<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body class="" style="word-wrap:break-word">
<font face="Verdana" size="4" class="">Dan’s point is very important. For example, most people describing languages do not know how to distinguish agents, topics, and syntactic pivots (“subject”), and just call anything that occurs initially as “subject”. Sometimes
even when the linguist is clear on the difference, they still use the word “subject”. E.g. Y. R. Chao, in his grammar of spoken Chinese, clearly stated there is nothing like what is referred to as “subject” in English, as all clauses are simply topic-comment,
but he still used the term “subject” for what he said was purely a topic. This has confused generations of linguists, and they call Chinese SVO, which not only implies that Chinese has such categories, but also that these categories either determine or are
determined by word order. See the following paper arguing against the use of such shortcuts, and arguing for more careful determination of the factors determining word order in a language:</font>
<div class=""><font face="Verdana" size="4" class=""><br class="">
</font></div>
<div class="">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:3pt; margin-left:18pt; text-align:justify; text-indent:-18pt; line-height:15pt">
<span lang="EN-AU" class="" style="font-size:12pt">LaPolla, Randy J. & Dory Poa. 2006. On describing word order.
<i class="">Catching Language: The Standing Challenge of Grammar Writing, </i>ed. by Felix Ameka, Alan Dench, & Nicholas Evans, 269-295. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:3pt; margin-left:18pt; text-align:justify; text-indent:-18pt; line-height:15pt">
<span lang="EN-AU" class="" style="font-size:12pt"> </span><span lang="EN-US" class=""><a href="http://randylapolla.net/papers/LaPolla_and_Poa_2006_On_Describing_Word_Order.pdf" class=""><span lang="EN-AU" class="" style="font-size:12pt">http://randylapolla.net/papers/LaPolla_and_Poa_2006_On_Describing_Word_Order.pdf</span></a></span><span lang="EN-AU" class="" style="font-size:12pt"></span></p>
<div class="">
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""><font face="Verdana" size="4" class="">Randy</font></div>
<div class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">
<div class="" style="color:rgb(0,0,0); letter-spacing:normal; orphans:auto; text-align:start; text-indent:0px; text-transform:none; white-space:normal; widows:auto; word-spacing:0px; word-wrap:break-word">
<div class=""><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif; font-size:15px"><span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Arial,sans-serif; color:rgb(34,34,34); background-color:white">-----</span></span>
<div class="" style="orphans:2; widows:2; word-wrap:break-word"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse:separate; border-spacing:0px">
<div class="" style="word-wrap:break-word"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse:separate; border-spacing:0px"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse:separate; border-spacing:0px">
<div class="" style="word-wrap:break-word"><span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Arial,sans-serif; color:rgb(34,34,34); background-color:white"><b class="">Prof. Randy J. LaPolla, PhD FAHA</b> （羅</span><span class="" style="color:rgb(34,34,34); background-color:white; font-size:13px"><font class="Apple-style-span" face="Song">仁地</font></span><span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Arial,sans-serif; color:rgb(34,34,34); background-color:white">）|
Division of Linguistics and Multilingual Studies | Nanyang Technological University</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif; font-size:15px"><span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Arial,sans-serif; color:rgb(34,34,34)"><br class="">
<span class="" style="background-color:white">HSS-03-45, 14 Nanyang Drive, Singapore 637332</span></span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color:rgb(34,34,34); font-family:Arial,sans-serif; font-size:13px"><span class="" style="background-color:white"> | </span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif; font-size:15px"><span class="" style="font-size:10pt; font-family:Arial,sans-serif; color:rgb(34,34,34)"><span class="" style="background-color:white">Tel:
(65) 6592-1825 GMT+8h | Fax: (65) 6795-6525 | <a href="http://randylapolla.net/" class="">
http://randylapolla.net/</a></span></span></span></div>
</span></span></div>
</span></div>
</div>
</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
</div>
<br class="">
<div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">On 19 Jan 2016, at 10:21 am, Everett, Daniel <<a href="mailto:DEVERETT@bentley.edu" class="">DEVERETT@bentley.edu</a>> wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div class="">
<div dir="auto" class="">
<div class="">One of the biggest problems in this regard that I have noticed is in grammars of individual languages. Fieldworkers sometimes confuse semantic and formal categories in the grammars, classifying as a syntactic structure a semantic category. If
typologists are not careful writers/readers of grammars they may bring such confusions into their typological studies. Sounds obvious. But not always so. </div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Dan<br class="">
<br class="">
Sent from my iPhone</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
On Jan 18, 2016, at 21:11, Matthew Dryer <<a href="mailto:dryer@buffalo.edu" class="">dryer@buffalo.edu</a>> wrote:<br class="">
<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">
<p class="MsoNormal">I agree entirely with Jan on the need to distinguish semantic categories and formal categories. In fact, in a paper of mine that is I have nearly completed revising, I have an entire section arguing that generative approaches fail to note
the fact that a given semantic category often has many different formal expressions over different languages and that this is problematic for implicit assumptions that equate semantic categories with formal categories.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">But Jan seems to think that this presents some sort of problem for the work I have done in word order typology.<span class="" style="">
</span>He says “<span lang="UZ-CYR" class="" style="font-family:Times">When these authors subsequently formulate rules and principles on the basis of the data they collected, the semantic category labels (Adjective, Genitive, Relative Clause, but also e.g.
Demonstrative and Numeral) appear to stand for <u class="">formal</u> categories, i.e. categories whose members are defined on the basis of structural or morphosyntactic criteria</span>”. But this is false. They stand for semantic categories.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Jan seems to think that it is somehow a problem that a given semantic category may have many different formal realizations across different languages. However, neither in his email nor in his 2009 paper in LT does he explain why he sees
this as a problem.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">There is, I admit, a <i class="" style="">potential</i> problem.<span class="" style="">
</span>Namely, it might be the case that for the purposes of word order correlations, the syntactic realization of a semantic category makes a major difference and that lumping the different syntactic realizations together is obscuring these differences. That
is why I have spent considerable time over the years collecting data, not only on word order in particular languages, but also on the syntactic realization in these languages, precisely to examine empirically whether the syntactic realization makes a difference.
The result is that while the syntactic realization sometimes makes a small difference, it is overall irrelevant: by and large, generalizations over semantic categories apply the same, regardless of the syntactic realization.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<span class="" style="">Matthew</span> <br class="">
<br class="">
<style class="">
<!--
@font-face
{font-family:Arial}
@font-face
{font-family:Times}
@font-face
{font-family:"ＭＳ 明朝"}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math"}
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman"}
.MsoChpDefault
{font-size:10.0pt}
@page WordSection1
{margin:72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt}
div.WordSection1
{}
-->
</style>On
1/18/16 4:41 AM, Jan Rijkhoff wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" class=""><style class="">
<!--
@font-face
{font-family:Arial}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math"}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri}
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman"}
.MsoChpDefault
{font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Calibri}
@page WordSection1
{margin:72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt}
-->
</style>
<div class="" style="direction:ltr; font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt"><style class="">
<!--
@font-face
{font-family:"ＭＳ 明朝"}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math"}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri}
@font-face
{font-family:"American Typewriter"}
@font-face
{font-family:AdvP497E2}
@font-face
{font-family:⁄ê∏Ôˇølæ—}
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman"}
p
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:Courier}
span.p-match
{font-family:"Times New Roman"}
.MsoChpDefault
{font-size:10.0pt}
@page WordSection1
{margin:70.9pt 70.9pt 70.9pt 70.9pt}
div.WordSection1
{}
-->
</style>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="">I think the last word has not been said about Greenbergian word order correlations, mainly because semantic categories and formal categories have not always been clearly distinguished in post-Greenberg (1963) word order studies
(Rijkhoff 2009a).* For example, both Hawkins (1983: 12) and Dryer (1992: 120) claimed that they followed Greenberg (1963: 74) in ‘basically applying semantic criteria’ to identify members of the same category across languages, but in practice these semantically
defined forms and constructions are treated as formal entities. </p>
<div class="" style=""> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="">If Hawkins and Dryer applied semantic criteria in their cross-linguistic studies, this implies, for example, that their semantic category Adjective must also have included verbal and nominal expressions of adjectival notions (such
as relative clauses and genitives), which are typically used in languages that lack a dedicated class of adjectives:</p>
<div class="" style=""> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><u class=""><span class="" style="">Kiribati
</span></u><span class="" style="">(Ross 1998: 90)</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span class="" style="">(1)<i class="">
</i><i class="" style="">te<span class="" style=""> </span>uee<span class="" style="">
</span>ae<span class="" style=""> </span>e<span class="" style=""> </span>
tikiraoi</i><span class="" style=""> </span>(relative clause)</span><span class="" style=""></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span class="" style=""><span class="" style="">
</span>art<span class="" style=""> </span></span><span class="" style="">flower
<span class="" style="font-variant:small-caps">rel </span>3<span class="" style="font-variant:small-caps">sg.s
<span class="" style=""></span></span>be.pretty<span class="" style=""> </span>
</span><span class="" style=""></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span class="" style=""><span class="" style="">
</span>‘a pretty flower’ (lit. ‘a flower that pretties’)<span class="" style="">
</span></span></p>
<div class="" style=""><span class="" style=""> </span><br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><u class=""><span class="" style="">Makwe</span></u><span class="" style=""> (Devos 2008: 136)</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span class="" style="">(2)<span class="" style=""></span><i class="" style=""> muú-nu<span class="" style="">
</span>w-á=ki-búúli</i><span class="" style=""> </span>(genitive)</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span class="" style=""><span class="" style="">
</span><span class="" style="font-variant:small-caps">nc1</span>-person <span class="" style="font-variant:small-caps">
pp1-gen=nc7</span>-silence</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span class="" style=""> ‘a silent person’ (lit. ‘person of silence’)</span></p>
<div class="" style=""> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="">Relative Clause and Genitive are, however, also semantic categories in their own right in word order studies by Dryer and Hawkins.</p>
<div class="" style=""> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="">When these authors subsequently formulate rules and principles on the basis of the data they collected, the semantic category labels (Adjective, Genitive, Relative Clause, but also e.g. Demonstrative and Numeral) appear to stand
for <u class="">formal</u> categories, i.e. categories whose members are defined on the basis of structural or morphosyntactic criteria. This apparent change of category is not explained, but can be seen in the case of the ‘Heaviness Serialization Principle’
(Hawkins 1983: 90-91) and the ‘Branching Direction Theory’ (Dryer 1992).</p>
<div class="" style=""> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-right:13.75pt; text-autospace:none">Hawkins defined ‘heaviness’ in terms of such non-semantic criteria as (a) length and quantity of morphemes, (b) quantity of words, (c) syntactic depth of branching nodes, and (d) inclusion
of dominated constituents. </p>
<div class="" style="margin-right:13.75pt"> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify; text-justify:inter-ideograph; page-break-after:avoid; text-autospace:none">
<span lang="EN-GB" class="" style="">(3)<span class="" style=""><i class=""> </i>
</span><i class="" style="">Heaviness Serialization Principle</i></span><span lang="EN-GB" class="" style=""><span class="" style="">:
</span>Rel<span class="" style=""> </span>≥<sub class="">R</sub><span class="" style="">
</span>Gen<span class="" style=""> </span>≥<sub class="">R</sub><span class="" style="">
</span>A<span class="" style=""> </span>≥<sub class="">R </sub><span class="" style=""> </span>Dem/Num</span>
</p>
<div class="" style="margin-right:13.75pt"> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-right:13.75pt; text-autospace:none">Thus a member of the (semantic? formal?) category Relative Clause is ‘heavier’ than a member of the (semantic? formal?) category Adjective. But Hawkins’s semantic category Adjective must
also have included members of the ‘heavy’ formal categories Genitive and Relative Clause (see (1) and (2) above). It is not clear whether the original members of the single semantic category Adjective were later ‘re-categorized’ and distributed over the formal
categories Adjective, Genitive and Relative Clause in the <i class="" style=""><span lang="EN-GB" class="" style="">Heaviness Serialization Principle</span></i>.</p>
<div class="" style="margin-right:13.75pt"> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="">Dryer’s ‘Branching Direction Theory’ refers to a structural feature of the internal syntactic organization of a constituent. According to the ‘Branching Direction Theory’, relative clauses and genitives are phrases, i.e. members
of a branching category, whose position relative to the noun correlates with the relative order of Verb and Object, whereas adjectives are non-branching elements, whose position relative to the noun does not correlate with OV or VO order (Dryer 1992: 107-8,
110-1). In this case, too, one may assume that the semantic category Adjective also included members of the formal categories Genitive and Relative Clause (see examples above). Again we do not know what happened to the branching/phrasal members of the erstwhile(?)
semantic category Adjective (relative clauses, genitives) when this category was turned into the formal (non-branching) category Adjective that is part of the ‘Branching Direction Theory’.</p>
<div class="" style=""> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="">So as to avoid categorial confusion in cross-linguistic research (and so as to make it possible to produce more reliable results), it is necessary to keep formal and semantic categories apart, as members of these two categories
have their own ordering rules or preferences. I also think it is an illusion to think we can give a satisfactory account of the grammatical behaviour of linguistic units -including word order- without taking into consideration functional (interpersonal) categories
or ‘discourse units’ (Rijkhoff 2009b, 2015). </p>
<div class="" style=""> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="">* Greenberg (1963: 88) made it clear that he sometimes used formal criteria to remove certain members of a semantic category before he formulated a universal, as in the case of his Universal 22.</p>
<div class="" style=""> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><font size="2" class=""><b class="" style="">References</b></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><font size="2" class="">Devos, M. 2008. <i class="" style="">
A Grammar of Makwe</i>. München: Lincom Europa.</font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><font size="2" class="">Dryer, M. S., 1992. The Greenbergian word order correlations.
<i class="" style="">Language</i> 68-1, 81-138.</font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:14.2pt; text-indent:-14.2pt"><font size="2" class="">Greenberg, J. H. 1963. Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. In J. H. Greenberg (ed.),
<i class="" style="">Universals of Language</i>, 73-113. Cambridge MA: MIT.</font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:14.2pt; text-indent:-14.2pt"><font size="2" class="">Hawkins, J. A., 1983.
<i class="" style="">Word Order Universals: Quantitative analyses of linguistic structure</i>. New York: Academic Press.</font></p>
<p class="" style="margin-left:14.2pt; text-indent:-14.2pt"><font size="2" class=""><span class="" style="">Rijkhoff, J. 2009a.
</span><span class="" style="">On the (un)suitability of semantic categories. <i class="" style="">
Linguistic Typology</i> 13-1, 95‑104.</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:14.2pt; text-indent:-14.2pt; text-autospace:none">
<font size="2" class=""><span class="" style="">Rijkhoff, Jan. 2009b. </span>On the co-variation between form and function of adnominal possessive modifiers in Dutch and English.
<span class="" style="">In William B. McGregor (ed.), <i class="" style="">The Expression of Possession</i> (</span>The Expression of Cognitive Categories [ECC] 2),<span class="" style=""> 51‑106. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:14.2pt; text-indent:-14.2pt; text-autospace:none">
<font size="2" class=""><span class="" style="">Rijkhoff, J. 2015. Word order. In James D. Wright (editor-in-chief),
<i class="" style="">International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (Second Edition)</i>, Vol. 25, 644–656. Oxford: Elsevier.</span><span class="" style=""></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:14.2pt; text-indent:-14.2pt"><font size="2" class="">Ross, M. 1998. Proto-Oceanic adjectival categories and their morphosyntax.
<i class="" style="">Oceanic Linguistics</i> 37-1, 85-119.</font></p>
<div class="" style="margin-left:14.2pt; text-indent:-14.2pt"><span class="p-match"> </span><br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:14.2pt; text-indent:-14.2pt"><span class="p-match">Jan Rijkhoff</span></p>
<div class="" style=""> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="font-family:Tahoma; font-size:13px">
<div class="" style="font-family:Tahoma; font-size:13px"></div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="" style="font-family:'Times New Roman'; font-size:16px">
<hr tabindex="-1" class="">
<div id="divRpF867311" class="" style="direction:ltr"><font face="Tahoma" size="2" class=""><b class="">From:</b> Lingtyp [<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:lingtyp-bounces@listserv.linguistlist.org">lingtyp-bounces@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>]
on behalf of Alan Rumsey [<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Alan.Rumsey@anu.edu.au">Alan.Rumsey@anu.edu.au</a>]<br class="">
<b class="">Sent:</b> Monday, January 18, 2016 12:23 PM<br class="">
<b class="">To:</b> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org">
lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br class="">
<b class="">Subject:</b> Re: [Lingtyp] Structural congruence as a dimension of language complexity/simplicity<br class="">
</font><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""><span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION" class="" style="">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" class="">Many thanks to all of you who responded to my posting on this topic, both online and off. All the readings you have pointed me to have indeed been highly relevant and very useful, including an excellent recent publication by
Jennifer Culbertson that she pointed me to in her offline response, at <a href="" target="_blank" class=""></a><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01964/abstract">http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01964/abstract</a></div>
</span>
<div class="" style=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="" style="">Thanks especially to Matthew Dryer for pointing out that the Greenbergian ‘universal’ I had used as an example – the putative association between VSO and noun-adjective order — had been falsified by his much more thorough 1992 study <span class="" style="background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">“The
Greenbergian Word Order Correlations”. My reading of that article and further correspondence with him has confirmed that, by contrast, Greenberg’s universals no 3 and 4 were solidly confirmed by his study, namely that SOV </span>languages are far more likely
to have postpositions than prepositions and that the reverse is true for VSO languages. </div>
<div class="" style=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Drawing on all your suggestions, Francesca and I have now finished a draft of the paper referred to in my posting, called '<span class="" style="text-align:center"><span lang="EN-US" class="">Structural Congruence as a Dimension of Language Complexity: </span></span><span lang="EN-US" class="">An
Example from Ku Waru Child Language’.<b class=""> </b></span>If any of you would like to read it please let me know and I’ll send it to you.</div>
<style class="">
<!--
@font-face
{font-family:Times}
@font-face
{font-family:"?? ??"}
@font-face
{font-family:"?? ??"}
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman"}
@page WordSection1
{margin:72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt}
-->
</style><style class="">
<!--
@font-face
{font-family:Arial}
@font-face
{font-family:Arial}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri}
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman"}
.MsoChpDefault
{font-family:Cambria}
@page WordSection1
{margin:72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt}
body
{direction:ltr;
font-family:Arial;
color:#000000;
font-size:10pt}
p
{margin-top:0;
margin-bottom:0}
body
{scrollbar-base-color:undefined;
scrollbar-highlight-color:undefined;
scrollbar-darkshadow-color:undefined;
scrollbar-arrow-color:undefined}
-->
</style>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Alan</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br class="">
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset> <br class="">
<pre class="">_______________________________________________
Lingtyp mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br class="">
</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class=""><span class="">_______________________________________________</span><br class="">
<span class="">Lingtyp mailing list</span><br class="">
<span class=""><a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" class="">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a></span><br class="">
<span class=""><a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" class="">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a></span><br class="">
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">
Lingtyp mailing list<br class="">
<a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" class="">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br class="">
http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp<br class="">
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<hr>
<font face="Arial" color="Gray" size="2">CONFIDENTIALITY: This email is intended solely for the person(s) named and may be confidential and/or privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete it, notify us and do not copy, use, or disclose its
contents.<br>
Towards a sustainable earth: Print only when necessary. Thank you.</font>
</body>
</html>