From alderson+mail at panix.com Tue Dec 4 01:59:32 2001 From: alderson+mail at panix.com (Rich Alderson) Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 20:59:32 EST Subject: Q: Two questions on carrots In-Reply-To: <60688.3216108206@wren.crn.cogs.susx.ac.uk> (message from Larry Trask on Fri, 30 Nov 2001 07:30:25 EST) Message-ID: ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Hi, Larry, Regarding the question of the *colour* of carrots, may I point out that legacy gardeners (those that grow old-fashioned varieties of vegetables that have gone out of common use because not amenable to the vicissitudes of modern shipping) grow black and red carrots--the orange varieties appear to be the hardiest, but may not have been the earliest. Rich Alderson From doncoop at mindspring.com Fri Dec 7 18:12:56 2001 From: doncoop at mindspring.com (Donald Cooper) Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 13:12:56 EST Subject: Who was Hermann Grassmann? Message-ID: Dear Histling: Winfred Lehmann's Reader in Nineteenth Century Historical Indo-European Linguistics (Indiana U.P., 1967) is no doubt familiar to many as a standard resource for courses in historical linguistics or the history of linguistics, for which a reading knowledge of German on the part of students cannot be assumed. The present writer has assigned parts of it in this capacity, and on the second-hand markets of the Internet the book is priced at a level which makes clear that it is still a valued work. Lehmann's brief introductions to the works translated are often the main sources of information easily available to students on the authors included. For this reason, the present writer was startled recently when he came across a quotation from one introduction included in Lehmann's collection, in which the biographical information was inaccurate and puzzling. It is discussed here because the actual facts are both interesting and perhaps suggestive in several more general senses. The section in question is devoted to the work of Hermann Grassmann. Lehmann states on p.110 that "Hermann Grassmann (1809-1877) was a banker who was compelled to retire because of tuberculosis." Unfortunately, the only accurate facts in this sentence are Grassmann's name and dates. Next it is stated that "In his leisure he occupied himself with mathematics and linguistics", which is merely but regrettably misleading as to the place of these occupations in his life. Who was Hermann Guenther Grassmann? Born on April 15 of 1809, he came from a scholarly German family resident in Pomeranian Stettin, now the Polish city of Szczecin. Starting the University of Berlin at the age of 18, he studied theology and classics there for three years, but in 1830 he returned to Stettin, where he undertook private study of physics and mathematics, natural history, theology, and philology, to prepare himself for a career of secondary teaching. In the spring of 1832, he entered his lifetime career of gymnasium (advanced high school) teaching when he began as assistant teacher at the Stettin gymnasium. During the academic year 1834-1835, he taught at the technical high school in Berlin, succeeding the geometer Jakob Steiner when Steiner moved to a professorship at the University of Berlin. In 1835, he returned to Stettin, where he joined the faculty of the Otto Schule gymnasium. He spent his life as a gymnasium-level teacher, never working in a bank and never able to obtain a university position. He did not retire, but remained a gymnasium instructor (with the nominal rank of professor) until he died on September 26, 1877 from cardiac problems rather than from tuberculosis. Grassmann's life and mathematical contributions are recounted in a number of standard references. Particularly valuable is the eight-page survey by W.Burau and C.J.Scriba, pp.192-199 in vol. XV of the Dictionary of Scientific Biography ed. C.C. Gillispie (Scribner's, 1978), which is drawn on in the present discussion. His mathematical work on vector analysis (the first version published in 1844 is usually referred to as Ausdehnungslehre) was so far ahead of its time that Grassmann's limited professional advancement is attributed as much to the lack of specialists qualified to assess his work as to the notorious difficulty of its exposition. This work is the main focus of the third chapter of Michael J. Crowe's solid History of Vector Analysis (1967,1985, Dover). To give a notion of the significance of Grassmann's mathematical work, it is useful to quote Crowe (1985, pp.54-55): "What Grassmann created was above all a mathematical system, not just a new mathematical idea or theorem. His creative act cannot be compared with such mathematical discoveries as the Pythagorean theorem or Newton's version of the calculus. Rather it is best thought of as comparable to such creations as non-Euclidean geometry or Boolean algebra." Because of its breadth and generality, it is difficult to summarize, and those interested may well refer to the discussions of Burau and Scriba (1978), of Crowe (1985) cited above, and of Klein (1926) cited below. Grassmann's original work in physics was better recognized than his mathematics during most of his lifetime. Crowe (1985)notes that by 1860, only five mathematicians in Europe are known to have come to appreciate Grassmann's work to some extent. When he was elected in 1864 to membership in the Leopoldina, founded in 1652 as the oldest scientific society of Germany, it was for his contributions to physics, not his mathematics. Building on his classical training, after the political storms of 1848-1849 Grassmann began the study of ancient Indo-European languages and comparative linguistics for which he is known to linguists. In 1854, his musical gifts contributed to his development of a theory of vowel acoustics in research which was limited by the available acoustic equipment, but won the respect of Helmholtz, the contemporary physicist most qualified to judge it, according to Klein (1926). In fact, Grassmann's theory of vowels is considered a substantial and independent anticipation of that of Helmholtz (1859). It stimulated an experimental investigation by J. Lahr in a doctoral dissertation of 1885 (Die Grassmansche Vocaltheorie im Lichte des Experiments Leipzig 1885; p.94 in Wiedemanns Annalen Bd. 26, 1886; cf. P.Gruetzner p.468 in Ergebnissse der Physiologie I, 1902). In the early 1860s came Grassmann's studies of comparative Indo-European phonology, which are the main reference of his fame in linguistics for Grassmann's Law, although Lehmann justly points out partial predecessors in this area. Disappointed by the poor reception of his second exposition of his main mathematical work in 1862, Grassmann changed the main focus of his original investigations, turning to the study of the Rig Veda, the most archaic document of Vedic Sanskrit. Although his metric translation of the Rig Veda into German (Berlin 1876-77) is now not well known, his Woerterbuch zum Rig-Veda (Leipzig 1873-1875), still available in two different editions published on opposite sides of the earth, is a monument to his labor and analytic penetration of the text. Publication of Grassmann's works on Sanskrit was followed by membership in the American Oriental Society and an honorary doctorate from the University of Tuebingen. His death was recognized in obituaries whose authors included the linguists B. Delbrueck (Augsburger Allg. Zeit. 1877, No.291, supp.) and August Leskien (jointly with the mathematician Moritz Kantor in Allg. Deutsche Biographie IX, pp.595-598, Leipzig 1879). Delbrueck would recall Grassmann later as "this remarkable scholar, who in a certain respect stands unique among us" (Einleitung in das Studium der indogermanischen Sprachen 6th ed. Leipzig 1919, p.124). During the years just before his death, increasing recognition of his mathematical work must have brought some satisfaction, and in the year of his death (1877) he revised the 1844 version of his work on vector analysis, in an edition which appeared in 1878. Those who wish to assess Grassmann's position in mathematics have only to turn to standard histories, such as E.T.Bell's The Development of Mathematics (2nd ed. McGraw-Hill 1945 pp.198-206), C.B.Boyer and U.Merzbach's modern History of Mathematics (2nd ed. Wiley 1991, pp.584-586), and Felix Klein's respectful 9-page treatment in his Vorlesungen ueber die Entwicklung der Mathematik im 19. Jahrhundert (Goettingen, 1926, pp.173-182). Klein admitted the significance of Grassmann's influence on his own Erlangen Program in geometry of 1872, his inaugural program pronounced when he assumed his professorship in Erlangen. However, it is fair to say that the nature and significance of Grassmann's linguistic work have not always been clearly appraised from the mathematical side: Boyer and Merzbach describe his linguistic work as "being a specialist in Sanskrit literature" (1991, p.585). From a linguistic point of view, it is intriguing to comment on a relevant parallel to Grassmann's work. The closest contemporary parallel to the primary mathematical work of Grassmann is the work of the Irish mathematician William Rowan Hamilton (1805-1865) known under the label of quaternions. Klein (1926), Bell (1945), and Crowe (1967) provide more or less detailed expositions of this work and its relation to that of Grassmann. Hamilton, like Grassmann, was linguistically gifted; by the age of thirteen, he had acquired one language for every year of his age, under the tutelage of his uncle, the Reverend James Hamilton. Unlike Grassmann, however, Hamilton's linguistic talents were never a focus of his mature original intellectual activity, except for his composition of mediocre poetry. Also unlike Grassmann, who published a number of books for use only as high-school textbooks, turned his genius too often to committee-work and political, social, and church issues, and was the center of a productive family, the reclusive Hamilton, proclaimed a professor before he finished his university program, left behind at his death many unpublished papers and about 60 large manuscript books of unpublished mathematical research (E.T.Bell Men of Mathematics Simon and Schuster 1937, pp.340-361). It is tempting to wonder whether this parallelism of achievement in a particular mathematical field and linguistic gifts is founded on cognitive parallels between mathematics and logic on the one hand and the formal aspect of linguistic structure on the other hand. A counter-argument might be that a third scientist who contributed much to vector analysis, the Yale mathematical physicist Josiah Willard Gibbs (1839-1903), who correctly valued Grassmann's work as much more general than the corresponding work of Hamilton (Burau and Scriba, 1978; Bell, 1945; L.P.Wheeler Josiah Willard Gibbs, 2nd ed. Yale U.P. 1952, ch. 7), is not known for such outstanding linguistic achievements, although his studies in Paris and Heidelberg (1866-1869) surely demanded practical linguistic competence. Neither were such linguistic gifts displayed by the British physicist Oliver Heaviside (1850-1925), a more modern exponent of vector methods, who did not in any case have the advantages either of university education or of a learned family background (pp.211-212 in Dictionary of Scientific Biography VI, ed. C.C.Gillispie, Scribner 1972). Now it is useful to recur to the apparently disparate combination of academic areas in which Grassmann was active. In terms of his home environment, Grassmann's father Justus Guenther Grassmann taught physics and mathematics in the Stettin gymnasium, and was an original researcher in crystallography and combinatorial mathematics (M. Cantor pp.598-599 in Allg. deutsche Biographie IX, Leipzig 1879). Thus it is reasonable to infer that although he was not at all regarded by his father as the prodigy which Hamilton was, Hermann Grassmann received a substantial early orientation in these scientific fields, from which his study of theology and classics might seem to be an intellectual deviation, if he had not come from a long line of Protestant pastors whose traditions included both scholarly and artistic interests (Klein, 1926). When Grassmann went to the still young University of Berlin in 1827, he studied partly under August Neander (1789-1850), who devoted himself to early Christian church history. Grassmann also studied under Neander's own teacher Friedrich Schleiermacher (1768-1834), who was still quite active and must have offered much broader intellectual perspectives as a philosopher and theologian who is regarded as a foundational thinker in the history of Protestant Christianity (K. Barth Protestant Theology in the Nineteenth Century 1952, trans. 1972 SCM Press). The influence of both Grassmann's father and of Schleiermacher on Grassmann's mathematics has been analyzed (Crowe, 1985). It has also been argued that the philosophical aspect of Schleiermacher's training made itself felt later in the abstract philosophical character of Grassmann's mathematical exposition, much to the detriment of its acceptance. Grassmann's study of classics in Berlin took place under the aegis of a scholar who would be quite distinctive among classicists of any time. August Boeckh (1785-1867) was in his bloom as a scholar who defined philology as the reconstruction of all aspects of a past culture. Boeckh focussed in much of his most brilliant work on quantitative phenomena, on weights, measures, and coinage standards in antiquity, on the economics and chronology of ancient Greece, and on Greek music and poetic metrics. Boeckh liked to think of both physical and metaphysical systems as founded on astronomy. For this reason, he dedicated a series of investigations to Greek astronomy (cf. U. von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff History of Classical Scholarship 1921, trans. Johns Hopkins 1982). There is a probable continuity here in that Grassmann's first major physical work, carried out in 1839-40, was on the theory of the tides, which result from the gravitational attraction of the moon and sun, and was carried out partly in relation to his study of the analytic mechanics of Lagrange and of the celestial mechanics of Laplace. Another point of continuity is that according to Cantor and Leskien (1879) Grassmann had continued to study mathematics privately in Berlin, as well as attending to his formal studies. In a more general sense, the nature of Grassmann's work in linguistics and Sanskrit in relation to mathematics can be appreciated by anyone who has ever been immersed in the formalisms of logical derivation (e.g. W. Quine Methods of Logic , Holt 1959) or computer programming, which are closely related to the logical substrate of stemmatics in textual criticism and specification of sequences of linguistic changes in historical linguistics. Given his exposure to technical aspects of philology under Boeckh, it is quite understandable that Grassmann should turn to making useable at least a nucleus of the data which were indispensable for comparative linguistics, the linguistic forms of the Rig Veda. Thus his linguistic and mathematical studies were not entirely unrelated, but overlapped to a considerable extent in that they represented different aspects of a single fundamental mode of thought. It is likely that many linguists have acquired from varied sources a more precise appreciation of Grassmann's background and contributions than is available in Lehmann's book. This was certainly true for the scholar from whom the present writer first heard of Grassmann's achievements both in mathematics and comparative linguistics, the Indo-Europeanist Joshua Whatmough. Whatmough's own interest in mathematics sensitized him to the duality of Grassmann's work. Sadly, Grassman is recorded not to have been a great teacher in the secondary school context, although he eventually advanced to a senior position in the Stettin gymnasium (Klein, 1926; Burau and Scriba, 1978). Whether the match of genius and such routine work is productive is uncertain. In the older German educational system, it was sometimes possible for such distinguished figures as the mathematicians Jakob Steiner and Karl Weierstrass to advance from secondary school teaching to a university post. As another example of someone who achieved greatly while remaining within the secondary educational system, later it was possible for the outstanding Hellenist Edwin Mayser to issue his six well-nourished volumes on the language of the Ptolemaic Greek papyri mainly from a Stuttgart gymnasium. It is instructive to reflect on whether such things would be likely to happen in modern American schools. Grassmann's limited professional advancement may ring a strong chord for those present-day linguists who must make their way outside of university circles. Felix Klein (1926, p.174), distinguished in his later years as a statesman of science, made a different point in this regard in discussing Grassman's life: "We academics grow up in acute competition with those striving in the same direction, like a tree in the middle of a forest, which must grow high and thin in order to be able to exist at all and capture its place in the light and air; on the other hand, he who stands alone, like Grassmann, can grow out fully in all directions, bring his essence and work to a harmonious perfection and rounding out." Although he lacked the collegial stimulation of the immediate university environment, Grassmann did not lack a drive towards creative intellectual discovery. This follows from words of Klein stated elsewhere in answer to a request for an explanation of the nature of mathematical discovery, words which have broader application and must have applied well to Grassmann: "You must have a problem", said Klein. "Choose one definite objective and drive ahead toward it.You may never reach your goal, but you will find something of interest on the way." (Bell, 1937, p.419). Donald S. Cooper, Ph.D. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jsalmons at facstaff.wisc.edu Fri Dec 7 18:11:04 2001 From: jsalmons at facstaff.wisc.edu (Joseph Salmons) Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 13:11:04 EST Subject: Editorial changes at Diachronica Message-ID: ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- On January 1, 2002, Brian Joseph will step down as Executive Editor of Diachronica to become editor of Language. Joe Salmons (University of Wisconsin) will replace Brian in that role, while Martha Ratliff (Wayne State University) will replace Joe as Review Editor. We are happy to report that Brian will remain a member of the journal's editorial team, along with Sheila Embleton and Konrad Koerner. Manuscripts and editorial correspondence should be sent to: Joseph Salmons Max Kade Institute University of Wisconsin 901 University Bay Dr. Madison, WI 53706 jsalmons at facstaff.wisc.edu tel. (608) 262-7546, fax (608) 265-4640 Books for review and review correspondence should go to: Martha Ratliff 802 S. Seventh St. Ann Arbor, MI 48103 martha_ratliff at wayne.edu tel. (313) 577-7646, fax (313) 577-0404 From larryt at cogs.susx.ac.uk Tue Dec 11 12:46:35 2001 From: larryt at cogs.susx.ac.uk (Larry Trask) Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 07:46:35 EST Subject: Sum: Two questions on carrots Message-ID: ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- A few days ago, I posted two questions about carrots. I've almost been overwhelmed by the responses: it appears that half the linguists on the planet, as well as a few plant specialists, have been beavering away on my behalf. Here's a summary of what I've learned. All specialists agree that the cultivated carrot originated in or near Afghanistan, that it was carried westward across the Near East and Turkey, that it was taken by the Arabs across North Africa into Spain around the 13th-14th century, and that it spread from Spain into the rest of Europe. One or two sources report that cultivated carrots were finally introduced into England only in the 15th or 16th centuries, either via France or by Flemish settlers from the Low Countries. Most sources agree that hybridization with the native European wild carrot probably or certainly took place at some point. At the same time, it is accepted that the ancient Greeks and Romans ate something which they called 'carrots', and indeed the very name 'carrot' derives from ancient Greek , itself of unknown origin. Since the European wild carrot is anything but tasty, it's far from clear just what those people were eating. Just to muddy the waters, Kluge, the standard etymological dictionary of German, insists that carrots are attested in the Stone Age stilt-houses of Switzerland, and that carrots were cultivated "early" by Germanic-speakers. I really don't know what to make of this. Now, to the English name. There is a common Germanic word *, applied to edible roots and root vegetables, and recorded widely in Germanic. Examples: Old Saxon , Old High German (modern German or , reportedly confined to Low German), Yiddish , and Swedish . This word is well recorded in Old English in the form , with a variant . The OED says that still exists as a dialectal word in England. Most philologists, including Bosworth-Toller, the standard dictionary of Old English, agree that this Old English word could be applied to any root vegetable, but also that it could mean specifically 'carrot'. Both B-T and several respondents cite OE passages in which ~ is glossed as 'carrot', either unmodified or in combination. Several sources note that or 'Welsh moru', 'foreign moru' (perhaps 'Roman'?) is sometimes used specifically for 'carrot', in contrast to , the parsnip. (This item survives into Middle English as .) Also recorded is a compound 'field moru', but it is far from clear just which root vegetable this name was applied to. All the early citations appear to come from herbalists, suggesting medicinal use but perhaps not cultivation for food. These citations antedate the accepted introduction of cultivated carrots into England by several centuries. But one or two respondents have wondered whether it is certain that these citations unquestionably designate the carrot, as opposed to some other root vegetable. The word 'carrot', according to the OED, is recorded in English only from 1533. But two respondents have reported the word, spelled 'karette', in an English herbalist dating from about 1500 -- or before any cultivated carrots are supposed to have reached England. The quotation is this: "Rotys for a gardyn. Persenepez, Turnepez, Radyche, Karettes, Galyngale." Two other English words of interest are (from 1425) and (from 1597), but both of these appear to mean 'parsnip', rather than 'carrot'. But , apparently from Latin, is abundantly recorded for 'wild carrot' in the 15th century. And 'shorthorn' is recorded from 1873. A curiosity is Wessex 'rantipole', meaning 'carrot' but recorded only from the 18th century, and apparently a transferred sense of a word meaning 'tearaway'. Now to the color. Everybody agrees that early carrots were variably dirty white, yellow, red or deep purple, and that the predominant dirty-white color helped to induce confusion between carrots and parsnips. Orange carrots were developed only in the 1600s, in the Netherlands, by the hybridization of red and yellow carrots. Orange carrots have now taken over the world, and the other colors are cultivated only by specialists. But all this makes my question about the earlier color term applied to carrots rather pointless. While I'm here, an aside or two. Spanish (and earlier variants) 'carrot' derives from Hispano-Arabic id., of unknown origin. The same Arabic word is the source of Basque (and many variants) 'carrot', seemingly with Romance mediation. Some eastern varieties of Basque have folk-etymologized this word into , as though from Basque 'root' and <(h)ori> 'yellow', with the final /a/ taken as the Basque article <-a>. I consider this one of the most successful folk etymologies of all time. The northern Basques mostly use for 'carrot', with many extended variants, such as . This must derive somehow from Latin 'parsnip', though the form shows that it can't be taken directly from Latin. My thanks to Laurent Sagart, Jim Rader, Marc Picard, Laura Wright, Dorothy Disterheft, Diana Lewis, Jane Roberts, Jasmin Harvey, Martin Huld, Margaret Sharpe, Peter Oehl, John Hines, John Charles Smith, Barrie Juniper, Dorine Houston, Rod McConchie, Paul Cohen, Richard Coates, Roger Wright, Christian Janet Kay, Carole Biggam, Cerwyss O'Hare, Simon Horobin, Rich Alderson, Brian Scott, Peter Bierbauner, Allan Hall, David Fertig, Debby Banham and Brett Kessler. Two things. I've done my best to copy this summary to any respondent who I suspected was not on HISTLING, but I may have missed one or two. If so, I apologize, and I'd be grateful if somebody could forward this posting to any such person. And my thank-you reply to Carole Biggam mysteriously bounced, which suggests that this one might bounce too. Larry Trask COGS University of Sussex Brighton BN1 9QH UK larryt at cogs.susx.ac.uk Tel: (01273)-678693 (from UK); +44-1273-678693 (from abroad) Fax: (01273)-671320 (from UK); +44-1273-671320 (from abroad) From larryt at cogs.susx.ac.uk Wed Dec 12 13:52:23 2001 From: larryt at cogs.susx.ac.uk (Larry Trask) Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 08:52:23 EST Subject: Q: English 'bizarre' = 'irascible'? Message-ID: ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Me again. This is a question on English 'bizarre'. I think I need to provide a bit of background before I ask my question, but, if you already know the origin of 'bizarre', you can skip the intro and go to the question. English has a word 'bizarre' (= 'weird'), which it shares with several other European languages. In most of these the word has about the same sense, but Spanish oddly means 'gallant, brave'. In 1607, the Basque writer Baltásar de Etxabe proposed that the Spanish word must derive from Basque 'beard', on the ground that being bearded equals being manly and brave. This idea was picked up by Friedrich Diez, who popularized it, and as a result the Basque story is presented as gospel in most reference books -- all of which conclude that French took the word from Spanish, and most of which propose that the French sense results from the startling effect of the bearded Spanish soldiers on the clean-shaven French troops. But the Basque story was shot to pieces several decades ago by the Catalan philologist Juan Corominas, who demonstrated that the word came from Italian. Italian is abundantly and steadily recorded from the 13th century on, and it even occurs in Dante and in Boccaccio. The original Italian sense, used by these writers, was 'quick to anger', 'irascible', and only later did the word develop semantically along the lines of 'quick to anger' > 'unpredictable' > 'eccentric' > 'weird'. French is attested only from 1533 and only in this last sense. Spanish is recorded only from 1569, and its odd sense appears to be explained by the observation that the Italian word has developed regional senses which are approving, such as 'spirited'. Moreover, there is an Italian source, in the word , originally 'quick flash of anger', today 'tantrum'. And Italian also has another derivative of this noun, , which has developed semantically in roughly similar ways but which has seemingly not been borrowed. So that seems to be that, and the Basque story is dead. But now to my question. The OED and other standard sources insist that English 'bizarre' is recorded only from 1648, already in its modern sense. But I've just been looking at William Brohaugh's recent popular book on English word histories, and Brohaugh tells me that, in fact, 'bizarre' is recorded at least once in English in the 13th century, and in the original Italian sense of 'irascible'. Unfortunately, Brohaugh gives no source and no precise date. I can't find confirming evidence anywhere, and I can't locate Brohaugh on the Net. So, my question is this. Can anybody point me at that 13th-century attestation? It occurs to me that the word *might* have occurred in an early English translation of Dante, if there was one that early, but I don't know if there was. It seems awfully early. Reference: William Brohaugh. 1998. English Through the Ages. Cincinnati: Writer's Digest. Larry Trask COGS University of Sussex Brighton BN1 9QH UK larryt at cogs.susx.ac.uk Tel: (01273)-678693 (from UK); +44-1273-678693 (from abroad) Fax: (01273)-671320 (from UK); +44-1273-671320 (from abroad) From Julia.Ulrich at deGruyter.com Wed Dec 12 13:51:32 2001 From: Julia.Ulrich at deGruyter.com (Julia Ulrich) Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 08:51:32 EST Subject: Principles of Historical Linguistics (Hans Heinrich Hock) Message-ID: ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- MOUTON DE GRUYTER CELEBRATES ITS 25TH ANNIVERSARY SPECIAL JUBILEE OFFER PRINCIPLES OF HISTORICAL LINGUISTICS Hans Henrich Hock Second edition, revised and updated 1991. 23 x 15,5 cm. xiv, 744 pages. 18 figures. Paperback. Previous price: € 39.95 NOW: US$ 19.95 / € 19.95 / sFr 32,- Save more than 50% ISBN 3-11-012962-0 This work appeared originally as volume 34 of the series TRENDS IN LINGUISTICS - STUDIES AND MONOGRAPHS This book provides an understanding of the principles of historical linguistics and the related fields of comparative linguistics and linguistic reconstruction. In addition, it provides a very broad exemplification for the principles of historical linguistics. FROM THE CONTENTS Preface Maps and charts 1. Introduction 2. Phonetics, transcriptions, terminology, abbreviations 3. Sound change: The regularity hypothesis 4. Sound change and phonological contrast 5. Sound change: Assimilation, weakening, loss 6. Sound change: Dissimilation, hapology, metathesis 7. Sound change: Epenthesis, elimination of hiatus, other changes 8. Sound change: Structure and function 9. Analogy: General discussion and typology 10. Analogy: Tendencies of analogical change 11. Analogy and generative grammar 12. Semantic change 13. Syntactic change 14. Linguistic contact: Lexical borrowing 15. Linguistic contact: Dialectology 16. Linguistic contact: Koinés, convergence, pidgins, creoles, language death 17. Internal reconstruction 18. Comparative method: Establishing linguistic relationship 19. Comparative reconstruction 20. Linguistic change: Its nature and causes Notes References Index For more information please contact the publisher: Mouton de Gruyter Genthiner Str. 13 10785 Berlin, Germany Fax: +49 30 26005 222 e-mail: orders at degruyter.de Please visit our website for other publications by Mouton de Gruyter http://www.degruyter.com For a full selection of our special jubilee offers, please visit our website at www.degruyter.de/mouton/jubi.pdf From tmcfadde at babel.ling.upenn.edu Sat Dec 15 16:46:19 2001 From: tmcfadde at babel.ling.upenn.edu (Thomas McFadden) Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 11:46:19 EST Subject: `tun' in Bavarian Message-ID: ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Hello all, I'm wondering if there's a standard explanation out there for the odd behavior of the Bavarian cognate of Standard German `tun.' The following paradigm, taken from Kufner's (1961) `Strukturelle Grammatik der Muenchner Stadtmundart' is typical of what I've seen elsewhere: Inf. dOa Sg. 1 dua 2 duasd 3 duad Pl. 1 dean 2 deadds 3 dean O= the open o rendered by a backwards c. Kufner doesn't indicate nasalization on vowels, but other dialect grammars have a nasalized vowel in the inf. What is odd here is the variation in the stem vowel. The difference btw. inf. and sg. may have something to do with nasalization of the vowel, but I can't think of anything that could be responsible for the difference btw. sg. and pl. Of course, vowel alternations exist btw the numbers in umlauting strong verbs and in preterite-presents, but this verb doesn't fit into either of those classes, and even if it did, the alternation ua/ea would be unique. Interestingly enough, it seems that certain Bavarian dialects have a plural stem vowel a rather than ea (the relatively front, unrounded a that's usually the outcome of MHG ou or umlauted a). I've found no indication of this sort of alternation in MHG or OHG, and the dialect grammars that describe it tend to be either semi-popular works for lay-people or purely synchronic-descriptive works, so they don't discuss the history of it. So, does anyone know what the story is here, or have a suggestion of where I could find it? I can't imagine that no one has worked on this before, I'm just not sure where to look for it, since I can't seem to find an index for the big German dialectology journals. Thanks! Tom McFadden From W.Schulze at lrz.uni-muenchen.de Sun Dec 16 23:54:16 2001 From: W.Schulze at lrz.uni-muenchen.de (W. Schulze) Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 18:54:16 EST Subject: `tun' in Bavarian Message-ID: ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- > Inf. dOa > Sg. 1 dua > 2 duasd > 3 duad > Pl. 1 dean > 2 deadds > 3 dean What I learnt during my training on German dialects is this: the plural forms stem from the subjunctive paradigm, hence we should correlate /dean/ [which I often hear being pronounced /deadn/] to /täten/ and /deadds/ [which I sometimes hear being pronounced /dead[ed]s/] to /tätet/( plus Bavarian -s). Hence /ea/ < /ä/ would be a good option. Naturally, the problem remains why the indicative plural has been replaced by the subjunctive (historically, an irrealis or 'mediated' realis!). As far as I know it is sometimes observed in different languages that event constructions based on non-singular 'persons' are rendered in a more modal way than those that shown the involvement of singular 'persons'. This may reflect some kind of 'social [or perhaps better: communicative] deixis'. But I'm not sure about that. At any rate the distribution of the stem vowels most probably does not reflect a schematic ablaut, in my humble opinion. Wolfgang -- Prof. Dr. Wolfgang M. Schulze IATS - Institute for General Linguistics and Language Typology [Institut fuer Allgemeine und Typologische Sprachwissenschaft] Dept. II [Communication and Languages - Kommunikation und Sprachen] F 13/14 - Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitaet Muenchen Geschwister-Scholl-Platz 1 D-80539 Muenchen Tel.: ++49-(0)89-21802484 (Secretary) ++49-(0)89-21805343 (Office) Fax: ++49-(0)89-21805345 Email: W.Schulze at lrz.uni-muenchen.de Web: http://www.lrz-muenchen.de/~wschulze/ats_eng.html From hopper at cmu.edu Mon Dec 17 14:45:42 2001 From: hopper at cmu.edu (Paul Hopper) Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 09:45:42 EST Subject: `tun' in Bavarian In-Reply-To: <3C1CD5FF.970C6B2A@lrz.uni-muenchen.de> Message-ID: ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Or perhaps the conjugation of Bav. dOa = NHG tun has become assimilated to the modal auxiliary pattern in which singular and plural are distinct and the plural typically has umlaut (muss/muessen, mag/moegen, kann koennen). This could well have occurred as a result of the use of "tun" as an auxiliary--common in non-standard German. For an example see below. - Paul Hopper Was tut sie denn den ganzen Tag, Da sie wohl nicht spinnen und nähen mag? Tut fischen und jagen. (Moericke, "Schoen-Rohtraut") --On Sunday, December 16, 2001 6:54 PM +0000 "W. Schulze" wrote: > ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- >> Inf. dOa >> Sg. 1 dua >> 2 duasd >> 3 duad >> Pl. 1 dean >> 2 deadds >> 3 dean > > What I learnt during my training on German dialects is this: the plural > forms stem from the subjunctive paradigm, hence we should correlate > /dean/ [which I often hear being pronounced /deadn/] to /täten/ and > /deadds/ [which I sometimes hear being pronounced /dead[ed]s/] to > /tätet/( plus Bavarian -s). Hence /ea/ < /ä/ would be a good option. > Naturally, the problem remains why the indicative plural has been > replaced by the subjunctive (historically, an irrealis or 'mediated' > realis!). As far as I know it is sometimes observed in different > languages that event constructions based on non-singular 'persons' are > rendered in a more modal way than those that shown the involvement of > singular 'persons'. This may reflect some kind of 'social [or perhaps > better: communicative] deixis'. But I'm not sure about that. At any rate > the distribution of the stem vowels most probably does not reflect a > schematic ablaut, in my humble opinion. > > Wolfgang > > > -- > Prof. Dr. Wolfgang M. Schulze > IATS - Institute for General Linguistics and Language Typology > [Institut fuer Allgemeine und Typologische Sprachwissenschaft] > Dept. II [Communication and Languages - Kommunikation und Sprachen] > F 13/14 - Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitaet Muenchen > Geschwister-Scholl-Platz 1 > D-80539 Muenchen > Tel.: ++49-(0)89-21802484 (Secretary) > ++49-(0)89-21805343 (Office) > Fax: ++49-(0)89-21805345 > Email: W.Schulze at lrz.uni-muenchen.de > Web: http://www.lrz-muenchen.de/~wschulze/ats_eng.html From r.millar at abdn.ac.uk Mon Dec 17 15:35:59 2001 From: r.millar at abdn.ac.uk (Robert McColl Millar) Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 10:35:59 EST Subject: Query: Language use and Language Attitudesamong the 18th century European nobility Message-ID: ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- I was wondering if anyone could give me any references to scholarly work about, or any material on, the language use and language attitudes of the European (upper) nobility and royalty (within Europe I include the countries of the British Isles). Many thanks Robert Millar ------------ Dr Robert McColl Millar Co-ordinator, Language and Linguistics Programme School of English and Film Studies University of Aberdeen King's College Aberdeen AB24 2UB Scotland Tel.: (+44) (0)1224 273909 Fax: (+44) (0)1224 272524 Language and Identities in the North-East of Scotland: http://www.abdn.ac.uk/english/lines.hti r.millar at abdn.ac.uk From EvolPub at aol.com Fri Dec 21 15:19:54 2001 From: EvolPub at aol.com (Tony Schiavo) Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 10:19:54 EST Subject: Now Available - A Vocabulary of Umbrian Message-ID: ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Evolution Publishing is pleased to announce publication of the following volume from the Languages of Classical Antiquity (LCA) series: Volume 3: A Vocabulary of Umbrian Carl Darling Buck, 1904 This vocabulary is extracted from Carl Darling Buck's A Grammar of Oscan and Umbrian (1904) and lists over 200 words in the language from the Iguvine Tables. Buck's Latin definitions are translated into English and listed alphabetically in two sections: Umbrian-English and English-Umbrian. Buck's translations of Umbrian words are compared with those of James Wilson Poultney (1959) and differences are noted. The volume also contains glosses attributed to the Umbrians, and a table of the Umbrian alphabet. October 2001 ~ clothbound ~ 75pp. ~ ISBN 1-889758-07-8 ~ US$32.00 Evolution Publishing is dedicated to preserving and consolidating hard-to-find linguistic records like this one with the goal of making them more accessible and readily available to the academic community. For further information on this and other titles in the LCA series: http://www.evolpub.com/LCA/LCAseries.html Evolution Publishing evolpub at aol.com From Julia.Ulrich at deGruyter.com Fri Dec 21 15:18:27 2001 From: Julia.Ulrich at deGruyter.com (Julia Ulrich) Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 10:18:27 EST Subject: General Ling: Mouton Classics.From Syntax to Cognition. From Phonology to Text. (2002) Message-ID: ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- MOUTON DE GRUYTER CELEBRATES ITS 25TH ANNIVERSARY SPECIAL JUBILEE OFFER MOUTON CLASSICS >>From Syntax to Cognition >>From Phonology to Text Two Volumes 2002. 23 x 15,5 cm. vi, 871 pages. € 38.95 / sFr 62,- / US$ 38.95 ISBN 3-11- 017346-8 Mouton proudly presents this collection of articles considered to be representative of author achievements over the past quarter-century of its publishing history. A selection, of course, can do little more than make the readers wish for more; it is hoped that these volumes will do just that. The book contains essays on phonology, morphology, formal syntax, functional linguistics, historical linguistics, language and cognition, language acquisition, discourse and text, sociology of language, and semiotics. FROM THE CONTENTS VOLUME 1 1. Phonology H. van der Hulst and N. Ritter: Head-Driven phonology A. Traill: The Percewption of clicks in !Xóõ 2. Morphology F. Plank: Paradigm size, morphological typology, and universal economy R. J. Hayward: The origins of the North Ometo verb agreement systems 3. Formal Syntax K. Hale: Core structures and adjunctions in Warlpiri syntax R. S. Kayne: Unambigious paths L. Rizzi and I. Roberts: Complex inversion in French 4. Functional Linguistics E. L. Keenan: Semantic correlates of the ergative / absolutive distinction S. C. Dik: How to build a natural language user S. C. Dik: Preview of Functional Grammar G. G. Corbett and N. M. Fraser: Default genders 5. Historical Linguistics W. Winter: The distribution of short and long vowels in stems of the type Lith. esti : vèsti : mèsti and OCS jasti : vesti : mesti in Baltic and Slavic languages B. Comrie: Morphology and word order reconstruction: problems and prospects VOLUME 2 6. Language and Cognition A. E. Goldberg: The inherent semantics of argument structure: the case of English ditransitive construction R. W. Langacker: Reference-point constructions S. Kemmer and A. Verhagen: The grammar of causatives and the conceptual structure of events 7. Language Acquisition M. Bowerman: Mapping thematic roles onto syntactic functions: are children helped by innate linking rules? 8. Discourse and Text H. J. Sasse: The thetic/categorical distinction revisited K. Hengeveld: Cohesion in Functional Grammar J. Costa: Focus in situ: Evidence from Portuguese 9. Sociology of Language E. Haugen: Language and ethnicity M. Meeuwis: Flemish Nationalism in the Belgian Congo versus Zairan anti-imperialism: Continuity and discontinuity in language ideological debates F. Coulmas: Language masters: defying linguistic materialism M. Eisenstein Ebsworth and T. Ebsworth: The pragmatics and perceptions of multicultural Puerto Ricans 10. Semiotics T. von Uexküll, W. Geigges and J. M. Herrmann: Endosemiosis P. Ekman and W. V. Friesen: The repertoire of nonverbal behavior: Categories, origins, usage, and coding Bibliography (Volume 1 and 2) For more information please contact the publisher: Mouton de Gruyter Genthiner Str. 13 10785 Berlin, Germany Fax: +49 30 26005 222 e-mail: orders at degruyter.de Please visit our website for other publications by Mouton de Gruyter http://www.degruyter.com For a full selection of our special jubilee offers, please visit our website at www.degruyter.de/mouton/jubi.pdf From alderson+mail at panix.com Tue Dec 4 01:59:32 2001 From: alderson+mail at panix.com (Rich Alderson) Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 20:59:32 EST Subject: Q: Two questions on carrots In-Reply-To: <60688.3216108206@wren.crn.cogs.susx.ac.uk> (message from Larry Trask on Fri, 30 Nov 2001 07:30:25 EST) Message-ID: ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Hi, Larry, Regarding the question of the *colour* of carrots, may I point out that legacy gardeners (those that grow old-fashioned varieties of vegetables that have gone out of common use because not amenable to the vicissitudes of modern shipping) grow black and red carrots--the orange varieties appear to be the hardiest, but may not have been the earliest. Rich Alderson From doncoop at mindspring.com Fri Dec 7 18:12:56 2001 From: doncoop at mindspring.com (Donald Cooper) Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 13:12:56 EST Subject: Who was Hermann Grassmann? Message-ID: Dear Histling: Winfred Lehmann's Reader in Nineteenth Century Historical Indo-European Linguistics (Indiana U.P., 1967) is no doubt familiar to many as a standard resource for courses in historical linguistics or the history of linguistics, for which a reading knowledge of German on the part of students cannot be assumed. The present writer has assigned parts of it in this capacity, and on the second-hand markets of the Internet the book is priced at a level which makes clear that it is still a valued work. Lehmann's brief introductions to the works translated are often the main sources of information easily available to students on the authors included. For this reason, the present writer was startled recently when he came across a quotation from one introduction included in Lehmann's collection, in which the biographical information was inaccurate and puzzling. It is discussed here because the actual facts are both interesting and perhaps suggestive in several more general senses. The section in question is devoted to the work of Hermann Grassmann. Lehmann states on p.110 that "Hermann Grassmann (1809-1877) was a banker who was compelled to retire because of tuberculosis." Unfortunately, the only accurate facts in this sentence are Grassmann's name and dates. Next it is stated that "In his leisure he occupied himself with mathematics and linguistics", which is merely but regrettably misleading as to the place of these occupations in his life. Who was Hermann Guenther Grassmann? Born on April 15 of 1809, he came from a scholarly German family resident in Pomeranian Stettin, now the Polish city of Szczecin. Starting the University of Berlin at the age of 18, he studied theology and classics there for three years, but in 1830 he returned to Stettin, where he undertook private study of physics and mathematics, natural history, theology, and philology, to prepare himself for a career of secondary teaching. In the spring of 1832, he entered his lifetime career of gymnasium (advanced high school) teaching when he began as assistant teacher at the Stettin gymnasium. During the academic year 1834-1835, he taught at the technical high school in Berlin, succeeding the geometer Jakob Steiner when Steiner moved to a professorship at the University of Berlin. In 1835, he returned to Stettin, where he joined the faculty of the Otto Schule gymnasium. He spent his life as a gymnasium-level teacher, never working in a bank and never able to obtain a university position. He did not retire, but remained a gymnasium instructor (with the nominal rank of professor) until he died on September 26, 1877 from cardiac problems rather than from tuberculosis. Grassmann's life and mathematical contributions are recounted in a number of standard references. Particularly valuable is the eight-page survey by W.Burau and C.J.Scriba, pp.192-199 in vol. XV of the Dictionary of Scientific Biography ed. C.C. Gillispie (Scribner's, 1978), which is drawn on in the present discussion. His mathematical work on vector analysis (the first version published in 1844 is usually referred to as Ausdehnungslehre) was so far ahead of its time that Grassmann's limited professional advancement is attributed as much to the lack of specialists qualified to assess his work as to the notorious difficulty of its exposition. This work is the main focus of the third chapter of Michael J. Crowe's solid History of Vector Analysis (1967,1985, Dover). To give a notion of the significance of Grassmann's mathematical work, it is useful to quote Crowe (1985, pp.54-55): "What Grassmann created was above all a mathematical system, not just a new mathematical idea or theorem. His creative act cannot be compared with such mathematical discoveries as the Pythagorean theorem or Newton's version of the calculus. Rather it is best thought of as comparable to such creations as non-Euclidean geometry or Boolean algebra." Because of its breadth and generality, it is difficult to summarize, and those interested may well refer to the discussions of Burau and Scriba (1978), of Crowe (1985) cited above, and of Klein (1926) cited below. Grassmann's original work in physics was better recognized than his mathematics during most of his lifetime. Crowe (1985)notes that by 1860, only five mathematicians in Europe are known to have come to appreciate Grassmann's work to some extent. When he was elected in 1864 to membership in the Leopoldina, founded in 1652 as the oldest scientific society of Germany, it was for his contributions to physics, not his mathematics. Building on his classical training, after the political storms of 1848-1849 Grassmann began the study of ancient Indo-European languages and comparative linguistics for which he is known to linguists. In 1854, his musical gifts contributed to his development of a theory of vowel acoustics in research which was limited by the available acoustic equipment, but won the respect of Helmholtz, the contemporary physicist most qualified to judge it, according to Klein (1926). In fact, Grassmann's theory of vowels is considered a substantial and independent anticipation of that of Helmholtz (1859). It stimulated an experimental investigation by J. Lahr in a doctoral dissertation of 1885 (Die Grassmansche Vocaltheorie im Lichte des Experiments Leipzig 1885; p.94 in Wiedemanns Annalen Bd. 26, 1886; cf. P.Gruetzner p.468 in Ergebnissse der Physiologie I, 1902). In the early 1860s came Grassmann's studies of comparative Indo-European phonology, which are the main reference of his fame in linguistics for Grassmann's Law, although Lehmann justly points out partial predecessors in this area. Disappointed by the poor reception of his second exposition of his main mathematical work in 1862, Grassmann changed the main focus of his original investigations, turning to the study of the Rig Veda, the most archaic document of Vedic Sanskrit. Although his metric translation of the Rig Veda into German (Berlin 1876-77) is now not well known, his Woerterbuch zum Rig-Veda (Leipzig 1873-1875), still available in two different editions published on opposite sides of the earth, is a monument to his labor and analytic penetration of the text. Publication of Grassmann's works on Sanskrit was followed by membership in the American Oriental Society and an honorary doctorate from the University of Tuebingen. His death was recognized in obituaries whose authors included the linguists B. Delbrueck (Augsburger Allg. Zeit. 1877, No.291, supp.) and August Leskien (jointly with the mathematician Moritz Kantor in Allg. Deutsche Biographie IX, pp.595-598, Leipzig 1879). Delbrueck would recall Grassmann later as "this remarkable scholar, who in a certain respect stands unique among us" (Einleitung in das Studium der indogermanischen Sprachen 6th ed. Leipzig 1919, p.124). During the years just before his death, increasing recognition of his mathematical work must have brought some satisfaction, and in the year of his death (1877) he revised the 1844 version of his work on vector analysis, in an edition which appeared in 1878. Those who wish to assess Grassmann's position in mathematics have only to turn to standard histories, such as E.T.Bell's The Development of Mathematics (2nd ed. McGraw-Hill 1945 pp.198-206), C.B.Boyer and U.Merzbach's modern History of Mathematics (2nd ed. Wiley 1991, pp.584-586), and Felix Klein's respectful 9-page treatment in his Vorlesungen ueber die Entwicklung der Mathematik im 19. Jahrhundert (Goettingen, 1926, pp.173-182). Klein admitted the significance of Grassmann's influence on his own Erlangen Program in geometry of 1872, his inaugural program pronounced when he assumed his professorship in Erlangen. However, it is fair to say that the nature and significance of Grassmann's linguistic work have not always been clearly appraised from the mathematical side: Boyer and Merzbach describe his linguistic work as "being a specialist in Sanskrit literature" (1991, p.585). From a linguistic point of view, it is intriguing to comment on a relevant parallel to Grassmann's work. The closest contemporary parallel to the primary mathematical work of Grassmann is the work of the Irish mathematician William Rowan Hamilton (1805-1865) known under the label of quaternions. Klein (1926), Bell (1945), and Crowe (1967) provide more or less detailed expositions of this work and its relation to that of Grassmann. Hamilton, like Grassmann, was linguistically gifted; by the age of thirteen, he had acquired one language for every year of his age, under the tutelage of his uncle, the Reverend James Hamilton. Unlike Grassmann, however, Hamilton's linguistic talents were never a focus of his mature original intellectual activity, except for his composition of mediocre poetry. Also unlike Grassmann, who published a number of books for use only as high-school textbooks, turned his genius too often to committee-work and political, social, and church issues, and was the center of a productive family, the reclusive Hamilton, proclaimed a professor before he finished his university program, left behind at his death many unpublished papers and about 60 large manuscript books of unpublished mathematical research (E.T.Bell Men of Mathematics Simon and Schuster 1937, pp.340-361). It is tempting to wonder whether this parallelism of achievement in a particular mathematical field and linguistic gifts is founded on cognitive parallels between mathematics and logic on the one hand and the formal aspect of linguistic structure on the other hand. A counter-argument might be that a third scientist who contributed much to vector analysis, the Yale mathematical physicist Josiah Willard Gibbs (1839-1903), who correctly valued Grassmann's work as much more general than the corresponding work of Hamilton (Burau and Scriba, 1978; Bell, 1945; L.P.Wheeler Josiah Willard Gibbs, 2nd ed. Yale U.P. 1952, ch. 7), is not known for such outstanding linguistic achievements, although his studies in Paris and Heidelberg (1866-1869) surely demanded practical linguistic competence. Neither were such linguistic gifts displayed by the British physicist Oliver Heaviside (1850-1925), a more modern exponent of vector methods, who did not in any case have the advantages either of university education or of a learned family background (pp.211-212 in Dictionary of Scientific Biography VI, ed. C.C.Gillispie, Scribner 1972). Now it is useful to recur to the apparently disparate combination of academic areas in which Grassmann was active. In terms of his home environment, Grassmann's father Justus Guenther Grassmann taught physics and mathematics in the Stettin gymnasium, and was an original researcher in crystallography and combinatorial mathematics (M. Cantor pp.598-599 in Allg. deutsche Biographie IX, Leipzig 1879). Thus it is reasonable to infer that although he was not at all regarded by his father as the prodigy which Hamilton was, Hermann Grassmann received a substantial early orientation in these scientific fields, from which his study of theology and classics might seem to be an intellectual deviation, if he had not come from a long line of Protestant pastors whose traditions included both scholarly and artistic interests (Klein, 1926). When Grassmann went to the still young University of Berlin in 1827, he studied partly under August Neander (1789-1850), who devoted himself to early Christian church history. Grassmann also studied under Neander's own teacher Friedrich Schleiermacher (1768-1834), who was still quite active and must have offered much broader intellectual perspectives as a philosopher and theologian who is regarded as a foundational thinker in the history of Protestant Christianity (K. Barth Protestant Theology in the Nineteenth Century 1952, trans. 1972 SCM Press). The influence of both Grassmann's father and of Schleiermacher on Grassmann's mathematics has been analyzed (Crowe, 1985). It has also been argued that the philosophical aspect of Schleiermacher's training made itself felt later in the abstract philosophical character of Grassmann's mathematical exposition, much to the detriment of its acceptance. Grassmann's study of classics in Berlin took place under the aegis of a scholar who would be quite distinctive among classicists of any time. August Boeckh (1785-1867) was in his bloom as a scholar who defined philology as the reconstruction of all aspects of a past culture. Boeckh focussed in much of his most brilliant work on quantitative phenomena, on weights, measures, and coinage standards in antiquity, on the economics and chronology of ancient Greece, and on Greek music and poetic metrics. Boeckh liked to think of both physical and metaphysical systems as founded on astronomy. For this reason, he dedicated a series of investigations to Greek astronomy (cf. U. von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff History of Classical Scholarship 1921, trans. Johns Hopkins 1982). There is a probable continuity here in that Grassmann's first major physical work, carried out in 1839-40, was on the theory of the tides, which result from the gravitational attraction of the moon and sun, and was carried out partly in relation to his study of the analytic mechanics of Lagrange and of the celestial mechanics of Laplace. Another point of continuity is that according to Cantor and Leskien (1879) Grassmann had continued to study mathematics privately in Berlin, as well as attending to his formal studies. In a more general sense, the nature of Grassmann's work in linguistics and Sanskrit in relation to mathematics can be appreciated by anyone who has ever been immersed in the formalisms of logical derivation (e.g. W. Quine Methods of Logic , Holt 1959) or computer programming, which are closely related to the logical substrate of stemmatics in textual criticism and specification of sequences of linguistic changes in historical linguistics. Given his exposure to technical aspects of philology under Boeckh, it is quite understandable that Grassmann should turn to making useable at least a nucleus of the data which were indispensable for comparative linguistics, the linguistic forms of the Rig Veda. Thus his linguistic and mathematical studies were not entirely unrelated, but overlapped to a considerable extent in that they represented different aspects of a single fundamental mode of thought. It is likely that many linguists have acquired from varied sources a more precise appreciation of Grassmann's background and contributions than is available in Lehmann's book. This was certainly true for the scholar from whom the present writer first heard of Grassmann's achievements both in mathematics and comparative linguistics, the Indo-Europeanist Joshua Whatmough. Whatmough's own interest in mathematics sensitized him to the duality of Grassmann's work. Sadly, Grassman is recorded not to have been a great teacher in the secondary school context, although he eventually advanced to a senior position in the Stettin gymnasium (Klein, 1926; Burau and Scriba, 1978). Whether the match of genius and such routine work is productive is uncertain. In the older German educational system, it was sometimes possible for such distinguished figures as the mathematicians Jakob Steiner and Karl Weierstrass to advance from secondary school teaching to a university post. As another example of someone who achieved greatly while remaining within the secondary educational system, later it was possible for the outstanding Hellenist Edwin Mayser to issue his six well-nourished volumes on the language of the Ptolemaic Greek papyri mainly from a Stuttgart gymnasium. It is instructive to reflect on whether such things would be likely to happen in modern American schools. Grassmann's limited professional advancement may ring a strong chord for those present-day linguists who must make their way outside of university circles. Felix Klein (1926, p.174), distinguished in his later years as a statesman of science, made a different point in this regard in discussing Grassman's life: "We academics grow up in acute competition with those striving in the same direction, like a tree in the middle of a forest, which must grow high and thin in order to be able to exist at all and capture its place in the light and air; on the other hand, he who stands alone, like Grassmann, can grow out fully in all directions, bring his essence and work to a harmonious perfection and rounding out." Although he lacked the collegial stimulation of the immediate university environment, Grassmann did not lack a drive towards creative intellectual discovery. This follows from words of Klein stated elsewhere in answer to a request for an explanation of the nature of mathematical discovery, words which have broader application and must have applied well to Grassmann: "You must have a problem", said Klein. "Choose one definite objective and drive ahead toward it.You may never reach your goal, but you will find something of interest on the way." (Bell, 1937, p.419). Donald S. Cooper, Ph.D. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jsalmons at facstaff.wisc.edu Fri Dec 7 18:11:04 2001 From: jsalmons at facstaff.wisc.edu (Joseph Salmons) Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 13:11:04 EST Subject: Editorial changes at Diachronica Message-ID: ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- On January 1, 2002, Brian Joseph will step down as Executive Editor of Diachronica to become editor of Language. Joe Salmons (University of Wisconsin) will replace Brian in that role, while Martha Ratliff (Wayne State University) will replace Joe as Review Editor. We are happy to report that Brian will remain a member of the journal's editorial team, along with Sheila Embleton and Konrad Koerner. Manuscripts and editorial correspondence should be sent to: Joseph Salmons Max Kade Institute University of Wisconsin 901 University Bay Dr. Madison, WI 53706 jsalmons at facstaff.wisc.edu tel. (608) 262-7546, fax (608) 265-4640 Books for review and review correspondence should go to: Martha Ratliff 802 S. Seventh St. Ann Arbor, MI 48103 martha_ratliff at wayne.edu tel. (313) 577-7646, fax (313) 577-0404 From larryt at cogs.susx.ac.uk Tue Dec 11 12:46:35 2001 From: larryt at cogs.susx.ac.uk (Larry Trask) Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 07:46:35 EST Subject: Sum: Two questions on carrots Message-ID: ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- A few days ago, I posted two questions about carrots. I've almost been overwhelmed by the responses: it appears that half the linguists on the planet, as well as a few plant specialists, have been beavering away on my behalf. Here's a summary of what I've learned. All specialists agree that the cultivated carrot originated in or near Afghanistan, that it was carried westward across the Near East and Turkey, that it was taken by the Arabs across North Africa into Spain around the 13th-14th century, and that it spread from Spain into the rest of Europe. One or two sources report that cultivated carrots were finally introduced into England only in the 15th or 16th centuries, either via France or by Flemish settlers from the Low Countries. Most sources agree that hybridization with the native European wild carrot probably or certainly took place at some point. At the same time, it is accepted that the ancient Greeks and Romans ate something which they called 'carrots', and indeed the very name 'carrot' derives from ancient Greek , itself of unknown origin. Since the European wild carrot is anything but tasty, it's far from clear just what those people were eating. Just to muddy the waters, Kluge, the standard etymological dictionary of German, insists that carrots are attested in the Stone Age stilt-houses of Switzerland, and that carrots were cultivated "early" by Germanic-speakers. I really don't know what to make of this. Now, to the English name. There is a common Germanic word *, applied to edible roots and root vegetables, and recorded widely in Germanic. Examples: Old Saxon , Old High German (modern German or , reportedly confined to Low German), Yiddish , and Swedish . This word is well recorded in Old English in the form , with a variant . The OED says that still exists as a dialectal word in England. Most philologists, including Bosworth-Toller, the standard dictionary of Old English, agree that this Old English word could be applied to any root vegetable, but also that it could mean specifically 'carrot'. Both B-T and several respondents cite OE passages in which ~ is glossed as 'carrot', either unmodified or in combination. Several sources note that or 'Welsh moru', 'foreign moru' (perhaps 'Roman'?) is sometimes used specifically for 'carrot', in contrast to , the parsnip. (This item survives into Middle English as .) Also recorded is a compound 'field moru', but it is far from clear just which root vegetable this name was applied to. All the early citations appear to come from herbalists, suggesting medicinal use but perhaps not cultivation for food. These citations antedate the accepted introduction of cultivated carrots into England by several centuries. But one or two respondents have wondered whether it is certain that these citations unquestionably designate the carrot, as opposed to some other root vegetable. The word 'carrot', according to the OED, is recorded in English only from 1533. But two respondents have reported the word, spelled 'karette', in an English herbalist dating from about 1500 -- or before any cultivated carrots are supposed to have reached England. The quotation is this: "Rotys for a gardyn. Persenepez, Turnepez, Radyche, Karettes, Galyngale." Two other English words of interest are (from 1425) and (from 1597), but both of these appear to mean 'parsnip', rather than 'carrot'. But , apparently from Latin, is abundantly recorded for 'wild carrot' in the 15th century. And 'shorthorn' is recorded from 1873. A curiosity is Wessex 'rantipole', meaning 'carrot' but recorded only from the 18th century, and apparently a transferred sense of a word meaning 'tearaway'. Now to the color. Everybody agrees that early carrots were variably dirty white, yellow, red or deep purple, and that the predominant dirty-white color helped to induce confusion between carrots and parsnips. Orange carrots were developed only in the 1600s, in the Netherlands, by the hybridization of red and yellow carrots. Orange carrots have now taken over the world, and the other colors are cultivated only by specialists. But all this makes my question about the earlier color term applied to carrots rather pointless. While I'm here, an aside or two. Spanish (and earlier variants) 'carrot' derives from Hispano-Arabic id., of unknown origin. The same Arabic word is the source of Basque (and many variants) 'carrot', seemingly with Romance mediation. Some eastern varieties of Basque have folk-etymologized this word into , as though from Basque 'root' and <(h)ori> 'yellow', with the final /a/ taken as the Basque article <-a>. I consider this one of the most successful folk etymologies of all time. The northern Basques mostly use for 'carrot', with many extended variants, such as . This must derive somehow from Latin 'parsnip', though the form shows that it can't be taken directly from Latin. My thanks to Laurent Sagart, Jim Rader, Marc Picard, Laura Wright, Dorothy Disterheft, Diana Lewis, Jane Roberts, Jasmin Harvey, Martin Huld, Margaret Sharpe, Peter Oehl, John Hines, John Charles Smith, Barrie Juniper, Dorine Houston, Rod McConchie, Paul Cohen, Richard Coates, Roger Wright, Christian Janet Kay, Carole Biggam, Cerwyss O'Hare, Simon Horobin, Rich Alderson, Brian Scott, Peter Bierbauner, Allan Hall, David Fertig, Debby Banham and Brett Kessler. Two things. I've done my best to copy this summary to any respondent who I suspected was not on HISTLING, but I may have missed one or two. If so, I apologize, and I'd be grateful if somebody could forward this posting to any such person. And my thank-you reply to Carole Biggam mysteriously bounced, which suggests that this one might bounce too. Larry Trask COGS University of Sussex Brighton BN1 9QH UK larryt at cogs.susx.ac.uk Tel: (01273)-678693 (from UK); +44-1273-678693 (from abroad) Fax: (01273)-671320 (from UK); +44-1273-671320 (from abroad) From larryt at cogs.susx.ac.uk Wed Dec 12 13:52:23 2001 From: larryt at cogs.susx.ac.uk (Larry Trask) Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 08:52:23 EST Subject: Q: English 'bizarre' = 'irascible'? Message-ID: ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Me again. This is a question on English 'bizarre'. I think I need to provide a bit of background before I ask my question, but, if you already know the origin of 'bizarre', you can skip the intro and go to the question. English has a word 'bizarre' (= 'weird'), which it shares with several other European languages. In most of these the word has about the same sense, but Spanish oddly means 'gallant, brave'. In 1607, the Basque writer Balt?sar de Etxabe proposed that the Spanish word must derive from Basque 'beard', on the ground that being bearded equals being manly and brave. This idea was picked up by Friedrich Diez, who popularized it, and as a result the Basque story is presented as gospel in most reference books -- all of which conclude that French took the word from Spanish, and most of which propose that the French sense results from the startling effect of the bearded Spanish soldiers on the clean-shaven French troops. But the Basque story was shot to pieces several decades ago by the Catalan philologist Juan Corominas, who demonstrated that the word came from Italian. Italian is abundantly and steadily recorded from the 13th century on, and it even occurs in Dante and in Boccaccio. The original Italian sense, used by these writers, was 'quick to anger', 'irascible', and only later did the word develop semantically along the lines of 'quick to anger' > 'unpredictable' > 'eccentric' > 'weird'. French is attested only from 1533 and only in this last sense. Spanish is recorded only from 1569, and its odd sense appears to be explained by the observation that the Italian word has developed regional senses which are approving, such as 'spirited'. Moreover, there is an Italian source, in the word , originally 'quick flash of anger', today 'tantrum'. And Italian also has another derivative of this noun, , which has developed semantically in roughly similar ways but which has seemingly not been borrowed. So that seems to be that, and the Basque story is dead. But now to my question. The OED and other standard sources insist that English 'bizarre' is recorded only from 1648, already in its modern sense. But I've just been looking at William Brohaugh's recent popular book on English word histories, and Brohaugh tells me that, in fact, 'bizarre' is recorded at least once in English in the 13th century, and in the original Italian sense of 'irascible'. Unfortunately, Brohaugh gives no source and no precise date. I can't find confirming evidence anywhere, and I can't locate Brohaugh on the Net. So, my question is this. Can anybody point me at that 13th-century attestation? It occurs to me that the word *might* have occurred in an early English translation of Dante, if there was one that early, but I don't know if there was. It seems awfully early. Reference: William Brohaugh. 1998. English Through the Ages. Cincinnati: Writer's Digest. Larry Trask COGS University of Sussex Brighton BN1 9QH UK larryt at cogs.susx.ac.uk Tel: (01273)-678693 (from UK); +44-1273-678693 (from abroad) Fax: (01273)-671320 (from UK); +44-1273-671320 (from abroad) From Julia.Ulrich at deGruyter.com Wed Dec 12 13:51:32 2001 From: Julia.Ulrich at deGruyter.com (Julia Ulrich) Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 08:51:32 EST Subject: Principles of Historical Linguistics (Hans Heinrich Hock) Message-ID: ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- MOUTON DE GRUYTER CELEBRATES ITS 25TH ANNIVERSARY SPECIAL JUBILEE OFFER PRINCIPLES OF HISTORICAL LINGUISTICS Hans Henrich Hock Second edition, revised and updated 1991. 23 x 15,5 cm. xiv, 744 pages. 18 figures. Paperback. Previous price: ? 39.95 NOW: US$ 19.95 / ? 19.95 / sFr 32,- Save more than 50% ISBN 3-11-012962-0 This work appeared originally as volume 34 of the series TRENDS IN LINGUISTICS - STUDIES AND MONOGRAPHS This book provides an understanding of the principles of historical linguistics and the related fields of comparative linguistics and linguistic reconstruction. In addition, it provides a very broad exemplification for the principles of historical linguistics. FROM THE CONTENTS Preface Maps and charts 1. Introduction 2. Phonetics, transcriptions, terminology, abbreviations 3. Sound change: The regularity hypothesis 4. Sound change and phonological contrast 5. Sound change: Assimilation, weakening, loss 6. Sound change: Dissimilation, hapology, metathesis 7. Sound change: Epenthesis, elimination of hiatus, other changes 8. Sound change: Structure and function 9. Analogy: General discussion and typology 10. Analogy: Tendencies of analogical change 11. Analogy and generative grammar 12. Semantic change 13. Syntactic change 14. Linguistic contact: Lexical borrowing 15. Linguistic contact: Dialectology 16. Linguistic contact: Koin?s, convergence, pidgins, creoles, language death 17. Internal reconstruction 18. Comparative method: Establishing linguistic relationship 19. Comparative reconstruction 20. Linguistic change: Its nature and causes Notes References Index For more information please contact the publisher: Mouton de Gruyter Genthiner Str. 13 10785 Berlin, Germany Fax: +49 30 26005 222 e-mail: orders at degruyter.de Please visit our website for other publications by Mouton de Gruyter http://www.degruyter.com For a full selection of our special jubilee offers, please visit our website at www.degruyter.de/mouton/jubi.pdf From tmcfadde at babel.ling.upenn.edu Sat Dec 15 16:46:19 2001 From: tmcfadde at babel.ling.upenn.edu (Thomas McFadden) Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 11:46:19 EST Subject: `tun' in Bavarian Message-ID: ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Hello all, I'm wondering if there's a standard explanation out there for the odd behavior of the Bavarian cognate of Standard German `tun.' The following paradigm, taken from Kufner's (1961) `Strukturelle Grammatik der Muenchner Stadtmundart' is typical of what I've seen elsewhere: Inf. dOa Sg. 1 dua 2 duasd 3 duad Pl. 1 dean 2 deadds 3 dean O= the open o rendered by a backwards c. Kufner doesn't indicate nasalization on vowels, but other dialect grammars have a nasalized vowel in the inf. What is odd here is the variation in the stem vowel. The difference btw. inf. and sg. may have something to do with nasalization of the vowel, but I can't think of anything that could be responsible for the difference btw. sg. and pl. Of course, vowel alternations exist btw the numbers in umlauting strong verbs and in preterite-presents, but this verb doesn't fit into either of those classes, and even if it did, the alternation ua/ea would be unique. Interestingly enough, it seems that certain Bavarian dialects have a plural stem vowel a rather than ea (the relatively front, unrounded a that's usually the outcome of MHG ou or umlauted a). I've found no indication of this sort of alternation in MHG or OHG, and the dialect grammars that describe it tend to be either semi-popular works for lay-people or purely synchronic-descriptive works, so they don't discuss the history of it. So, does anyone know what the story is here, or have a suggestion of where I could find it? I can't imagine that no one has worked on this before, I'm just not sure where to look for it, since I can't seem to find an index for the big German dialectology journals. Thanks! Tom McFadden From W.Schulze at lrz.uni-muenchen.de Sun Dec 16 23:54:16 2001 From: W.Schulze at lrz.uni-muenchen.de (W. Schulze) Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 18:54:16 EST Subject: `tun' in Bavarian Message-ID: ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- > Inf. dOa > Sg. 1 dua > 2 duasd > 3 duad > Pl. 1 dean > 2 deadds > 3 dean What I learnt during my training on German dialects is this: the plural forms stem from the subjunctive paradigm, hence we should correlate /dean/ [which I often hear being pronounced /deadn/] to /t?ten/ and /deadds/ [which I sometimes hear being pronounced /dead[ed]s/] to /t?tet/( plus Bavarian -s). Hence /ea/ < /?/ would be a good option. Naturally, the problem remains why the indicative plural has been replaced by the subjunctive (historically, an irrealis or 'mediated' realis!). As far as I know it is sometimes observed in different languages that event constructions based on non-singular 'persons' are rendered in a more modal way than those that shown the involvement of singular 'persons'. This may reflect some kind of 'social [or perhaps better: communicative] deixis'. But I'm not sure about that. At any rate the distribution of the stem vowels most probably does not reflect a schematic ablaut, in my humble opinion. Wolfgang -- Prof. Dr. Wolfgang M. Schulze IATS - Institute for General Linguistics and Language Typology [Institut fuer Allgemeine und Typologische Sprachwissenschaft] Dept. II [Communication and Languages - Kommunikation und Sprachen] F 13/14 - Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitaet Muenchen Geschwister-Scholl-Platz 1 D-80539 Muenchen Tel.: ++49-(0)89-21802484 (Secretary) ++49-(0)89-21805343 (Office) Fax: ++49-(0)89-21805345 Email: W.Schulze at lrz.uni-muenchen.de Web: http://www.lrz-muenchen.de/~wschulze/ats_eng.html From hopper at cmu.edu Mon Dec 17 14:45:42 2001 From: hopper at cmu.edu (Paul Hopper) Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 09:45:42 EST Subject: `tun' in Bavarian In-Reply-To: <3C1CD5FF.970C6B2A@lrz.uni-muenchen.de> Message-ID: ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Or perhaps the conjugation of Bav. dOa = NHG tun has become assimilated to the modal auxiliary pattern in which singular and plural are distinct and the plural typically has umlaut (muss/muessen, mag/moegen, kann koennen). This could well have occurred as a result of the use of "tun" as an auxiliary--common in non-standard German. For an example see below. - Paul Hopper Was tut sie denn den ganzen Tag, Da sie wohl nicht spinnen und n?hen mag? Tut fischen und jagen. (Moericke, "Schoen-Rohtraut") --On Sunday, December 16, 2001 6:54 PM +0000 "W. Schulze" wrote: > ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- >> Inf. dOa >> Sg. 1 dua >> 2 duasd >> 3 duad >> Pl. 1 dean >> 2 deadds >> 3 dean > > What I learnt during my training on German dialects is this: the plural > forms stem from the subjunctive paradigm, hence we should correlate > /dean/ [which I often hear being pronounced /deadn/] to /t?ten/ and > /deadds/ [which I sometimes hear being pronounced /dead[ed]s/] to > /t?tet/( plus Bavarian -s). Hence /ea/ < /?/ would be a good option. > Naturally, the problem remains why the indicative plural has been > replaced by the subjunctive (historically, an irrealis or 'mediated' > realis!). As far as I know it is sometimes observed in different > languages that event constructions based on non-singular 'persons' are > rendered in a more modal way than those that shown the involvement of > singular 'persons'. This may reflect some kind of 'social [or perhaps > better: communicative] deixis'. But I'm not sure about that. At any rate > the distribution of the stem vowels most probably does not reflect a > schematic ablaut, in my humble opinion. > > Wolfgang > > > -- > Prof. Dr. Wolfgang M. Schulze > IATS - Institute for General Linguistics and Language Typology > [Institut fuer Allgemeine und Typologische Sprachwissenschaft] > Dept. II [Communication and Languages - Kommunikation und Sprachen] > F 13/14 - Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitaet Muenchen > Geschwister-Scholl-Platz 1 > D-80539 Muenchen > Tel.: ++49-(0)89-21802484 (Secretary) > ++49-(0)89-21805343 (Office) > Fax: ++49-(0)89-21805345 > Email: W.Schulze at lrz.uni-muenchen.de > Web: http://www.lrz-muenchen.de/~wschulze/ats_eng.html From r.millar at abdn.ac.uk Mon Dec 17 15:35:59 2001 From: r.millar at abdn.ac.uk (Robert McColl Millar) Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 10:35:59 EST Subject: Query: Language use and Language Attitudesamong the 18th century European nobility Message-ID: ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- I was wondering if anyone could give me any references to scholarly work about, or any material on, the language use and language attitudes of the European (upper) nobility and royalty (within Europe I include the countries of the British Isles). Many thanks Robert Millar ------------ Dr Robert McColl Millar Co-ordinator, Language and Linguistics Programme School of English and Film Studies University of Aberdeen King's College Aberdeen AB24 2UB Scotland Tel.: (+44) (0)1224 273909 Fax: (+44) (0)1224 272524 Language and Identities in the North-East of Scotland: http://www.abdn.ac.uk/english/lines.hti r.millar at abdn.ac.uk From EvolPub at aol.com Fri Dec 21 15:19:54 2001 From: EvolPub at aol.com (Tony Schiavo) Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 10:19:54 EST Subject: Now Available - A Vocabulary of Umbrian Message-ID: ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Evolution Publishing is pleased to announce publication of the following volume from the Languages of Classical Antiquity (LCA) series: Volume 3: A Vocabulary of Umbrian Carl Darling Buck, 1904 This vocabulary is extracted from Carl Darling Buck's A Grammar of Oscan and Umbrian (1904) and lists over 200 words in the language from the Iguvine Tables. Buck's Latin definitions are translated into English and listed alphabetically in two sections: Umbrian-English and English-Umbrian. Buck's translations of Umbrian words are compared with those of James Wilson Poultney (1959) and differences are noted. The volume also contains glosses attributed to the Umbrians, and a table of the Umbrian alphabet. October 2001 ~ clothbound ~ 75pp. ~ ISBN 1-889758-07-8 ~ US$32.00 Evolution Publishing is dedicated to preserving and consolidating hard-to-find linguistic records like this one with the goal of making them more accessible and readily available to the academic community. For further information on this and other titles in the LCA series: http://www.evolpub.com/LCA/LCAseries.html Evolution Publishing evolpub at aol.com From Julia.Ulrich at deGruyter.com Fri Dec 21 15:18:27 2001 From: Julia.Ulrich at deGruyter.com (Julia Ulrich) Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 10:18:27 EST Subject: General Ling: Mouton Classics.From Syntax to Cognition. From Phonology to Text. (2002) Message-ID: ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- MOUTON DE GRUYTER CELEBRATES ITS 25TH ANNIVERSARY SPECIAL JUBILEE OFFER MOUTON CLASSICS >>From Syntax to Cognition >>From Phonology to Text Two Volumes 2002. 23 x 15,5 cm. vi, 871 pages. ? 38.95 / sFr 62,- / US$ 38.95 ISBN 3-11- 017346-8 Mouton proudly presents this collection of articles considered to be representative of author achievements over the past quarter-century of its publishing history. A selection, of course, can do little more than make the readers wish for more; it is hoped that these volumes will do just that. The book contains essays on phonology, morphology, formal syntax, functional linguistics, historical linguistics, language and cognition, language acquisition, discourse and text, sociology of language, and semiotics. FROM THE CONTENTS VOLUME 1 1. Phonology H. van der Hulst and N. Ritter: Head-Driven phonology A. Traill: The Percewption of clicks in !X?? 2. Morphology F. Plank: Paradigm size, morphological typology, and universal economy R. J. Hayward: The origins of the North Ometo verb agreement systems 3. Formal Syntax K. Hale: Core structures and adjunctions in Warlpiri syntax R. S. Kayne: Unambigious paths L. Rizzi and I. Roberts: Complex inversion in French 4. Functional Linguistics E. L. Keenan: Semantic correlates of the ergative / absolutive distinction S. C. Dik: How to build a natural language user S. C. Dik: Preview of Functional Grammar G. G. Corbett and N. M. Fraser: Default genders 5. Historical Linguistics W. Winter: The distribution of short and long vowels in stems of the type Lith. esti : v?sti : m?sti and OCS jasti : vesti : mesti in Baltic and Slavic languages B. Comrie: Morphology and word order reconstruction: problems and prospects VOLUME 2 6. Language and Cognition A. E. Goldberg: The inherent semantics of argument structure: the case of English ditransitive construction R. W. Langacker: Reference-point constructions S. Kemmer and A. Verhagen: The grammar of causatives and the conceptual structure of events 7. Language Acquisition M. Bowerman: Mapping thematic roles onto syntactic functions: are children helped by innate linking rules? 8. Discourse and Text H. J. Sasse: The thetic/categorical distinction revisited K. Hengeveld: Cohesion in Functional Grammar J. Costa: Focus in situ: Evidence from Portuguese 9. Sociology of Language E. Haugen: Language and ethnicity M. Meeuwis: Flemish Nationalism in the Belgian Congo versus Zairan anti-imperialism: Continuity and discontinuity in language ideological debates F. Coulmas: Language masters: defying linguistic materialism M. Eisenstein Ebsworth and T. Ebsworth: The pragmatics and perceptions of multicultural Puerto Ricans 10. Semiotics T. von Uexk?ll, W. Geigges and J. M. Herrmann: Endosemiosis P. Ekman and W. V. Friesen: The repertoire of nonverbal behavior: Categories, origins, usage, and coding Bibliography (Volume 1 and 2) For more information please contact the publisher: Mouton de Gruyter Genthiner Str. 13 10785 Berlin, Germany Fax: +49 30 26005 222 e-mail: orders at degruyter.de Please visit our website for other publications by Mouton de Gruyter http://www.degruyter.com For a full selection of our special jubilee offers, please visit our website at www.degruyter.de/mouton/jubi.pdf