dummyhood

[Paul Roochnik]

When I saw the word "dummyhood", my heart soared: "At last" I thought to 
myself, "The LFG list has finally begun to discuss this field at a level 
which even dummies like me can understand!"

Moments later, as my eyes wandered across the message, the truth came 
slamming into my mind: even the concept of "dummies" eludes my reptilian 
brain.

Please, LFG experts, come to my rescue:  I have tried to read any number 
of LFG articles and books.  Many of them claim to be written for people 
like me, i.e., those of us who know nothing of LFG but deseperately wish 
to learn it.  But what happens after you get beynd the 3rd or 4th page?  
The author seems to forget that (s)he is writing for a non-specialist, 
and launches into high-falutin stuff, way beond my comprehension.

Say, you know how the book-shelves have recently begun to fill up with 
titles like "UNIX for Dummies" or "Windows for Dummies" or "Calculus for 
Dummies" or "Genetic Engineering for Dummies", etc. etc.?  Well, guess 
what I need!

Cheers from Paul.


On Thu, 9 May 1996, LFG List wrote:

> this is a references inquiry:  i would appreciate any references to lfg treatments
> of phenomena analyzed in terms of dummyhood within the relational grammar literature
> and/or treatments of phenomena which appear to violate the subject condition of lfg
> mapping theory.  with respect to the latter, i would appreciate references to analyses
> of such phenomena, rather than observations that such and such a phenomenon in language
> x appears to represent a violation.  thanks very much, farrell
>