoff.st at gmail.com (s.t. bischoff) Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2011 09:43:05 -0500 Subject: Twitter Corpus Message-ID: Hi all, Some of you may find this of interest... http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/suttin-hella-koo-yall-regional-dialects-thrive-on-twitter/28960?sid=wc&utm_source=wc&utm_medium=en Suttin Hella Koo, Y?all: Regional Dialects Thrive on Twitter January 13, 2011, 11:41 am By Marc Parry When people wanted to study language, they used to have two options. They could use a computer to analyze a large body of formal writing, like newspapers. Or they could go out and interview a bunch of people. Now Twitter offers something fresh for researchers interested in the evolution of language: massive amounts of informal written communication. Scientists at Carnegie Mellon University are demonstrating the potential of that data in a study, which has found that regional dialects are thriving on Twitter. In fact, local slang seems to be evolving within the social-media site. From bischoff.st at gmail.com Fri Jan 14 17:16:05 2011 From: bischoff.st at gmail.com (s.t. bischoff) Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2011 12:16:05 -0500 Subject: language technology/presence survey Message-ID: Please forward We are conducting two surveys about endangered languages. One is regarding language use. The other is regarding the relationship between language and technology. Please take a few minutes to visit our website http://users.ipfw.edu/bischofs/ling/langsurvey/survey1home.htmland take the short surveys (10 questions each). Each survey should take 10 to 20 minutes to complete. The surveys are in Spanish and English. Please note participation is voluntary. Participants must be 18 years old. If you have any questions please contact Shannon Bischoff at bischoff [dot] st [at] gmail [dot] com or Rosita Rivera at rositalisa [dot] rivera [at] gmail [dot ] com or Kimberly Santiago at kimberly [dot] santiago [at] upr [dot] edu. The surveys will be available indefinitely, and results will be added to the website periodically. Thank you for your time. Estamos administrando dos encuestas acerca de lenguajes en peligro de extinci?n. Uno es relacionado al uso del idioma. El otro es acerca de la relaci?n entre el uso del lenguaje y la tecnolog?a. Por favor, tome unos minutos para visitar nuestro sitio en el web http://users.ipfw.edu/bischofs/ling/langsurvey/survey1homespn.html y conteste la encuesta (10 preguntas cada una). Cada encuesta debe tomar unos 10 a 20 minutos para completar. Las encuestas est?n disponibles en espa?ol y en ingl?s. Su participaci?n es voluntaria. Los participantes deben ser mayor de 18 a?os. Si tiene alguna pregunta relacionada con la encuesta, por favor, contacte a Shannon Bischoff a bischoff [dot] st [at] gmail [dot] com o a Rosita L. Rivera a rositalisa [dot] rivera [at] gmail [dot ] com o a Kimberly Santiago a kimberly [dot] santiago [at] upr [dot] edu. Gracias por su tiempo From bischoff.st at gmail.com Sun Jan 16 22:08:52 2011 From: bischoff.st at gmail.com (s.t. bischoff) Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2011 17:08:52 -0500 Subject: Lang Tech Survey: Redux Message-ID: Apparently some folks had difficulty with the English link. It should work now. Please forward We are conducting two surveys about endangered languages. One is regarding language use. The other is regarding the relationship between language and technology. Please take a few minutes to visit our website http://users.ipfw.edu/bischofs/ling/langsurvey/survey1home.html and take the short surveys (10 questions each). Each survey should take 10 to 20 minutes to complete. The surveys are in Spanish and English. Please note participation is voluntary. Participants must be 18 years old. If you have any questions please contact Shannon Bischoff at bischoff [dot] st [at] gmail [dot] com or Rosita Rivera at rositalisa [dot] rivera [at] gmail [dot ] com or Kimberly Santiago at kimberly [dot] santiago [at] upr [dot] edu. The surveys will be available indefinitely, and results will be added to the website periodically. Thank you for your time. Estamos administrando dos encuestas acerca de lenguajes en peligro de extinci?n. Uno es relacionado al uso del idioma. El otro es acerca de la relaci?n entre el uso del lenguaje y la tecnolog?a. Por favor, tome unos minutos para visitar nuestro sitio en el web http://users.ipfw.edu/bischofs/ling/langsurvey/survey1homespn.html y conteste la encuesta (10 preguntas cada una). Cada encuesta debe tomar unos 10 a 20 minutos para completar. Las encuestas est?n disponibles en espa?ol y en ingl?s. Su participaci?n es voluntaria. Los participantes deben ser mayor de 18 a?os. Si tiene alguna pregunta relacionada con la encuesta, por favor, contacte a Shannon Bischoff a bischoff [dot] st [at] gmail [dot] com o a Rosita L. Rivera a rositalisa [dot] rivera [at] gmail [dot ] com o a Kimberly Santiago a kimberly [dot] santiago [at] upr [dot] edu. Gracias por su tiempo From jrubba at calpoly.edu Mon Jan 17 03:08:07 2011 From: jrubba at calpoly.edu (Johanna Rubba) Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2011 19:08:07 -0800 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I began studying Arabic in my mid-20's. I used a book from the old "Teach Yourself" series, which presented Classical Arabic, I think. Later, I lived in Tunisia for four years. I began using Tunisian Arabic for many everyday encounters after I had been there for about 2.5 years. By my fourth year there strangers would ask me if I was from Algeria or some other Arabic-speaking country. My communicative range was, of course, pretty narrow, since I operated within a pretty restricted domain of experience (I used English, French, or German for most purposes), but it struck me that my accent and grammar were good enough for people to ask me that question. The biggest challenge, was, of course, the vocabulary, but I still had a good memory then! I studied German for 7 years, from sophomore year of high school to senior year of college, and then lived in Germany from '76 to '78. Within four or so months, my comprehension was very good. A year or so in, people thought I was a native speaker; I came back with influence from the local dialect (Mainz). On a good day, I can still fool people, although I'm losing word genders, and that's a giveaway. I have, however, found French extremely difficult, from the point of view of both pronunciation and grammar -- more difficult than Arabic, believe it or not. Still, if I hit the right balance between effort and relaxation, my French pronunciation can be pretty good. I don't think there's any doubt that some people have a talent for learning other languages, even in adulthood. I was raised monolingual English (though I did learn to speak Cat). I think one's talent can also be concentrated in one area over another -- pronunciation is particularly easy for me. I consider it an inborn talent (no brag). I'd have to disagree with the idea that learning a Germanic language like German is easier for an English speaker than a less Germanic or less Indo-European language. A lot of German words are obvious -- Buch, Hand, Mann, gut -- but, in many, if not most, cases, sound change or semantic shift obscures the connection; this is compounded, of course, by English's massive loss of Germanic words and adoption of thousands of French, Latin, and Greek words. 'Oak' and 'Eich,' 'Zeit' and 'tide,' 'treiben' and 'drive,' 'tragen' and 'draw' are all recoverable only if you can undo the sound changes and are familiar with the Old English lexicon. Then there's all that inflection! When I taught German as a TA at UCSD, my students just did not *get* case marking. Their minds were blown by the fact that changing a 'reversible' sentence's word order would not change who did what to whom. It was always their weakest point. Dr. Johanna Rubba, Ph. D. Professor, Linguistics Linguistics Minor Advisor English Dept. Cal Poly State University San Luis Obispo San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 Ofc. tel. : 805-756-2184 Dept. tel.: 805-756-2596 Dept. fax: 805-756-6374 E-mail: jrubba at calpoly.edu URL: http://cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba From amnfn at well.com Mon Jan 17 13:59:11 2011 From: amnfn at well.com (A. Katz) Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 05:59:11 -0800 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: <1F735A99-96F0-4310-8B6F-96D66C4E863C@calpoly.edu> Message-ID: Johanna, German and English are bad examples of "similar" languages, because despite the genetic relationship, they are very different structurally, and so the only thing that is helpful for English speakers in German are a few stray lexical cognates. That doesn't help achieve grammatical fluency. Sometimes two languages can have some degree of structural similarity and not be genetecally related at all (at least in any way that's attested.) I started studying Russian in college, as a minor. I was able to speed through the beginning material really fast, because something about Russian was very familiar. I'd never spoken any other Slavic language, and yet the syntax more or less made sense, and I had no trouble putting together a sentence that didn't sound strange. The accent was also easy to pick up. Some things, like case and aspect, were not as familiar, but not hard to learn. After only about two years of study, I could converse and pass myself off as, if not exactly a "Russian", a Ukrainian. ;-> At the time, I was an adult, and I considered myself to be "talented" at languages. Most people who knew me thought so, too. I got a degree in foreign languages, with a concentration in French and a minor in Russian and German. Then I went to law school and didn't do anything with languages for about twelve years, then went back to grad school, got a Ph.D. in linguistics, and eventually a job teaching in Taiwan. I went there believing that I was good at languages, and that I would be fluent in a matter of months. It didn't work out that way. Here are some of the factors that may have made the difference: * I was thirty-eight when I arrived. I think brain plasticity changes over time, and someone who is able to pick something up fast at eighteen or twenty or even twenty-eight isn't as good at it at thrity-eight or forty. * I had a full time job and no time to play. I didn't socialize outside the workplace or explore after hours. I was too exhausted. * Eventually I had a baby to take care of as well as a job, as well as old business in the states. * Mandarin is very different from the languages I had known previously. It wasn't a superficial fit with some other language I knew. It was my first tone language, and I could not seem to open a new category for tone, even though I could mimic the sounds well. These are some of the factors that go in to making someone appear to be "talented" or not at language. For whatever it's worth, I did not speak Mandarin like an American, and nothing about the way I used it suggested that to the locals. Instead, one merchant asked me if I was Korean! I don't know much about Catalan, but I am wondering if there might not be some grammatical or areal feautures of the language that might make Arabic not that hard to learn, if you already speak Cat. After all, Spanish had some Arabic influence in it in general, and I imagine that all languages spoken on the Iberian peninsula have Semitic influences from both the moorish conquests and the earlier Carthaginian occupation. When we are talented at something, there is usually a reason for it, even if we don't know what that reason is. Chances are it has more to do with function, and less to do with labels. Best, --Aya http://hubpages.com/hub/How-to-Learn-a-Foreign-Language-Issues-in-Second-Language-Acquisition-and-Pedagogy http://hubpages.com/hub/The-Once-and-Future-Nanny On Sun, 16 Jan 2011, Johanna Rubba wrote: > I began studying Arabic in my mid-20's. I used a book from the old "Teach > Yourself" series, which presented Classical Arabic, I think. Later, I lived > in Tunisia for four years. I began using Tunisian Arabic for many everyday > encounters after I had been there for about 2.5 years. By my fourth year > there strangers would ask me if I was from Algeria or some other > Arabic-speaking country. My communicative range was, of course, pretty > narrow, since I operated within a pretty restricted domain of experience (I > used English, French, or German for most purposes), but it struck me that my > accent and grammar were good enough for people to ask me that question. The > biggest challenge, was, of course, the vocabulary, but I still had a good > memory then! > > I studied German for 7 years, from sophomore year of high school to senior > year of college, and then lived in Germany from '76 to '78. Within four or so > months, my comprehension was very good. A year or so in, people thought I was > a native speaker; I came back with influence from the local dialect (Mainz). > On a good day, I can still fool people, although I'm losing word genders, and > that's a giveaway. > > I have, however, found French extremely difficult, from the point of view of > both pronunciation and grammar -- more difficult than Arabic, believe it or > not. Still, if I hit the right balance between effort and relaxation, my > French pronunciation can be pretty good. > > I don't think there's any doubt that some people have a talent for learning > other languages, even in adulthood. I was raised monolingual > English (though I did learn to speak Cat). I think one's talent can also be > concentrated in one area over another -- pronunciation is particularly easy > for me. I consider it an inborn talent (no brag). > > I'd have to disagree with the idea that learning a Germanic language like > German is easier for an English speaker than a less Germanic or less > Indo-European language. A lot of German words are obvious -- Buch, Hand, > Mann, gut -- but, in many, if not most, cases, sound change or semantic shift > obscures the connection; this is compounded, of course, by English's massive > loss of Germanic words and adoption of thousands of French, Latin, and Greek > words. 'Oak' and 'Eich,' 'Zeit' and 'tide,' 'treiben' and 'drive,' 'tragen' > and 'draw' are all recoverable only if you can undo the sound changes and are > familiar with the Old English lexicon. Then there's all that inflection! When > I taught German as a TA at UCSD, my students just did not *get* case marking. > Their minds were blown by the fact that changing a 'reversible' sentence's > word order would not change who did what to whom. It was always their weakest > point. > > Dr. Johanna Rubba, Ph. D. > Professor, Linguistics > Linguistics Minor Advisor > English Dept. > Cal Poly State University San Luis Obispo > San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 > Ofc. tel. : 805-756-2184 > Dept. tel.: 805-756-2596 > Dept. fax: 805-756-6374 > E-mail: jrubba at calpoly.edu > URL: http://cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba > > > From danielrr2 at gmail.com Mon Jan 17 15:01:37 2011 From: danielrr2 at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Daniel_Ria=F1o?=) Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 16:01:37 +0100 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: The influence of Arabic over modern Spanish is amazingly scarce, specially considering the centuries of Moorish presence in the Iberian Peninsula. Probably even less over Catalan. The identifiable influence of other Semitic languages over Modern Spanish (outside toponymy and modern borrowings) is almost zero. Almost all the influence of Arabic on Modern Spanish affects the vocabulary, and even there, the quantity of words of Arabic origin in the common modern vocabulary is surprisingly small, probably around one or (at most) two hundreds, mostly restricted to substantives, and almost all of them belonging to a small number of semantic fields: water and irrigation, warfare, local institutions, building, horses, some crafts, and specially plants and food. Most educated Spanish speakers identify the "al" element at the beginning of many words with an Arabic etymology, with or without reason (usually with). A good number of scientific terms entered the Spanish vocabulary via the arabic scholars, most of them of Greek origin. There's one expresion of Arabic origin ("ojala", "God Willing") that Spanish-speaking people use vey often. With much philological pain it has been collected a list of almost 4,000 words of Arabic origin used in documents written in Spanish at some time, but most of them are words out of use, often terms to designate aspects of Islamic life. There is very little of Arabic in modern Spanish morphology: an -i suffix used almost only with Arabic (or muslim-) related realia ("nazar?") and maybe an "a" causative prefix (as in "acalorar") still productive. Most phonetic and syntactical phenomena that have been attributed to Arabic influence, and there's not much of them, are best (and usually) explained otherwise. Daniel P.S. The influence of Berber languages over all romance languages of the Iberian Peninsula is much smaller, limited to local lexical borrowings in some small locations. 2011/1/17 A. Katz > > I don't know much about Catalan, but I am wondering if there might not be > some grammatical or areal feautures of the language that might make Arabic > not that hard to learn, if you already speak Cat. After all, Spanish had > some Arabic influence in it in general, and I imagine that all languages > spoken on the Iberian peninsula have Semitic influences from both the > moorish conquests and the earlier Carthaginian occupation. > >> >> From dcyr at yorku.ca Mon Jan 17 15:22:22 2011 From: dcyr at yorku.ca (Danielle E. Cyr) Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 10:22:22 -0500 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: <1F735A99-96F0-4310-8B6F-96D66C4E863C@calpoly.edu> Message-ID: Thanks Jo for your language learning narrative. It really interesting and enlightening. Ii is also an incentive to add mine to our conversation. I was born in an Acadian family of New Richmond in the Gasp? Peninsula (Gaspesie) and thus raised in that variety of French. Both my parents were children of teachers (my paternal grandmother an elementary school teacher and my maternal grandfather a teacher?s college teacher). This means that we were speaking a less archaic variety of Acadian French than other children around us. I have to add that New Richmond was then, and is still a bilingual town with 20% English speakers and 80% French Speakers. I learnt my first English with NYC Long Island kids who came with their parents every year to spend the summer months in a log cabin close to our house. By the age of ten I was able to converse in English with a definite Long Island accent. My adult relatives used to burst in laughter when hearing me saying that I spoke like a Yankee. During teenage I then I socialized with New Richmond local anglophones and my yankee accent shifted towards the Gasp? Peninsula regional accent (a mix of canadianized Irish and Scottish accents I would say). Then the Qu?bec Independence movement arose and, in its wake all my generation got into the idea that speaking English was a betrayal to the cause. So my English went dormant. Meanwhile I was sent to a boarding school to do what was called in Qu?bec a ? cours classique ?, i.e. eight years of classics and humanities starting in G8. I then did a lot of English grammar and a bit of English literature + eight years of Latin and six years of Old Greek. On the side with a classmate we bought each a Assimil German and taught ourselves enough German. so After two years I met some German tourists and I could carry a small conversation with them, to my astonishment. After a B.A. in linguistics I did a M.A. on tense and aspect in pre-classical Latin, I then spent a year in Tuscany and taugh myself Italian from a book. It was very easy mostly because I could use my French apply backward Latin to French historical phonetics to it and hit the right Italian words. It was also easy because I lived in the Tuscan countryside and the neighbours spoke nothing else than Italian (Tuscan variety). When I came back to Qu?bec I enrolled in Italian courses at the university level. When I first opened my mouth in the class the teacher laughed and said that I spoke Italian like a Tuscan peasant. Anyway, I passed all levels of Italian and even received an award from the Swiss Embassy for the best student of Italian in Canada! When I went back to Tuscany, however, my good neighbours said that my grammar had improved but my accent was impoverished ... Meanwhile I enrolled in Inuktitut, Innu (Algonquian) and German at university level. I started to teach myself Swedish with a book and tapes. Some times at the end of the day my brain was so full of foreign languages that I could hardly read the French advertisments in the bus I was taking for my ride home. Anyway I passed all the exams that allowed me to go and study in Germany and I could start to think in Inuktitut, Innu and Swedish One year into my doctoral (I was then 39) I went to do my coursework at Stockholm University (with ?sten Dahl and Ake Viberg). Getting there I could understand about 75% of what was said in Swedish. I suppose I could have started to speak right away but I was a bit shy and all the Swedes spoke such a beautiful English that there seemed to me no way I could try my poor Swedish on these great people. Also, because I was a Canadian people took for granted that English was my first language so they wanted to take the opportunity to practice their English with me. That is how MY English got a lot better in my first year in Sweden because I learnt a lot more English from the Swedes than THEY ever learnt from me! And, consequently, my English accent shifted again from the Yankee-Gasp? variety to something a bit more British ? la Swedish. It is only after the first year, however, and having made a lot of friends that I became quite fluent in Swedish I believe. During my first summer in Scandinavia I went to immerse myself in Finnish intensive courses for three weeks. I found Finnish very easy. In the first place I was used to declensions because of Latin and Inuktitut, in the second place Finns get so excited that somebody want to learn their language that they are highly collaborative. Each Finn turns into a private teacher when you try talking to them. Third, at that time back in 1987 not a lot of them spoke English so Finnish was the only way to communicate. Or else it would have had to be Russian or German but I never told them that I spoke German. The pronunciation is quite easy except for the fact that one has to get used to put the stress on the first syllable instead of on the last like in French. After three weeks of learning Finnish, on the eve of my departure I was able to go to a taxi driver, explain to him that my boarding place (a student residence) had no phone connection before 7 :00 a.m. and that I needed to catch a train at 6 :30 so could he come and fetch me a 6 :00 the morning after. All in Finnish after three weeks only. Well, guess what, he had understood me because he was there the morning after! After my PH.D I went to teach at York University in Toronto, where I still am. I had an Australian roommate for almost three years, thus my English accent shifted again to become a bit Australian. And I became much more fluent than ever. I watched every possible BBC Masterpiece theater, read most of the 19th century English classics, and worked hard at improving my vocabulary. Sometimes English speaking people would wonder where I was from with my 19th century vocabulary and my unique blend of accents overlaying a slight French background. Now, when in England I can shift from North American English to British English without any difficulty. >>From 1995 to 1997 I took a leave of absence and went for two years as school principal in the Mi?gmaq reserve of Listuguj. I had already started to teach myself the language from a teaching grammar and tapes. Getting there however, I found that the linguistic situation was very tensed. Only people above 50 still spoke. Those of them who worked in the school were so resentful that they refrained from speaking in Mi?gmaq in front of me in case I would learn from them. I was also forbidden to interview people and conduct any kind of research, not to mention to publish. So I did not learn much. It is then that I launched the sentence : ? Trying to learn a dying language is like trying to learn dancing with a dying dancer. ? So, in the end, I conclude that learning foreign languages successfully depends on many factors : talent, love of languages and cultures, good teachers, helping context, age, good teaching materials among others. The distance from one?s own first language is easily compensated by how nurturing the context is, how helpful the native speakers are and how good the teaching material is. If all these conditions are satisfied, the more languages one learns, the easier they become to learn. The Pope is a good case. Based on my personal experience also, retaining foreign languages is a matter of practice of course; yet once a language has become dormant, it is quite easy to reawake through practice in context. When I go back to either Italy, Germany, Sweden of Finland, it takes about 4-5 days before I can resume speaking and regaining fluency at a satisfying pace. I also find that improving one?s fluency is possible at any age if there is need or interest. This is my story, Danielle By the way, I want to thank all my Swedish and Finnish friends and colleagues who have been so patient and generous towards me with their time and knowledge. "The only hope we have as human beings is to learn each other's languages. Only then can we truly hope to understand one another." Professor Danielle E. Cyr Department of French Studies York University Toronto, ON, Canada, M3J 1P3 Tel. 1.416.736.2100 #310180 FAX. 1.416.736.5924 dcyr at yorku.ca From jrubba at calpoly.edu Mon Jan 17 17:42:42 2011 From: jrubba at calpoly.edu (Johanna Rubba) Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 09:42:42 -0800 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Aya, It is a bit mysterious why some languages come easier to some people than others. I spoke about French. I finally understood French grammar after reading Knud Lambrecht's book on information structure. It suddenly made sense. I will always have trouble with the pronunciation, though. I think it is a problem that you would find sensible -- French doesn't use reduced vowels, or many central vowels, while both English and Arabic do (at least the Arabic dialect I learned), and German to some extent. Spanish and French don't, and I find that I have to "stretch" to move among the cardinal vowel points. I could probably master this if I practiced a lot, but I haven't had or taken much opportunity to do so. I've never tried a tone language. I've always found them scary. I did take a few classes on Standard Arabic, taught by some nuns (!) in Tunis. I couldn't stick with the class, because of its location and transportation/time issues, but we did get into some pretty complex grammar and I did find it oddly logical and familiar. It is pretty different from the dialect I was learning; I certainly never got into the grammar concepts with the dialect that I did in those few classes of Standard. Like what you experienced with Russian. Anyway ... thanks for writing back. Dr. Johanna Rubba, Ph. D. Professor, Linguistics Linguistics Minor Advisor English Dept. Cal Poly State University San Luis Obispo San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 Ofc. tel. : 805-756-2184 Dept. tel.: 805-756-2596 Dept. fax: 805-756-6374 E-mail: jrubba at calpoly.edu URL: http://cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba From amnfn at well.com Mon Jan 17 18:00:42 2011 From: amnfn at well.com (A. Katz) Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 10:00:42 -0800 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Daniel, For purposes of ease of learning as a new language, Arabic and Spanish, or Arabic and Catalan, need not have any elements that can be properly traced to historical borrowing or genetic common origin. All that is required is that there be some genuine similarity in their present forms of whatever origin -- even mere coincidence. For instance, the definite articles are superficially similar. Are they related? Most would say "no." The Spanish comes from Latin ille and the Arabic from maybe hal-, but "el" and "al" seem very similar, and this is not just a sound similarity, but a similarity of function. After all, not every language has a definite article, let alone one that sounds like that. As Jo said, it can all seem very mysterious why one language seems easy to learn, and the ease is often a subconscious assessment of similarity that has nothing to do with the rigors of genetic classification. --Aya On Mon, 17 Jan 2011, Daniel Ria?o wrote: > The influence of Arabic over modern Spanish is amazingly scarce, specially > considering the centuries of Moorish presence in the Iberian Peninsula. > Probably even less over Catalan. The identifiable influence of other Semitic > languages over Modern Spanish (outside toponymy and modern borrowings) is > almost zero. > > Almost all the influence of Arabic on Modern Spanish affects the vocabulary, > and even there, the quantity of words of Arabic origin in the common modern > vocabulary is surprisingly small, probably around one or (at most) two > hundreds, mostly restricted to substantives, and almost all of them > belonging to a small number of semantic fields: water and irrigation, > warfare, local institutions, building, horses, some crafts, and specially > plants and food. Most educated Spanish speakers identify the "al" element at > the beginning of many words with an Arabic etymology, with or without reason > (usually with). A good number of scientific terms entered the Spanish > vocabulary via the arabic scholars, most of them of Greek origin. There's > one expresion of Arabic origin ("ojala", "God Willing") that > Spanish-speaking people use vey often. > > With much philological pain it has been collected a list of almost 4,000 > words of Arabic origin used in documents written in Spanish at some time, > but most of them are words out of use, often terms to designate aspects of > Islamic life. > > There is very little of Arabic in modern Spanish morphology: an -i suffix > used almost only with Arabic (or muslim-) related realia ("nazar?") and > maybe an "a" causative prefix (as in "acalorar") still productive. > > Most phonetic and syntactical phenomena that have been attributed to Arabic > influence, and there's not much of them, are best (and usually) explained > otherwise. > > > Daniel > > P.S. The influence of Berber languages over all romance languages of the > Iberian Peninsula is much smaller, limited to local lexical borrowings in > some small locations. > > > 2011/1/17 A. Katz > >> >> I don't know much about Catalan, but I am wondering if there might not be >> some grammatical or areal feautures of the language that might make Arabic >> not that hard to learn, if you already speak Cat. After all, Spanish had >> some Arabic influence in it in general, and I imagine that all languages >> spoken on the Iberian peninsula have Semitic influences from both the >> moorish conquests and the earlier Carthaginian occupation. >> >>> >>> > From danielrr2 at gmail.com Mon Jan 17 21:01:33 2011 From: danielrr2 at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Daniel_Ria=F1o?=) Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 22:01:33 +0100 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dear Aya, 2011/1/17 A. Katz > > For purposes of ease of learning as a new language, Arabic and Spanish, or > Arabic and Catalan, need not have any elements that can be properly traced > to historical borrowing or genetic common origin. All that is required is > that there be some genuine similarity in their present forms of whatever > origin -- even mere coincidence. > > This is very true, in many senses. Castillian speakers, for instance, find much more easy to speak in Greek than they do in French, since the phonetics of Greek and Castillian are similar, whilst the repertory of French vocals, just to mention one point, is too exuberant for the typical Castillian taste. Spanish learners of Greek with just some proficiency may pass as native talkers of some dialectal variety of Greek, while for French, well you've heard about the Spanish cow... But, to me, the hardest part for learning a language is vocabulary, and the irregularities of a given grammar. For that reason my experience is that, for a Spaniard, it may be easier to progress in Tagalog than it is in, say, Russian, in spite of lingustic affiliations. As for Arabic, (and you can take this with a grain of salt) I don't think Spaniards (speakers of Spanish or Catalan) have any advantage in learning it (or the reverse); Phonetics are not specially close (and vocal length pose always an issue for Spaniards), and there are huge differences in syntax, of course, just to mention two points. Without much in the vocabulary to help, is no wonder that Arabic immigrants in Spain seem to find it harder to master the language than many immigrants coming from other non Indoeuropean communities (there may be many additional explanations, of course). > For instance, the definite articles are superficially similar. Are they > related? Most would say "no." The Spanish comes from Latin ille and the > Arabic from maybe hal-, but "el" and "al" seem very similar, and this is not > just a sound similarity, but a similarity of function. After all, not every > language has a definite article, let alone one that sounds like that. > > Hmmmm, I think the relation between the Arabic and Spanish articles a little bit far-fetched. Of course they share similarities (both are articles after all) but the Spanish article is, as you say, the old story of ille-finds-a-new-meaning for its old function & falls in love & become engaged, so common in most Romance languages, with no special phonetic changes calling for a foreign explanation. There are big differences in use, too! It is a bit like the similarities between "potamos" and "Potomac", which doesn't explain the Corinthian columns of the Capitol (I think). And articles have so little phonetic substance that chance may play a big role in apparent similarities. best, Daniel > As Jo said, it can all seem very mysterious why one language seems easy to > learn, and the ease is often a subconscious assessment of similarity that > has nothing to do with the rigors of genetic classification. > > > --Aya > > > > > On Mon, 17 Jan 2011, Daniel Ria?o wrote: > > The influence of Arabic over modern Spanish is amazingly scarce, specially >> considering the centuries of Moorish presence in the Iberian Peninsula. >> Probably even less over Catalan. The identifiable influence of other >> Semitic >> languages over Modern Spanish (outside toponymy and modern borrowings) is >> almost zero. >> >> Almost all the influence of Arabic on Modern Spanish affects the >> vocabulary, >> and even there, the quantity of words of Arabic origin in the common >> modern >> vocabulary is surprisingly small, probably around one or (at most) two >> hundreds, mostly restricted to substantives, and almost all of them >> belonging to a small number of semantic fields: water and irrigation, >> warfare, local institutions, building, horses, some crafts, and specially >> plants and food. Most educated Spanish speakers identify the "al" element >> at >> the beginning of many words with an Arabic etymology, with or without >> reason >> (usually with). A good number of scientific terms entered the Spanish >> vocabulary via the arabic scholars, most of them of Greek origin. There's >> one expresion of Arabic origin ("ojala", "God Willing") that >> Spanish-speaking people use vey often. >> >> With much philological pain it has been collected a list of almost 4,000 >> words of Arabic origin used in documents written in Spanish at some time, >> but most of them are words out of use, often terms to designate aspects of >> Islamic life. >> >> There is very little of Arabic in modern Spanish morphology: an -i suffix >> used almost only with Arabic (or muslim-) related realia ("nazar?") and >> maybe an "a" causative prefix (as in "acalorar") still productive. >> >> Most phonetic and syntactical phenomena that have been attributed to >> Arabic >> influence, and there's not much of them, are best (and usually) explained >> otherwise. >> >> >> Daniel >> >> P.S. The influence of Berber languages over all romance languages of the >> Iberian Peninsula is much smaller, limited to local lexical borrowings in >> some small locations. >> >> >> 2011/1/17 A. Katz >> >> >>> I don't know much about Catalan, but I am wondering if there might not be >>> some grammatical or areal feautures of the language that might make >>> Arabic >>> not that hard to learn, if you already speak Cat. After all, Spanish had >>> some Arabic influence in it in general, and I imagine that all languages >>> spoken on the Iberian peninsula have Semitic influences from both the >>> moorish conquests and the earlier Carthaginian occupation. >>> >>> >>>> >>>> From john at research.haifa.ac.il Mon Jan 17 21:51:52 2011 From: john at research.haifa.ac.il (john at research.haifa.ac.il) Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 23:51:52 +0200 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: As an extreme example of this, there are a number of things about Chinese which made it feel particularly easy to me as an English speaker. It has no grammatical gender (as a native English speaker, when I'm speaking a language like Hebrew or Spanish I not infrequently 'forgot' about which grammatical gender the antecedent of a pronoun is and use the wrong one--of course I know in principle which one to use but in running conversation I just don't pay much attention because I don't instinctively track the gender of inanimate objects). It has diphthongs galore, many sounding very similar to English diphthongs. The serial verb constructions usually wind up decomposing and expressing meaning in a way parallel to English verb plus particle combinations. Same dummy for existential constructions ('you' in Chinese). Even the /r/ sounds much like English /r/ (obviously more frication, but the same general idea). (On the other hand, writing is another matter...). Of course these are just coincidences, but it's still very helpful. John Quoting "A. Katz" : > Daniel, > > For purposes of ease of learning as a new language, Arabic and Spanish, or > Arabic and Catalan, need not have any elements that can be properly traced > to historical borrowing or genetic common origin. All that is required is > that there be some genuine similarity in their present forms of whatever > origin -- even mere coincidence. > > For instance, the definite articles are superficially similar. Are they > related? Most would say "no." The Spanish comes from Latin ille and the > Arabic from maybe hal-, but "el" and "al" seem very similar, and this is > not just a sound similarity, but a similarity of function. After all, not > every language has a definite article, let alone one that sounds like > that. > > As Jo said, it can all seem very mysterious why one language seems easy to > learn, and the ease is often a subconscious assessment of similarity that > has nothing to do with the rigors of genetic classification. > > > --Aya > > > > On Mon, 17 Jan 2011, Daniel Ria?o wrote: > > > The influence of Arabic over modern Spanish is amazingly scarce, specially > > considering the centuries of Moorish presence in the Iberian Peninsula. > > Probably even less over Catalan. The identifiable influence of other > Semitic > > languages over Modern Spanish (outside toponymy and modern borrowings) is > > almost zero. > > > > Almost all the influence of Arabic on Modern Spanish affects the > vocabulary, > > and even there, the quantity of words of Arabic origin in the common modern > > vocabulary is surprisingly small, probably around one or (at most) two > > hundreds, mostly restricted to substantives, and almost all of them > > belonging to a small number of semantic fields: water and irrigation, > > warfare, local institutions, building, horses, some crafts, and specially > > plants and food. Most educated Spanish speakers identify the "al" element > at > > the beginning of many words with an Arabic etymology, with or without > reason > > (usually with). A good number of scientific terms entered the Spanish > > vocabulary via the arabic scholars, most of them of Greek origin. There's > > one expresion of Arabic origin ("ojala", "God Willing") that > > Spanish-speaking people use vey often. > > > > With much philological pain it has been collected a list of almost 4,000 > > words of Arabic origin used in documents written in Spanish at some time, > > but most of them are words out of use, often terms to designate aspects of > > Islamic life. > > > > There is very little of Arabic in modern Spanish morphology: an -i suffix > > used almost only with Arabic (or muslim-) related realia ("nazar?") and > > maybe an "a" causative prefix (as in "acalorar") still productive. > > > > Most phonetic and syntactical phenomena that have been attributed to Arabic > > influence, and there's not much of them, are best (and usually) explained > > otherwise. > > > > > > Daniel > > > > P.S. The influence of Berber languages over all romance languages of the > > Iberian Peninsula is much smaller, limited to local lexical borrowings in > > some small locations. > > > > > > 2011/1/17 A. Katz > > > >> > >> I don't know much about Catalan, but I am wondering if there might not be > >> some grammatical or areal feautures of the language that might make Arabic > >> not that hard to learn, if you already speak Cat. After all, Spanish had > >> some Arabic influence in it in general, and I imagine that all languages > >> spoken on the Iberian peninsula have Semitic influences from both the > >> moorish conquests and the earlier Carthaginian occupation. > >> > >>> > >>> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ This message was sent using IMP, the Webmail Program of Haifa University From john at research.haifa.ac.il Mon Jan 17 22:05:13 2011 From: john at research.haifa.ac.il (john at research.haifa.ac.il) Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 00:05:13 +0200 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: About the similarity of Spanish and Greek--I know Spanish but not Greek, and sometimes if I hear people speaking Greek from a distance and I can't hear the words very well, I think that it's Spanish until I get closer and hear the actual words. The same thing happens with English and Dutch (at least if the Dutch speaker doesn't say the numerous uvular fricatives with much vehemence), but of course these are very closely related languages. John Quoting Daniel Ria?o : > Dear Aya, > > 2011/1/17 A. Katz > > > > > For purposes of ease of learning as a new language, Arabic and Spanish, or > > Arabic and Catalan, need not have any elements that can be properly traced > > to historical borrowing or genetic common origin. All that is required is > > that there be some genuine similarity in their present forms of whatever > > origin -- even mere coincidence. > > > > This is very true, in many senses. Castillian speakers, for instance, find > much more easy to speak in Greek than they do in French, since the phonetics > of Greek and Castillian are similar, whilst the repertory of French vocals, > just to mention one point, is too exuberant for the typical Castillian > taste. Spanish learners of Greek with just some proficiency may pass as > native talkers of some dialectal variety of Greek, while for French, well > you've heard about the Spanish cow... > > But, to me, the hardest part for learning a language is vocabulary, and the > irregularities of a given grammar. For that reason my experience is that, > for a Spaniard, it may be easier to progress in Tagalog than it is in, say, > Russian, in spite of lingustic affiliations. As for Arabic, (and you can > take this with a grain of salt) I don't think Spaniards (speakers of Spanish > or Catalan) have any advantage in learning it (or the reverse); Phonetics > are not specially close (and vocal length pose always an issue for > Spaniards), and there are huge differences in syntax, of course, just to > mention two points. Without much in the vocabulary to help, is no wonder > that Arabic immigrants in Spain seem to find it harder to master the > language than many immigrants coming from other non Indoeuropean communities > (there may be many additional explanations, of course). > > > > For instance, the definite articles are superficially similar. Are they > > related? Most would say "no." The Spanish comes from Latin ille and the > > Arabic from maybe hal-, but "el" and "al" seem very similar, and this is > not > > just a sound similarity, but a similarity of function. After all, not every > > language has a definite article, let alone one that sounds like that. > > > > > Hmmmm, I think the relation between the Arabic and Spanish articles a little > bit far-fetched. Of course they share similarities (both are articles after > all) but the Spanish article is, as you say, the old story of > ille-finds-a-new-meaning for its old function & falls in love & become > engaged, so common in most Romance languages, with no special phonetic > changes calling for a foreign explanation. There are big differences in use, > too! It is a bit like the similarities between "potamos" and "Potomac", > which doesn't explain the Corinthian columns of the Capitol (I think). And > articles have so little phonetic substance that chance may play a big role > in apparent similarities. > > best, > > Daniel > > > > As Jo said, it can all seem very mysterious why one language seems easy to > > learn, and the ease is often a subconscious assessment of similarity that > > has nothing to do with the rigors of genetic classification. > > > > > > --Aya > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 17 Jan 2011, Daniel Ria??o wrote: > > > > The influence of Arabic over modern Spanish is amazingly scarce, specially > >> considering the centuries of Moorish presence in the Iberian Peninsula. > >> Probably even less over Catalan. The identifiable influence of other > >> Semitic > >> languages over Modern Spanish (outside toponymy and modern borrowings) is > >> almost zero. > >> > >> Almost all the influence of Arabic on Modern Spanish affects the > >> vocabulary, > >> and even there, the quantity of words of Arabic origin in the common > >> modern > >> vocabulary is surprisingly small, probably around one or (at most) two > >> hundreds, mostly restricted to substantives, and almost all of them > >> belonging to a small number of semantic fields: water and irrigation, > >> warfare, local institutions, building, horses, some crafts, and specially > >> plants and food. Most educated Spanish speakers identify the "al" element > >> at > >> the beginning of many words with an Arabic etymology, with or without > >> reason > >> (usually with). A good number of scientific terms entered the Spanish > >> vocabulary via the arabic scholars, most of them of Greek origin. There's > >> one expresion of Arabic origin ("ojala", "God Willing") that > >> Spanish-speaking people use vey often. > >> > >> With much philological pain it has been collected a list of almost 4,000 > >> words of Arabic origin used in documents written in Spanish at some time, > >> but most of them are words out of use, often terms to designate aspects of > >> Islamic life. > >> > >> There is very little of Arabic in modern Spanish morphology: an -i suffix > >> used almost only with Arabic (or muslim-) related realia ("nazar??") and > >> maybe an "a" causative prefix (as in "acalorar") still productive. > >> > >> Most phonetic and syntactical phenomena that have been attributed to > >> Arabic > >> influence, and there's not much of them, are best (and usually) explained > >> otherwise. > >> > >> > >> Daniel > >> > >> P.S. The influence of Berber languages over all romance languages of the > >> Iberian Peninsula is much smaller, limited to local lexical borrowings in > >> some small locations. > >> > >> > >> 2011/1/17 A. Katz > >> > >> > >>> I don't know much about Catalan, but I am wondering if there might not be > >>> some grammatical or areal feautures of the language that might make > >>> Arabic > >>> not that hard to learn, if you already speak Cat. After all, Spanish had > >>> some Arabic influence in it in general, and I imagine that all languages > >>> spoken on the Iberian peninsula have Semitic influences from both the > >>> moorish conquests and the earlier Carthaginian occupation. > >>> > >>> > >>>> > >>>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ This message was sent using IMP, the Webmail Program of Haifa University From gregor.perko at guest.arnes.si Tue Jan 18 11:48:27 2011 From: gregor.perko at guest.arnes.si (Gregor Perko) Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 12:48:27 +0100 Subject: Journal call for papers: Morphology Message-ID: Call for papers The journal Linguistica, published by the Faculty of Arts, University of Ljubljana (Slovenia), will devote its 51th issue (2011) to internal and external boundaries of morphology. Guest editor: Gregor Perko, Faculty of Arts, University of Ljubljana Over the past decades, morphology is witnessing some fundamental changes. One of the issues frequently addressed by several linguists concerns "peripheral", "marginal" or "irregular" phenomena that do not belong to the "core" of morphology. See, among others, Zwicky and Pullum (1987), Thornton and Doleschal (eds) (2000), Dressler et al. (eds) (2005), Fradin, Pl?nat and Montermini (2009). Some of the topics proposed are: - the relation(s) between the central, prototypical or grammatical morphology, and marginal, expressive or extragrammatical morphology; - issues related to typologies of morphological processes; - morphology from the perspective of dichotomies: langue/parole, competence/performance; - boundary between morphology and syntax; - boundary between inflectional and derivational morphology; - morphology and the boundaries between lexis and grammar; - boundaries between morphology and phraseology/idioms; - morphological productivity vs. morphological creativity; - morphology and lexicalization. This list is not exhaustive and all papers aimed at investigating internal and external boundaries of morphology are welcome. Authors wishing to participate are invited to submit the title and the abstract (100 - 200 words) of their article as an email attachment (Word or PDF) at linguistica at ff.uni-lj.si by 31th March 2011. Each abstract will be evaluated by two members of the reviewing committee. Notifications of acceptance of submitted abstracts will be sent to the authors in mid April. Articles and abstracts can be written in English, German, Spanish, French or Italian. The accepted articles should not exceed 30 000 characters, including spaces. Deadline for abstracts: 31 March 2011 Deadline for sending in accepted papers: 30 June 2011 July to September 2011: evaluation of articles by members of the reading committee October, November 2011: submission of revised versions and proofs References : Doleschal, Ursula/Anna M. THORNTON (eds) (2000) Extragrammatical and Marginal Morphology. M?nchen: Lincom Europa. Dressler, Wolfgang U. et al. (eds) (2005) Morphology and its Demarcations. Amsterdam/Philadephia: John Benjamins. Fradin, Bernard/Fabio Montermini/Marc Pl?nat (2009) In: B. Fradin/F. Kerleroux/M. Pl?nat (eds.), Aper?us de morphologie du fran?ais. Paris: Presses universitaires de Vincennes, 21-45. Zwicky, Arnold M./Geofrey K. Pullum (1987) In: J. Aske et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the Thirteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic Society. Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistic Society, 330-340. From jrubba at calpoly.edu Tue Jan 18 15:28:29 2011 From: jrubba at calpoly.edu (Johanna Rubba) Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 07:28:29 -0800 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: <1295301913.4d34bd1910ef9@webmail.haifa.ac.il> Message-ID: Spanish and Greek may sound similar in part because they both have an unusual /s/. I don't know how to describe it phonetically; it sounds "mushier" than /s/ in other IE languages. It's one of the things I find attractive about both languages. They don't sound similar to me otherwise; especially since Greek has theta (I'm used to American Spanish, not Castilian) and /ks/. Dr. Johanna Rubba, Ph. D. Professor, Linguistics Linguistics Minor Advisor English Dept. Cal Poly State University San Luis Obispo San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 Ofc. tel. : 805-756-2184 Dept. tel.: 805-756-2596 Dept. fax: 805-756-6374 E-mail: jrubba at calpoly.edu URL: http://cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba From john at research.haifa.ac.il Tue Jan 18 15:48:17 2011 From: john at research.haifa.ac.il (john at research.haifa.ac.il) Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 17:48:17 +0200 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: The /s/ you're talking about is used in northern Spain (it's from Basque). It feels to me like the difference from a 'normal' /s/ is that the passage for frication is formed more with the blade of the tongue than the tip. I don't think the /s/ for other Spanish speakers is in any way unusual (except that in many dialects it gets elided or forms a geminate with the following consonant in syllable-final position, but I don't think that's what you're talking about). One thing Spanish and Greek have in common is that both have voiced bilabial, dental, and velar fricatives (although the allophonic distribution of them is different), I personal don't know any other language with all three of these. But I don't know whether this is why they sound similar to me--maybe other people don't feel this way. John Quoting Johanna Rubba : > Spanish and Greek may sound similar in part because they both have an > unusual /s/. I don't know how to describe it phonetically; it sounds > "mushier" than /s/ in other IE languages. It's one of the things I > find attractive about both languages. They don't sound similar to me > otherwise; especially since Greek has theta (I'm used to American > Spanish, not Castilian) and /ks/. > > Dr. Johanna Rubba, Ph. D. > Professor, Linguistics > Linguistics Minor Advisor > English Dept. > Cal Poly State University San Luis Obispo > San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 > Ofc. tel. : 805-756-2184 > Dept. tel.: 805-756-2596 > Dept. fax: 805-756-6374 > E-mail: jrubba at calpoly.edu > URL: http://cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ This message was sent using IMP, the Webmail Program of Haifa University From ariel.spigelman at usyd.edu.au Tue Jan 18 16:29:49 2011 From: ariel.spigelman at usyd.edu.au (Ariel Spigelman) Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 13:29:49 -0300 Subject: teaching foreign languages at an early age In-Reply-To: <1295365697.4d35b64144348@webmail.haifa.ac.il> Message-ID: An interesting view of certain Spanish phoneticians (e.g. Marti?nez-Celdra?n 2004) is that the bilabial, dental, and velar fricatives in Spanish shouldn't be classified as fricatives at all, lacking as they do a "turbulent airstream...which is required for any fricative" (p. 203). He rather classifies them as a kind of 'spirantized approximant'. Eugenio Marti'nez-Celdra'n (2004). Problems in the classification of approximants. /Journal of the International Phonetic Association/, 34, pp 201-210 On 18/01/11 12:48 PM, john at research.haifa.ac.il wrote: > The /s/ you're talking about is used in northern Spain (it's from Basque). > It feels to me like the difference from a 'normal' /s/ is that the passage for > frication is formed more with the blade of the tongue than the tip. > I don't think the /s/ for other Spanish speakers is in any way unusual (except > that in many dialects it gets elided or forms a geminate with the following > consonant in syllable-final position, but I don't think that's what you're > talking about). One thing Spanish and Greek have in common is that both have > voiced bilabial, dental, and velar fricatives (although the allophonic > distribution of them is different), I personal don't know any other language > with all three of these. But I don't know whether this is why they sound > similar to me--maybe other people don't feel this way. > John > > > > > Quoting Johanna Rubba: > >> Spanish and Greek may sound similar in part because they both have an >> unusual /s/. I don't know how to describe it phonetically; it sounds >> "mushier" than /s/ in other IE languages. It's one of the things I >> find attractive about both languages. They don't sound similar to me >> otherwise; especially since Greek has theta (I'm used to American >> Spanish, not Castilian) and /ks/. >> >> Dr. Johanna Rubba, Ph. D. >> Professor, Linguistics >> Linguistics Minor Advisor >> English Dept. >> Cal Poly State University San Luis Obispo >> San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 >> Ofc. tel. : 805-756-2184 >> Dept. tel.: 805-756-2596 >> Dept. fax: 805-756-6374 >> E-mail:jrubba at calpoly.edu >> URL:http://cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba >> >> >> >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > This message was sent using IMP, the Webmail Program of Haifa University From bischoff.st at gmail.com Tue Jan 18 17:13:06 2011 From: bischoff.st at gmail.com (s.t. bischoff) Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 12:13:06 -0500 Subject: LSA: Functionalism Panel Message-ID: Hi all, There were a number of requests at the LSA to make the power points from the talks and Tom's handout available online. They can now be accessed as PDFs at the following link: http://users.ipfw.edu/bischofs/ling/LSA_2011/lsa.html Thanks to all the folks that showed up on Sunday morning. We had a very good crowd...perhaps some folks will consider proposing similar panels for the next LSA annual conference. Cheers, Shannon From tgivon at uoregon.edu Tue Jan 18 19:42:03 2011 From: tgivon at uoregon.edu (Tom Givon) Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 12:42:03 -0700 Subject: Dog Might Provide Clues on How Language Is Acquired - NYTimes.com Message-ID: Before we all go wild patting ourselves on the shoulder for being able to learn a 2nd (and 3rd, and 4th) language, I thought the enclosed link might furnish some amusement, maybe even perspective. The SL-learner in question is native speaker of Canine, a language many of us have been struggling to acquire for many years with, alas, less-than-perfect results. Cheers, TG http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/18/science/18dog.html?_r=1&emc=eta1 From amnfn at well.com Tue Jan 18 20:04:55 2011 From: amnfn at well.com (A. Katz) Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 12:04:55 -0800 Subject: Dog Might Provide Clues on How Language Is Acquired - NYTimes.com In-Reply-To: <4D35ED0B.1070502@uoregon.edu> Message-ID: I don't think there is any doubt that dogs who live with humans comprehend much of what is said around them. I've known dogs who were bilingual who understood things that were said, when other humans in the room who did not speak the language in question didn't understand. The problem with all this evidence? It's anecdotal. There is the opposite problem with the experiment described here. In this type of set-up, all the evidence is predictable and rote. The experiment described in the NYTimes article did not teach the dog to comprehend by rote: the dog was trained to obey by rote. The problem with this kind of experiment is that it doesn't seem to distinguish comprehension from obedience. The way the dog proves comprehension is by fetching an item. (The assumption being, if he didn't fetch it, we have no proof of comprehension.) As an aside, all the words for "objects" in the experiment are really being used as commands. Sue Savage-Rumbaugh made a very big point that if a chimp uses "apple" to ask for an apple, this does not mean that he understands that apple also refers to an apple in a different kind of context. It's easy to get chimps in experimental settings to ask for things, and it's easy to get dogs (of certain breeds) to fetch things, but what is not easy is to prove comprehension when uncoupled from obedience or someone asking someone else to do something. I don't doubt that the dog in question understands the words. I'm just saying there is something wrong with our standards of proof. --Aya On Tue, 18 Jan 2011, Tom Givon wrote: > > > Before we all go wild patting ourselves on the shoulder for being able to > learn a 2nd (and 3rd, and 4th) language, I thought the enclosed link might > furnish some amusement, maybe even perspective. The SL-learner in question is > native speaker of Canine, a language many of us have been struggling to > acquire for many years with, alas, less-than-perfect results. Cheers, TG > > > > http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/18/science/18dog.html?_r=1&emc=eta1 > > From phonosemantics at earthlink.net Tue Jan 18 21:02:28 2011 From: phonosemantics at earthlink.net (jess tauber) Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 16:02:28 -0500 Subject: Dog Might Provide Clues on How Language Is Acquired - NYTimes.com Message-ID: Perhaps distinct word classes are a late development in the evolution of language- there are still discussions of issues about the distinction yet lurking about in the literature. Some languages let most nouns act as verbs, or vice versa; in others the inflectable verb class has shrunk to almost nothing. Carved in stone? Or just evolved there? For a retriever, 'getting' is the most used verblike notion in the context, so perhaps its presence is assumed by the animal? How would a pointer fare? Jess Tauber From grvsmth at panix.com Wed Jan 19 01:05:11 2011 From: grvsmth at panix.com (Angus B. Grieve-Smith) Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 20:05:11 -0500 Subject: Dog Might Provide Clues on How Language Is Acquired - NYTimes.com In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On 1/18/2011 3:04 PM, A. Katz wrote: > I don't think there is any doubt that dogs who live with humans > comprehend much of what is said around them. I've known dogs who were > bilingual who understood things that were said, when other humans in > the room who did not speak the language in question didn't understand. > The problem with all this evidence? It's anecdotal. Yes. Also from an anecdotal standpoint, there's Gary Larsen's famous critique of people's expectations about animal language: http://s173.photobucket.com/albums/w57/spn_imgs/?action=view¤t=blahblah.jpg&newest=1 -- -Angus B. Grieve-Smith grvsmth at panix.com From keithjohnson at berkeley.edu Thu Jan 20 16:50:19 2011 From: keithjohnson at berkeley.edu (Keith Johnson) Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 08:50:19 -0800 Subject: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages Message-ID: Hi Funksters, My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article raises a couple of issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered languages unit? Keith Johnson http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html From amnfn at well.com Thu Jan 20 17:38:15 2011 From: amnfn at well.com (A. Katz) Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 09:38:15 -0800 Subject: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Why not? If it helps preserve the language, and the speakers approve, then there should be no problem. On Thu, 20 Jan 2011, Keith Johnson wrote: > Hi Funksters, > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article raises a > couple of > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered languages > unit? > > Keith Johnson > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > From wsmith at csusb.edu Thu Jan 20 18:07:07 2011 From: wsmith at csusb.edu (Wendy Smith) Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 10:07:07 -0800 Subject: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages In-Reply-To: Message-ID: This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > Hi Funksters, > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > raises a couple of > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > languages > unit? > > Keith Johnson > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > > From lkpinette at comcast.net Thu Jan 20 18:15:49 2011 From: lkpinette at comcast.net (Luke Kundl Pinette) Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 03:15:49 +0900 Subject: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi Keith, I'm of two minds about this. Now the Rosetta Stone is not a good program. And I will first confess that I've had a vendetta against the Rosetta Stone because I feel that its entire marketing strategy, from premise to conclusion consists of propagating myths about language instruction: 1. Children learn languages effortlessly. 2. You can learn a language like a child does. 3. You should learn a language like a child does. 4. The Rosetta Stone's program resembles the way a child learns language. 5. Ergo you can learn a language effortlessly using the Rosetta Stone. Nonetheless it's a very effective marketing strategy. Most people have heard of the Rosetta Stone, whether they study languages or not, and quite a lot of them believe it's the best program on the market. It's not the unjustified self-promotion over the competition which bothers me (that's the whole point of marketing), but rather the fact that it fits too well with the attitude Americans tend to have about language learning. I've met far too many people who claim that they simply don't have the knack for learning languages, as their efforts while they were in school, at the local community college, and yes--the Rosetta Stone show. Having studied with some of said people in college, I've observed that most students in language classes believe that less than five hours a week in a language class or on a computer is sufficient to learn a language, and that if they can't they're simply unable to learn a language. In the time I studied Spanish and Arabic in a classroom, I could not find one person willing to speak the language outside of class except for native speakers. I've heard praise for a couple other programs (which I won't name), however the people who use these programs, myself included, recognize that they are a tool and not a teacher. Rosetta Stone claims to be a teacher, and I've never met a person who's tried Rosetta Stone and claimed success in it. It's either a bad program (usually heard from someone who eventually learned the language through more conventional means) or it's the user's own fault (from someone who hasn't). Of course the easiest way to learn a language is to immerse yourself, but endangered languages tend to be in a situation similar to that I experienced in the United States, where native speakers of the target language are hard to come by outside of formal classes. In situations like that it's absolutely essential to practice with other non-native speakers, which requires both will and resources. And the question is whether the Rosetta Stone's contribution to the latter outweighs any detrimental effect on the former. It's well established in psychology that when people find something hard and think that it will always be hard, they tend to give up. I've long suspected that telling hearing a program makes language easy, and then finding that it's not would encourage people to give up more easily than going into it with the assumption it will be a challenge. And while this would be a bad thing when we're talking Americans learning Arabic, it's a great deal worse when we're talking a language on the verge of extinction. But language is quite different from most of human psychology, and I don't think there's been any research on language specifically. The kind of people who buy the Rosetta Stone expecting a brain-translator-slug may not be the kind of people who are all that determined to learn a language in the first place, and the people who use the program to learn an endangered language will go into it with different expectations. They won't be using it because they think it's an easy way to attract Italian models, but rather because it's what's available. And I'd expect that these students will be using it as a tool and not a teacher. Language revitalization takes a good deal more dedication and savvy than learning one of the world's major tongues. The Rosetta Stone does record actual native speakers, and in that sense, when your options are limited, it would almost certainly be a useful tool. I'm not sure if there are other language companies who have endangered languages departments. Personally I'd like to see pretty much any company except the Rosetta Stone doing this, but even despite my dislike of the company I'm inclined to say it's probably beneficial on the balance. Regards, Luke On 1/21/11 1:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > Hi Funksters, > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > raises a couple of > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > languages > unit? > > Keith Johnson > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > > From tgivon at uoregon.edu Thu Jan 20 18:16:32 2011 From: tgivon at uoregon.edu (Tom Givon) Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 11:16:32 -0700 Subject: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already has. TG ============== On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > Hi Funksters, > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > raises a couple of > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > languages > unit? > > Keith Johnson > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > From mischlerj at nsula.edu Thu Jan 20 18:19:39 2011 From: mischlerj at nsula.edu (James J. Mischler) Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 12:19:39 -0600 Subject: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages In-Reply-To: <4D3879CB.6010503@csusb.edu> Message-ID: Wendy and all, I wonder if *any* program has been found, via controlled research study, to aid in the learning of a language. Wendy said that there are programs that are better than Rosetta Stone; what are they? Is there any data to support the view that the program(s) did in fact aid learning? Jim Mischler Assistant Professor Language & Communication Northwestern State University of Louisiana Natchitoches, LA -----Original Message----- From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [mailto:funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Wendy Smith Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:07 PM To: Keith Johnson Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > Hi Funksters, > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > raises a couple of > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > languages > unit? > > Keith Johnson > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > > From wsmith at csusb.edu Thu Jan 20 18:29:35 2011 From: wsmith at csusb.edu (Wendy Smith) Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 10:29:35 -0800 Subject: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages In-Reply-To: <285D95BE552E5A4F9C45A549C5763B3635D9480115@ex-mbx1.nsula.edu> Message-ID: no language programs can effect language acquisition or learning (in the case of the adult brain we say 'learning,' not acquisition). I have been using Pimsleur which I have found to be quite good in providing the sounds of the language and some useful conversation. It is still repetition and memory, which does not equate SLA. I am now repeating these dialogues in my sleep (!) but when I try to speak to a native speaker, it all goes out the window. I am counting on immersion--I will be in Belarus for 4-5 months as of Monday. (I know of no controlled study of any program--but it doesn't mean they haven't been done--I would check ACTFL for that information). On 1/20/2011 10:19 AM, James J. Mischler wrote: > Wendy and all, > > I wonder if *any* program has been found, via controlled research study, to aid in the learning of a language. Wendy said that there are programs that are better than Rosetta Stone; what are they? Is there any data to support the view that the program(s) did in fact aid learning? > > Jim Mischler > Assistant Professor > Language& Communication > Northwestern State University of Louisiana > Natchitoches, LA > > > -----Original Message----- > From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [mailto:funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Wendy Smith > Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:07 PM > To: Keith Johnson > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > > This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, > and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child > acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no > direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be > patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the > same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the > materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women > are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who > works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training > or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will > learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint > Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is > virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car > or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction > to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. > > On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >> Hi Funksters, >> >> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >> raises a couple of >> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >> languages >> unit? >> >> Keith Johnson >> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >> >> >> >> From bischoff.st at gmail.com Thu Jan 20 18:31:36 2011 From: bischoff.st at gmail.com (s.t. bischoff) Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 13:31:36 -0500 Subject: FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: The issue of Rosetta Stone and endangered languages seems ripe for controversy. The relationship can be easily exploited by Rosetta Stone. If a community provides data and RS controls the data the community may find itself at the mercy of the RS. For example, as I understand it, often RS provides the "service" to create the resources for "free". They charge a nominal fee for access to the first level lessons. However, that fee increases with advancing levels. Like most minority groups, endangered language communities are easy targets for exploitation (see the recent Coushatta casino scam). Additionally, there is a good deal of controversy regarding weather or not RS actually works. As I understand it, some researchers have done research on RS and the conclusion have been that it doesn't work (linguists working the software can judge for themselves)...the results cannot be released due to litigation. In short, these types of relationships can't help but raise some concerns...I wonder if communities (both endangered language and academic) are always savvy enough to protect themselves. Of course greater detail of the actual relationships that RS creates would be helpful in terms of understanding. On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 1:00 PM, wrote: > Send FUNKNET mailing list submissions to > funknet at mailman.rice.edu > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/funknet > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > funknet-request at mailman.rice.edu > > You can reach the person managing the list at > funknet-owner at mailman.rice.edu > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of FUNKNET digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > (Keith Johnson) > 2. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > (A. Katz) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 08:50:19 -0800 > From: Keith Johnson > Subject: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes > > Hi Funksters, > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > raises a couple of > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > languages > unit? > > Keith Johnson > > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 09:38:15 -0800 (PST) > From: "A. Katz" > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > To: Keith Johnson > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: > Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed > > Why not? If it helps preserve the language, and the speakers approve, then > there should be no problem. > > > > On Thu, 20 Jan 2011, Keith Johnson wrote: > > > Hi Funksters, > > > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article raises > a > > couple of > > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > languages > > unit? > > > > Keith Johnson > > > > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > > > > > End of FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 > *************************************** > From amnfn at well.com Thu Jan 20 19:12:17 2011 From: amnfn at well.com (A. Katz) Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 11:12:17 -0800 Subject: FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I think the issue of whether the RS program works is quite marginal to the question of whether RS or some other commercial program can help to preserve the resources of a language community for future generations. Let's grant for a moment that RS -- or any other computerized program -- cannot in and of itself cause someone to acquire a language that he cannot speak already. The question is: how are speakers of this language going to be damaged by the program? Surely their language isn't going to be "taken away from them." What they know, they know. What they are able to transmit to the next generation by natural means, they will. So what is really at issue is: will this help them to preserve language resources now in danger of being lost? Will it help keep the language on ice, in case of language death, so that it can be revived later, by people willing to put in the effort? Are there other issues? Is there any fear that these resources will not be available to future generations of would be speakers? Is someone concerned that the language will get "patented" and only RS will have the license to use it? --Aya From dubois at linguistics.ucsb.edu Fri Jan 21 01:48:25 2011 From: dubois at linguistics.ucsb.edu (John Du Bois) Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 17:48:25 -0800 Subject: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages In-Reply-To: <4D387C00.2050307@uoregon.edu> Message-ID: I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in an endangered language community. For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that work with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the last speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far as indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, and linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this specific legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for whatever reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on their language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language community, this can have a big negative impact. It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and to work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies for mitigating any negative effects. Jack Du Bois On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: > > > Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my > Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. > However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the > Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more > vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already > has. TG > > ============== > > > On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >> Hi Funksters, >> >> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >> raises a couple of >> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >> languages >> unit? >> >> Keith Johnson >> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >> >> >> > -- *************************************************** John W. Du Bois, Professor Department of Linguistics 3607 South Hall University of California, Santa Barbara Santa Barbara, California 93106-3100 USA *************************************************** From lkpinette at comcast.net Fri Jan 21 02:34:14 2011 From: lkpinette at comcast.net (Luke Kundl Pinette) Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:34:14 +0900 Subject: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages In-Reply-To: <285D95BE552E5A4F9C45A549C5763B3635D9480115@ex-mbx1.nsula.edu> Message-ID: James, So this gets us a bit off topic, but again I of course have to comment. I don't know about a controlled study. Before I decided on pragmatics I considered doing my thesis on second-language learning strategies, and did a fair bit of research to this end, and I didn't see any formal paper specifically mentioning language programs. I'd suspect there's something, but these programs are all designed so differently that a negative result on one wouldn't apply across programs. As I said earlier, no program can be a teacher. Until we design a program that can pass the Turing test, even if we imagine a program that can hold a conversation, it won't be able to teach subtle distinctions in semantics and pragmatics. Consider the difference in spoken English between "Whaddaya doing?" "Whacha doing?" and "Whacha up to?" and consider the fact that not only English, but every language has myriads of minor distinctions like this. There's three programs I know by name; I've had all of them recommended to me by friends and acquaintances: Rosetta Stone, Pimsleur, and Before You Know It. Rosetta Stone as I said was so awful out of the box, contradicting everything I knew about language learning and good pedagogy that I promptly returned it to my brother (who had been foolish enough to buy it and of course never used it). The two programs I've used are Pimsleur and Before You Know It. I like Pimsleur, it teaches grammar from the outset, and starts the way you would start a language class, and teaches you to speak in sentences from the start. I think it would be more useful if you have someone to practice with--the scripts it uses are actually pretty good, but if you don't have someone it's just rote memorization. And it's definitely not a quick way to learn a language. And if you know linguistics, and have broken down the morphology of the sentence less than ten minutes in, it becomes a bit tedious. It's still something I happily recommend to people I know, though I usually suggest they get it from the library, unless the site is having a sale (as I think they sometimes do). On the other hand if you've traveled much to a foreign country without speaking the language, you'll know that pointing, money, and a calculator will get you pretty far. A few words, social niceties like "hello," "thank you," and "I'm sorry" will get you even further, and if you're going right now it's useful to be able to pick which words you need. Before You Know It, which an acquaintance described as a set of computerized flashcards, is useful in this respect. I don't know anyone who's used the paid version, or even what that includes, but the free version is quite extensive. My biggest complaint is that the pronunciations given are generally not the way the speaker would say it. It's like if you paid an English speaker to ennunciate words, and they said "what-are-you-do-ing" "want-to" "ve-ge-ta-ble" and "com-for-ta-ble" every time. For example Koreans don't say "annyeonghaseyo" for "hello," but "anyeseyo" or even "yeseyo." And "thank you" is not "kamsahamnida" but "kamsamnida." Nonetheless, these are useful words. The Koreans understood what I was saying, even if they always cracked up when they heard me, and since I knew what the words sounded like in context I was able to figure out how they were actually pronounced. But if the paid version contained clips of the way people actually say the words, it would be well worth paying for. I think most of the lesser known products on the market are similar to one or the other of these. I've seen other computer programs which are flashcard based, and I inherited a few German records and tapes from my grandfather when he moved to Florida, and they're similar to Pimsleur. (Though I like Pimsleur's layout better.) That said though, when you view language programs as a tool to help study, you might as well ask whether there's any data to support the view that textbooks in fact aid learning. It depends on the program, the student, and the use the latter makes of the former. Regards, Luke On 1/21/11 3:19 AM, James J. Mischler wrote: > Wendy and all, > > I wonder if *any* program has been found, via controlled research study, to aid in the learning of a language. Wendy said that there are programs that are better than Rosetta Stone; what are they? Is there any data to support the view that the program(s) did in fact aid learning? > > Jim Mischler > Assistant Professor > Language& Communication > Northwestern State University of Louisiana > Natchitoches, LA > > > -----Original Message----- > From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [mailto:funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Wendy Smith > Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:07 PM > To: Keith Johnson > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > > This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, > and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child > acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no > direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be > patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the > same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the > materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women > are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who > works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training > or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will > learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint > Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is > virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car > or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction > to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. > > On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >> Hi Funksters, >> >> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >> raises a couple of >> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >> languages >> unit? >> >> Keith Johnson >> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >> >> >> >> From lkpinette at comcast.net Fri Jan 21 04:09:16 2011 From: lkpinette at comcast.net (Luke Kundl Pinette) Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 13:09:16 +0900 Subject: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages In-Reply-To: <4D38E5E9.9030402@linguistics.ucsb.edu> Message-ID: The question is, why is the Rosetta Stone doing this anyways? According to the article, Rosetta doesn't actually distribute the programs, just makes them. It doesn't say if it's turning a profit, a loss or selling them at cost (though the last is what one would infer from the article). If they're doing it for the PR, they'll probably try not to screw over native communities too badly, though of course you know what they say about the pavement used on the road to hell. If they're in it for the money, I wouldn't put it past them to add a clause like that. Then we've got a legal question on our hands. It's essentially monopolistic practice, particularly if they make a pattern of deliberately blocking competition for language programs in endangered languages. I suspect that if they were to try it, it would be possible to find some lawyer willing to pursue the issue, and when taken to court they would lose. It would certainly cause a lot of trouble in the meantime though. It sounds like nobody on this list has any illusions about the company. It's depressing to see that a linguist like Krauss, and one in such an important position has bought into Rosetta Stone's marketing, but again, unless another company steps up it doesn't sound like there's any options other than no language program. If Rosetta is not in fact inserting insidious clauses into the agreements with their informants, it's still probably better than nothing. Regards, Luke On 1/21/11 10:48 AM, John Du Bois wrote: > I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage > that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in > an endangered language community. > > For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that > work with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the > last speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far > as indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, > and linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this > specific legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for > whatever reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on > their language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language > community, this can have a big negative impact. > > It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered > language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and > to work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies > for mitigating any negative effects. > > Jack Du Bois > > On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: >> >> >> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my >> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. >> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the >> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more >> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already >> has. TG >> >> ============== >> >> >> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>> Hi Funksters, >>> >>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>> raises a couple of >>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>> languages >>> unit? >>> >>> Keith Johnson >>> >>> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>> >>> >>> >> > From c.gabrielatos at lancaster.ac.uk Fri Jan 21 11:09:08 2011 From: c.gabrielatos at lancaster.ac.uk (Gabrielatos, Costas) Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 03:09:08 -0800 Subject: Call for papers: Lancaster Postgraduate Conference in Linguistics and English Language Message-ID: THE SIXTH LANCASTER UNIVERSITY INTERNATIONAL POSTGRADUATE CONFERENCE IN?LINGUISTICS AND LANGUAGE TEACHING Dear All, We are pleased to announce the Sixth Lancaster University International Postgraduate Conference in Linguistics and English Language (LAEL PG Conference) which will take place at Lancaster University's George Fox building, on Tuesday 12th of July 2011. This one-day conference is designed to give linguistics postgraduates from all research areas an opportunity to present and discuss their research in an informal and intellectually stimulating setting. This year's conference will be opened by Prof. Greg Myers (Lancaster University), and there will be guest plenary lectures by: Prof. Paul Kerswill (Lancaster University) Dr. Johnny Unger (Lancaster University) We invite postgraduate students to submit abstracts for oral and poster presentations on any area of linguistics, theoretical or applied (see below for abstract submission guidelines). Topics Include: ? - Cognitive linguistics ? - Corpus linguistics ? - Critical discourse analysis ? - Historical linguistics ? - Literacy studies ? - Pragmatics/semantics ? - Phonetics/phonology ? - Second language teaching/learning/assessment ? - Sociolinguistics ? - Syntax/morphology Stylistics ? - Translation studies ? - Other: please specify For further information, please visit the website: http://www.lancs.ac.uk/fass/events/laelpgconference/index.htm Key Dates Abstracts must be received by Friday 25 March 2011 Notification of acceptancewill be given on Tuesday 10 May 2011 Hope to hear from you all soon, Helen Faye West Janina Iwaniec Matteo Di Cristofaro Jonathon Adams Ibrahim Efe From tthornes at uca.edu Fri Jan 21 14:14:57 2011 From: tthornes at uca.edu (Tim Thornes) Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 08:14:57 -0600 Subject: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages Message-ID: I would agree with this sentiment as well as with the inherent potential of a company like this to really screw up relationships with members of an endangered language community. I mean, if Rosetta Stone as the "worldwide leader in language learning worldwide (sic)" (http://www.rosettastone.com/backnolang?pc=se2011&cid=se-gg&gclid=CPCPvsm8y6YCFQPsKgodqhCrHA) can't help us, why would I think some nerdy academic with a microphone and a laptop could? As one such, I am as capable as any big company of damaging relationships with community members, and I ought to know better. Is there any expectation that RS does? Best, Tim Tim Thornes, PhD Assistant Professor of Linguistics Department of Writing University of Central Arkansas 201 Donaghey Avenue Conway, Arkansas 72035 USA (501)450-5613 tthornes at uca.edu >>> John Du Bois 01/20/11 7:48 PM >>> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in an endangered language community. For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that work with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the last speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far as indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, and linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this specific legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for whatever reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on their language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language community, this can have a big negative impact. It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and to work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies for mitigating any negative effects. Jack Du Bois On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: > > > Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my > Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. > However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the > Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more > vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already > has. TG > > ============== > > > On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >> Hi Funksters, >> >> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >> raises a couple of >> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >> languages >> unit? >> >> Keith Johnson >> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >> >> >> > -- *************************************************** John W. Du Bois, Professor Department of Linguistics 3607 South Hall University of California, Santa Barbara Santa Barbara, California 93106-3100 USA *************************************************** From munro at ucla.edu Fri Jan 21 15:48:38 2011 From: munro at ucla.edu (Pamela Munro) Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 07:48:38 -0800 Subject: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages In-Reply-To: <4D394082020000870009B3F2@gwia1.uca.edu> Message-ID: All these suggestions are truly scary. Pam Tim Thornes wrote: > I would agree with this sentiment as well as with the inherent potential of a company like this to really screw up relationships with members of an endangered language community. I mean, if Rosetta Stone as the "worldwide leader in language learning worldwide (sic)" (http://www.rosettastone.com/backnolang?pc=se2011&cid=se-gg&gclid=CPCPvsm8y6YCFQPsKgodqhCrHA) can't help us, why would I think some nerdy academic with a microphone and a laptop could? > As one such, I am as capable as any big company of damaging relationships with community members, and I ought to know better. Is there any expectation that RS does? > Best, > Tim > > Tim Thornes, PhD > Assistant Professor of Linguistics > Department of Writing > University of Central Arkansas > 201 Donaghey Avenue > Conway, Arkansas 72035 > USA > (501)450-5613 > tthornes at uca.edu > > >>>> John Du Bois 01/20/11 7:48 PM >>> >>>> > I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage > that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in an > endangered language community. > > For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that work > with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the last > speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far as > indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, and > linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this specific > legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for whatever > reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on their > language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language > community, this can have a big negative impact. > > It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered > language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and to > work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies for > mitigating any negative effects. > > Jack Du Bois > > On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: > >> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my >> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. >> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the >> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more >> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already >> has. TG >> >> ============== >> >> >> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >> >>> Hi Funksters, >>> >>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>> raises a couple of >>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>> languages >>> unit? >>> >>> Keith Johnson >>> >>> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>> >>> >>> >>> > > -- Pamela Munro, Professor, Linguistics, UCLA UCLA Box 951543 Los Angeles, CA 90095-1543 http://www.linguistics.ucla.edu/people/munro/munro.htm From macw at cmu.edu Fri Jan 21 16:30:39 2011 From: macw at cmu.edu (Brian MacWhinney) Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:30:39 -0500 Subject: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages In-Reply-To: <4D3906EC.7030301@comcast.net> Message-ID: Folks, I share your low regard for Rosetta Stone, not so much for what they fail to deliver, but rather for the overstated claims they make. I know a couple of students who have worked with them on internships and, so far, there is no evidence of malicious practices vis a vis native communities. Despite this, I agree that it is likely that communities who collaborate with them will get led down the garden path and end up unwilling to participate later with other, more promising, approaches to language maintenance. But these are freely-formed relations between consenting parties, so nothing can militate against it. Regarding the wider issue of effectiveness of language learning programs, I find it strange that Luke has located nothing on this subject. Back in 1968, Paul Pimsleur already demonstrated the effectiveness of his method of graduated interval recall which is picked up, in an admittedly diluted form, by the current Pimsleur series. There are hundreds of studies distributed across six major journals demonstrating the relatively greater effectiveness of specific components of language instruction, from keyword method to corrective feedback. These effects have been demonstrated in both controlled experiments and, somewhat less convincingly, in classroom and online instruction. Nearly all of my own experimental work is now focused on tests of this type embedded within online tutors. Perhaps what Luke is referring to is the absence of evidence of the overall comparative effectiveness of the big commercial language programs such as Rosetta Stone or Pimsleur. In the cases of such full programs, it is extremely difficult to coordinate a decent experimental test, because it would require buy in from a large group of volunteers across a long period with careful controls for study time and so on. So, I think it is generally better to focus on demonstrations of the effects of individual components of programs, because these can be subject to reasonable experimental control. Of course, all of this leaves the naturalistic methods of language learning out in the cold, and that is wrong. In the end, the best way to advance this field will be to increase automatic data collection during the language learning process, within online, classroom, and naturalistic contexts. This is what I am working on. Regards, -- Brian MacWhinney On Jan 20, 2011, at 11:09 PM, Luke Kundl Pinette wrote: > The question is, why is the Rosetta Stone doing this anyways? According to the article, Rosetta doesn't actually distribute the programs, just makes them. It doesn't say if it's turning a profit, a loss or selling them at cost (though the last is what one would infer from the article). If they're doing it for the PR, they'll probably try not to screw over native communities too badly, though of course you know what they say about the pavement used on the road to hell. > > If they're in it for the money, I wouldn't put it past them to add a clause like that. Then we've got a legal question on our hands. It's essentially monopolistic practice, particularly if they make a pattern of deliberately blocking competition for language programs in endangered languages. I suspect that if they were to try it, it would be possible to find some lawyer willing to pursue the issue, and when taken to court they would lose. It would certainly cause a lot of trouble in the meantime though. > > It sounds like nobody on this list has any illusions about the company. It's depressing to see that a linguist like Krauss, and one in such an important position has bought into Rosetta Stone's marketing, but again, unless another company steps up it doesn't sound like there's any options other than no language program. If Rosetta is not in fact inserting insidious clauses into the agreements with their informants, it's still probably better than nothing. > > Regards, > Luke > > > On 1/21/11 10:48 AM, John Du Bois wrote: >> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage >> that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in >> an endangered language community. >> >> For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that >> work with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the >> last speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far >> as indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, >> and linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this >> specific legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for >> whatever reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on >> their language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language >> community, this can have a big negative impact. >> >> It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered >> language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and >> to work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies >> for mitigating any negative effects. >> >> Jack Du Bois >> >> On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: >>> >>> >>> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my >>> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. >>> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the >>> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more >>> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already >>> has. TG >>> >>> ============== >>> >>> >>> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>>> Hi Funksters, >>>> >>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>>> raises a couple of >>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>>> languages >>>> unit? >>>> >>>> Keith Johnson >>>> >>>> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> > > From phonosemantics at earthlink.net Fri Jan 21 16:33:26 2011 From: phonosemantics at earthlink.net (jess tauber) Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:33:26 -0500 Subject: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages Message-ID: Just minutes ago as I write this, on the television show 'The View', actor Ed Harris brought up his not so successful attempt to use Rosetta Stone, 'that thing you can get', to pick up a little Russian for his movie opening this week- eventually he had to utilize the services of a Bulgarian, in person. Maybe the public isn't so misinformed? Jess Tauber From tgivon at uoregon.edu Fri Jan 21 16:40:02 2011 From: tgivon at uoregon.edu (Tom Givon) Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 09:40:02 -0700 Subject: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages In-Reply-To: <32117937.1295627607528.JavaMail.root@wamui-hunyo.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: They still shell out C-notes by the bushel for this scam. RS does not make their money off satisfied customers, but off poor first-hit suckers. TG ============================ On 1/21/2011 9:33 AM, jess tauber wrote: > Just minutes ago as I write this, on the television show 'The View', actor Ed Harris brought up his not so successful attempt to use Rosetta Stone, 'that thing you can get', to pick up a little Russian for his movie opening this week- eventually he had to utilize the services of a Bulgarian, in person. > > Maybe the public isn't so misinformed? > > Jess Tauber From mithun at linguistics.ucsb.edu Fri Jan 21 16:57:58 2011 From: mithun at linguistics.ucsb.edu (Marianne Mithun) Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 08:57:58 -0800 Subject: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages In-Reply-To: <9A44FA72-E6DF-4498-A4A0-0A4C4E605BD7@cmu.edu> Message-ID: I finally have to weigh in here on another aspect of the issue specifically with respect to endangered languages. For communities in danger of losing their traditional languages, learning the heritage language isn't just about being able to order a meal in a restaurant or book a hotel room. It's often about something much deeper, about appreciating traditional ways of viewing the world, of categorizing concepts, of combining ideas, of interacting. And the Rosetta Stone system is one-size-fits-all. People are essentially asked to translate the model sentences into whatever language is at hand, and the results tend to be close to word-by-word translations. So yes, learners learn how to say 'boy' and 'run'. But they don't learn, for example, that ideas expressed by nouns in English are expressed in language X by verbs. Or that in many languages people don't tend to talk sentences consisting of Noun Verb Noun (or Noun Noun Verb). They don't learn about the glorious elaboration of semantic distinctions or domains that have no counterparts in the model language. They probably won't learn about evidentials. They are unlikely to learn about elaborate aspectual distinctions. They certainly won't learn different patterns of subordination or clause combining. For some situations, that may be fine. Heritage speakers just want to be able to use some phrases in everyday talk. And they don't have the time or interest for that kind of complexity. For others, it sort of defeats the whole purpose. Marianne Mithun --On Friday, January 21, 2011 11:30 AM -0500 Brian MacWhinney wrote: > Folks, > > I share your low regard for Rosetta Stone, not so much for what they > fail to deliver, but rather for the overstated claims they make. I know > a couple of students who have worked with them on internships and, so > far, there is no evidence of malicious practices vis a vis native > communities. Despite this, I agree that it is likely that communities who > collaborate with them will get led down the garden path and end up > unwilling to participate later with other, more promising, approaches to > language maintenance. But these are freely-formed relations between > consenting parties, so nothing can militate against it. Regarding > the wider issue of effectiveness of language learning programs, I find it > strange that Luke has located nothing on this subject. Back in 1968, > Paul Pimsleur already demonstrated the effectiveness of his method of > graduated interval recall which is picked up, in an admittedly diluted > form, by the current Pimsleur series. There are hundreds of studies > distributed across six major journals demonstrating the relatively > greater effectiveness of specific components of language instruction, > from keyword method to corrective feedback. These effects have been > demonstrated in both controlled experiments and, somewhat less > convincingly, in classroom and online instruction. Nearly all of my own > experimental work is now focused on tests of this type embedded within > online tutors. Perhaps what Luke is referring to is the absence of > evidence of the overall comparative effectiveness of the big commercial > language programs such as Rosetta Stone or Pimsleur. In the cases of > such full programs, it is extremely difficult to coordinate a decent > experimental test, because it would require buy in from a large group of > volunteers across a long period with careful controls for study time and > so on. So, I think it is generally better to focus on demonstrations of > the effects of individual components of programs, because these can be > subject to reasonable experimental control. Of course, all of this > leaves the naturalistic methods of language learning out in the cold, and > that is wrong. In the end, the best way to advance this field will be to > increase automatic data collection during the language learning process, > within online, classroom, and naturalistic contexts. This is what I am > working on. > > Regards, > > -- Brian MacWhinney > > On Jan 20, 2011, at 11:09 PM, Luke Kundl Pinette wrote: > >> The question is, why is the Rosetta Stone doing this anyways? According >> to the article, Rosetta doesn't actually distribute the programs, just >> makes them. It doesn't say if it's turning a profit, a loss or selling >> them at cost (though the last is what one would infer from the article). >> If they're doing it for the PR, they'll probably try not to screw over >> native communities too badly, though of course you know what they say >> about the pavement used on the road to hell. >> >> If they're in it for the money, I wouldn't put it past them to add a >> clause like that. Then we've got a legal question on our hands. It's >> essentially monopolistic practice, particularly if they make a pattern >> of deliberately blocking competition for language programs in endangered >> languages. I suspect that if they were to try it, it would be possible >> to find some lawyer willing to pursue the issue, and when taken to court >> they would lose. It would certainly cause a lot of trouble in the >> meantime though. >> >> It sounds like nobody on this list has any illusions about the company. >> It's depressing to see that a linguist like Krauss, and one in such an >> important position has bought into Rosetta Stone's marketing, but again, >> unless another company steps up it doesn't sound like there's any >> options other than no language program. If Rosetta is not in fact >> inserting insidious clauses into the agreements with their informants, >> it's still probably better than nothing. >> >> Regards, >> Luke >> >> >> On 1/21/11 10:48 AM, John Du Bois wrote: >>> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage >>> that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in >>> an endangered language community. >>> >>> For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that >>> work with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the >>> last speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far >>> as indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, >>> and linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this >>> specific legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for >>> whatever reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on >>> their language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language >>> community, this can have a big negative impact. >>> >>> It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered >>> language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and >>> to work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies >>> for mitigating any negative effects. >>> >>> Jack Du Bois >>> >>> On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my >>>> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. >>>> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the >>>> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more >>>> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already >>>> has. TG >>>> >>>> ============== >>>> >>>> >>>> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>>>> Hi Funksters, >>>>> >>>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>>>> raises a couple of >>>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>>>> languages >>>>> unit? >>>>> >>>>> Keith Johnson >>>>> >>>>> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-ros >>>>> etta.html >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >> > From bischoff.st at gmail.com Fri Jan 21 23:11:19 2011 From: bischoff.st at gmail.com (s.t. bischoff) Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 18:11:19 -0500 Subject: FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 17 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: The Center for Advanced Study of Language at UM College Park did a few studies regarding language programs like RS...you can learn about these studies at their website and download the official findings (I haven't read these myself): http://casl.umd.edu/node/541 In conversation I was told that the RS report was not inclusive of all findings because RS had blocked the report and was proceeding with litigation against CASL to prevent the release of the findings which could be damaging to RS. I can't verify the truth of this, but I have no reason to doubt the source. When Xerox released its FST toolkit (useful for creating automated syntactic, phonological, and morphological analyzers and thus things like spell/grammar checkers, language revitalization tools, etc.), some linguists took elements of the copyright notice to mean that "all data used with the toolkit" became the property of Xerox in part or whole. This led some linguists to work on the development of a similar open source FST toolkit, FOMA. I'm not a copyright lawyer so can't comment on the validity of the concern. Cheers, Shannon On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 1:00 PM, wrote: > Send FUNKNET mailing list submissions to > funknet at mailman.rice.edu > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/funknet > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > funknet-request at mailman.rice.edu > > You can reach the person managing the list at > funknet-owner at mailman.rice.edu > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of FUNKNET digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > (Wendy Smith) > 2. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > (Luke Kundl Pinette) > 3. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > (Tom Givon) > 4. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > (James J. Mischler) > 5. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > (Wendy Smith) > 6. Re: FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 (s.t. bischoff) > 7. Re: FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 (A. Katz) > 8. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > (John Du Bois) > 9. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > (Luke Kundl Pinette) > 10. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > (Luke Kundl Pinette) > 11. Call for papers: Lancaster Postgraduate Conference in > Linguistics and English Language (Gabrielatos, Costas) > 12. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > (Tim Thornes) > 13. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > (Pamela Munro) > 14. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > (Brian MacWhinney) > 15. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > (jess tauber) > 16. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > (Tom Givon) > 17. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > (Marianne Mithun) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 10:07:07 -0800 > From: Wendy Smith > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > To: Keith Johnson > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: <4D3879CB.6010503 at csusb.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, > and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child > acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no > direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be > patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the > same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the > materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women > are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who > works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training > or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will > learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint > Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is > virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car > or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction > to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. > > On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > > Hi Funksters, > > > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > > raises a couple of > > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > > languages > > unit? > > > > Keith Johnson > > > > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 03:15:49 +0900 > From: Luke Kundl Pinette > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > To: Keith Johnson , > funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: <4D387BD5.5020305 at comcast.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Hi Keith, > > I'm of two minds about this. > > Now the Rosetta Stone is not a good program. And I will first confess > that I've had a vendetta against the Rosetta Stone because I feel that > its entire marketing strategy, from premise to conclusion consists of > propagating myths about language instruction: > > 1. Children learn languages effortlessly. > 2. You can learn a language like a child does. > 3. You should learn a language like a child does. > 4. The Rosetta Stone's program resembles the way a child learns language. > 5. Ergo you can learn a language effortlessly using the Rosetta Stone. > > Nonetheless it's a very effective marketing strategy. Most people have > heard of the Rosetta Stone, whether they study languages or not, and > quite a lot of them believe it's the best program on the market. It's > not the unjustified self-promotion over the competition which bothers me > (that's the whole point of marketing), but rather the fact that it fits > too well with the attitude Americans tend to have about language learning. > > I've met far too many people who claim that they simply don't have the > knack for learning languages, as their efforts while they were in > school, at the local community college, and yes--the Rosetta Stone > show. Having studied with some of said people in college, I've observed > that most students in language classes believe that less than five hours > a week in a language class or on a computer is sufficient to learn a > language, and that if they can't they're simply unable to learn a > language. In the time I studied Spanish and Arabic in a classroom, I > could not find one person willing to speak the language outside of class > except for native speakers. > > I've heard praise for a couple other programs (which I won't name), > however the people who use these programs, myself included, recognize > that they are a tool and not a teacher. Rosetta Stone claims to be a > teacher, and I've never met a person who's tried Rosetta Stone and > claimed success in it. It's either a bad program (usually heard from > someone who eventually learned the language through more conventional > means) or it's the user's own fault (from someone who hasn't). > > Of course the easiest way to learn a language is to immerse yourself, > but endangered languages tend to be in a situation similar to that I > experienced in the United States, where native speakers of the target > language are hard to come by outside of formal classes. In situations > like that it's absolutely essential to practice with other non-native > speakers, which requires both will and resources. And the question is > whether the Rosetta Stone's contribution to the latter outweighs any > detrimental effect on the former. > > It's well established in psychology that when people find something hard > and think that it will always be hard, they tend to give up. I've long > suspected that telling hearing a program makes language easy, and then > finding that it's not would encourage people to give up more easily than > going into it with the assumption it will be a challenge. And while > this would be a bad thing when we're talking Americans learning Arabic, > it's a great deal worse when we're talking a language on the verge of > extinction. > > But language is quite different from most of human psychology, and I > don't think there's been any research on language specifically. The > kind of people who buy the Rosetta Stone expecting a > brain-translator-slug may not be the kind of people who are all that > determined to learn a language in the first place, and the people who > use the program to learn an endangered language will go into it with > different expectations. They won't be using it because they think it's > an easy way to attract Italian models, but rather because it's what's > available. And I'd expect that these students will be using it as a > tool and not a teacher. Language revitalization takes a good deal more > dedication and savvy than learning one of the world's major tongues. > > The Rosetta Stone does record actual native speakers, and in that sense, > when your options are limited, it would almost certainly be a useful > tool. I'm not sure if there are other language companies who have > endangered languages departments. Personally I'd like to see pretty > much any company except the Rosetta Stone doing this, but even despite > my dislike of the company I'm inclined to say it's probably beneficial > on the balance. > > Regards, > Luke > > > On 1/21/11 1:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > > Hi Funksters, > > > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > > raises a couple of > > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > > languages > > unit? > > > > Keith Johnson > > > > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 11:16:32 -0700 > From: Tom Givon > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: <4D387C00.2050307 at uoregon.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > > > Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my Ute > friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. However, > preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the Natives are > just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more vulnerable. I > hope they don't create more damage than history already has. TG > > ============== > > > On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > > Hi Funksters, > > > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > > raises a couple of > > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > > languages > > unit? > > > > Keith Johnson > > > > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 12:19:39 -0600 > From: "James J. Mischler" > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > To: Wendy Smith , Keith Johnson > > Cc: "funknet at mailman.rice.edu" > Message-ID: > <285D95BE552E5A4F9C45A549C5763B3635D9480115 at ex-mbx1.nsula.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Wendy and all, > > I wonder if *any* program has been found, via controlled research study, to > aid in the learning of a language. Wendy said that there are programs that > are better than Rosetta Stone; what are they? Is there any data to support > the view that the program(s) did in fact aid learning? > > Jim Mischler > Assistant Professor > Language & Communication > Northwestern State University of Louisiana > Natchitoches, LA > > > -----Original Message----- > From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [mailto: > funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Wendy Smith > Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:07 PM > To: Keith Johnson > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > > This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, > and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child > acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no > direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be > patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the > same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the > materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women > are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who > works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training > or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will > learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint > Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is > virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car > or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction > to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. > > On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > > Hi Funksters, > > > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > > raises a couple of > > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > > languages > > unit? > > > > Keith Johnson > > > > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 10:29:35 -0800 > From: Wendy Smith > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > To: "James J. Mischler" > Cc: Keith Johnson , > "funknet at mailman.rice.edu" > Message-ID: <4D387F0F.7070400 at csusb.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > no language programs can effect language acquisition or learning (in the > case of the adult brain we say 'learning,' not acquisition). I have been > using Pimsleur which I have found to be quite good in providing the > sounds of the language and some useful conversation. It is still > repetition and memory, which does not equate SLA. I am now repeating > these dialogues in my sleep (!) but when I try to speak to a native > speaker, it all goes out the window. I am counting on immersion--I will > be in Belarus for 4-5 months as of Monday. (I know of no controlled > study of any program--but it doesn't mean they haven't been done--I > would check ACTFL for that information). > > On 1/20/2011 10:19 AM, James J. Mischler wrote: > > Wendy and all, > > > > I wonder if *any* program has been found, via controlled research study, > to aid in the learning of a language. Wendy said that there are programs > that are better than Rosetta Stone; what are they? Is there any data to > support the view that the program(s) did in fact aid learning? > > > > Jim Mischler > > Assistant Professor > > Language& Communication > > Northwestern State University of Louisiana > > Natchitoches, LA > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [mailto: > funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Wendy Smith > > Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:07 PM > > To: Keith Johnson > > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > > > > This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, > > and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child > > acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no > > direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be > > patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the > > same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the > > materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women > > are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who > > works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training > > or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will > > learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint > > Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is > > virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car > > or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction > > to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. > > > > On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > >> Hi Funksters, > >> > >> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > >> raises a couple of > >> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > >> languages > >> unit? > >> > >> Keith Johnson > >> > >> > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 13:31:36 -0500 > From: "s.t. bischoff" > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: > > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > The issue of Rosetta Stone and endangered languages seems ripe for > controversy. The relationship can be easily exploited by Rosetta Stone. If > a > community provides data and RS controls the data the community may find > itself at the mercy of the RS. For example, as I understand it, often RS > provides the "service" to create the resources for "free". They charge a > nominal fee for access to the first level lessons. However, that fee > increases with advancing levels. Like most minority groups, endangered > language communities are easy targets for exploitation (see the recent > Coushatta casino scam). Additionally, there is a good deal of controversy > regarding weather or not RS actually works. As I understand it, some > researchers have done research on RS and the conclusion have been that it > doesn't work (linguists working the software can judge for > themselves)...the > results cannot be released due to litigation. In short, these types of > relationships can't help but raise some concerns...I wonder if communities > (both endangered language and academic) are always savvy enough to protect > themselves. Of course greater detail of the actual relationships that RS > creates would be helpful in terms of understanding. > > On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 1:00 PM, wrote: > > > Send FUNKNET mailing list submissions to > > funknet at mailman.rice.edu > > > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > > https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/funknet > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > > funknet-request at mailman.rice.edu > > > > You can reach the person managing the list at > > funknet-owner at mailman.rice.edu > > > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > > than "Re: Contents of FUNKNET digest..." > > > > > > Today's Topics: > > > > 1. Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > > (Keith Johnson) > > 2. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > > (A. Katz) > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Message: 1 > > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 08:50:19 -0800 > > From: Keith Johnson > > Subject: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > > languages > > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > > Message-ID: > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes > > > > Hi Funksters, > > > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > > raises a couple of > > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > > languages > > unit? > > > > Keith Johnson > > > > > > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Message: 2 > > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 09:38:15 -0800 (PST) > > From: "A. Katz" > > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > > languages > > To: Keith Johnson > > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > > Message-ID: > > Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed > > > > Why not? If it helps preserve the language, and the speakers approve, > then > > there should be no problem. > > > > > > > > On Thu, 20 Jan 2011, Keith Johnson wrote: > > > > > Hi Funksters, > > > > > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > raises > > a > > > couple of > > > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > > languages > > > unit? > > > > > > Keith Johnson > > > > > > > > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > > > > > > > > > > End of FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 > > *************************************** > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 11:12:17 -0800 (PST) > From: "A. Katz" > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 > To: "s.t. bischoff" > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: > Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed > > I think the issue of whether the RS program works is quite marginal to the > question of whether RS or some other commercial program can help to > preserve the resources of a language community for future generations. > > Let's grant for a moment that RS -- or any other computerized program -- > cannot in and of itself cause someone to acquire a language that he cannot > speak already. > > The question is: how are speakers of this language going to be damaged by > the program? Surely their language isn't going to be "taken away from > them." What they know, they know. What they are able to transmit to the > next generation by natural means, they will. So what is really at issue > is: will this help them to preserve language resources now in danger of > being lost? Will it help keep the language on ice, in case of language > death, so that it can be revived later, by people willing to put in the > effort? > > Are there other issues? Is there any fear that these resources will not be > available to future generations of would be speakers? Is someone > concerned that the language will get "patented" and only RS will have the > license to use it? > > > --Aya > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 8 > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 17:48:25 -0800 > From: John Du Bois > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > To: Tom Givon > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: <4D38E5E9.9030402 at linguistics.ucsb.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage > that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in an > endangered language community. > > For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that work > with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the last > speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far as > indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, and > linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this specific > legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for whatever > reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on their > language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language > community, this can have a big negative impact. > > It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered > language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and to > work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies for > mitigating any negative effects. > > Jack Du Bois > > On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: > > > > > > Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my > > Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. > > However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the > > Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more > > vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already > > has. TG > > > > ============== > > > > > > On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > >> Hi Funksters, > >> > >> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > >> raises a couple of > >> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > >> languages > >> unit? > >> > >> Keith Johnson > >> > >> > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > >> > >> > >> > > > > -- > > *************************************************** > John W. Du Bois, Professor > Department of Linguistics > 3607 South Hall > University of California, Santa Barbara > Santa Barbara, California 93106-3100 > USA > *************************************************** > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 9 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:34:14 +0900 > From: Luke Kundl Pinette > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to > endangered > languages > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: <4D38F0A6.1010605 at comcast.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > James, > So this gets us a bit off topic, but again I of course have to comment. > > I don't know about a controlled study. Before I decided on pragmatics I > considered doing my thesis on second-language learning strategies, and > did a fair bit of research to this end, and I didn't see any formal > paper specifically mentioning language programs. I'd suspect there's > something, but these programs are all designed so differently that a > negative result on one wouldn't apply across programs. > > As I said earlier, no program can be a teacher. Until we design a > program that can pass the Turing test, even if we imagine a program that > can hold a conversation, it won't be able to teach subtle distinctions > in semantics and pragmatics. Consider the difference in spoken English > between "Whaddaya doing?" "Whacha doing?" and "Whacha up to?" and > consider the fact that not only English, but every language has myriads > of minor distinctions like this. > > There's three programs I know by name; I've had all of them recommended > to me by friends and acquaintances: Rosetta Stone, Pimsleur, and Before > You Know It. Rosetta Stone as I said was so awful out of the box, > contradicting everything I knew about language learning and good > pedagogy that I promptly returned it to my brother (who had been foolish > enough to buy it and of course never used it). > > The two programs I've used are Pimsleur and Before You Know It. I like > Pimsleur, it teaches grammar from the outset, and starts the way you > would start a language class, and teaches you to speak in sentences from > the start. I think it would be more useful if you have someone to > practice with--the scripts it uses are actually pretty good, but if you > don't have someone it's just rote memorization. And it's definitely not > a quick way to learn a language. And if you know linguistics, and have > broken down the morphology of the sentence less than ten minutes in, it > becomes a bit tedious. It's still something I happily recommend to > people I know, though I usually suggest they get it from the library, > unless the site is having a sale (as I think they sometimes do). > > On the other hand if you've traveled much to a foreign country without > speaking the language, you'll know that pointing, money, and a > calculator will get you pretty far. A few words, social niceties like > "hello," "thank you," and "I'm sorry" will get you even further, and if > you're going right now it's useful to be able to pick which words you > need. Before You Know It, which an acquaintance described as a set of > computerized flashcards, is useful in this respect. I don't know anyone > who's used the paid version, or even what that includes, but the free > version is quite extensive. > > My biggest complaint is that the pronunciations given are generally not > the way the speaker would say it. It's like if you paid an English > speaker to ennunciate words, and they said "what-are-you-do-ing" > "want-to" "ve-ge-ta-ble" and "com-for-ta-ble" every time. For example > Koreans don't say "annyeonghaseyo" for "hello," but "anyeseyo" or even > "yeseyo." And "thank you" is not "kamsahamnida" but "kamsamnida." > Nonetheless, these are useful words. The Koreans understood what I was > saying, even if they always cracked up when they heard me, and since I > knew what the words sounded like in context I was able to figure out how > they were actually pronounced. But if the paid version contained clips > of the way people actually say the words, it would be well worth paying > for. > > I think most of the lesser known products on the market are similar to > one or the other of these. I've seen other computer programs which are > flashcard based, and I inherited a few German records and tapes from my > grandfather when he moved to Florida, and they're similar to Pimsleur. > (Though I like Pimsleur's layout better.) > > That said though, when you view language programs as a tool to help > study, you might as well ask whether there's any data to support the > view that textbooks in fact aid learning. It depends on the program, > the student, and the use the latter makes of the former. > > Regards, > Luke > > On 1/21/11 3:19 AM, James J. Mischler wrote: > > Wendy and all, > > > > I wonder if *any* program has been found, via controlled research study, > to aid in the learning of a language. Wendy said that there are programs > that are better than Rosetta Stone; what are they? Is there any data to > support the view that the program(s) did in fact aid learning? > > > > Jim Mischler > > Assistant Professor > > Language& Communication > > Northwestern State University of Louisiana > > Natchitoches, LA > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [mailto: > funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Wendy Smith > > Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:07 PM > > To: Keith Johnson > > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > > > > This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, > > and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child > > acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no > > direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be > > patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the > > same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the > > materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women > > are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who > > works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training > > or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will > > learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint > > Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is > > virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car > > or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction > > to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. > > > > On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > >> Hi Funksters, > >> > >> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > >> raises a couple of > >> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > >> languages > >> unit? > >> > >> Keith Johnson > >> > >> > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 10 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 13:09:16 +0900 > From: Luke Kundl Pinette > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to > endangered > languages > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: <4D3906EC.7030301 at comcast.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > The question is, why is the Rosetta Stone doing this anyways? According > to the article, Rosetta doesn't actually distribute the programs, just > makes them. It doesn't say if it's turning a profit, a loss or selling > them at cost (though the last is what one would infer from the article). > If they're doing it for the PR, they'll probably try not to screw over > native communities too badly, though of course you know what they say > about the pavement used on the road to hell. > > If they're in it for the money, I wouldn't put it past them to add a > clause like that. Then we've got a legal question on our hands. It's > essentially monopolistic practice, particularly if they make a pattern > of deliberately blocking competition for language programs in endangered > languages. I suspect that if they were to try it, it would be possible > to find some lawyer willing to pursue the issue, and when taken to court > they would lose. It would certainly cause a lot of trouble in the > meantime though. > > It sounds like nobody on this list has any illusions about the company. > It's depressing to see that a linguist like Krauss, and one in such an > important position has bought into Rosetta Stone's marketing, but again, > unless another company steps up it doesn't sound like there's any > options other than no language program. If Rosetta is not in fact > inserting insidious clauses into the agreements with their informants, > it's still probably better than nothing. > > Regards, > Luke > > > On 1/21/11 10:48 AM, John Du Bois wrote: > > I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage > > that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in > > an endangered language community. > > > > For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that > > work with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the > > last speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far > > as indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, > > and linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this > > specific legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for > > whatever reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on > > their language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language > > community, this can have a big negative impact. > > > > It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered > > language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and > > to work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies > > for mitigating any negative effects. > > > > Jack Du Bois > > > > On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: > >> > >> > >> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my > >> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. > >> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the > >> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more > >> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already > >> has. TG > >> > >> ============== > >> > >> > >> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > >>> Hi Funksters, > >>> > >>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > >>> raises a couple of > >>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > >>> languages > >>> unit? > >>> > >>> Keith Johnson > >>> > >>> > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 11 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 03:09:08 -0800 (PST) > From: "Gabrielatos, Costas" > Subject: [FUNKNET] Call for papers: Lancaster Postgraduate Conference > in Linguistics and English Language > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Cc: Helen West > Message-ID: <420317.74566.qm at web113306.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 > > THE SIXTH LANCASTER UNIVERSITY INTERNATIONAL POSTGRADUATE CONFERENCE > IN?LINGUISTICS AND LANGUAGE TEACHING > > Dear All, > > We are pleased to announce the Sixth Lancaster University International > Postgraduate Conference in Linguistics and English Language (LAEL PG > Conference) which will take place at Lancaster University's George Fox > building, > > on Tuesday 12th of July 2011. > > This one-day conference is designed to give linguistics postgraduates from > all > research areas an opportunity to present and discuss their research in > an informal and intellectually stimulating setting. > > This year's conference will be opened by Prof. Greg Myers (Lancaster > University), and there will be guest plenary lectures by: > Prof. Paul Kerswill (Lancaster University) > Dr. Johnny Unger (Lancaster University) > > We invite postgraduate students to submit abstracts for oral and poster > presentations on any area of linguistics, theoretical or applied (see below > for > abstract submission guidelines). > > Topics Include: > > ? - Cognitive linguistics > ? - Corpus linguistics > ? - Critical discourse analysis > ? - Historical linguistics > ? - Literacy studies > ? - Pragmatics/semantics > ? - Phonetics/phonology > ? - Second language teaching/learning/assessment > ? - Sociolinguistics > ? - Syntax/morphology Stylistics > ? - Translation studies > ? - Other: please specify > > For further information, please visit the website: > http://www.lancs.ac.uk/fass/events/laelpgconference/index.htm > > Key Dates > > Abstracts must be received by Friday 25 March 2011 > Notification of acceptancewill be given on Tuesday 10 May 2011 > > Hope to hear from you all soon, > > Helen Faye West > Janina Iwaniec > Matteo Di Cristofaro > Jonathon Adams > Ibrahim Efe > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 12 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 08:14:57 -0600 > From: "Tim Thornes" > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > To: , > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: <4D394082020000870009B3F2 at gwia1.uca.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > > I would agree with this sentiment as well as with the inherent potential of > a company like this to really screw up relationships with members of an > endangered language community. I mean, if Rosetta Stone as the "worldwide > leader in language learning worldwide (sic)" ( > http://www.rosettastone.com/backnolang?pc=se2011&cid=se-gg&gclid=CPCPvsm8y6YCFQPsKgodqhCrHA) > can't help us, why would I think some nerdy academic with a microphone and a > laptop could? > As one such, I am as capable as any big company of damaging relationships > with community members, and I ought to know better. Is there any > expectation that RS does? > Best, > Tim > > Tim Thornes, PhD > Assistant Professor of Linguistics > Department of Writing > University of Central Arkansas > 201 Donaghey Avenue > Conway, Arkansas 72035 > USA > (501)450-5613 > tthornes at uca.edu > > >>> John Du Bois 01/20/11 7:48 PM >>> > I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage > that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in an > endangered language community. > > For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that work > with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the last > speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far as > indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, and > linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this specific > legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for whatever > reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on their > language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language > community, this can have a big negative impact. > > It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered > language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and to > work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies for > mitigating any negative effects. > > Jack Du Bois > > On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: > > > > > > Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my > > Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. > > However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the > > Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more > > vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already > > has. TG > > > > ============== > > > > > > On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > >> Hi Funksters, > >> > >> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > >> raises a couple of > >> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > >> languages > >> unit? > >> > >> Keith Johnson > >> > >> > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > >> > >> > >> > > > > -- > > *************************************************** > John W. Du Bois, Professor > Department of Linguistics > 3607 South Hall > University of California, Santa Barbara > Santa Barbara, California 93106-3100 > USA > *************************************************** > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 13 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 07:48:38 -0800 > From: Pamela Munro > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > To: Tim Thornes > Cc: tgivon at uoregon.edu, dubois at linguistics.ucsb.edu, > funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: <4D39AAD6.7090508 at ucla.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > All these suggestions are truly scary. > > Pam > > Tim Thornes wrote: > > I would agree with this sentiment as well as with the inherent potential > of a company like this to really screw up relationships with members of an > endangered language community. I mean, if Rosetta Stone as the "worldwide > leader in language learning worldwide (sic)" ( > http://www.rosettastone.com/backnolang?pc=se2011&cid=se-gg&gclid=CPCPvsm8y6YCFQPsKgodqhCrHA) > can't help us, why would I think some nerdy academic with a microphone and a > laptop could? > > As one such, I am as capable as any big company of damaging relationships > with community members, and I ought to know better. Is there any > expectation that RS does? > > Best, > > Tim > > > > Tim Thornes, PhD > > Assistant Professor of Linguistics > > Department of Writing > > University of Central Arkansas > > 201 Donaghey Avenue > > Conway, Arkansas 72035 > > USA > > (501)450-5613 > > tthornes at uca.edu > > > > > >>>> John Du Bois 01/20/11 7:48 PM >>> > >>>> > > I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage > > that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in an > > endangered language community. > > > > For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that work > > with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the last > > speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far as > > indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, and > > linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this specific > > legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for whatever > > reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on their > > language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language > > community, this can have a big negative impact. > > > > It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered > > language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and to > > work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies for > > mitigating any negative effects. > > > > Jack Du Bois > > > > On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: > > > >> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my > >> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. > >> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the > >> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more > >> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already > >> has. TG > >> > >> ============== > >> > >> > >> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > >> > >>> Hi Funksters, > >>> > >>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > >>> raises a couple of > >>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > >>> languages > >>> unit? > >>> > >>> Keith Johnson > >>> > >>> > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > > > > > > -- > Pamela Munro, > Professor, Linguistics, UCLA > UCLA Box 951543 > Los Angeles, CA 90095-1543 > http://www.linguistics.ucla.edu/people/munro/munro.htm > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 14 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:30:39 -0500 > From: Brian MacWhinney > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to > endangered > languages > To: Funknet > Message-ID: <9A44FA72-E6DF-4498-A4A0-0A4C4E605BD7 at cmu.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > Folks, > > I share your low regard for Rosetta Stone, not so much for what they > fail to deliver, but rather for the overstated claims they make. I know a > couple of students who have worked with them on internships and, so far, > there is no evidence of malicious practices vis a vis native communities. > Despite this, I agree that it is likely that communities who collaborate > with them will get led down the garden path and end up unwilling to > participate later with other, more promising, approaches to language > maintenance. But these are freely-formed relations between consenting > parties, so nothing can militate against it. > Regarding the wider issue of effectiveness of language learning > programs, I find it strange that Luke has located nothing on this subject. > Back in 1968, Paul Pimsleur already demonstrated the effectiveness of his > method of graduated interval recall which is picked up, in an admittedly > diluted form, by the current Pimsleur series. There are hundreds of studies > distributed across six major journals demonstrating the relatively greater > effectiveness of specific components of language instruction, from keyword > method to corrective feedback. These effects have been demonstrated in both > controlled experiments and, somewhat less convincingly, in classroom and > online instruction. Nearly all of my own experimental work is now focused > on tests of this type embedded within online tutors. Perhaps what Luke is > referring to is the absence of evidence of the overall comparative > effectiveness of the big commercial language programs such as Rosetta Stone > or Pimsleur. In the cases of > such full programs, it is extremely difficult to coordinate a decent > experimental test, because it would require buy in from a large group of > volunteers across a long period with careful controls for study time and so > on. So, I think it is generally better to focus on demonstrations of the > effects of individual components of programs, because these can be subject > to reasonable experimental control. Of course, all of this leaves the > naturalistic methods of language learning out in the cold, and that is > wrong. In the end, the best way to advance this field will be to increase > automatic data collection during the language learning process, within > online, classroom, and naturalistic contexts. This is what I am working on. > > Regards, > > -- Brian MacWhinney > > On Jan 20, 2011, at 11:09 PM, Luke Kundl Pinette wrote: > > > The question is, why is the Rosetta Stone doing this anyways? According > to the article, Rosetta doesn't actually distribute the programs, just makes > them. It doesn't say if it's turning a profit, a loss or selling them at > cost (though the last is what one would infer from the article). If they're > doing it for the PR, they'll probably try not to screw over native > communities too badly, though of course you know what they say about the > pavement used on the road to hell. > > > > If they're in it for the money, I wouldn't put it past them to add a > clause like that. Then we've got a legal question on our hands. It's > essentially monopolistic practice, particularly if they make a pattern of > deliberately blocking competition for language programs in endangered > languages. I suspect that if they were to try it, it would be possible to > find some lawyer willing to pursue the issue, and when taken to court they > would lose. It would certainly cause a lot of trouble in the meantime > though. > > > > It sounds like nobody on this list has any illusions about the company. > It's depressing to see that a linguist like Krauss, and one in such an > important position has bought into Rosetta Stone's marketing, but again, > unless another company steps up it doesn't sound like there's any options > other than no language program. If Rosetta is not in fact inserting > insidious clauses into the agreements with their informants, it's still > probably better than nothing. > > > > Regards, > > Luke > > > > > > On 1/21/11 10:48 AM, John Du Bois wrote: > >> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage > >> that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in > >> an endangered language community. > >> > >> For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that > >> work with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the > >> last speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far > >> as indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, > >> and linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this > >> specific legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for > >> whatever reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on > >> their language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language > >> community, this can have a big negative impact. > >> > >> It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered > >> language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and > >> to work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies > >> for mitigating any negative effects. > >> > >> Jack Du Bois > >> > >> On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my > >>> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. > >>> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the > >>> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more > >>> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already > >>> has. TG > >>> > >>> ============== > >>> > >>> > >>> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > >>>> Hi Funksters, > >>>> > >>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > >>>> raises a couple of > >>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > >>>> languages > >>>> unit? > >>>> > >>>> Keith Johnson > >>>> > >>>> > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 15 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:33:26 -0500 (GMT-05:00) > From: jess tauber > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to > endangered > languages > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: > < > 32117937.1295627607528.JavaMail.root at wamui-hunyo.atl.sa.earthlink.net> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > Just minutes ago as I write this, on the television show 'The View', actor > Ed Harris brought up his not so successful attempt to use Rosetta Stone, > 'that thing you can get', to pick up a little Russian for his movie opening > this week- eventually he had to utilize the services of a Bulgarian, in > person. > > Maybe the public isn't so misinformed? > > Jess Tauber > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 16 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 09:40:02 -0700 > From: Tom Givon > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to > endangered > languages > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: <4D39B6E2.3030004 at uoregon.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > > They still shell out C-notes by the bushel for this scam. RS does not > make their money off satisfied customers, but off poor first-hit > suckers. TG > > ============================ > > > > > > > On 1/21/2011 9:33 AM, jess tauber wrote: > > Just minutes ago as I write this, on the television show 'The View', > actor Ed Harris brought up his not so successful attempt to use Rosetta > Stone, 'that thing you can get', to pick up a little Russian for his movie > opening this week- eventually he had to utilize the services of a Bulgarian, > in person. > > > > Maybe the public isn't so misinformed? > > > > Jess Tauber > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 17 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 08:57:58 -0800 > From: Marianne Mithun > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to > endangered > languages > To: Brian MacWhinney , Funknet > > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed > > I finally have to weigh in here on another aspect of the issue specifically > with respect to endangered languages. > > For communities in danger of losing their traditional languages, learning > the heritage language isn't just about being able to order a meal in a > restaurant or book a hotel room. It's often about something much deeper, > about appreciating traditional ways of viewing the world, of categorizing > concepts, of combining ideas, of interacting. And the Rosetta Stone system > is one-size-fits-all. People are essentially asked to translate the model > sentences into whatever language is at hand, and the results tend to be > close to word-by-word translations. So yes, learners learn how to say 'boy' > and 'run'. But they don't learn, for example, that ideas expressed by nouns > in English are expressed in language X by verbs. Or that in many languages > people don't tend to talk sentences consisting of Noun Verb Noun (or Noun > Noun Verb). They don't learn about the glorious elaboration of semantic > distinctions or domains that have no counterparts in the model language. > They probably won't learn about evidentials. They are unlikely to learn > about elaborate aspectual distinctions. They certainly won't learn > different patterns of subordination or clause combining. > > For some situations, that may be fine. Heritage speakers just want to be > able to use some phrases in everyday talk. And they don't have the time or > interest for that kind of complexity. For others, it sort of defeats the > whole purpose. > > Marianne Mithun > > > --On Friday, January 21, 2011 11:30 AM -0500 Brian MacWhinney > wrote: > > > Folks, > > > > I share your low regard for Rosetta Stone, not so much for what they > > fail to deliver, but rather for the overstated claims they make. I know > > a couple of students who have worked with them on internships and, so > > far, there is no evidence of malicious practices vis a vis native > > communities. Despite this, I agree that it is likely that communities who > > collaborate with them will get led down the garden path and end up > > unwilling to participate later with other, more promising, approaches to > > language maintenance. But these are freely-formed relations between > > consenting parties, so nothing can militate against it. Regarding > > the wider issue of effectiveness of language learning programs, I find it > > strange that Luke has located nothing on this subject. Back in 1968, > > Paul Pimsleur already demonstrated the effectiveness of his method of > > graduated interval recall which is picked up, in an admittedly diluted > > form, by the current Pimsleur series. There are hundreds of studies > > distributed across six major journals demonstrating the relatively > > greater effectiveness of specific components of language instruction, > > from keyword method to corrective feedback. These effects have been > > demonstrated in both controlled experiments and, somewhat less > > convincingly, in classroom and online instruction. Nearly all of my own > > experimental work is now focused on tests of this type embedded within > > online tutors. Perhaps what Luke is referring to is the absence of > > evidence of the overall comparative effectiveness of the big commercial > > language programs such as Rosetta Stone or Pimsleur. In the cases of > > such full programs, it is extremely difficult to coordinate a decent > > experimental test, because it would require buy in from a large group of > > volunteers across a long period with careful controls for study time and > > so on. So, I think it is generally better to focus on demonstrations of > > the effects of individual components of programs, because these can be > > subject to reasonable experimental control. Of course, all of this > > leaves the naturalistic methods of language learning out in the cold, and > > that is wrong. In the end, the best way to advance this field will be to > > increase automatic data collection during the language learning process, > > within online, classroom, and naturalistic contexts. This is what I am > > working on. > > > > Regards, > > > > -- Brian MacWhinney > > > > On Jan 20, 2011, at 11:09 PM, Luke Kundl Pinette wrote: > > > >> The question is, why is the Rosetta Stone doing this anyways? According > >> to the article, Rosetta doesn't actually distribute the programs, just > >> makes them. It doesn't say if it's turning a profit, a loss or selling > >> them at cost (though the last is what one would infer from the article). > >> If they're doing it for the PR, they'll probably try not to screw over > >> native communities too badly, though of course you know what they say > >> about the pavement used on the road to hell. > >> > >> If they're in it for the money, I wouldn't put it past them to add a > >> clause like that. Then we've got a legal question on our hands. It's > >> essentially monopolistic practice, particularly if they make a pattern > >> of deliberately blocking competition for language programs in endangered > >> languages. I suspect that if they were to try it, it would be possible > >> to find some lawyer willing to pursue the issue, and when taken to court > >> they would lose. It would certainly cause a lot of trouble in the > >> meantime though. > >> > >> It sounds like nobody on this list has any illusions about the company. > >> It's depressing to see that a linguist like Krauss, and one in such an > >> important position has bought into Rosetta Stone's marketing, but again, > >> unless another company steps up it doesn't sound like there's any > >> options other than no language program. If Rosetta is not in fact > >> inserting insidious clauses into the agreements with their informants, > >> it's still probably better than nothing. > >> > >> Regards, > >> Luke > >> > >> > >> On 1/21/11 10:48 AM, John Du Bois wrote: > >>> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage > >>> that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in > >>> an endangered language community. > >>> > >>> For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that > >>> work with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the > >>> last speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far > >>> as indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, > >>> and linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this > >>> specific legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for > >>> whatever reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on > >>> their language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language > >>> community, this can have a big negative impact. > >>> > >>> It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered > >>> language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and > >>> to work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies > >>> for mitigating any negative effects. > >>> > >>> Jack Du Bois > >>> > >>> On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my > >>>> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. > >>>> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the > >>>> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more > >>>> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already > >>>> has. TG > >>>> > >>>> ============== > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > >>>>> Hi Funksters, > >>>>> > >>>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > >>>>> raises a couple of > >>>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > >>>>> languages > >>>>> unit? > >>>>> > >>>>> Keith Johnson > >>>>> > >>>>> > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-ros > >>>>> etta.html > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > End of FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 17 > *************************************** > From bischoff.st at gmail.com Sat Jan 22 03:20:48 2011 From: bischoff.st at gmail.com (s.t. bischoff) Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 22:20:48 -0500 Subject: FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 17 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I should have added in my previous post...can anyone "confirm" or "deny" the claims I noted: (1) There is some sort of litigation involving RS and CASL over research involving RS (2) Xeorox's Finite State Tool Kit copyright can be interpreted as indicating data used in the tool kit is property of Xerox to one degree or another. Also, this reminds me of an issue I have thought about having worked with facsimiles of unpublished texts. Does anyone know who owns legacy materials such as unpublished field notes or manuscripts with data from endangered languages or other types of languages? For example, texts collected in the 19th or early 20th century (or earlier) in the US recording myths and tales. Could these be construed as heritage objects that "must be returned" to the community? Has anyone ever had to deal with this issue? We've seen in recent years museums returning important objects to communities...I wonder if this has come up in terms of language. Also, if a linguist records a narrative or myth...who has the "copyright" to it, if anyone? The linguist, the speaker, the community, the tribal council? Cheers, Shannon On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 1:00 PM, wrote: > Send FUNKNET mailing list submissions to > funknet at mailman.rice.edu > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/funknet > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > funknet-request at mailman.rice.edu > > You can reach the person managing the list at > funknet-owner at mailman.rice.edu > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of FUNKNET digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > (Wendy Smith) > 2. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > (Luke Kundl Pinette) > 3. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > (Tom Givon) > 4. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > (James J. Mischler) > 5. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > (Wendy Smith) > 6. Re: FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 (s.t. bischoff) > 7. Re: FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 (A. Katz) > 8. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > (John Du Bois) > 9. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > (Luke Kundl Pinette) > 10. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > (Luke Kundl Pinette) > 11. Call for papers: Lancaster Postgraduate Conference in > Linguistics and English Language (Gabrielatos, Costas) > 12. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > (Tim Thornes) > 13. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > (Pamela Munro) > 14. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > (Brian MacWhinney) > 15. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > (jess tauber) > 16. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > (Tom Givon) > 17. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > (Marianne Mithun) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 10:07:07 -0800 > From: Wendy Smith > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > To: Keith Johnson > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: <4D3879CB.6010503 at csusb.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, > and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child > acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no > direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be > patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the > same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the > materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women > are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who > works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training > or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will > learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint > Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is > virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car > or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction > to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. > > On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > > Hi Funksters, > > > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > > raises a couple of > > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > > languages > > unit? > > > > Keith Johnson > > > > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 03:15:49 +0900 > From: Luke Kundl Pinette > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > To: Keith Johnson , > funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: <4D387BD5.5020305 at comcast.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Hi Keith, > > I'm of two minds about this. > > Now the Rosetta Stone is not a good program. And I will first confess > that I've had a vendetta against the Rosetta Stone because I feel that > its entire marketing strategy, from premise to conclusion consists of > propagating myths about language instruction: > > 1. Children learn languages effortlessly. > 2. You can learn a language like a child does. > 3. You should learn a language like a child does. > 4. The Rosetta Stone's program resembles the way a child learns language. > 5. Ergo you can learn a language effortlessly using the Rosetta Stone. > > Nonetheless it's a very effective marketing strategy. Most people have > heard of the Rosetta Stone, whether they study languages or not, and > quite a lot of them believe it's the best program on the market. It's > not the unjustified self-promotion over the competition which bothers me > (that's the whole point of marketing), but rather the fact that it fits > too well with the attitude Americans tend to have about language learning. > > I've met far too many people who claim that they simply don't have the > knack for learning languages, as their efforts while they were in > school, at the local community college, and yes--the Rosetta Stone > show. Having studied with some of said people in college, I've observed > that most students in language classes believe that less than five hours > a week in a language class or on a computer is sufficient to learn a > language, and that if they can't they're simply unable to learn a > language. In the time I studied Spanish and Arabic in a classroom, I > could not find one person willing to speak the language outside of class > except for native speakers. > > I've heard praise for a couple other programs (which I won't name), > however the people who use these programs, myself included, recognize > that they are a tool and not a teacher. Rosetta Stone claims to be a > teacher, and I've never met a person who's tried Rosetta Stone and > claimed success in it. It's either a bad program (usually heard from > someone who eventually learned the language through more conventional > means) or it's the user's own fault (from someone who hasn't). > > Of course the easiest way to learn a language is to immerse yourself, > but endangered languages tend to be in a situation similar to that I > experienced in the United States, where native speakers of the target > language are hard to come by outside of formal classes. In situations > like that it's absolutely essential to practice with other non-native > speakers, which requires both will and resources. And the question is > whether the Rosetta Stone's contribution to the latter outweighs any > detrimental effect on the former. > > It's well established in psychology that when people find something hard > and think that it will always be hard, they tend to give up. I've long > suspected that telling hearing a program makes language easy, and then > finding that it's not would encourage people to give up more easily than > going into it with the assumption it will be a challenge. And while > this would be a bad thing when we're talking Americans learning Arabic, > it's a great deal worse when we're talking a language on the verge of > extinction. > > But language is quite different from most of human psychology, and I > don't think there's been any research on language specifically. The > kind of people who buy the Rosetta Stone expecting a > brain-translator-slug may not be the kind of people who are all that > determined to learn a language in the first place, and the people who > use the program to learn an endangered language will go into it with > different expectations. They won't be using it because they think it's > an easy way to attract Italian models, but rather because it's what's > available. And I'd expect that these students will be using it as a > tool and not a teacher. Language revitalization takes a good deal more > dedication and savvy than learning one of the world's major tongues. > > The Rosetta Stone does record actual native speakers, and in that sense, > when your options are limited, it would almost certainly be a useful > tool. I'm not sure if there are other language companies who have > endangered languages departments. Personally I'd like to see pretty > much any company except the Rosetta Stone doing this, but even despite > my dislike of the company I'm inclined to say it's probably beneficial > on the balance. > > Regards, > Luke > > > On 1/21/11 1:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > > Hi Funksters, > > > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > > raises a couple of > > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > > languages > > unit? > > > > Keith Johnson > > > > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 11:16:32 -0700 > From: Tom Givon > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: <4D387C00.2050307 at uoregon.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > > > Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my Ute > friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. However, > preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the Natives are > just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more vulnerable. I > hope they don't create more damage than history already has. TG > > ============== > > > On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > > Hi Funksters, > > > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > > raises a couple of > > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > > languages > > unit? > > > > Keith Johnson > > > > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 12:19:39 -0600 > From: "James J. Mischler" > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > To: Wendy Smith , Keith Johnson > > Cc: "funknet at mailman.rice.edu" > Message-ID: > <285D95BE552E5A4F9C45A549C5763B3635D9480115 at ex-mbx1.nsula.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Wendy and all, > > I wonder if *any* program has been found, via controlled research study, to > aid in the learning of a language. Wendy said that there are programs that > are better than Rosetta Stone; what are they? Is there any data to support > the view that the program(s) did in fact aid learning? > > Jim Mischler > Assistant Professor > Language & Communication > Northwestern State University of Louisiana > Natchitoches, LA > > > -----Original Message----- > From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [mailto: > funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Wendy Smith > Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:07 PM > To: Keith Johnson > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > > This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, > and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child > acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no > direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be > patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the > same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the > materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women > are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who > works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training > or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will > learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint > Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is > virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car > or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction > to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. > > On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > > Hi Funksters, > > > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > > raises a couple of > > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > > languages > > unit? > > > > Keith Johnson > > > > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 10:29:35 -0800 > From: Wendy Smith > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > To: "James J. Mischler" > Cc: Keith Johnson , > "funknet at mailman.rice.edu" > Message-ID: <4D387F0F.7070400 at csusb.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > no language programs can effect language acquisition or learning (in the > case of the adult brain we say 'learning,' not acquisition). I have been > using Pimsleur which I have found to be quite good in providing the > sounds of the language and some useful conversation. It is still > repetition and memory, which does not equate SLA. I am now repeating > these dialogues in my sleep (!) but when I try to speak to a native > speaker, it all goes out the window. I am counting on immersion--I will > be in Belarus for 4-5 months as of Monday. (I know of no controlled > study of any program--but it doesn't mean they haven't been done--I > would check ACTFL for that information). > > On 1/20/2011 10:19 AM, James J. Mischler wrote: > > Wendy and all, > > > > I wonder if *any* program has been found, via controlled research study, > to aid in the learning of a language. Wendy said that there are programs > that are better than Rosetta Stone; what are they? Is there any data to > support the view that the program(s) did in fact aid learning? > > > > Jim Mischler > > Assistant Professor > > Language& Communication > > Northwestern State University of Louisiana > > Natchitoches, LA > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [mailto: > funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Wendy Smith > > Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:07 PM > > To: Keith Johnson > > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > > > > This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, > > and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child > > acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no > > direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be > > patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the > > same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the > > materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women > > are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who > > works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training > > or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will > > learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint > > Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is > > virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car > > or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction > > to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. > > > > On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > >> Hi Funksters, > >> > >> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > >> raises a couple of > >> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > >> languages > >> unit? > >> > >> Keith Johnson > >> > >> > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 13:31:36 -0500 > From: "s.t. bischoff" > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: > > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > The issue of Rosetta Stone and endangered languages seems ripe for > controversy. The relationship can be easily exploited by Rosetta Stone. If > a > community provides data and RS controls the data the community may find > itself at the mercy of the RS. For example, as I understand it, often RS > provides the "service" to create the resources for "free". They charge a > nominal fee for access to the first level lessons. However, that fee > increases with advancing levels. Like most minority groups, endangered > language communities are easy targets for exploitation (see the recent > Coushatta casino scam). Additionally, there is a good deal of controversy > regarding weather or not RS actually works. As I understand it, some > researchers have done research on RS and the conclusion have been that it > doesn't work (linguists working the software can judge for > themselves)...the > results cannot be released due to litigation. In short, these types of > relationships can't help but raise some concerns...I wonder if communities > (both endangered language and academic) are always savvy enough to protect > themselves. Of course greater detail of the actual relationships that RS > creates would be helpful in terms of understanding. > > On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 1:00 PM, wrote: > > > Send FUNKNET mailing list submissions to > > funknet at mailman.rice.edu > > > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > > https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/funknet > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > > funknet-request at mailman.rice.edu > > > > You can reach the person managing the list at > > funknet-owner at mailman.rice.edu > > > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > > than "Re: Contents of FUNKNET digest..." > > > > > > Today's Topics: > > > > 1. Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > > (Keith Johnson) > > 2. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > > (A. Katz) > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Message: 1 > > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 08:50:19 -0800 > > From: Keith Johnson > > Subject: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > > languages > > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > > Message-ID: > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes > > > > Hi Funksters, > > > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > > raises a couple of > > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > > languages > > unit? > > > > Keith Johnson > > > > > > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Message: 2 > > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 09:38:15 -0800 (PST) > > From: "A. Katz" > > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > > languages > > To: Keith Johnson > > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > > Message-ID: > > Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed > > > > Why not? If it helps preserve the language, and the speakers approve, > then > > there should be no problem. > > > > > > > > On Thu, 20 Jan 2011, Keith Johnson wrote: > > > > > Hi Funksters, > > > > > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > raises > > a > > > couple of > > > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > > languages > > > unit? > > > > > > Keith Johnson > > > > > > > > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > > > > > > > > > > End of FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 > > *************************************** > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 11:12:17 -0800 (PST) > From: "A. Katz" > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 > To: "s.t. bischoff" > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: > Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed > > I think the issue of whether the RS program works is quite marginal to the > question of whether RS or some other commercial program can help to > preserve the resources of a language community for future generations. > > Let's grant for a moment that RS -- or any other computerized program -- > cannot in and of itself cause someone to acquire a language that he cannot > speak already. > > The question is: how are speakers of this language going to be damaged by > the program? Surely their language isn't going to be "taken away from > them." What they know, they know. What they are able to transmit to the > next generation by natural means, they will. So what is really at issue > is: will this help them to preserve language resources now in danger of > being lost? Will it help keep the language on ice, in case of language > death, so that it can be revived later, by people willing to put in the > effort? > > Are there other issues? Is there any fear that these resources will not be > available to future generations of would be speakers? Is someone > concerned that the language will get "patented" and only RS will have the > license to use it? > > > --Aya > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 8 > Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 17:48:25 -0800 > From: John Du Bois > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > To: Tom Givon > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: <4D38E5E9.9030402 at linguistics.ucsb.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage > that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in an > endangered language community. > > For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that work > with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the last > speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far as > indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, and > linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this specific > legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for whatever > reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on their > language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language > community, this can have a big negative impact. > > It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered > language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and to > work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies for > mitigating any negative effects. > > Jack Du Bois > > On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: > > > > > > Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my > > Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. > > However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the > > Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more > > vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already > > has. TG > > > > ============== > > > > > > On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > >> Hi Funksters, > >> > >> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > >> raises a couple of > >> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > >> languages > >> unit? > >> > >> Keith Johnson > >> > >> > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > >> > >> > >> > > > > -- > > *************************************************** > John W. Du Bois, Professor > Department of Linguistics > 3607 South Hall > University of California, Santa Barbara > Santa Barbara, California 93106-3100 > USA > *************************************************** > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 9 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:34:14 +0900 > From: Luke Kundl Pinette > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to > endangered > languages > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: <4D38F0A6.1010605 at comcast.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > James, > So this gets us a bit off topic, but again I of course have to comment. > > I don't know about a controlled study. Before I decided on pragmatics I > considered doing my thesis on second-language learning strategies, and > did a fair bit of research to this end, and I didn't see any formal > paper specifically mentioning language programs. I'd suspect there's > something, but these programs are all designed so differently that a > negative result on one wouldn't apply across programs. > > As I said earlier, no program can be a teacher. Until we design a > program that can pass the Turing test, even if we imagine a program that > can hold a conversation, it won't be able to teach subtle distinctions > in semantics and pragmatics. Consider the difference in spoken English > between "Whaddaya doing?" "Whacha doing?" and "Whacha up to?" and > consider the fact that not only English, but every language has myriads > of minor distinctions like this. > > There's three programs I know by name; I've had all of them recommended > to me by friends and acquaintances: Rosetta Stone, Pimsleur, and Before > You Know It. Rosetta Stone as I said was so awful out of the box, > contradicting everything I knew about language learning and good > pedagogy that I promptly returned it to my brother (who had been foolish > enough to buy it and of course never used it). > > The two programs I've used are Pimsleur and Before You Know It. I like > Pimsleur, it teaches grammar from the outset, and starts the way you > would start a language class, and teaches you to speak in sentences from > the start. I think it would be more useful if you have someone to > practice with--the scripts it uses are actually pretty good, but if you > don't have someone it's just rote memorization. And it's definitely not > a quick way to learn a language. And if you know linguistics, and have > broken down the morphology of the sentence less than ten minutes in, it > becomes a bit tedious. It's still something I happily recommend to > people I know, though I usually suggest they get it from the library, > unless the site is having a sale (as I think they sometimes do). > > On the other hand if you've traveled much to a foreign country without > speaking the language, you'll know that pointing, money, and a > calculator will get you pretty far. A few words, social niceties like > "hello," "thank you," and "I'm sorry" will get you even further, and if > you're going right now it's useful to be able to pick which words you > need. Before You Know It, which an acquaintance described as a set of > computerized flashcards, is useful in this respect. I don't know anyone > who's used the paid version, or even what that includes, but the free > version is quite extensive. > > My biggest complaint is that the pronunciations given are generally not > the way the speaker would say it. It's like if you paid an English > speaker to ennunciate words, and they said "what-are-you-do-ing" > "want-to" "ve-ge-ta-ble" and "com-for-ta-ble" every time. For example > Koreans don't say "annyeonghaseyo" for "hello," but "anyeseyo" or even > "yeseyo." And "thank you" is not "kamsahamnida" but "kamsamnida." > Nonetheless, these are useful words. The Koreans understood what I was > saying, even if they always cracked up when they heard me, and since I > knew what the words sounded like in context I was able to figure out how > they were actually pronounced. But if the paid version contained clips > of the way people actually say the words, it would be well worth paying > for. > > I think most of the lesser known products on the market are similar to > one or the other of these. I've seen other computer programs which are > flashcard based, and I inherited a few German records and tapes from my > grandfather when he moved to Florida, and they're similar to Pimsleur. > (Though I like Pimsleur's layout better.) > > That said though, when you view language programs as a tool to help > study, you might as well ask whether there's any data to support the > view that textbooks in fact aid learning. It depends on the program, > the student, and the use the latter makes of the former. > > Regards, > Luke > > On 1/21/11 3:19 AM, James J. Mischler wrote: > > Wendy and all, > > > > I wonder if *any* program has been found, via controlled research study, > to aid in the learning of a language. Wendy said that there are programs > that are better than Rosetta Stone; what are they? Is there any data to > support the view that the program(s) did in fact aid learning? > > > > Jim Mischler > > Assistant Professor > > Language& Communication > > Northwestern State University of Louisiana > > Natchitoches, LA > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [mailto: > funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Wendy Smith > > Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:07 PM > > To: Keith Johnson > > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > > > > This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, > > and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child > > acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no > > direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be > > patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the > > same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the > > materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women > > are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who > > works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training > > or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will > > learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint > > Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is > > virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car > > or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction > > to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. > > > > On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > >> Hi Funksters, > >> > >> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > >> raises a couple of > >> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > >> languages > >> unit? > >> > >> Keith Johnson > >> > >> > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 10 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 13:09:16 +0900 > From: Luke Kundl Pinette > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to > endangered > languages > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: <4D3906EC.7030301 at comcast.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > The question is, why is the Rosetta Stone doing this anyways? According > to the article, Rosetta doesn't actually distribute the programs, just > makes them. It doesn't say if it's turning a profit, a loss or selling > them at cost (though the last is what one would infer from the article). > If they're doing it for the PR, they'll probably try not to screw over > native communities too badly, though of course you know what they say > about the pavement used on the road to hell. > > If they're in it for the money, I wouldn't put it past them to add a > clause like that. Then we've got a legal question on our hands. It's > essentially monopolistic practice, particularly if they make a pattern > of deliberately blocking competition for language programs in endangered > languages. I suspect that if they were to try it, it would be possible > to find some lawyer willing to pursue the issue, and when taken to court > they would lose. It would certainly cause a lot of trouble in the > meantime though. > > It sounds like nobody on this list has any illusions about the company. > It's depressing to see that a linguist like Krauss, and one in such an > important position has bought into Rosetta Stone's marketing, but again, > unless another company steps up it doesn't sound like there's any > options other than no language program. If Rosetta is not in fact > inserting insidious clauses into the agreements with their informants, > it's still probably better than nothing. > > Regards, > Luke > > > On 1/21/11 10:48 AM, John Du Bois wrote: > > I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage > > that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in > > an endangered language community. > > > > For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that > > work with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the > > last speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far > > as indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, > > and linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this > > specific legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for > > whatever reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on > > their language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language > > community, this can have a big negative impact. > > > > It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered > > language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and > > to work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies > > for mitigating any negative effects. > > > > Jack Du Bois > > > > On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: > >> > >> > >> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my > >> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. > >> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the > >> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more > >> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already > >> has. TG > >> > >> ============== > >> > >> > >> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > >>> Hi Funksters, > >>> > >>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > >>> raises a couple of > >>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > >>> languages > >>> unit? > >>> > >>> Keith Johnson > >>> > >>> > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 11 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 03:09:08 -0800 (PST) > From: "Gabrielatos, Costas" > Subject: [FUNKNET] Call for papers: Lancaster Postgraduate Conference > in Linguistics and English Language > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Cc: Helen West > Message-ID: <420317.74566.qm at web113306.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 > > THE SIXTH LANCASTER UNIVERSITY INTERNATIONAL POSTGRADUATE CONFERENCE > IN?LINGUISTICS AND LANGUAGE TEACHING > > Dear All, > > We are pleased to announce the Sixth Lancaster University International > Postgraduate Conference in Linguistics and English Language (LAEL PG > Conference) which will take place at Lancaster University's George Fox > building, > > on Tuesday 12th of July 2011. > > This one-day conference is designed to give linguistics postgraduates from > all > research areas an opportunity to present and discuss their research in > an informal and intellectually stimulating setting. > > This year's conference will be opened by Prof. Greg Myers (Lancaster > University), and there will be guest plenary lectures by: > Prof. Paul Kerswill (Lancaster University) > Dr. Johnny Unger (Lancaster University) > > We invite postgraduate students to submit abstracts for oral and poster > presentations on any area of linguistics, theoretical or applied (see below > for > abstract submission guidelines). > > Topics Include: > > ? - Cognitive linguistics > ? - Corpus linguistics > ? - Critical discourse analysis > ? - Historical linguistics > ? - Literacy studies > ? - Pragmatics/semantics > ? - Phonetics/phonology > ? - Second language teaching/learning/assessment > ? - Sociolinguistics > ? - Syntax/morphology Stylistics > ? - Translation studies > ? - Other: please specify > > For further information, please visit the website: > http://www.lancs.ac.uk/fass/events/laelpgconference/index.htm > > Key Dates > > Abstracts must be received by Friday 25 March 2011 > Notification of acceptancewill be given on Tuesday 10 May 2011 > > Hope to hear from you all soon, > > Helen Faye West > Janina Iwaniec > Matteo Di Cristofaro > Jonathon Adams > Ibrahim Efe > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 12 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 08:14:57 -0600 > From: "Tim Thornes" > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > To: , > Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: <4D394082020000870009B3F2 at gwia1.uca.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > > I would agree with this sentiment as well as with the inherent potential of > a company like this to really screw up relationships with members of an > endangered language community. I mean, if Rosetta Stone as the "worldwide > leader in language learning worldwide (sic)" ( > http://www.rosettastone.com/backnolang?pc=se2011&cid=se-gg&gclid=CPCPvsm8y6YCFQPsKgodqhCrHA) > can't help us, why would I think some nerdy academic with a microphone and a > laptop could? > As one such, I am as capable as any big company of damaging relationships > with community members, and I ought to know better. Is there any > expectation that RS does? > Best, > Tim > > Tim Thornes, PhD > Assistant Professor of Linguistics > Department of Writing > University of Central Arkansas > 201 Donaghey Avenue > Conway, Arkansas 72035 > USA > (501)450-5613 > tthornes at uca.edu > > >>> John Du Bois 01/20/11 7:48 PM >>> > I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage > that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in an > endangered language community. > > For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that work > with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the last > speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far as > indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, and > linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this specific > legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for whatever > reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on their > language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language > community, this can have a big negative impact. > > It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered > language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and to > work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies for > mitigating any negative effects. > > Jack Du Bois > > On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: > > > > > > Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my > > Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. > > However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the > > Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more > > vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already > > has. TG > > > > ============== > > > > > > On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > >> Hi Funksters, > >> > >> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > >> raises a couple of > >> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > >> languages > >> unit? > >> > >> Keith Johnson > >> > >> > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > >> > >> > >> > > > > -- > > *************************************************** > John W. Du Bois, Professor > Department of Linguistics > 3607 South Hall > University of California, Santa Barbara > Santa Barbara, California 93106-3100 > USA > *************************************************** > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 13 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 07:48:38 -0800 > From: Pamela Munro > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered > languages > To: Tim Thornes > Cc: tgivon at uoregon.edu, dubois at linguistics.ucsb.edu, > funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: <4D39AAD6.7090508 at ucla.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > All these suggestions are truly scary. > > Pam > > Tim Thornes wrote: > > I would agree with this sentiment as well as with the inherent potential > of a company like this to really screw up relationships with members of an > endangered language community. I mean, if Rosetta Stone as the "worldwide > leader in language learning worldwide (sic)" ( > http://www.rosettastone.com/backnolang?pc=se2011&cid=se-gg&gclid=CPCPvsm8y6YCFQPsKgodqhCrHA) > can't help us, why would I think some nerdy academic with a microphone and a > laptop could? > > As one such, I am as capable as any big company of damaging relationships > with community members, and I ought to know better. Is there any > expectation that RS does? > > Best, > > Tim > > > > Tim Thornes, PhD > > Assistant Professor of Linguistics > > Department of Writing > > University of Central Arkansas > > 201 Donaghey Avenue > > Conway, Arkansas 72035 > > USA > > (501)450-5613 > > tthornes at uca.edu > > > > > >>>> John Du Bois 01/20/11 7:48 PM >>> > >>>> > > I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage > > that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in an > > endangered language community. > > > > For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that work > > with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the last > > speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far as > > indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, and > > linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this specific > > legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for whatever > > reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on their > > language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language > > community, this can have a big negative impact. > > > > It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered > > language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and to > > work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies for > > mitigating any negative effects. > > > > Jack Du Bois > > > > On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: > > > >> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my > >> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. > >> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the > >> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more > >> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already > >> has. TG > >> > >> ============== > >> > >> > >> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > >> > >>> Hi Funksters, > >>> > >>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > >>> raises a couple of > >>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > >>> languages > >>> unit? > >>> > >>> Keith Johnson > >>> > >>> > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > > > > > > -- > Pamela Munro, > Professor, Linguistics, UCLA > UCLA Box 951543 > Los Angeles, CA 90095-1543 > http://www.linguistics.ucla.edu/people/munro/munro.htm > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 14 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:30:39 -0500 > From: Brian MacWhinney > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to > endangered > languages > To: Funknet > Message-ID: <9A44FA72-E6DF-4498-A4A0-0A4C4E605BD7 at cmu.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > Folks, > > I share your low regard for Rosetta Stone, not so much for what they > fail to deliver, but rather for the overstated claims they make. I know a > couple of students who have worked with them on internships and, so far, > there is no evidence of malicious practices vis a vis native communities. > Despite this, I agree that it is likely that communities who collaborate > with them will get led down the garden path and end up unwilling to > participate later with other, more promising, approaches to language > maintenance. But these are freely-formed relations between consenting > parties, so nothing can militate against it. > Regarding the wider issue of effectiveness of language learning > programs, I find it strange that Luke has located nothing on this subject. > Back in 1968, Paul Pimsleur already demonstrated the effectiveness of his > method of graduated interval recall which is picked up, in an admittedly > diluted form, by the current Pimsleur series. There are hundreds of studies > distributed across six major journals demonstrating the relatively greater > effectiveness of specific components of language instruction, from keyword > method to corrective feedback. These effects have been demonstrated in both > controlled experiments and, somewhat less convincingly, in classroom and > online instruction. Nearly all of my own experimental work is now focused > on tests of this type embedded within online tutors. Perhaps what Luke is > referring to is the absence of evidence of the overall comparative > effectiveness of the big commercial language programs such as Rosetta Stone > or Pimsleur. In the cases of > such full programs, it is extremely difficult to coordinate a decent > experimental test, because it would require buy in from a large group of > volunteers across a long period with careful controls for study time and so > on. So, I think it is generally better to focus on demonstrations of the > effects of individual components of programs, because these can be subject > to reasonable experimental control. Of course, all of this leaves the > naturalistic methods of language learning out in the cold, and that is > wrong. In the end, the best way to advance this field will be to increase > automatic data collection during the language learning process, within > online, classroom, and naturalistic contexts. This is what I am working on. > > Regards, > > -- Brian MacWhinney > > On Jan 20, 2011, at 11:09 PM, Luke Kundl Pinette wrote: > > > The question is, why is the Rosetta Stone doing this anyways? According > to the article, Rosetta doesn't actually distribute the programs, just makes > them. It doesn't say if it's turning a profit, a loss or selling them at > cost (though the last is what one would infer from the article). If they're > doing it for the PR, they'll probably try not to screw over native > communities too badly, though of course you know what they say about the > pavement used on the road to hell. > > > > If they're in it for the money, I wouldn't put it past them to add a > clause like that. Then we've got a legal question on our hands. It's > essentially monopolistic practice, particularly if they make a pattern of > deliberately blocking competition for language programs in endangered > languages. I suspect that if they were to try it, it would be possible to > find some lawyer willing to pursue the issue, and when taken to court they > would lose. It would certainly cause a lot of trouble in the meantime > though. > > > > It sounds like nobody on this list has any illusions about the company. > It's depressing to see that a linguist like Krauss, and one in such an > important position has bought into Rosetta Stone's marketing, but again, > unless another company steps up it doesn't sound like there's any options > other than no language program. If Rosetta is not in fact inserting > insidious clauses into the agreements with their informants, it's still > probably better than nothing. > > > > Regards, > > Luke > > > > > > On 1/21/11 10:48 AM, John Du Bois wrote: > >> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage > >> that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in > >> an endangered language community. > >> > >> For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that > >> work with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the > >> last speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far > >> as indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, > >> and linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this > >> specific legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for > >> whatever reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on > >> their language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language > >> community, this can have a big negative impact. > >> > >> It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered > >> language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and > >> to work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies > >> for mitigating any negative effects. > >> > >> Jack Du Bois > >> > >> On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my > >>> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. > >>> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the > >>> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more > >>> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already > >>> has. TG > >>> > >>> ============== > >>> > >>> > >>> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > >>>> Hi Funksters, > >>>> > >>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > >>>> raises a couple of > >>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > >>>> languages > >>>> unit? > >>>> > >>>> Keith Johnson > >>>> > >>>> > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 15 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:33:26 -0500 (GMT-05:00) > From: jess tauber > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to > endangered > languages > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: > < > 32117937.1295627607528.JavaMail.root at wamui-hunyo.atl.sa.earthlink.net> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > Just minutes ago as I write this, on the television show 'The View', actor > Ed Harris brought up his not so successful attempt to use Rosetta Stone, > 'that thing you can get', to pick up a little Russian for his movie opening > this week- eventually he had to utilize the services of a Bulgarian, in > person. > > Maybe the public isn't so misinformed? > > Jess Tauber > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 16 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 09:40:02 -0700 > From: Tom Givon > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to > endangered > languages > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Message-ID: <4D39B6E2.3030004 at uoregon.edu> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > > They still shell out C-notes by the bushel for this scam. RS does not > make their money off satisfied customers, but off poor first-hit > suckers. TG > > ============================ > > > > > > > On 1/21/2011 9:33 AM, jess tauber wrote: > > Just minutes ago as I write this, on the television show 'The View', > actor Ed Harris brought up his not so successful attempt to use Rosetta > Stone, 'that thing you can get', to pick up a little Russian for his movie > opening this week- eventually he had to utilize the services of a Bulgarian, > in person. > > > > Maybe the public isn't so misinformed? > > > > Jess Tauber > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 17 > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 08:57:58 -0800 > From: Marianne Mithun > Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to > endangered > languages > To: Brian MacWhinney , Funknet > > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed > > I finally have to weigh in here on another aspect of the issue specifically > with respect to endangered languages. > > For communities in danger of losing their traditional languages, learning > the heritage language isn't just about being able to order a meal in a > restaurant or book a hotel room. It's often about something much deeper, > about appreciating traditional ways of viewing the world, of categorizing > concepts, of combining ideas, of interacting. And the Rosetta Stone system > is one-size-fits-all. People are essentially asked to translate the model > sentences into whatever language is at hand, and the results tend to be > close to word-by-word translations. So yes, learners learn how to say 'boy' > and 'run'. But they don't learn, for example, that ideas expressed by nouns > in English are expressed in language X by verbs. Or that in many languages > people don't tend to talk sentences consisting of Noun Verb Noun (or Noun > Noun Verb). They don't learn about the glorious elaboration of semantic > distinctions or domains that have no counterparts in the model language. > They probably won't learn about evidentials. They are unlikely to learn > about elaborate aspectual distinctions. They certainly won't learn > different patterns of subordination or clause combining. > > For some situations, that may be fine. Heritage speakers just want to be > able to use some phrases in everyday talk. And they don't have the time or > interest for that kind of complexity. For others, it sort of defeats the > whole purpose. > > Marianne Mithun > > > --On Friday, January 21, 2011 11:30 AM -0500 Brian MacWhinney > wrote: > > > Folks, > > > > I share your low regard for Rosetta Stone, not so much for what they > > fail to deliver, but rather for the overstated claims they make. I know > > a couple of students who have worked with them on internships and, so > > far, there is no evidence of malicious practices vis a vis native > > communities. Despite this, I agree that it is likely that communities who > > collaborate with them will get led down the garden path and end up > > unwilling to participate later with other, more promising, approaches to > > language maintenance. But these are freely-formed relations between > > consenting parties, so nothing can militate against it. Regarding > > the wider issue of effectiveness of language learning programs, I find it > > strange that Luke has located nothing on this subject. Back in 1968, > > Paul Pimsleur already demonstrated the effectiveness of his method of > > graduated interval recall which is picked up, in an admittedly diluted > > form, by the current Pimsleur series. There are hundreds of studies > > distributed across six major journals demonstrating the relatively > > greater effectiveness of specific components of language instruction, > > from keyword method to corrective feedback. These effects have been > > demonstrated in both controlled experiments and, somewhat less > > convincingly, in classroom and online instruction. Nearly all of my own > > experimental work is now focused on tests of this type embedded within > > online tutors. Perhaps what Luke is referring to is the absence of > > evidence of the overall comparative effectiveness of the big commercial > > language programs such as Rosetta Stone or Pimsleur. In the cases of > > such full programs, it is extremely difficult to coordinate a decent > > experimental test, because it would require buy in from a large group of > > volunteers across a long period with careful controls for study time and > > so on. So, I think it is generally better to focus on demonstrations of > > the effects of individual components of programs, because these can be > > subject to reasonable experimental control. Of course, all of this > > leaves the naturalistic methods of language learning out in the cold, and > > that is wrong. In the end, the best way to advance this field will be to > > increase automatic data collection during the language learning process, > > within online, classroom, and naturalistic contexts. This is what I am > > working on. > > > > Regards, > > > > -- Brian MacWhinney > > > > On Jan 20, 2011, at 11:09 PM, Luke Kundl Pinette wrote: > > > >> The question is, why is the Rosetta Stone doing this anyways? According > >> to the article, Rosetta doesn't actually distribute the programs, just > >> makes them. It doesn't say if it's turning a profit, a loss or selling > >> them at cost (though the last is what one would infer from the article). > >> If they're doing it for the PR, they'll probably try not to screw over > >> native communities too badly, though of course you know what they say > >> about the pavement used on the road to hell. > >> > >> If they're in it for the money, I wouldn't put it past them to add a > >> clause like that. Then we've got a legal question on our hands. It's > >> essentially monopolistic practice, particularly if they make a pattern > >> of deliberately blocking competition for language programs in endangered > >> languages. I suspect that if they were to try it, it would be possible > >> to find some lawyer willing to pursue the issue, and when taken to court > >> they would lose. It would certainly cause a lot of trouble in the > >> meantime though. > >> > >> It sounds like nobody on this list has any illusions about the company. > >> It's depressing to see that a linguist like Krauss, and one in such an > >> important position has bought into Rosetta Stone's marketing, but again, > >> unless another company steps up it doesn't sound like there's any > >> options other than no language program. If Rosetta is not in fact > >> inserting insidious clauses into the agreements with their informants, > >> it's still probably better than nothing. > >> > >> Regards, > >> Luke > >> > >> > >> On 1/21/11 10:48 AM, John Du Bois wrote: > >>> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage > >>> that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in > >>> an endangered language community. > >>> > >>> For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that > >>> work with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the > >>> last speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far > >>> as indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, > >>> and linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this > >>> specific legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for > >>> whatever reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on > >>> their language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language > >>> community, this can have a big negative impact. > >>> > >>> It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered > >>> language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and > >>> to work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies > >>> for mitigating any negative effects. > >>> > >>> Jack Du Bois > >>> > >>> On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my > >>>> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. > >>>> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the > >>>> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more > >>>> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already > >>>> has. TG > >>>> > >>>> ============== > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: > >>>>> Hi Funksters, > >>>>> > >>>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article > >>>>> raises a couple of > >>>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > >>>>> languages > >>>>> unit? > >>>>> > >>>>> Keith Johnson > >>>>> > >>>>> > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-ros > >>>>> etta.html > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > End of FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 17 > *************************************** > From tgivon at uoregon.edu Sat Jan 22 04:33:35 2011 From: tgivon at uoregon.edu (Tom Givon) Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 21:33:35 -0700 Subject: RS Message-ID: I am forwarding a letter from Katharine Nielson from the U. of Maryland (). It speaks for itself. Y'all have fun y'hear. TG ================== On 1/21/2011 6:49 PM, Katharine Nielson wrote: > Ah, my old friend Rosetta Stone. I tried to conduct an empirical study with 150 volunteers who agreed to use RS according to manufacturer's recommendations for about 6 months. These were all highly motivated adult learners who were granted free access to the software in their workplace. I say "tried" because our overwhelming finding was of severe participant attrition. 32 volunteers persisted with the software for more than 10 hours and only 21 made it through to the first scheduled assessment. After the first test, which was designed to be given 1/4 of the way through the study, the drop-our rate became even more dramatic, and just one participant finished the complete study protocol. > > This crazy attrition is probably mostly a product of the uselessness of these computer-mediated, self-study programs that tout themselves as "language learning solutions." We found similar results with a similar study of Auralog TELL ME MORE. > > The other work I did with RS was to "critically evaluate" the software in light of the questionable claims put forth by the company's marketing department. We basically said that there was no way that using Rosetta Stone alone could possibly result in much successful language acquisition given the lack of genuine input, the exposure to a handful of scripted, unrealistic dialogues, and the lack of opportunities for output and interaction. Another PhD student and I spent many, many hours going through all of the Arabic and Spanish lessons in Version 2 and Version 3 of Rosetta Stone in order to write the comparative review. > > I read through the thread you forwarded, and it might be worth noting that in my experience, RS is very trigger-happy with the lawyers. They hired Skadden Arps (one of the biggest law firms in DC) to come after the University of Maryland after they got hold of the technical reports I wrote, and the end result is that CASL is not permitted to distribute them and I am not supposed to talk about them. I believe these Rosetta Stone technical reports are actually available through the CASL website, but I have been told not to distribute the link. > > Feel free to forward this response to the list if you think it would be helpful to anyone. > > Thanks for getting in touch with me! > > Katie From amnfn at well.com Sat Jan 22 14:33:45 2011 From: amnfn at well.com (A. Katz) Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2011 06:33:45 -0800 Subject: FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 17 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Fri, 21 Jan 2011, s.t. bischoff wrote: > Also, this reminds me of an issue I have thought about having worked with > facsimiles of unpublished texts. Does anyone know who owns legacy materials > such as unpublished field notes or manuscripts with data from endangered > languages or other types of languages? For example, texts collected in the > 19th or early 20th century (or earlier) in the US recording myths and > tales. Could these be construed as heritage objects that "must be returned" > to the community? Has anyone ever had to deal with this issue? We've seen > in recent years museums returning important objects to communities...I > wonder if this has come up in terms of language. Also, if a linguist records > a narrative or myth...who has the "copyright" to it, if anyone? The > linguist, the speaker, the community, the tribal council? > > Cheers, > Shannon Copyright is for the arrangement of words in a sequence, as it pertains to texts. You cannot copyright an idea. In the case of oral texts that were created centuries ago by unknown individual authors, a person cannot obtain copyright over them just by writing them down, because writing them down is not creating a new sequence. So... nobody has copyright in such oral texts -- not the natives and not the people who copy them down for the natives -- they are in the public domain, as long as authorship was finished long before the informant gave the linguist a recital of the text. If you have field notes that were taken down during a period that is still under copyright protection, then a facsimile of the written notes might be under copyright to the person who jotted them down or their heirs, but the actual text, which is an abstract sequence of words, in not within copyright. --Aya > > On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 1:00 PM, wrote: > >> Send FUNKNET mailing list submissions to >> funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> >> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >> https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/funknet >> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >> funknet-request at mailman.rice.edu >> >> You can reach the person managing the list at >> funknet-owner at mailman.rice.edu >> >> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >> than "Re: Contents of FUNKNET digest..." >> >> >> Today's Topics: >> >> 1. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >> (Wendy Smith) >> 2. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >> (Luke Kundl Pinette) >> 3. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >> (Tom Givon) >> 4. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >> (James J. Mischler) >> 5. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >> (Wendy Smith) >> 6. Re: FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 (s.t. bischoff) >> 7. Re: FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 (A. Katz) >> 8. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >> (John Du Bois) >> 9. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> (Luke Kundl Pinette) >> 10. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> (Luke Kundl Pinette) >> 11. Call for papers: Lancaster Postgraduate Conference in >> Linguistics and English Language (Gabrielatos, Costas) >> 12. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >> (Tim Thornes) >> 13. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >> (Pamela Munro) >> 14. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> (Brian MacWhinney) >> 15. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> (jess tauber) >> 16. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> (Tom Givon) >> 17. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> (Marianne Mithun) >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Message: 1 >> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 10:07:07 -0800 >> From: Wendy Smith >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> To: Keith Johnson >> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: <4D3879CB.6010503 at csusb.edu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, >> and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child >> acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no >> direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be >> patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the >> same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the >> materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women >> are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who >> works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training >> or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will >> learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint >> Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is >> virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car >> or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction >> to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. >> >> On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>> Hi Funksters, >>> >>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>> raises a couple of >>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>> languages >>> unit? >>> >>> Keith Johnson >>> >>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 2 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 03:15:49 +0900 >> From: Luke Kundl Pinette >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> To: Keith Johnson , >> funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: <4D387BD5.5020305 at comcast.net> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> Hi Keith, >> >> I'm of two minds about this. >> >> Now the Rosetta Stone is not a good program. And I will first confess >> that I've had a vendetta against the Rosetta Stone because I feel that >> its entire marketing strategy, from premise to conclusion consists of >> propagating myths about language instruction: >> >> 1. Children learn languages effortlessly. >> 2. You can learn a language like a child does. >> 3. You should learn a language like a child does. >> 4. The Rosetta Stone's program resembles the way a child learns language. >> 5. Ergo you can learn a language effortlessly using the Rosetta Stone. >> >> Nonetheless it's a very effective marketing strategy. Most people have >> heard of the Rosetta Stone, whether they study languages or not, and >> quite a lot of them believe it's the best program on the market. It's >> not the unjustified self-promotion over the competition which bothers me >> (that's the whole point of marketing), but rather the fact that it fits >> too well with the attitude Americans tend to have about language learning. >> >> I've met far too many people who claim that they simply don't have the >> knack for learning languages, as their efforts while they were in >> school, at the local community college, and yes--the Rosetta Stone >> show. Having studied with some of said people in college, I've observed >> that most students in language classes believe that less than five hours >> a week in a language class or on a computer is sufficient to learn a >> language, and that if they can't they're simply unable to learn a >> language. In the time I studied Spanish and Arabic in a classroom, I >> could not find one person willing to speak the language outside of class >> except for native speakers. >> >> I've heard praise for a couple other programs (which I won't name), >> however the people who use these programs, myself included, recognize >> that they are a tool and not a teacher. Rosetta Stone claims to be a >> teacher, and I've never met a person who's tried Rosetta Stone and >> claimed success in it. It's either a bad program (usually heard from >> someone who eventually learned the language through more conventional >> means) or it's the user's own fault (from someone who hasn't). >> >> Of course the easiest way to learn a language is to immerse yourself, >> but endangered languages tend to be in a situation similar to that I >> experienced in the United States, where native speakers of the target >> language are hard to come by outside of formal classes. In situations >> like that it's absolutely essential to practice with other non-native >> speakers, which requires both will and resources. And the question is >> whether the Rosetta Stone's contribution to the latter outweighs any >> detrimental effect on the former. >> >> It's well established in psychology that when people find something hard >> and think that it will always be hard, they tend to give up. I've long >> suspected that telling hearing a program makes language easy, and then >> finding that it's not would encourage people to give up more easily than >> going into it with the assumption it will be a challenge. And while >> this would be a bad thing when we're talking Americans learning Arabic, >> it's a great deal worse when we're talking a language on the verge of >> extinction. >> >> But language is quite different from most of human psychology, and I >> don't think there's been any research on language specifically. The >> kind of people who buy the Rosetta Stone expecting a >> brain-translator-slug may not be the kind of people who are all that >> determined to learn a language in the first place, and the people who >> use the program to learn an endangered language will go into it with >> different expectations. They won't be using it because they think it's >> an easy way to attract Italian models, but rather because it's what's >> available. And I'd expect that these students will be using it as a >> tool and not a teacher. Language revitalization takes a good deal more >> dedication and savvy than learning one of the world's major tongues. >> >> The Rosetta Stone does record actual native speakers, and in that sense, >> when your options are limited, it would almost certainly be a useful >> tool. I'm not sure if there are other language companies who have >> endangered languages departments. Personally I'd like to see pretty >> much any company except the Rosetta Stone doing this, but even despite >> my dislike of the company I'm inclined to say it's probably beneficial >> on the balance. >> >> Regards, >> Luke >> >> >> On 1/21/11 1:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>> Hi Funksters, >>> >>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>> raises a couple of >>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>> languages >>> unit? >>> >>> Keith Johnson >>> >>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 3 >> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 11:16:32 -0700 >> From: Tom Givon >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: <4D387C00.2050307 at uoregon.edu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> >> >> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my Ute >> friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. However, >> preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the Natives are >> just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more vulnerable. I >> hope they don't create more damage than history already has. TG >> >> ============== >> >> >> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>> Hi Funksters, >>> >>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>> raises a couple of >>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>> languages >>> unit? >>> >>> Keith Johnson >>> >>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 4 >> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 12:19:39 -0600 >> From: "James J. Mischler" >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> To: Wendy Smith , Keith Johnson >> >> Cc: "funknet at mailman.rice.edu" >> Message-ID: >> <285D95BE552E5A4F9C45A549C5763B3635D9480115 at ex-mbx1.nsula.edu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >> >> Wendy and all, >> >> I wonder if *any* program has been found, via controlled research study, to >> aid in the learning of a language. Wendy said that there are programs that >> are better than Rosetta Stone; what are they? Is there any data to support >> the view that the program(s) did in fact aid learning? >> >> Jim Mischler >> Assistant Professor >> Language & Communication >> Northwestern State University of Louisiana >> Natchitoches, LA >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [mailto: >> funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Wendy Smith >> Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:07 PM >> To: Keith Johnson >> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> >> This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, >> and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child >> acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no >> direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be >> patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the >> same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the >> materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women >> are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who >> works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training >> or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will >> learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint >> Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is >> virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car >> or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction >> to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. >> >> On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>> Hi Funksters, >>> >>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>> raises a couple of >>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>> languages >>> unit? >>> >>> Keith Johnson >>> >>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 5 >> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 10:29:35 -0800 >> From: Wendy Smith >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> To: "James J. Mischler" >> Cc: Keith Johnson , >> "funknet at mailman.rice.edu" >> Message-ID: <4D387F0F.7070400 at csusb.edu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> no language programs can effect language acquisition or learning (in the >> case of the adult brain we say 'learning,' not acquisition). I have been >> using Pimsleur which I have found to be quite good in providing the >> sounds of the language and some useful conversation. It is still >> repetition and memory, which does not equate SLA. I am now repeating >> these dialogues in my sleep (!) but when I try to speak to a native >> speaker, it all goes out the window. I am counting on immersion--I will >> be in Belarus for 4-5 months as of Monday. (I know of no controlled >> study of any program--but it doesn't mean they haven't been done--I >> would check ACTFL for that information). >> >> On 1/20/2011 10:19 AM, James J. Mischler wrote: >>> Wendy and all, >>> >>> I wonder if *any* program has been found, via controlled research study, >> to aid in the learning of a language. Wendy said that there are programs >> that are better than Rosetta Stone; what are they? Is there any data to >> support the view that the program(s) did in fact aid learning? >>> >>> Jim Mischler >>> Assistant Professor >>> Language& Communication >>> Northwestern State University of Louisiana >>> Natchitoches, LA >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [mailto: >> funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Wendy Smith >>> Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:07 PM >>> To: Keith Johnson >>> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >>> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >>> >>> This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, >>> and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child >>> acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no >>> direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be >>> patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the >>> same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the >>> materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women >>> are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who >>> works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training >>> or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will >>> learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint >>> Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is >>> virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car >>> or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction >>> to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. >>> >>> On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>>> Hi Funksters, >>>> >>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>>> raises a couple of >>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>>> languages >>>> unit? >>>> >>>> Keith Johnson >>>> >>>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 6 >> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 13:31:36 -0500 >> From: "s.t. bischoff" >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 >> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: >> >>> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 >> >> The issue of Rosetta Stone and endangered languages seems ripe for >> controversy. The relationship can be easily exploited by Rosetta Stone. If >> a >> community provides data and RS controls the data the community may find >> itself at the mercy of the RS. For example, as I understand it, often RS >> provides the "service" to create the resources for "free". They charge a >> nominal fee for access to the first level lessons. However, that fee >> increases with advancing levels. Like most minority groups, endangered >> language communities are easy targets for exploitation (see the recent >> Coushatta casino scam). Additionally, there is a good deal of controversy >> regarding weather or not RS actually works. As I understand it, some >> researchers have done research on RS and the conclusion have been that it >> doesn't work (linguists working the software can judge for >> themselves)...the >> results cannot be released due to litigation. In short, these types of >> relationships can't help but raise some concerns...I wonder if communities >> (both endangered language and academic) are always savvy enough to protect >> themselves. Of course greater detail of the actual relationships that RS >> creates would be helpful in terms of understanding. >> >> On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 1:00 PM, wrote: >> >>> Send FUNKNET mailing list submissions to >>> funknet at mailman.rice.edu >>> >>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >>> https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/funknet >>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >>> funknet-request at mailman.rice.edu >>> >>> You can reach the person managing the list at >>> funknet-owner at mailman.rice.edu >>> >>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >>> than "Re: Contents of FUNKNET digest..." >>> >>> >>> Today's Topics: >>> >>> 1. Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >>> (Keith Johnson) >>> 2. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >>> (A. Katz) >>> >>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> Message: 1 >>> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 08:50:19 -0800 >>> From: Keith Johnson >>> Subject: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >>> languages >>> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >>> Message-ID: >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes >>> >>> Hi Funksters, >>> >>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>> raises a couple of >>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>> languages >>> unit? >>> >>> Keith Johnson >>> >>> >>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> Message: 2 >>> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 09:38:15 -0800 (PST) >>> From: "A. Katz" >>> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >>> languages >>> To: Keith Johnson >>> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >>> Message-ID: >>> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed >>> >>> Why not? If it helps preserve the language, and the speakers approve, >> then >>> there should be no problem. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, 20 Jan 2011, Keith Johnson wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Funksters, >>>> >>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >> raises >>> a >>>> couple of >>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>> languages >>>> unit? >>>> >>>> Keith Johnson >>>> >>>> >>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> End of FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 >>> *************************************** >>> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 7 >> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 11:12:17 -0800 (PST) >> From: "A. Katz" >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 >> To: "s.t. bischoff" >> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: >> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed >> >> I think the issue of whether the RS program works is quite marginal to the >> question of whether RS or some other commercial program can help to >> preserve the resources of a language community for future generations. >> >> Let's grant for a moment that RS -- or any other computerized program -- >> cannot in and of itself cause someone to acquire a language that he cannot >> speak already. >> >> The question is: how are speakers of this language going to be damaged by >> the program? Surely their language isn't going to be "taken away from >> them." What they know, they know. What they are able to transmit to the >> next generation by natural means, they will. So what is really at issue >> is: will this help them to preserve language resources now in danger of >> being lost? Will it help keep the language on ice, in case of language >> death, so that it can be revived later, by people willing to put in the >> effort? >> >> Are there other issues? Is there any fear that these resources will not be >> available to future generations of would be speakers? Is someone >> concerned that the language will get "patented" and only RS will have the >> license to use it? >> >> >> --Aya >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 8 >> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 17:48:25 -0800 >> From: John Du Bois >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> To: Tom Givon >> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: <4D38E5E9.9030402 at linguistics.ucsb.edu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage >> that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in an >> endangered language community. >> >> For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that work >> with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the last >> speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far as >> indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, and >> linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this specific >> legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for whatever >> reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on their >> language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language >> community, this can have a big negative impact. >> >> It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered >> language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and to >> work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies for >> mitigating any negative effects. >> >> Jack Du Bois >> >> On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: >>> >>> >>> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my >>> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. >>> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the >>> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more >>> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already >>> has. TG >>> >>> ============== >>> >>> >>> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>>> Hi Funksters, >>>> >>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>>> raises a couple of >>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>>> languages >>>> unit? >>>> >>>> Keith Johnson >>>> >>>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> -- >> >> *************************************************** >> John W. Du Bois, Professor >> Department of Linguistics >> 3607 South Hall >> University of California, Santa Barbara >> Santa Barbara, California 93106-3100 >> USA >> *************************************************** >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 9 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:34:14 +0900 >> From: Luke Kundl Pinette >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to >> endangered >> languages >> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: <4D38F0A6.1010605 at comcast.net> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> James, >> So this gets us a bit off topic, but again I of course have to comment. >> >> I don't know about a controlled study. Before I decided on pragmatics I >> considered doing my thesis on second-language learning strategies, and >> did a fair bit of research to this end, and I didn't see any formal >> paper specifically mentioning language programs. I'd suspect there's >> something, but these programs are all designed so differently that a >> negative result on one wouldn't apply across programs. >> >> As I said earlier, no program can be a teacher. Until we design a >> program that can pass the Turing test, even if we imagine a program that >> can hold a conversation, it won't be able to teach subtle distinctions >> in semantics and pragmatics. Consider the difference in spoken English >> between "Whaddaya doing?" "Whacha doing?" and "Whacha up to?" and >> consider the fact that not only English, but every language has myriads >> of minor distinctions like this. >> >> There's three programs I know by name; I've had all of them recommended >> to me by friends and acquaintances: Rosetta Stone, Pimsleur, and Before >> You Know It. Rosetta Stone as I said was so awful out of the box, >> contradicting everything I knew about language learning and good >> pedagogy that I promptly returned it to my brother (who had been foolish >> enough to buy it and of course never used it). >> >> The two programs I've used are Pimsleur and Before You Know It. I like >> Pimsleur, it teaches grammar from the outset, and starts the way you >> would start a language class, and teaches you to speak in sentences from >> the start. I think it would be more useful if you have someone to >> practice with--the scripts it uses are actually pretty good, but if you >> don't have someone it's just rote memorization. And it's definitely not >> a quick way to learn a language. And if you know linguistics, and have >> broken down the morphology of the sentence less than ten minutes in, it >> becomes a bit tedious. It's still something I happily recommend to >> people I know, though I usually suggest they get it from the library, >> unless the site is having a sale (as I think they sometimes do). >> >> On the other hand if you've traveled much to a foreign country without >> speaking the language, you'll know that pointing, money, and a >> calculator will get you pretty far. A few words, social niceties like >> "hello," "thank you," and "I'm sorry" will get you even further, and if >> you're going right now it's useful to be able to pick which words you >> need. Before You Know It, which an acquaintance described as a set of >> computerized flashcards, is useful in this respect. I don't know anyone >> who's used the paid version, or even what that includes, but the free >> version is quite extensive. >> >> My biggest complaint is that the pronunciations given are generally not >> the way the speaker would say it. It's like if you paid an English >> speaker to ennunciate words, and they said "what-are-you-do-ing" >> "want-to" "ve-ge-ta-ble" and "com-for-ta-ble" every time. For example >> Koreans don't say "annyeonghaseyo" for "hello," but "anyeseyo" or even >> "yeseyo." And "thank you" is not "kamsahamnida" but "kamsamnida." >> Nonetheless, these are useful words. The Koreans understood what I was >> saying, even if they always cracked up when they heard me, and since I >> knew what the words sounded like in context I was able to figure out how >> they were actually pronounced. But if the paid version contained clips >> of the way people actually say the words, it would be well worth paying >> for. >> >> I think most of the lesser known products on the market are similar to >> one or the other of these. I've seen other computer programs which are >> flashcard based, and I inherited a few German records and tapes from my >> grandfather when he moved to Florida, and they're similar to Pimsleur. >> (Though I like Pimsleur's layout better.) >> >> That said though, when you view language programs as a tool to help >> study, you might as well ask whether there's any data to support the >> view that textbooks in fact aid learning. It depends on the program, >> the student, and the use the latter makes of the former. >> >> Regards, >> Luke >> >> On 1/21/11 3:19 AM, James J. Mischler wrote: >>> Wendy and all, >>> >>> I wonder if *any* program has been found, via controlled research study, >> to aid in the learning of a language. Wendy said that there are programs >> that are better than Rosetta Stone; what are they? Is there any data to >> support the view that the program(s) did in fact aid learning? >>> >>> Jim Mischler >>> Assistant Professor >>> Language& Communication >>> Northwestern State University of Louisiana >>> Natchitoches, LA >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [mailto: >> funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Wendy Smith >>> Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:07 PM >>> To: Keith Johnson >>> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >>> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >>> >>> This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, >>> and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child >>> acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no >>> direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be >>> patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the >>> same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the >>> materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women >>> are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who >>> works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training >>> or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will >>> learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint >>> Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is >>> virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car >>> or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction >>> to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. >>> >>> On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>>> Hi Funksters, >>>> >>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>>> raises a couple of >>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>>> languages >>>> unit? >>>> >>>> Keith Johnson >>>> >>>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 10 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 13:09:16 +0900 >> From: Luke Kundl Pinette >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to >> endangered >> languages >> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: <4D3906EC.7030301 at comcast.net> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> The question is, why is the Rosetta Stone doing this anyways? According >> to the article, Rosetta doesn't actually distribute the programs, just >> makes them. It doesn't say if it's turning a profit, a loss or selling >> them at cost (though the last is what one would infer from the article). >> If they're doing it for the PR, they'll probably try not to screw over >> native communities too badly, though of course you know what they say >> about the pavement used on the road to hell. >> >> If they're in it for the money, I wouldn't put it past them to add a >> clause like that. Then we've got a legal question on our hands. It's >> essentially monopolistic practice, particularly if they make a pattern >> of deliberately blocking competition for language programs in endangered >> languages. I suspect that if they were to try it, it would be possible >> to find some lawyer willing to pursue the issue, and when taken to court >> they would lose. It would certainly cause a lot of trouble in the >> meantime though. >> >> It sounds like nobody on this list has any illusions about the company. >> It's depressing to see that a linguist like Krauss, and one in such an >> important position has bought into Rosetta Stone's marketing, but again, >> unless another company steps up it doesn't sound like there's any >> options other than no language program. If Rosetta is not in fact >> inserting insidious clauses into the agreements with their informants, >> it's still probably better than nothing. >> >> Regards, >> Luke >> >> >> On 1/21/11 10:48 AM, John Du Bois wrote: >>> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage >>> that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in >>> an endangered language community. >>> >>> For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that >>> work with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the >>> last speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far >>> as indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, >>> and linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this >>> specific legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for >>> whatever reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on >>> their language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language >>> community, this can have a big negative impact. >>> >>> It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered >>> language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and >>> to work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies >>> for mitigating any negative effects. >>> >>> Jack Du Bois >>> >>> On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my >>>> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. >>>> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the >>>> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more >>>> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already >>>> has. TG >>>> >>>> ============== >>>> >>>> >>>> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>>>> Hi Funksters, >>>>> >>>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>>>> raises a couple of >>>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>>>> languages >>>>> unit? >>>>> >>>>> Keith Johnson >>>>> >>>>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 11 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 03:09:08 -0800 (PST) >> From: "Gabrielatos, Costas" >> Subject: [FUNKNET] Call for papers: Lancaster Postgraduate Conference >> in Linguistics and English Language >> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Cc: Helen West >> Message-ID: <420317.74566.qm at web113306.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 >> >> THE SIXTH LANCASTER UNIVERSITY INTERNATIONAL POSTGRADUATE CONFERENCE >> IN?LINGUISTICS AND LANGUAGE TEACHING >> >> Dear All, >> >> We are pleased to announce the Sixth Lancaster University International >> Postgraduate Conference in Linguistics and English Language (LAEL PG >> Conference) which will take place at Lancaster University's George Fox >> building, >> >> on Tuesday 12th of July 2011. >> >> This one-day conference is designed to give linguistics postgraduates from >> all >> research areas an opportunity to present and discuss their research in >> an informal and intellectually stimulating setting. >> >> This year's conference will be opened by Prof. Greg Myers (Lancaster >> University), and there will be guest plenary lectures by: >> Prof. Paul Kerswill (Lancaster University) >> Dr. Johnny Unger (Lancaster University) >> >> We invite postgraduate students to submit abstracts for oral and poster >> presentations on any area of linguistics, theoretical or applied (see below >> for >> abstract submission guidelines). >> >> Topics Include: >> >> ? - Cognitive linguistics >> ? - Corpus linguistics >> ? - Critical discourse analysis >> ? - Historical linguistics >> ? - Literacy studies >> ? - Pragmatics/semantics >> ? - Phonetics/phonology >> ? - Second language teaching/learning/assessment >> ? - Sociolinguistics >> ? - Syntax/morphology Stylistics >> ? - Translation studies >> ? - Other: please specify >> >> For further information, please visit the website: >> http://www.lancs.ac.uk/fass/events/laelpgconference/index.htm >> >> Key Dates >> >> Abstracts must be received by Friday 25 March 2011 >> Notification of acceptancewill be given on Tuesday 10 May 2011 >> >> Hope to hear from you all soon, >> >> Helen Faye West >> Janina Iwaniec >> Matteo Di Cristofaro >> Jonathon Adams >> Ibrahim Efe >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 12 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 08:14:57 -0600 >> From: "Tim Thornes" >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> To: , >> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: <4D394082020000870009B3F2 at gwia1.uca.edu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII >> >> I would agree with this sentiment as well as with the inherent potential of >> a company like this to really screw up relationships with members of an >> endangered language community. I mean, if Rosetta Stone as the "worldwide >> leader in language learning worldwide (sic)" ( >> http://www.rosettastone.com/backnolang?pc=se2011&cid=se-gg&gclid=CPCPvsm8y6YCFQPsKgodqhCrHA) >> can't help us, why would I think some nerdy academic with a microphone and a >> laptop could? >> As one such, I am as capable as any big company of damaging relationships >> with community members, and I ought to know better. Is there any >> expectation that RS does? >> Best, >> Tim >> >> Tim Thornes, PhD >> Assistant Professor of Linguistics >> Department of Writing >> University of Central Arkansas >> 201 Donaghey Avenue >> Conway, Arkansas 72035 >> USA >> (501)450-5613 >> tthornes at uca.edu >> >>>>> John Du Bois 01/20/11 7:48 PM >>> >> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage >> that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in an >> endangered language community. >> >> For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that work >> with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the last >> speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far as >> indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, and >> linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this specific >> legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for whatever >> reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on their >> language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language >> community, this can have a big negative impact. >> >> It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered >> language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and to >> work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies for >> mitigating any negative effects. >> >> Jack Du Bois >> >> On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: >>> >>> >>> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my >>> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. >>> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the >>> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more >>> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already >>> has. TG >>> >>> ============== >>> >>> >>> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>>> Hi Funksters, >>>> >>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>>> raises a couple of >>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>>> languages >>>> unit? >>>> >>>> Keith Johnson >>>> >>>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> -- >> >> *************************************************** >> John W. Du Bois, Professor >> Department of Linguistics >> 3607 South Hall >> University of California, Santa Barbara >> Santa Barbara, California 93106-3100 >> USA >> *************************************************** >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 13 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 07:48:38 -0800 >> From: Pamela Munro >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> To: Tim Thornes >> Cc: tgivon at uoregon.edu, dubois at linguistics.ucsb.edu, >> funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: <4D39AAD6.7090508 at ucla.edu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> All these suggestions are truly scary. >> >> Pam >> >> Tim Thornes wrote: >>> I would agree with this sentiment as well as with the inherent potential >> of a company like this to really screw up relationships with members of an >> endangered language community. I mean, if Rosetta Stone as the "worldwide >> leader in language learning worldwide (sic)" ( >> http://www.rosettastone.com/backnolang?pc=se2011&cid=se-gg&gclid=CPCPvsm8y6YCFQPsKgodqhCrHA) >> can't help us, why would I think some nerdy academic with a microphone and a >> laptop could? >>> As one such, I am as capable as any big company of damaging relationships >> with community members, and I ought to know better. Is there any >> expectation that RS does? >>> Best, >>> Tim >>> >>> Tim Thornes, PhD >>> Assistant Professor of Linguistics >>> Department of Writing >>> University of Central Arkansas >>> 201 Donaghey Avenue >>> Conway, Arkansas 72035 >>> USA >>> (501)450-5613 >>> tthornes at uca.edu >>> >>> >>>>>> John Du Bois 01/20/11 7:48 PM >>> >>>>>> >>> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage >>> that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in an >>> endangered language community. >>> >>> For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that work >>> with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the last >>> speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far as >>> indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, and >>> linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this specific >>> legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for whatever >>> reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on their >>> language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language >>> community, this can have a big negative impact. >>> >>> It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered >>> language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and to >>> work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies for >>> mitigating any negative effects. >>> >>> Jack Du Bois >>> >>> On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: >>> >>>> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my >>>> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. >>>> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the >>>> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more >>>> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already >>>> has. TG >>>> >>>> ============== >>>> >>>> >>>> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Funksters, >>>>> >>>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>>>> raises a couple of >>>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>>>> languages >>>>> unit? >>>>> >>>>> Keith Johnson >>>>> >>>>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >> >> -- >> Pamela Munro, >> Professor, Linguistics, UCLA >> UCLA Box 951543 >> Los Angeles, CA 90095-1543 >> http://www.linguistics.ucla.edu/people/munro/munro.htm >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 14 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:30:39 -0500 >> From: Brian MacWhinney >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to >> endangered >> languages >> To: Funknet >> Message-ID: <9A44FA72-E6DF-4498-A4A0-0A4C4E605BD7 at cmu.edu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >> >> Folks, >> >> I share your low regard for Rosetta Stone, not so much for what they >> fail to deliver, but rather for the overstated claims they make. I know a >> couple of students who have worked with them on internships and, so far, >> there is no evidence of malicious practices vis a vis native communities. >> Despite this, I agree that it is likely that communities who collaborate >> with them will get led down the garden path and end up unwilling to >> participate later with other, more promising, approaches to language >> maintenance. But these are freely-formed relations between consenting >> parties, so nothing can militate against it. >> Regarding the wider issue of effectiveness of language learning >> programs, I find it strange that Luke has located nothing on this subject. >> Back in 1968, Paul Pimsleur already demonstrated the effectiveness of his >> method of graduated interval recall which is picked up, in an admittedly >> diluted form, by the current Pimsleur series. There are hundreds of studies >> distributed across six major journals demonstrating the relatively greater >> effectiveness of specific components of language instruction, from keyword >> method to corrective feedback. These effects have been demonstrated in both >> controlled experiments and, somewhat less convincingly, in classroom and >> online instruction. Nearly all of my own experimental work is now focused >> on tests of this type embedded within online tutors. Perhaps what Luke is >> referring to is the absence of evidence of the overall comparative >> effectiveness of the big commercial language programs such as Rosetta Stone >> or Pimsleur. In the cases of >> such full programs, it is extremely difficult to coordinate a decent >> experimental test, because it would require buy in from a large group of >> volunteers across a long period with careful controls for study time and so >> on. So, I think it is generally better to focus on demonstrations of the >> effects of individual components of programs, because these can be subject >> to reasonable experimental control. Of course, all of this leaves the >> naturalistic methods of language learning out in the cold, and that is >> wrong. In the end, the best way to advance this field will be to increase >> automatic data collection during the language learning process, within >> online, classroom, and naturalistic contexts. This is what I am working on. >> >> Regards, >> >> -- Brian MacWhinney >> >> On Jan 20, 2011, at 11:09 PM, Luke Kundl Pinette wrote: >> >>> The question is, why is the Rosetta Stone doing this anyways? According >> to the article, Rosetta doesn't actually distribute the programs, just makes >> them. It doesn't say if it's turning a profit, a loss or selling them at >> cost (though the last is what one would infer from the article). If they're >> doing it for the PR, they'll probably try not to screw over native >> communities too badly, though of course you know what they say about the >> pavement used on the road to hell. >>> >>> If they're in it for the money, I wouldn't put it past them to add a >> clause like that. Then we've got a legal question on our hands. It's >> essentially monopolistic practice, particularly if they make a pattern of >> deliberately blocking competition for language programs in endangered >> languages. I suspect that if they were to try it, it would be possible to >> find some lawyer willing to pursue the issue, and when taken to court they >> would lose. It would certainly cause a lot of trouble in the meantime >> though. >>> >>> It sounds like nobody on this list has any illusions about the company. >> It's depressing to see that a linguist like Krauss, and one in such an >> important position has bought into Rosetta Stone's marketing, but again, >> unless another company steps up it doesn't sound like there's any options >> other than no language program. If Rosetta is not in fact inserting >> insidious clauses into the agreements with their informants, it's still >> probably better than nothing. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Luke >>> >>> >>> On 1/21/11 10:48 AM, John Du Bois wrote: >>>> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage >>>> that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in >>>> an endangered language community. >>>> >>>> For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that >>>> work with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the >>>> last speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far >>>> as indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, >>>> and linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this >>>> specific legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for >>>> whatever reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on >>>> their language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language >>>> community, this can have a big negative impact. >>>> >>>> It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered >>>> language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and >>>> to work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies >>>> for mitigating any negative effects. >>>> >>>> Jack Du Bois >>>> >>>> On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my >>>>> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. >>>>> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the >>>>> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more >>>>> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already >>>>> has. TG >>>>> >>>>> ============== >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>>>>> Hi Funksters, >>>>>> >>>>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>>>>> raises a couple of >>>>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>>>>> languages >>>>>> unit? >>>>>> >>>>>> Keith Johnson >>>>>> >>>>>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 15 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:33:26 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >> From: jess tauber >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to >> endangered >> languages >> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: >> < >> 32117937.1295627607528.JavaMail.root at wamui-hunyo.atl.sa.earthlink.net> >> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 >> >> Just minutes ago as I write this, on the television show 'The View', actor >> Ed Harris brought up his not so successful attempt to use Rosetta Stone, >> 'that thing you can get', to pick up a little Russian for his movie opening >> this week- eventually he had to utilize the services of a Bulgarian, in >> person. >> >> Maybe the public isn't so misinformed? >> >> Jess Tauber >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 16 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 09:40:02 -0700 >> From: Tom Givon >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to >> endangered >> languages >> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: <4D39B6E2.3030004 at uoregon.edu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> >> They still shell out C-notes by the bushel for this scam. RS does not >> make their money off satisfied customers, but off poor first-hit >> suckers. TG >> >> ============================ >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On 1/21/2011 9:33 AM, jess tauber wrote: >>> Just minutes ago as I write this, on the television show 'The View', >> actor Ed Harris brought up his not so successful attempt to use Rosetta >> Stone, 'that thing you can get', to pick up a little Russian for his movie >> opening this week- eventually he had to utilize the services of a Bulgarian, >> in person. >>> >>> Maybe the public isn't so misinformed? >>> >>> Jess Tauber >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 17 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 08:57:58 -0800 >> From: Marianne Mithun >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to >> endangered >> languages >> To: Brian MacWhinney , Funknet >> >> Message-ID: >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed >> >> I finally have to weigh in here on another aspect of the issue specifically >> with respect to endangered languages. >> >> For communities in danger of losing their traditional languages, learning >> the heritage language isn't just about being able to order a meal in a >> restaurant or book a hotel room. It's often about something much deeper, >> about appreciating traditional ways of viewing the world, of categorizing >> concepts, of combining ideas, of interacting. And the Rosetta Stone system >> is one-size-fits-all. People are essentially asked to translate the model >> sentences into whatever language is at hand, and the results tend to be >> close to word-by-word translations. So yes, learners learn how to say 'boy' >> and 'run'. But they don't learn, for example, that ideas expressed by nouns >> in English are expressed in language X by verbs. Or that in many languages >> people don't tend to talk sentences consisting of Noun Verb Noun (or Noun >> Noun Verb). They don't learn about the glorious elaboration of semantic >> distinctions or domains that have no counterparts in the model language. >> They probably won't learn about evidentials. They are unlikely to learn >> about elaborate aspectual distinctions. They certainly won't learn >> different patterns of subordination or clause combining. >> >> For some situations, that may be fine. Heritage speakers just want to be >> able to use some phrases in everyday talk. And they don't have the time or >> interest for that kind of complexity. For others, it sort of defeats the >> whole purpose. >> >> Marianne Mithun >> >> >> --On Friday, January 21, 2011 11:30 AM -0500 Brian MacWhinney >> wrote: >> >>> Folks, >>> >>> I share your low regard for Rosetta Stone, not so much for what they >>> fail to deliver, but rather for the overstated claims they make. I know >>> a couple of students who have worked with them on internships and, so >>> far, there is no evidence of malicious practices vis a vis native >>> communities. Despite this, I agree that it is likely that communities who >>> collaborate with them will get led down the garden path and end up >>> unwilling to participate later with other, more promising, approaches to >>> language maintenance. But these are freely-formed relations between >>> consenting parties, so nothing can militate against it. Regarding >>> the wider issue of effectiveness of language learning programs, I find it >>> strange that Luke has located nothing on this subject. Back in 1968, >>> Paul Pimsleur already demonstrated the effectiveness of his method of >>> graduated interval recall which is picked up, in an admittedly diluted >>> form, by the current Pimsleur series. There are hundreds of studies >>> distributed across six major journals demonstrating the relatively >>> greater effectiveness of specific components of language instruction, >>> from keyword method to corrective feedback. These effects have been >>> demonstrated in both controlled experiments and, somewhat less >>> convincingly, in classroom and online instruction. Nearly all of my own >>> experimental work is now focused on tests of this type embedded within >>> online tutors. Perhaps what Luke is referring to is the absence of >>> evidence of the overall comparative effectiveness of the big commercial >>> language programs such as Rosetta Stone or Pimsleur. In the cases of >>> such full programs, it is extremely difficult to coordinate a decent >>> experimental test, because it would require buy in from a large group of >>> volunteers across a long period with careful controls for study time and >>> so on. So, I think it is generally better to focus on demonstrations of >>> the effects of individual components of programs, because these can be >>> subject to reasonable experimental control. Of course, all of this >>> leaves the naturalistic methods of language learning out in the cold, and >>> that is wrong. In the end, the best way to advance this field will be to >>> increase automatic data collection during the language learning process, >>> within online, classroom, and naturalistic contexts. This is what I am >>> working on. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> -- Brian MacWhinney >>> >>> On Jan 20, 2011, at 11:09 PM, Luke Kundl Pinette wrote: >>> >>>> The question is, why is the Rosetta Stone doing this anyways? According >>>> to the article, Rosetta doesn't actually distribute the programs, just >>>> makes them. It doesn't say if it's turning a profit, a loss or selling >>>> them at cost (though the last is what one would infer from the article). >>>> If they're doing it for the PR, they'll probably try not to screw over >>>> native communities too badly, though of course you know what they say >>>> about the pavement used on the road to hell. >>>> >>>> If they're in it for the money, I wouldn't put it past them to add a >>>> clause like that. Then we've got a legal question on our hands. It's >>>> essentially monopolistic practice, particularly if they make a pattern >>>> of deliberately blocking competition for language programs in endangered >>>> languages. I suspect that if they were to try it, it would be possible >>>> to find some lawyer willing to pursue the issue, and when taken to court >>>> they would lose. It would certainly cause a lot of trouble in the >>>> meantime though. >>>> >>>> It sounds like nobody on this list has any illusions about the company. >>>> It's depressing to see that a linguist like Krauss, and one in such an >>>> important position has bought into Rosetta Stone's marketing, but again, >>>> unless another company steps up it doesn't sound like there's any >>>> options other than no language program. If Rosetta is not in fact >>>> inserting insidious clauses into the agreements with their informants, >>>> it's still probably better than nothing. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Luke >>>> >>>> >>>> On 1/21/11 10:48 AM, John Du Bois wrote: >>>>> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage >>>>> that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in >>>>> an endangered language community. >>>>> >>>>> For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that >>>>> work with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the >>>>> last speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far >>>>> as indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, >>>>> and linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this >>>>> specific legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for >>>>> whatever reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on >>>>> their language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language >>>>> community, this can have a big negative impact. >>>>> >>>>> It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered >>>>> language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and >>>>> to work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies >>>>> for mitigating any negative effects. >>>>> >>>>> Jack Du Bois >>>>> >>>>> On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my >>>>>> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. >>>>>> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the >>>>>> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more >>>>>> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already >>>>>> has. TG >>>>>> >>>>>> ============== >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>>>>>> Hi Funksters, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>>>>>> raises a couple of >>>>>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>>>>>> languages >>>>>>> unit? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Keith Johnson >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-ros >>>>>>> etta.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> End of FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 17 >> *************************************** >> > > From delancey at uoregon.edu Sat Jan 22 14:47:39 2011 From: delancey at uoregon.edu (scott delancey) Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2011 06:47:39 -0800 Subject: FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 17 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 22:20:48 -0500, "s.t. bischoff" wrote: > Also, if a linguist records > a narrative or myth...who has the "copyright" to it, if anyone? The > linguist, the speaker, the community, the tribal council? I don't know the lawyer legalities (I doubt if the issues have been extensively tested in court) but as both a practical and an ethical matter these are questions you need to negotiate with the tribe before you collect anything. And get it in writing. And in detail. -- Scott DeLancey Department of Linguistics University of Oregon 1290 Eugene, OR 97403-1290, USA 541-346-3901 From macw at cmu.edu Sun Jan 23 02:19:13 2011 From: macw at cmu.edu (Brian MacWhinney) Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2011 21:19:13 -0500 Subject: FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 17 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Shannon, If you click through and download the fact sheet at the CASL site, you will find no evidence of anything that looks like an actual empirical study in the sense of something with a control condition and outcomes measures. There appears to be a good reason for this. The programs that were evaluated were simply not appropriate for the target learners in terms of level or coverage. Regarding FST, I believe that you may be right about the copyright issue. When we started on the path of building morphological analyzers for the CHILDES and TalkBank databases, one of our early ideas was to simply make use of FST as an "off the shelf" technology. However, we then found that the various grammars built with FST were not publicly available, often because of copyright issues. This is why we built the MOR system as an alternative. We have developed MOR grammars for 12 languages and used them to tag large segments of the CHILDES and TalkBank databases. These grammars and the code that runs MOR are all open source, thereby avoiding this type of problem. -- Brian MacWhinney On Jan 21, 2011, at 6:11 PM, s.t. bischoff wrote: > The Center for Advanced Study of Language at UM College Park did a few > studies regarding language programs like RS...you can learn about these > studies at their website and download the official findings (I haven't read > these myself): > > http://casl.umd.edu/node/541 > > In conversation I was told that the RS report was not inclusive of all > findings because RS had blocked the report and was proceeding with > litigation against CASL to prevent the release of the findings which could > be damaging to RS. I can't verify the truth of this, but I have no reason to > doubt the source. > > When Xerox released its FST toolkit (useful for creating automated > syntactic, phonological, and morphological analyzers and thus things like > spell/grammar checkers, language revitalization tools, etc.), some linguists > took elements of the copyright notice to mean that "all data used with the > toolkit" became the property of Xerox in part or whole. This led some > linguists to work on the development of a similar open source FST toolkit, > FOMA. I'm not a copyright lawyer so can't comment on the validity of the > concern. > > Cheers, > Shannon > > > On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 1:00 PM, wrote: > >> Send FUNKNET mailing list submissions to >> funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> >> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >> https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/funknet >> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >> funknet-request at mailman.rice.edu >> >> You can reach the person managing the list at >> funknet-owner at mailman.rice.edu >> >> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >> than "Re: Contents of FUNKNET digest..." >> >> >> Today's Topics: >> >> 1. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >> (Wendy Smith) >> 2. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >> (Luke Kundl Pinette) >> 3. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >> (Tom Givon) >> 4. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >> (James J. Mischler) >> 5. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >> (Wendy Smith) >> 6. Re: FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 (s.t. bischoff) >> 7. Re: FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 (A. Katz) >> 8. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >> (John Du Bois) >> 9. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> (Luke Kundl Pinette) >> 10. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> (Luke Kundl Pinette) >> 11. Call for papers: Lancaster Postgraduate Conference in >> Linguistics and English Language (Gabrielatos, Costas) >> 12. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >> (Tim Thornes) >> 13. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >> (Pamela Munro) >> 14. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> (Brian MacWhinney) >> 15. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> (jess tauber) >> 16. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> (Tom Givon) >> 17. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> (Marianne Mithun) >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Message: 1 >> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 10:07:07 -0800 >> From: Wendy Smith >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> To: Keith Johnson >> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: <4D3879CB.6010503 at csusb.edu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, >> and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child >> acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no >> direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be >> patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the >> same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the >> materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women >> are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who >> works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training >> or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will >> learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint >> Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is >> virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car >> or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction >> to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. >> >> On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>> Hi Funksters, >>> >>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>> raises a couple of >>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>> languages >>> unit? >>> >>> Keith Johnson >>> >>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 2 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 03:15:49 +0900 >> From: Luke Kundl Pinette >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> To: Keith Johnson , >> funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: <4D387BD5.5020305 at comcast.net> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> Hi Keith, >> >> I'm of two minds about this. >> >> Now the Rosetta Stone is not a good program. And I will first confess >> that I've had a vendetta against the Rosetta Stone because I feel that >> its entire marketing strategy, from premise to conclusion consists of >> propagating myths about language instruction: >> >> 1. Children learn languages effortlessly. >> 2. You can learn a language like a child does. >> 3. You should learn a language like a child does. >> 4. The Rosetta Stone's program resembles the way a child learns language. >> 5. Ergo you can learn a language effortlessly using the Rosetta Stone. >> >> Nonetheless it's a very effective marketing strategy. Most people have >> heard of the Rosetta Stone, whether they study languages or not, and >> quite a lot of them believe it's the best program on the market. It's >> not the unjustified self-promotion over the competition which bothers me >> (that's the whole point of marketing), but rather the fact that it fits >> too well with the attitude Americans tend to have about language learning. >> >> I've met far too many people who claim that they simply don't have the >> knack for learning languages, as their efforts while they were in >> school, at the local community college, and yes--the Rosetta Stone >> show. Having studied with some of said people in college, I've observed >> that most students in language classes believe that less than five hours >> a week in a language class or on a computer is sufficient to learn a >> language, and that if they can't they're simply unable to learn a >> language. In the time I studied Spanish and Arabic in a classroom, I >> could not find one person willing to speak the language outside of class >> except for native speakers. >> >> I've heard praise for a couple other programs (which I won't name), >> however the people who use these programs, myself included, recognize >> that they are a tool and not a teacher. Rosetta Stone claims to be a >> teacher, and I've never met a person who's tried Rosetta Stone and >> claimed success in it. It's either a bad program (usually heard from >> someone who eventually learned the language through more conventional >> means) or it's the user's own fault (from someone who hasn't). >> >> Of course the easiest way to learn a language is to immerse yourself, >> but endangered languages tend to be in a situation similar to that I >> experienced in the United States, where native speakers of the target >> language are hard to come by outside of formal classes. In situations >> like that it's absolutely essential to practice with other non-native >> speakers, which requires both will and resources. And the question is >> whether the Rosetta Stone's contribution to the latter outweighs any >> detrimental effect on the former. >> >> It's well established in psychology that when people find something hard >> and think that it will always be hard, they tend to give up. I've long >> suspected that telling hearing a program makes language easy, and then >> finding that it's not would encourage people to give up more easily than >> going into it with the assumption it will be a challenge. And while >> this would be a bad thing when we're talking Americans learning Arabic, >> it's a great deal worse when we're talking a language on the verge of >> extinction. >> >> But language is quite different from most of human psychology, and I >> don't think there's been any research on language specifically. The >> kind of people who buy the Rosetta Stone expecting a >> brain-translator-slug may not be the kind of people who are all that >> determined to learn a language in the first place, and the people who >> use the program to learn an endangered language will go into it with >> different expectations. They won't be using it because they think it's >> an easy way to attract Italian models, but rather because it's what's >> available. And I'd expect that these students will be using it as a >> tool and not a teacher. Language revitalization takes a good deal more >> dedication and savvy than learning one of the world's major tongues. >> >> The Rosetta Stone does record actual native speakers, and in that sense, >> when your options are limited, it would almost certainly be a useful >> tool. I'm not sure if there are other language companies who have >> endangered languages departments. Personally I'd like to see pretty >> much any company except the Rosetta Stone doing this, but even despite >> my dislike of the company I'm inclined to say it's probably beneficial >> on the balance. >> >> Regards, >> Luke >> >> >> On 1/21/11 1:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>> Hi Funksters, >>> >>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>> raises a couple of >>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>> languages >>> unit? >>> >>> Keith Johnson >>> >>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 3 >> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 11:16:32 -0700 >> From: Tom Givon >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: <4D387C00.2050307 at uoregon.edu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> >> >> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my Ute >> friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. However, >> preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the Natives are >> just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more vulnerable. I >> hope they don't create more damage than history already has. TG >> >> ============== >> >> >> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>> Hi Funksters, >>> >>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>> raises a couple of >>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>> languages >>> unit? >>> >>> Keith Johnson >>> >>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 4 >> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 12:19:39 -0600 >> From: "James J. Mischler" >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> To: Wendy Smith , Keith Johnson >> >> Cc: "funknet at mailman.rice.edu" >> Message-ID: >> <285D95BE552E5A4F9C45A549C5763B3635D9480115 at ex-mbx1.nsula.edu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >> >> Wendy and all, >> >> I wonder if *any* program has been found, via controlled research study, to >> aid in the learning of a language. Wendy said that there are programs that >> are better than Rosetta Stone; what are they? Is there any data to support >> the view that the program(s) did in fact aid learning? >> >> Jim Mischler >> Assistant Professor >> Language & Communication >> Northwestern State University of Louisiana >> Natchitoches, LA >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [mailto: >> funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Wendy Smith >> Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:07 PM >> To: Keith Johnson >> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> >> This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, >> and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child >> acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no >> direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be >> patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the >> same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the >> materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women >> are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who >> works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training >> or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will >> learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint >> Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is >> virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car >> or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction >> to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. >> >> On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>> Hi Funksters, >>> >>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>> raises a couple of >>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>> languages >>> unit? >>> >>> Keith Johnson >>> >>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 5 >> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 10:29:35 -0800 >> From: Wendy Smith >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> To: "James J. Mischler" >> Cc: Keith Johnson , >> "funknet at mailman.rice.edu" >> Message-ID: <4D387F0F.7070400 at csusb.edu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> no language programs can effect language acquisition or learning (in the >> case of the adult brain we say 'learning,' not acquisition). I have been >> using Pimsleur which I have found to be quite good in providing the >> sounds of the language and some useful conversation. It is still >> repetition and memory, which does not equate SLA. I am now repeating >> these dialogues in my sleep (!) but when I try to speak to a native >> speaker, it all goes out the window. I am counting on immersion--I will >> be in Belarus for 4-5 months as of Monday. (I know of no controlled >> study of any program--but it doesn't mean they haven't been done--I >> would check ACTFL for that information). >> >> On 1/20/2011 10:19 AM, James J. Mischler wrote: >>> Wendy and all, >>> >>> I wonder if *any* program has been found, via controlled research study, >> to aid in the learning of a language. Wendy said that there are programs >> that are better than Rosetta Stone; what are they? Is there any data to >> support the view that the program(s) did in fact aid learning? >>> >>> Jim Mischler >>> Assistant Professor >>> Language& Communication >>> Northwestern State University of Louisiana >>> Natchitoches, LA >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [mailto: >> funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Wendy Smith >>> Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:07 PM >>> To: Keith Johnson >>> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >>> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >>> >>> This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, >>> and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child >>> acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no >>> direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be >>> patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the >>> same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the >>> materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women >>> are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who >>> works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training >>> or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will >>> learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint >>> Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is >>> virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car >>> or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction >>> to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. >>> >>> On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>>> Hi Funksters, >>>> >>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>>> raises a couple of >>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>>> languages >>>> unit? >>>> >>>> Keith Johnson >>>> >>>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 6 >> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 13:31:36 -0500 >> From: "s.t. bischoff" >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 >> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: >> >>> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 >> >> The issue of Rosetta Stone and endangered languages seems ripe for >> controversy. The relationship can be easily exploited by Rosetta Stone. If >> a >> community provides data and RS controls the data the community may find >> itself at the mercy of the RS. For example, as I understand it, often RS >> provides the "service" to create the resources for "free". They charge a >> nominal fee for access to the first level lessons. However, that fee >> increases with advancing levels. Like most minority groups, endangered >> language communities are easy targets for exploitation (see the recent >> Coushatta casino scam). Additionally, there is a good deal of controversy >> regarding weather or not RS actually works. As I understand it, some >> researchers have done research on RS and the conclusion have been that it >> doesn't work (linguists working the software can judge for >> themselves)...the >> results cannot be released due to litigation. In short, these types of >> relationships can't help but raise some concerns...I wonder if communities >> (both endangered language and academic) are always savvy enough to protect >> themselves. Of course greater detail of the actual relationships that RS >> creates would be helpful in terms of understanding. >> >> On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 1:00 PM, wrote: >> >>> Send FUNKNET mailing list submissions to >>> funknet at mailman.rice.edu >>> >>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >>> https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/funknet >>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >>> funknet-request at mailman.rice.edu >>> >>> You can reach the person managing the list at >>> funknet-owner at mailman.rice.edu >>> >>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >>> than "Re: Contents of FUNKNET digest..." >>> >>> >>> Today's Topics: >>> >>> 1. Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >>> (Keith Johnson) >>> 2. Re: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages >>> (A. Katz) >>> >>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> Message: 1 >>> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 08:50:19 -0800 >>> From: Keith Johnson >>> Subject: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >>> languages >>> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >>> Message-ID: >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes >>> >>> Hi Funksters, >>> >>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>> raises a couple of >>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>> languages >>> unit? >>> >>> Keith Johnson >>> >>> >>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> Message: 2 >>> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 09:38:15 -0800 (PST) >>> From: "A. Katz" >>> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >>> languages >>> To: Keith Johnson >>> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >>> Message-ID: >>> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed >>> >>> Why not? If it helps preserve the language, and the speakers approve, >> then >>> there should be no problem. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, 20 Jan 2011, Keith Johnson wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Funksters, >>>> >>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >> raises >>> a >>>> couple of >>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>> languages >>>> unit? >>>> >>>> Keith Johnson >>>> >>>> >>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> End of FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 >>> *************************************** >>> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 7 >> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 11:12:17 -0800 (PST) >> From: "A. Katz" >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16 >> To: "s.t. bischoff" >> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: >> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed >> >> I think the issue of whether the RS program works is quite marginal to the >> question of whether RS or some other commercial program can help to >> preserve the resources of a language community for future generations. >> >> Let's grant for a moment that RS -- or any other computerized program -- >> cannot in and of itself cause someone to acquire a language that he cannot >> speak already. >> >> The question is: how are speakers of this language going to be damaged by >> the program? Surely their language isn't going to be "taken away from >> them." What they know, they know. What they are able to transmit to the >> next generation by natural means, they will. So what is really at issue >> is: will this help them to preserve language resources now in danger of >> being lost? Will it help keep the language on ice, in case of language >> death, so that it can be revived later, by people willing to put in the >> effort? >> >> Are there other issues? Is there any fear that these resources will not be >> available to future generations of would be speakers? Is someone >> concerned that the language will get "patented" and only RS will have the >> license to use it? >> >> >> --Aya >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 8 >> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 17:48:25 -0800 >> From: John Du Bois >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> To: Tom Givon >> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: <4D38E5E9.9030402 at linguistics.ucsb.edu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage >> that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in an >> endangered language community. >> >> For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that work >> with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the last >> speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far as >> indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, and >> linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this specific >> legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for whatever >> reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on their >> language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language >> community, this can have a big negative impact. >> >> It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered >> language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and to >> work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies for >> mitigating any negative effects. >> >> Jack Du Bois >> >> On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: >>> >>> >>> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my >>> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. >>> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the >>> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more >>> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already >>> has. TG >>> >>> ============== >>> >>> >>> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>>> Hi Funksters, >>>> >>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>>> raises a couple of >>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>>> languages >>>> unit? >>>> >>>> Keith Johnson >>>> >>>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> -- >> >> *************************************************** >> John W. Du Bois, Professor >> Department of Linguistics >> 3607 South Hall >> University of California, Santa Barbara >> Santa Barbara, California 93106-3100 >> USA >> *************************************************** >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 9 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:34:14 +0900 >> From: Luke Kundl Pinette >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to >> endangered >> languages >> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: <4D38F0A6.1010605 at comcast.net> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> James, >> So this gets us a bit off topic, but again I of course have to comment. >> >> I don't know about a controlled study. Before I decided on pragmatics I >> considered doing my thesis on second-language learning strategies, and >> did a fair bit of research to this end, and I didn't see any formal >> paper specifically mentioning language programs. I'd suspect there's >> something, but these programs are all designed so differently that a >> negative result on one wouldn't apply across programs. >> >> As I said earlier, no program can be a teacher. Until we design a >> program that can pass the Turing test, even if we imagine a program that >> can hold a conversation, it won't be able to teach subtle distinctions >> in semantics and pragmatics. Consider the difference in spoken English >> between "Whaddaya doing?" "Whacha doing?" and "Whacha up to?" and >> consider the fact that not only English, but every language has myriads >> of minor distinctions like this. >> >> There's three programs I know by name; I've had all of them recommended >> to me by friends and acquaintances: Rosetta Stone, Pimsleur, and Before >> You Know It. Rosetta Stone as I said was so awful out of the box, >> contradicting everything I knew about language learning and good >> pedagogy that I promptly returned it to my brother (who had been foolish >> enough to buy it and of course never used it). >> >> The two programs I've used are Pimsleur and Before You Know It. I like >> Pimsleur, it teaches grammar from the outset, and starts the way you >> would start a language class, and teaches you to speak in sentences from >> the start. I think it would be more useful if you have someone to >> practice with--the scripts it uses are actually pretty good, but if you >> don't have someone it's just rote memorization. And it's definitely not >> a quick way to learn a language. And if you know linguistics, and have >> broken down the morphology of the sentence less than ten minutes in, it >> becomes a bit tedious. It's still something I happily recommend to >> people I know, though I usually suggest they get it from the library, >> unless the site is having a sale (as I think they sometimes do). >> >> On the other hand if you've traveled much to a foreign country without >> speaking the language, you'll know that pointing, money, and a >> calculator will get you pretty far. A few words, social niceties like >> "hello," "thank you," and "I'm sorry" will get you even further, and if >> you're going right now it's useful to be able to pick which words you >> need. Before You Know It, which an acquaintance described as a set of >> computerized flashcards, is useful in this respect. I don't know anyone >> who's used the paid version, or even what that includes, but the free >> version is quite extensive. >> >> My biggest complaint is that the pronunciations given are generally not >> the way the speaker would say it. It's like if you paid an English >> speaker to ennunciate words, and they said "what-are-you-do-ing" >> "want-to" "ve-ge-ta-ble" and "com-for-ta-ble" every time. For example >> Koreans don't say "annyeonghaseyo" for "hello," but "anyeseyo" or even >> "yeseyo." And "thank you" is not "kamsahamnida" but "kamsamnida." >> Nonetheless, these are useful words. The Koreans understood what I was >> saying, even if they always cracked up when they heard me, and since I >> knew what the words sounded like in context I was able to figure out how >> they were actually pronounced. But if the paid version contained clips >> of the way people actually say the words, it would be well worth paying >> for. >> >> I think most of the lesser known products on the market are similar to >> one or the other of these. I've seen other computer programs which are >> flashcard based, and I inherited a few German records and tapes from my >> grandfather when he moved to Florida, and they're similar to Pimsleur. >> (Though I like Pimsleur's layout better.) >> >> That said though, when you view language programs as a tool to help >> study, you might as well ask whether there's any data to support the >> view that textbooks in fact aid learning. It depends on the program, >> the student, and the use the latter makes of the former. >> >> Regards, >> Luke >> >> On 1/21/11 3:19 AM, James J. Mischler wrote: >>> Wendy and all, >>> >>> I wonder if *any* program has been found, via controlled research study, >> to aid in the learning of a language. Wendy said that there are programs >> that are better than Rosetta Stone; what are they? Is there any data to >> support the view that the program(s) did in fact aid learning? >>> >>> Jim Mischler >>> Assistant Professor >>> Language& Communication >>> Northwestern State University of Louisiana >>> Natchitoches, LA >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [mailto: >> funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Wendy Smith >>> Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:07 PM >>> To: Keith Johnson >>> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >>> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >>> >>> This is amazing. I tried to use Rosetta Stone to get started in Russian, >>> and it was hopeless. They say that their materials are based on child >>> acquisition theory and research--therefore direct immersion with no >>> direct instruction. As someone who has studied SLA, I found this to be >>> patently ridiculous. Adult second language learners do not learn in the >>> same way as first language acquirers. In addition, the core of the >>> materials are made up of isolated useless sentences such as "the women >>> are cooking" and "the boys are not reading." My brother-in-law, who >>> works in the biotech industry (in other words, no linguistics training >>> or knowledge) insisted to me that if you just do the program, you will >>> learn Russian. However, a month after he returned from his trip to Saint >>> Petersburg he could not remember the words for "where" or "when." It is >>> virtually impossible to "acquire" (as RS states) a language in your car >>> or at your computer, but there are other programs that help introduction >>> to the language way better than Rosetta Stone. >>> >>> On 1/20/2011 8:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>>> Hi Funksters, >>>> >>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>>> raises a couple of >>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>>> languages >>>> unit? >>>> >>>> Keith Johnson >>>> >>>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 10 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 13:09:16 +0900 >> From: Luke Kundl Pinette >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to >> endangered >> languages >> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: <4D3906EC.7030301 at comcast.net> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> The question is, why is the Rosetta Stone doing this anyways? According >> to the article, Rosetta doesn't actually distribute the programs, just >> makes them. It doesn't say if it's turning a profit, a loss or selling >> them at cost (though the last is what one would infer from the article). >> If they're doing it for the PR, they'll probably try not to screw over >> native communities too badly, though of course you know what they say >> about the pavement used on the road to hell. >> >> If they're in it for the money, I wouldn't put it past them to add a >> clause like that. Then we've got a legal question on our hands. It's >> essentially monopolistic practice, particularly if they make a pattern >> of deliberately blocking competition for language programs in endangered >> languages. I suspect that if they were to try it, it would be possible >> to find some lawyer willing to pursue the issue, and when taken to court >> they would lose. It would certainly cause a lot of trouble in the >> meantime though. >> >> It sounds like nobody on this list has any illusions about the company. >> It's depressing to see that a linguist like Krauss, and one in such an >> important position has bought into Rosetta Stone's marketing, but again, >> unless another company steps up it doesn't sound like there's any >> options other than no language program. If Rosetta is not in fact >> inserting insidious clauses into the agreements with their informants, >> it's still probably better than nothing. >> >> Regards, >> Luke >> >> >> On 1/21/11 10:48 AM, John Du Bois wrote: >>> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage >>> that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in >>> an endangered language community. >>> >>> For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that >>> work with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the >>> last speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far >>> as indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, >>> and linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this >>> specific legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for >>> whatever reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on >>> their language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language >>> community, this can have a big negative impact. >>> >>> It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered >>> language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and >>> to work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies >>> for mitigating any negative effects. >>> >>> Jack Du Bois >>> >>> On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my >>>> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. >>>> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the >>>> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more >>>> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already >>>> has. TG >>>> >>>> ============== >>>> >>>> >>>> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>>>> Hi Funksters, >>>>> >>>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>>>> raises a couple of >>>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>>>> languages >>>>> unit? >>>>> >>>>> Keith Johnson >>>>> >>>>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 11 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 03:09:08 -0800 (PST) >> From: "Gabrielatos, Costas" >> Subject: [FUNKNET] Call for papers: Lancaster Postgraduate Conference >> in Linguistics and English Language >> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Cc: Helen West >> Message-ID: <420317.74566.qm at web113306.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 >> >> THE SIXTH LANCASTER UNIVERSITY INTERNATIONAL POSTGRADUATE CONFERENCE >> IN?LINGUISTICS AND LANGUAGE TEACHING >> >> Dear All, >> >> We are pleased to announce the Sixth Lancaster University International >> Postgraduate Conference in Linguistics and English Language (LAEL PG >> Conference) which will take place at Lancaster University's George Fox >> building, >> >> on Tuesday 12th of July 2011. >> >> This one-day conference is designed to give linguistics postgraduates from >> all >> research areas an opportunity to present and discuss their research in >> an informal and intellectually stimulating setting. >> >> This year's conference will be opened by Prof. Greg Myers (Lancaster >> University), and there will be guest plenary lectures by: >> Prof. Paul Kerswill (Lancaster University) >> Dr. Johnny Unger (Lancaster University) >> >> We invite postgraduate students to submit abstracts for oral and poster >> presentations on any area of linguistics, theoretical or applied (see below >> for >> abstract submission guidelines). >> >> Topics Include: >> >> ? - Cognitive linguistics >> ? - Corpus linguistics >> ? - Critical discourse analysis >> ? - Historical linguistics >> ? - Literacy studies >> ? - Pragmatics/semantics >> ? - Phonetics/phonology >> ? - Second language teaching/learning/assessment >> ? - Sociolinguistics >> ? - Syntax/morphology Stylistics >> ? - Translation studies >> ? - Other: please specify >> >> For further information, please visit the website: >> http://www.lancs.ac.uk/fass/events/laelpgconference/index.htm >> >> Key Dates >> >> Abstracts must be received by Friday 25 March 2011 >> Notification of acceptancewill be given on Tuesday 10 May 2011 >> >> Hope to hear from you all soon, >> >> Helen Faye West >> Janina Iwaniec >> Matteo Di Cristofaro >> Jonathon Adams >> Ibrahim Efe >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 12 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 08:14:57 -0600 >> From: "Tim Thornes" >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> To: , >> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: <4D394082020000870009B3F2 at gwia1.uca.edu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII >> >> I would agree with this sentiment as well as with the inherent potential of >> a company like this to really screw up relationships with members of an >> endangered language community. I mean, if Rosetta Stone as the "worldwide >> leader in language learning worldwide (sic)" ( >> http://www.rosettastone.com/backnolang?pc=se2011&cid=se-gg&gclid=CPCPvsm8y6YCFQPsKgodqhCrHA) >> can't help us, why would I think some nerdy academic with a microphone and a >> laptop could? >> As one such, I am as capable as any big company of damaging relationships >> with community members, and I ought to know better. Is there any >> expectation that RS does? >> Best, >> Tim >> >> Tim Thornes, PhD >> Assistant Professor of Linguistics >> Department of Writing >> University of Central Arkansas >> 201 Donaghey Avenue >> Conway, Arkansas 72035 >> USA >> (501)450-5613 >> tthornes at uca.edu >> >>>>> John Du Bois 01/20/11 7:48 PM >>> >> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage >> that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in an >> endangered language community. >> >> For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that work >> with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the last >> speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far as >> indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, and >> linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this specific >> legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for whatever >> reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on their >> language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language >> community, this can have a big negative impact. >> >> It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered >> language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and to >> work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies for >> mitigating any negative effects. >> >> Jack Du Bois >> >> On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: >>> >>> >>> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my >>> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. >>> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the >>> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more >>> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already >>> has. TG >>> >>> ============== >>> >>> >>> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>>> Hi Funksters, >>>> >>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>>> raises a couple of >>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>>> languages >>>> unit? >>>> >>>> Keith Johnson >>>> >>>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> -- >> >> *************************************************** >> John W. Du Bois, Professor >> Department of Linguistics >> 3607 South Hall >> University of California, Santa Barbara >> Santa Barbara, California 93106-3100 >> USA >> *************************************************** >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 13 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 07:48:38 -0800 >> From: Pamela Munro >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered >> languages >> To: Tim Thornes >> Cc: tgivon at uoregon.edu, dubois at linguistics.ucsb.edu, >> funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: <4D39AAD6.7090508 at ucla.edu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> All these suggestions are truly scary. >> >> Pam >> >> Tim Thornes wrote: >>> I would agree with this sentiment as well as with the inherent potential >> of a company like this to really screw up relationships with members of an >> endangered language community. I mean, if Rosetta Stone as the "worldwide >> leader in language learning worldwide (sic)" ( >> http://www.rosettastone.com/backnolang?pc=se2011&cid=se-gg&gclid=CPCPvsm8y6YCFQPsKgodqhCrHA) >> can't help us, why would I think some nerdy academic with a microphone and a >> laptop could? >>> As one such, I am as capable as any big company of damaging relationships >> with community members, and I ought to know better. Is there any >> expectation that RS does? >>> Best, >>> Tim >>> >>> Tim Thornes, PhD >>> Assistant Professor of Linguistics >>> Department of Writing >>> University of Central Arkansas >>> 201 Donaghey Avenue >>> Conway, Arkansas 72035 >>> USA >>> (501)450-5613 >>> tthornes at uca.edu >>> >>> >>>>>> John Du Bois 01/20/11 7:48 PM >>> >>>>>> >>> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage >>> that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in an >>> endangered language community. >>> >>> For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that work >>> with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the last >>> speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far as >>> indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, and >>> linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this specific >>> legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for whatever >>> reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on their >>> language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language >>> community, this can have a big negative impact. >>> >>> It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered >>> language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and to >>> work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies for >>> mitigating any negative effects. >>> >>> Jack Du Bois >>> >>> On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: >>> >>>> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my >>>> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. >>>> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the >>>> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more >>>> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already >>>> has. TG >>>> >>>> ============== >>>> >>>> >>>> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Funksters, >>>>> >>>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>>>> raises a couple of >>>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>>>> languages >>>>> unit? >>>>> >>>>> Keith Johnson >>>>> >>>>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >> >> -- >> Pamela Munro, >> Professor, Linguistics, UCLA >> UCLA Box 951543 >> Los Angeles, CA 90095-1543 >> http://www.linguistics.ucla.edu/people/munro/munro.htm >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 14 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:30:39 -0500 >> From: Brian MacWhinney >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to >> endangered >> languages >> To: Funknet >> Message-ID: <9A44FA72-E6DF-4498-A4A0-0A4C4E605BD7 at cmu.edu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >> >> Folks, >> >> I share your low regard for Rosetta Stone, not so much for what they >> fail to deliver, but rather for the overstated claims they make. I know a >> couple of students who have worked with them on internships and, so far, >> there is no evidence of malicious practices vis a vis native communities. >> Despite this, I agree that it is likely that communities who collaborate >> with them will get led down the garden path and end up unwilling to >> participate later with other, more promising, approaches to language >> maintenance. But these are freely-formed relations between consenting >> parties, so nothing can militate against it. >> Regarding the wider issue of effectiveness of language learning >> programs, I find it strange that Luke has located nothing on this subject. >> Back in 1968, Paul Pimsleur already demonstrated the effectiveness of his >> method of graduated interval recall which is picked up, in an admittedly >> diluted form, by the current Pimsleur series. There are hundreds of studies >> distributed across six major journals demonstrating the relatively greater >> effectiveness of specific components of language instruction, from keyword >> method to corrective feedback. These effects have been demonstrated in both >> controlled experiments and, somewhat less convincingly, in classroom and >> online instruction. Nearly all of my own experimental work is now focused >> on tests of this type embedded within online tutors. Perhaps what Luke is >> referring to is the absence of evidence of the overall comparative >> effectiveness of the big commercial language programs such as Rosetta Stone >> or Pimsleur. In the cases of >> such full programs, it is extremely difficult to coordinate a decent >> experimental test, because it would require buy in from a large group of >> volunteers across a long period with careful controls for study time and so >> on. So, I think it is generally better to focus on demonstrations of the >> effects of individual components of programs, because these can be subject >> to reasonable experimental control. Of course, all of this leaves the >> naturalistic methods of language learning out in the cold, and that is >> wrong. In the end, the best way to advance this field will be to increase >> automatic data collection during the language learning process, within >> online, classroom, and naturalistic contexts. This is what I am working on. >> >> Regards, >> >> -- Brian MacWhinney >> >> On Jan 20, 2011, at 11:09 PM, Luke Kundl Pinette wrote: >> >>> The question is, why is the Rosetta Stone doing this anyways? According >> to the article, Rosetta doesn't actually distribute the programs, just makes >> them. It doesn't say if it's turning a profit, a loss or selling them at >> cost (though the last is what one would infer from the article). If they're >> doing it for the PR, they'll probably try not to screw over native >> communities too badly, though of course you know what they say about the >> pavement used on the road to hell. >>> >>> If they're in it for the money, I wouldn't put it past them to add a >> clause like that. Then we've got a legal question on our hands. It's >> essentially monopolistic practice, particularly if they make a pattern of >> deliberately blocking competition for language programs in endangered >> languages. I suspect that if they were to try it, it would be possible to >> find some lawyer willing to pursue the issue, and when taken to court they >> would lose. It would certainly cause a lot of trouble in the meantime >> though. >>> >>> It sounds like nobody on this list has any illusions about the company. >> It's depressing to see that a linguist like Krauss, and one in such an >> important position has bought into Rosetta Stone's marketing, but again, >> unless another company steps up it doesn't sound like there's any options >> other than no language program. If Rosetta is not in fact inserting >> insidious clauses into the agreements with their informants, it's still >> probably better than nothing. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Luke >>> >>> >>> On 1/21/11 10:48 AM, John Du Bois wrote: >>>> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage >>>> that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in >>>> an endangered language community. >>>> >>>> For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that >>>> work with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the >>>> last speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far >>>> as indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, >>>> and linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this >>>> specific legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for >>>> whatever reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on >>>> their language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language >>>> community, this can have a big negative impact. >>>> >>>> It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered >>>> language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and >>>> to work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies >>>> for mitigating any negative effects. >>>> >>>> Jack Du Bois >>>> >>>> On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my >>>>> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. >>>>> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the >>>>> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more >>>>> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already >>>>> has. TG >>>>> >>>>> ============== >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>>>>> Hi Funksters, >>>>>> >>>>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>>>>> raises a couple of >>>>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>>>>> languages >>>>>> unit? >>>>>> >>>>>> Keith Johnson >>>>>> >>>>>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 15 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:33:26 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >> From: jess tauber >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to >> endangered >> languages >> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: >> < >> 32117937.1295627607528.JavaMail.root at wamui-hunyo.atl.sa.earthlink.net> >> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 >> >> Just minutes ago as I write this, on the television show 'The View', actor >> Ed Harris brought up his not so successful attempt to use Rosetta Stone, >> 'that thing you can get', to pick up a little Russian for his movie opening >> this week- eventually he had to utilize the services of a Bulgarian, in >> person. >> >> Maybe the public isn't so misinformed? >> >> Jess Tauber >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 16 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 09:40:02 -0700 >> From: Tom Givon >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to >> endangered >> languages >> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu >> Message-ID: <4D39B6E2.3030004 at uoregon.edu> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> >> They still shell out C-notes by the bushel for this scam. RS does not >> make their money off satisfied customers, but off poor first-hit >> suckers. TG >> >> ============================ >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On 1/21/2011 9:33 AM, jess tauber wrote: >>> Just minutes ago as I write this, on the television show 'The View', >> actor Ed Harris brought up his not so successful attempt to use Rosetta >> Stone, 'that thing you can get', to pick up a little Russian for his movie >> opening this week- eventually he had to utilize the services of a Bulgarian, >> in person. >>> >>> Maybe the public isn't so misinformed? >>> >>> Jess Tauber >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 17 >> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 08:57:58 -0800 >> From: Marianne Mithun >> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to >> endangered >> languages >> To: Brian MacWhinney , Funknet >> >> Message-ID: >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed >> >> I finally have to weigh in here on another aspect of the issue specifically >> with respect to endangered languages. >> >> For communities in danger of losing their traditional languages, learning >> the heritage language isn't just about being able to order a meal in a >> restaurant or book a hotel room. It's often about something much deeper, >> about appreciating traditional ways of viewing the world, of categorizing >> concepts, of combining ideas, of interacting. And the Rosetta Stone system >> is one-size-fits-all. People are essentially asked to translate the model >> sentences into whatever language is at hand, and the results tend to be >> close to word-by-word translations. So yes, learners learn how to say 'boy' >> and 'run'. But they don't learn, for example, that ideas expressed by nouns >> in English are expressed in language X by verbs. Or that in many languages >> people don't tend to talk sentences consisting of Noun Verb Noun (or Noun >> Noun Verb). They don't learn about the glorious elaboration of semantic >> distinctions or domains that have no counterparts in the model language. >> They probably won't learn about evidentials. They are unlikely to learn >> about elaborate aspectual distinctions. They certainly won't learn >> different patterns of subordination or clause combining. >> >> For some situations, that may be fine. Heritage speakers just want to be >> able to use some phrases in everyday talk. And they don't have the time or >> interest for that kind of complexity. For others, it sort of defeats the >> whole purpose. >> >> Marianne Mithun >> >> >> --On Friday, January 21, 2011 11:30 AM -0500 Brian MacWhinney >> wrote: >> >>> Folks, >>> >>> I share your low regard for Rosetta Stone, not so much for what they >>> fail to deliver, but rather for the overstated claims they make. I know >>> a couple of students who have worked with them on internships and, so >>> far, there is no evidence of malicious practices vis a vis native >>> communities. Despite this, I agree that it is likely that communities who >>> collaborate with them will get led down the garden path and end up >>> unwilling to participate later with other, more promising, approaches to >>> language maintenance. But these are freely-formed relations between >>> consenting parties, so nothing can militate against it. Regarding >>> the wider issue of effectiveness of language learning programs, I find it >>> strange that Luke has located nothing on this subject. Back in 1968, >>> Paul Pimsleur already demonstrated the effectiveness of his method of >>> graduated interval recall which is picked up, in an admittedly diluted >>> form, by the current Pimsleur series. There are hundreds of studies >>> distributed across six major journals demonstrating the relatively >>> greater effectiveness of specific components of language instruction, >>> from keyword method to corrective feedback. These effects have been >>> demonstrated in both controlled experiments and, somewhat less >>> convincingly, in classroom and online instruction. Nearly all of my own >>> experimental work is now focused on tests of this type embedded within >>> online tutors. Perhaps what Luke is referring to is the absence of >>> evidence of the overall comparative effectiveness of the big commercial >>> language programs such as Rosetta Stone or Pimsleur. In the cases of >>> such full programs, it is extremely difficult to coordinate a decent >>> experimental test, because it would require buy in from a large group of >>> volunteers across a long period with careful controls for study time and >>> so on. So, I think it is generally better to focus on demonstrations of >>> the effects of individual components of programs, because these can be >>> subject to reasonable experimental control. Of course, all of this >>> leaves the naturalistic methods of language learning out in the cold, and >>> that is wrong. In the end, the best way to advance this field will be to >>> increase automatic data collection during the language learning process, >>> within online, classroom, and naturalistic contexts. This is what I am >>> working on. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> -- Brian MacWhinney >>> >>> On Jan 20, 2011, at 11:09 PM, Luke Kundl Pinette wrote: >>> >>>> The question is, why is the Rosetta Stone doing this anyways? According >>>> to the article, Rosetta doesn't actually distribute the programs, just >>>> makes them. It doesn't say if it's turning a profit, a loss or selling >>>> them at cost (though the last is what one would infer from the article). >>>> If they're doing it for the PR, they'll probably try not to screw over >>>> native communities too badly, though of course you know what they say >>>> about the pavement used on the road to hell. >>>> >>>> If they're in it for the money, I wouldn't put it past them to add a >>>> clause like that. Then we've got a legal question on our hands. It's >>>> essentially monopolistic practice, particularly if they make a pattern >>>> of deliberately blocking competition for language programs in endangered >>>> languages. I suspect that if they were to try it, it would be possible >>>> to find some lawyer willing to pursue the issue, and when taken to court >>>> they would lose. It would certainly cause a lot of trouble in the >>>> meantime though. >>>> >>>> It sounds like nobody on this list has any illusions about the company. >>>> It's depressing to see that a linguist like Krauss, and one in such an >>>> important position has bought into Rosetta Stone's marketing, but again, >>>> unless another company steps up it doesn't sound like there's any >>>> options other than no language program. If Rosetta is not in fact >>>> inserting insidious clauses into the agreements with their informants, >>>> it's still probably better than nothing. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Luke >>>> >>>> >>>> On 1/21/11 10:48 AM, John Du Bois wrote: >>>>> I agree with Tom's assessment. One should not underestimate the damage >>>>> that a company with Rosetta Stone's tendencies to mislead could do in >>>>> an endangered language community. >>>>> >>>>> For example, they could insert a legal clause binding speakers that >>>>> work with them to work with nobody else in the future. If that's the >>>>> last speaker of the language, that's the end of the language, as far >>>>> as indigenous language revitalization efforts, language documentation, >>>>> and linguistic fieldwork go. Even if Rosetta Stone doesn't use this >>>>> specific legal tactic, if speakers end up feeling abused by them for >>>>> whatever reason, they may feel leery about working with anyone else on >>>>> their language. When there are few speakers in an endangered language >>>>> community, this can have a big negative impact. >>>>> >>>>> It may be worthwhile for some people involved in work with endangered >>>>> language communities to monitor Rosetta Stone's actions closely, and >>>>> to work with representatives of those communities to devise strategies >>>>> for mitigating any negative effects. >>>>> >>>>> Jack Du Bois >>>>> >>>>> On 1/20/2011 10:16 AM, Tom Givon wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Rosetta Stone is a f---ing fraud. I certainly won't recommend to my >>>>>> Ute friends that they do anything with them--if they asked me. >>>>>> However, preying on innocent customers is RS's specialty, and the >>>>>> Natives are just as gullible as the rest of us, an in many way more >>>>>> vulnerable. I hope they don't create more damage than history already >>>>>> has. TG >>>>>> >>>>>> ============== >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 1/20/2011 9:50 AM, Keith Johnson wrote: >>>>>>> Hi Funksters, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article >>>>>>> raises a couple of >>>>>>> issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered >>>>>>> languages >>>>>>> unit? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Keith Johnson >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >> http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-ros >>>>>>> etta.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> End of FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 17 >> *************************************** >> > From bat2 at rice.edu Sun Jan 23 05:59:20 2011 From: bat2 at rice.edu (Bethany Townsend) Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2011 23:59:20 -0600 Subject: FUNKNET Digest, Vol 88, Issue 17 Message-ID: Paul Newman has written about copyright law and field situations: http://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/html/10125/1724/newman.html Bethany Townsend Ph.D. Student, Rice University Dept. of Linguistics, MS 23 P.O. Box 1892 Houston, TX 77251-1892 USA From language at sprynet.com Mon Jan 24 23:14:01 2011 From: language at sprynet.com (alex gross) Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2011 18:14:01 -0500 Subject: Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages Message-ID: Of course the main problem concerning Rosetta Stone has not been remotely addressed here, nor did I expect it to be. Had linguists continued on the intersecting paths of Whorf, Sapir, Bloomfield, and Hayakawa during the Sixties, the entire Rosetta Stone encroachment would have never come about. Descriptivist linguists showed sensitivity to Native American languages and regarded them as views of reality in many ways as valid as our own, creating a close unity between Native American speakers and the scholars who studied them. Our profession would then have been in a position to explain to them why Rosetta Stone could not truly help them. And the aim of the Semanticist movement was to create an ongoing and far-reaching critique of American trends in politics, advertising, and religion, which could have led to a heightened consciousness of the many ways language can lead us astray and why simplistic tools like Rosetta Stone are of limited use. But instead the profession has squandered the enormous prestige enjoyed by linguistics 50 years ago in pompous and demonstrably false proclamations about universal grammar, deep structure, and hard wiring, not to mention endless feuding between angry factions over the details of this monumental failure. As I pointed out in an earlier post: So-called "mainstream linguistics" ends up being on about the same level of credibility as all those TV ads for "Rosetta Stone." Just as they claim you can "learn a language," without bothering to mention whether by "learn" they mean read, speak, understand what is spoken back to you, translate in either direction, or simply pick up the general sense, so "mainstream linguistics" stakes out vast fields of competence but never comes remotely near actually achieving them. Yes, Rosetta Stone has engaged in outrageously false claims on behalf of its so-called method for a number of years now. But many mainstream linguists have engaged in equally noxious rhetoric about the alleged triumph of their supposed breakthroughs or about the imminent advent of MT and automatic language systems they have championed. And they have continued to do so despite ample evidence to the contrary over at least the last four decades. And yet other linguists , who have been perfectly aware that these claims were overstated, have chosen to remain silent. It is not the slightest bit surprising that the guiding force of so-called mainstream linguistics stems from the same era that also handed us the notion that man can "conquer" the planet, that highways can "conquer" the wilderness, that cities can "conquer" landscape, that modernity can "conquer" traditional ways. Indeed, the main thrust of language study today is still centered on the eminently falsifiable doctrine that language itself can be conquered and open the way to some ill-defined realm where deep knowledge of "grammar" can give rise to deep knowledge of reality. All the best to every one! alex ************************************************************** The principal purpose of language is not communication but to persuade ourselves that we know what we are talking about, when quite often we do not. ************************************************************** ----- Original Message ----- From: "Keith Johnson" To: Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 11:50 AM Subject: [FUNKNET] Rosetta Stone acquires the rights to endangered languages > Hi Funksters, > > My subject heading is intentionally provocative, but this article raises > a couple of > issues. Is it a good thing for Rosetta Stone to have an endangered > languages > unit? > > Keith Johnson > > http://www.adn.com/2011/01/19/1657429/alaska-natives-team-up-with-rosetta.html > > > From mike_cahill at sil.org Tue Jan 25 19:42:12 2011 From: mike_cahill at sil.org (Mike Cahill) Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 13:42:12 -0600 Subject: Orthographies for Unwritten Languages Symposium materials posted Message-ID: The abstracts, handouts, and PowerPoints for the LSA Symposium on Developing Orthographies for Unwritten Languages are now posted at: http://www.sil.org/linguistics/2011LSASymposium/ . Papers were divided between general concept papers (non-linguistic factors in orthographies, phonological depth and orthographies, tone and orthographies), and specific case studies from different areas of the world (Mexico, California, Nepal, and southeast Asia). Mike Cahill From paul at benjamins.com Wed Jan 26 23:10:11 2011 From: paul at benjamins.com (Paul Peranteau) Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 18:10:11 -0500 Subject: New Benjamins title: Amiridze et al. - Fillers, Pauses and Placeholders Message-ID: Fillers, Pauses and Placeholders Edited by Nino Amiridze, Boyd H. Davis and Margaret Maclagan Utrecht University & University of Jena / University of North Carolina - Charlotte / University of Canterbury Typological Studies in Language 93 2010. vii, 224 pp. Hardbound: 978 90 272 0674 9 / EUR 99.00 / USD 149.00 e-Book ? Available from e-book platforms 978 90 272 8776 2 / EUR 99.00 / USD 149.00 Fillers are items that speakers insert in spontaneous speech as a repair strategy. Types of fillers include hesitation markers and placeholders. Both are used to fill pauses that arise during planning problems or in lexical retrieval failure. However, while hesitation markers may not bear any resemblance to lexical items they replace, placeholders typically share some morphosyntactic properties with the target form. Additionally, fillers can function as a pragmatic tool, in order to replace lexical items that the speaker wants to avoid mentioning for some reason. The present volume is the first collection on the topic of fillers and will be a useful reference work for future investigations on the topic. It consists of typological surveys and in-depth studies exploring the form and use of fillers across languages and sections of different populations, including cognitively impaired speakers. The volume will be interesting to typologists and linguists working in discourse studies. Table of contents Acknowledgements vii Introduction Barbara A. Fox 1?10 Parameters for typological variation of placeholders Vera I. Podlesskaya 11?32 A cross-linguistic exploration of demonstratives in interaction: With particular reference to the context of word-formulation trouble Makoto Hayashi and Kyung-Eun Yoon 33?66 Placeholder verbs in Modern Georgian Nino Amiridze 67?94 From interrogatives to placeholders in Udi and Agul spontaneous narratives Dmitry Ganenkov, Yury Lander and Timur Maisak 95?118 Fillers and placeholders in Nahavaq Laura Dimock 119?138 The interactional profile of a placeholder: The Estonian demonstrative see Leelo Keevallik 139?172 Fillers and their relevance in describing Sliammon Salish Honor? Watanabe 173?188 Pauses, fillers, placeholders and formulaicity in Alzheimer?s discourse: Gluing relationships as impairment increases Boyd H. Davis and Margaret Maclagan 189?216 Language index 217 Name index 219?220 Subject index 221?224 -- John Benjamins Publishing 763 N 24th Street Philadelphia PA USA Ph: 215 769-3444 Fax: 215 769-3446 From paul at benjamins.com Wed Jan 26 23:12:41 2011 From: paul at benjamins.com (Paul Peranteau) Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 18:12:41 -0500 Subject: New Benjamins title: Stathi et al. - Grammaticalization Message-ID: Grammaticalization. Current views and issues. Edited by Katerina Stathi, Elke Gehweiler and Ekkehard K?nig Free University Berlin Studies in Language Companion Series 119 2010. vii, 379 pp. Hardbound: 978 90 272 0586 5 / EUR 99.00 / USD 149.00 e-Book ? Available from e-book platforms 978 90 272 8800 4 / EUR 99.00 / USD 149.00 This volume contains a selection of papers on grammaticalization from a broad perspective. Some of the papers focus on basic concepts in grammaticalization research such as the concept of 'grammar' as the endpoint of grammaticalization processes, erosion, (uni)directionality, the relation between grammaticalization and constructions, subjectification, and the relation between grammaticalization and analogy. Other papers shed a critical light on grammaticalization as an explanatory parameter in language change. New case studies of micro-processes of grammaticalization complete the selection. The empirical evidence for (and against) grammaticalization comes from diverse domains: subject control, clitics, reciprocal markers, pronouns and agreement markers, gender markers, auxiliaries, aspectual categories, intensifying adjectives and determiners, and pragmatic markers. The languages covered include English and its varieties, German, Dutch, Italian, Spanish, French, Slavonic languages, and Turkish. The book will be valuable to scholars working on grammaticalization and language change as well as to those interested in individual languages. Table of contents Table of contents v?vi Preface vii Introduction Katerina Stathi, Elke Gehweiler and Ekkehard K?nig 01?14 Part I Basic questions On some problem areas in grammaticalization studies Gabriele Diewald 17?50 Issues in constructional approaches to grammaticalization in English Graeme Trousdale 51?72 Reconsidering erosion in grammaticalization: Evidence from cliticization Ren? Schiering 73?100 Grammaticalization, subjectification and objectification Svenja Kranich 101?122 Degrammaticalization: Three common controversies Muriel Norde 123?150 Degrammaticalization and obsolescent morphology: Evidence from Slavonic David Willis 151?178 Part II Grammaticalization and the explanation of language change An analogical approach to grammaticalization Olga Fischer 181?220 Does grammaticalisation need analogy? Different pathways on the ?pronoun/agreement marker?-cline Gunther De Vogelaer 221?240 What grammaticalisation can reveal about same-subject control Debra Ziegeler 241?272 How the Latin neuter pronominal forms became markers of non-individuation in Spanish Elisabeth Stark and Natascha Pomino 273?294 Part III Case studies of micro-processes of grammaticalization The Grammaticalization of the German adjectives lauter (and eitel) Elke Gehweiler 297?322 Is German geh?ren an auxiliary? The grammaticalization of the construction geh?ren + participle II Katerina Stathi 323?342 Micro-processes of grammaticalization: The case of Italian l?un l?altro Letizia Vezzosi 343?372 List of contributors 373?374 Index 375?380 -- John Benjamins Publishing 763 N 24th Street Philadelphia PA USA Ph: 215 769-3444 Fax: 215 769-3446 From falonso at dfm.ulpgc.es Thu Jan 27 23:27:35 2011 From: falonso at dfm.ulpgc.es (Francisco Alonso Almeida) Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2011 23:27:35 +0000 Subject: CFP: Panel Corpus design, compilation and types (CILC3) Message-ID: III International Conference on Corpus Linguistics (CILC3) 07-Apr-2011 - 09-Apr-2011 Polytechnic University of Valencia, Spain Conference website: http://www.upv.es/contenidos/CILC2011/indexi.html CFP: Panel Corpus design, compilation and types Call Deadline: 07-Feb-2011 Proposal submission: http://www.upv.es/contenidos/CILC2011/info/764072normali.html For more information on this panel, please contact: Francisco Alonso (falonso at dfm.ulpgc.es). Conference Organisers: Marisa Carri? Pastor Ana Botella Trelis Miguel ?ngel Candel Mora Luz Gil Salom Penny Mac Donald Lightbound Carmen Soler Monreal Keith Stuart From caterina.mauri at unipv.it Mon Jan 31 15:39:09 2011 From: caterina.mauri at unipv.it (Caterina Mauri) Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 16:39:09 +0100 Subject: Deadline approaching - Pavia, May 2011 - Workshop on "GRADUALNESS IN CHANGE AND ITS RELATION TO SYNCHRONIC VARIATION AND USE" Message-ID: ** WE APOLOGIZE FOR CROSS-POSTING ** ------------------------ International workshop on: "GRADUALNESS IN CHANGE AND ITS RELATION TO SYNCHRONIC VARIATION AND USE" Pavia (Italy), 30-31 May 2011 Workshop URL: https://sites.google.com/site/workshoppavia2011/ ------------------------ DESCRIPTION: The workshop aims to contribute to the discussion on the factors at play in diachronic change and to investigate the relationship between diachronic gradualness and synchronic variation, integrating the current views on linguistic variation and language use. Special attention will be devoted to theoretical and methodological issues concerning i) how the study of language change can benefit from the most recent achievements in linguistic theories and ii) how the explanations of synchronic variation may be found in diachronic processes, discussing whether diachronic gradualness and synchronic variation may be analyzed through the same lenses and by means of the same theoretical instruments. Furthermore, the workshop also wants to address the question of the impact of contact on linguistic change. Language contact may indeed be seen as a special type of synchronic phenomenon that may last in time and may gradually lead to diachronic change, triggering or influencing the development of particular constructions in neighbouring languages. INVITED SPEAKERS: Olga Fischer (University of Amsterdam): ---- Topic: On the role of analogy in processes of language change B?atrice Lamiroy (University of Leuven): ---- Topic: The pace of grammaticalization in Romance languages Graeme Trousdale (University of Edinburgh): ---- Topic: Diachronic construction grammar and gradualness in language change Johan van der Auwera (University of Antwerp): ----- Topic: On diachronic semantic maps The workshop will also accommodate four contributions from the project members (t.b.a) on the effects of contact and interference within the macro-geographic-area of the Mediterranean. CALL FOR PAPERS: Authors are invited to submit a one-page abstract, keeping in mind that the slot for their communication will last 40 min. including discussion. Abstracts should be anonymous and should be sent as attachments in PDF format to: gradualness.workshop at gmail.com. Author(s) name(s) and affiliation should be indicated in the corpus of the e-mail. The abstracts will be anonimously reviewed by two members of the Scientific Committee. Besides theoretical issues, the exam of specific examples and the description of general patterns will also be welcome. Topics of interest include: ? what kind of factors trigger the grammaticalization processes ? the relation of grammaticalization to other mechanisms of language change such as reanalysis and analogy ? the relationship between synchronic variation and grammatical change ? the interaction between frequency, entrenchment and use ? the possibility of multiple source constructions in language change ? the role of language contact in grammatical change ? how particular diachronic phenomena may be analyzed in the light of the most recent linguistic theories (e.g. construction grammar) ? diachronic explanations for synchronic patterns of variation ? ?.. IMPORTANT DATES: Deadline for submission: 10 February 2011 Notification of acceptance 10 March 2011 ORGANIZERS AND CONTACT: Anna Giacalone Ramat - annaram (at) unipv.it Caterina Mauri - caterina.mauri (at) unipv.it Piera Molinelli - piera.molinelli (at) unibg.it For any questions and for submissions, please write to gradualness.workshop at gmail.com SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE: Pierluigi Cuzzolin (University of Bergamo), Chiara Fedriani (University of Pavia), Chiara Ghezzi (University of Pavia), Anna Giacalone Ramat (University of Pavia), Gianguido Manzelli (University of Pavia), Caterina Mauri (University of Pavia), Piera Molinelli (University of Bergamo), Paolo Ramat (IUSS Institute), Andrea Sans? (Insubria University - Como), Federica Venier (University of Bergamo) --- Caterina Mauri Dept. of Theoretical and Applied Linguistics University of Pavia Strada Nuova 65 27100 Pavia Italy Email: caterina.mauri at unipv.it Homepage: http://lettere.unipv.it/diplinguistica/docenti.php?&id=1114