<html dir="ltr">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<style id="owaParaStyle" type="text/css">P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;}</style>
</head>
<body ocsi="0" fpstyle="1" class="" style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div style="direction: ltr;font-family: Arial;color: #000000;font-size: 10pt;"><style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"ＭＳ 明朝";
mso-font-charset:78;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:-536870145 1791491579 18 0 131231 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"ＭＳ 明朝";
mso-font-charset:78;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:-536870145 1791491579 18 0 131231 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"LPGMOF+Arial\,Italic";
panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;
mso-font-alt:Arial;
mso-font-charset:77;
mso-generic-font-family:swiss;
mso-font-format:other;
mso-font-pitch:auto;
mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:LPGBIA+Arial;
panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;
mso-font-alt:Arial;
mso-font-charset:77;
mso-generic-font-family:swiss;
mso-font-format:other;
mso-font-pitch:auto;
mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-unhide:no;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
tab-stops:14.2pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-font-family:"ＭＳ 明朝";
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
mso-default-props:yes;
font-size:10.0pt;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt;
mso-fareast-font-family:"ＭＳ 明朝";
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;
mso-fareast-language:JA;}
@page WordSection1
{size:595.0pt 841.0pt;
margin:70.9pt 70.9pt 70.9pt 70.9pt;
mso-header-margin:35.45pt;
mso-footer-margin:35.45pt;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
-->
</style>
<p class="MsoNormal">Re universals, categories, red foxes and cassowaries - this is perhaps a good moment to throw in a bit of philosophy.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="tab-stops:65.2pt">John Locke (1689) already wrote in ‘An Essay Concerning Human Understanding’ that all categories are the products of our cognitive system: without us humans, there would be no category of
<span style="font-variant:small-caps">Red Foxes, Tables, Spoons, Adjectives</span> or
<span style="font-variant:small-caps">Linguists</span>.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">“<i style="mso-bidi-font-style:normal"><span style="mso-bidi-font-weight:bold">Men determine the sorts of substances, which may be sorted
</span>variously. From what has been said, it is evident that men make sorts of things. For, it being different essences alone that make different species, it is plain that they who make those abstract ideas which are the nominal essences do thereby make the
species, or sort. ….</i>.”</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">…</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style:normal">Nature makes many particular things, which do agree one with another in many sensible qualities, and probably too in their internal frame and constitution: but it is not this real essence that distinguishes
them into species; it is men who, taking occasion from the qualities they find united in them, and wherein they observe often several individuals to agree, range them into sorts, in order to their naming, for the convenience of comprehensive signs</i>; …”</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">This is why not everybody considers the cassowary a bird (Bulmer 1967) and why there are no ‘<span style="mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">natural kinds that exist independently of individual language systems</span>’.
</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The best or perhaps only thing we can do is to agree on the properties that we (or some of us) believe the members of a category should have in common and take it from there, whether this concerns members of the category
<span style="font-variant:small-caps">Red Fox, Table, Linguist</span> or <span style="font-variant:small-caps">
Adjective</span>. </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">In other words, if humans do the categorization, we decide what is contained in the category
<span style="font-variant:small-caps">Table, Linguist</span> or <span style="font-variant:small-caps">
Adjective</span>. How we define these categories or which features count as ‘relevant’ or ‘necessary’ depends on one’s goals, method, data and various (cognitive, cultural, theoretical etc.) factors, so disagreement is a part of the categorization enterprise.
It is probably easier to agree on what counts as a member of the category <span style="font-variant:small-caps">
bird</span> (but see above) than to agree on what counts as a member of the category
<span style="font-variant:small-caps">Adjective</span> - but this is just a matter of degree.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:14.2pt;text-indent:-14.2pt;tab-stops:
-35.45pt">
<span style="mso-fareast-language:JA">Bulmer, Ralph. 1967. Why is the cassowary not a bird? A problem of zoological taxonomy among the Karam of the New Guinea highlands.
</span><i><span style="mso-bidi-font-family:"LPGMOF+Arial\,Italic";
mso-fareast-language:JA">Man</span></i><span style="mso-bidi-font-family:"LPGMOF+Arial\,Italic";
mso-fareast-language:JA;mso-bidi-font-style:italic"> 2-1,
</span><span style="mso-bidi-font-family:LPGBIA+Arial;mso-fareast-language:JA">5-25.</span><span style="mso-fareast-language:JA"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Jan Rijkhoff</p>
<div>
<div style="font-family:Tahoma; font-size:13px">
<div style="font-family:Tahoma; font-size:13px">
<div style="font-family:Tahoma; font-size:13px"></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #000000; font-size: 16px">
<hr tabindex="-1">
<div style="direction: ltr;" id="divRpF779347"><font face="Tahoma" color="#000000" size="2"><b>From:</b> Lingtyp [lingtyp-bounces@listserv.linguistlist.org] on behalf of Everett, Daniel [DEVERETT@bentley.edu]<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, January 19, 2016 3:56 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Randy John LaPolla (Prof)<br>
<b>Cc:</b> lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Lingtyp] Structural congruence<br>
</font><br>
</div>
<div></div>
<div>Randy’s position sounds pretty reasonable to me.
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Typological categories, like the phonetic categories of the IPA are idealizations, though based on data collected from a wide variety of languages. Thus a “p” in the IPA is a voiceless bilabial stop. However, a [p] in Pirahã is a voiceless bilabial
stop with closure and flattening across the entire length of the lips. It is not the same as the “p” of the IPA. But clearly it is related to it as an individual dog is to the noun “dog.”</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">But we cannot call an alveolar stop a “p” nor a cat a dog. Idealizations do not mean that there is no empirical connection between a specific language and the typological category. </div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">It is possible that we might have something that fails to correspond to any syntactic notion of subject in a particular language. But if the grammar-writer refers to it as a “subject” on semantic grounds this could be the equivalent of calling
a “t” a “p” because it is the frontmost voiceless occlusive in a given language. So the grammar-writer would have introduced an error which could potentially be propagated throughout the typological literature. By the same token, calling that language SVO
might not only obscure the actual facts of the language, but it would also be a disservice to typology.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">In Pirahã, for example, the surface variants/allophones of /g/ are [n], a unique double-flap laminal, and [g] (which was historically a [d]). The n is not a velar simply because it is an allophone of a velar. And care needs to be used in describing
the segmental phonology of the language. </div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Subtleties missed only confuse the field.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Dan</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""> </div>
<div class="">
<div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">On Jan 19, 2016, at 9:44 AM, Randy John LaPolla (Prof) <<a href="redir.aspx?REF=GoS-TXT4MwJQz9694c9UmIia-KL3nJLRFALtAScktnxlknT-9SDTCAFtYWlsdG86UmFuZHlMYVBvbGxhQG50dS5lZHUuc2c." class="" target="_blank">RandyLaPolla@ntu.edu.sg</a>> wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div class=""><span class="" style="font-family:Arial; font-size:13px; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:normal; letter-spacing:normal; orphans:auto; text-align:start; text-indent:0px; text-transform:none; white-space:normal; widows:auto; word-spacing:0px; float:none; display:inline!important">Sorry,
Matthew, no. I am arguing it is an empirical question, and am against the a priori assumption and imposition of categories on languages without any basis. This is what I have been fighting against for almost 30 years.</span>
<div class="" style="font-family:Arial; font-size:13px; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:normal; letter-spacing:normal; orphans:auto; text-align:start; text-indent:0px; text-transform:none; white-space:normal; widows:auto; word-spacing:0px">
<br class="">
</div>
<div class="" style="font-family:Arial; font-size:13px; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:normal; letter-spacing:normal; orphans:auto; text-align:start; text-indent:0px; text-transform:none; white-space:normal; widows:auto; word-spacing:0px">
We seem to be talking past each other, as we each have our own way of understanding things, and assume the others are saying something they aren’t. <span class="" style="font-size:10pt"> </span><span class="" style="font-size:10pt">It seems impossible to post
to this list without being misunderstood. </span><span class="" style="font-size:10pt">This is nice evidence for the theory of communication I’ve been flogging for 20 years, but it is very frustrating.</span></div>
<div class="" style="font-family:Arial; font-size:13px; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:normal; letter-spacing:normal; orphans:auto; text-align:start; text-indent:0px; text-transform:none; white-space:normal; widows:auto; word-spacing:0px">
<br class="">
</div>
<div class="" style="font-family:Arial; font-size:13px; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:normal; letter-spacing:normal; orphans:auto; text-align:start; text-indent:0px; text-transform:none; white-space:normal; widows:auto; word-spacing:0px">
I was talking about the inductive analysis of individual languages. You are talking about cross-linguistic characterisations. I also argue there are no universal categories, and I think we need to understand each language on its own terms, and in a description
of an individual language, which is what I am talking about, you need to give the facts of that language, not a cross-linguistic category that also happens to have the same name as a category that many people ascribe to individual languages, such that people
reading that description will assume the language has that category.</div>
<div class="" style="font-family:Arial; font-size:13px; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:normal; letter-spacing:normal; orphans:auto; text-align:start; text-indent:0px; text-transform:none; white-space:normal; widows:auto; word-spacing:0px">
<br class="">
</div>
<div class="" style="font-family:Arial; font-size:13px; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:normal; letter-spacing:normal; orphans:auto; text-align:start; text-indent:0px; text-transform:none; white-space:normal; widows:auto; word-spacing:0px">
Also, what does the category “subject” mean to you such that it would be cross-linguistically useful, to the point of even saying languages that don’t have such a category are subject-verb-object languages? </div>
<div class="" style="font-family:Arial; font-size:13px; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:normal; letter-spacing:normal; orphans:auto; text-align:start; text-indent:0px; text-transform:none; white-space:normal; widows:auto; word-spacing:0px">
<br class="">
</div>
<div class="" style="font-family:Arial; font-size:13px; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:normal; letter-spacing:normal; orphans:auto; text-align:start; text-indent:0px; text-transform:none; white-space:normal; widows:auto; word-spacing:0px">
In terms of the correlations you talk about among languages that manifest what is (from my view problematically) subsumed under the VO or SVO rubric, my view is that we should look for the reasons why, in terms of information structure, structural pivots, historical
development, or whatever, the languages manifest the particular patterns they do. Simply lumping them together under a single rubric does nothing but categorise them, and doesn’t explain anything. </div>
<div class="" style="font-family:Arial; font-size:13px; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:normal; letter-spacing:normal; orphans:auto; text-align:start; text-indent:0px; text-transform:none; white-space:normal; widows:auto; word-spacing:0px">
<br class="">
</div>
<div class="" style="font-family:Arial; font-size:13px; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:normal; letter-spacing:normal; orphans:auto; text-align:start; text-indent:0px; text-transform:none; white-space:normal; widows:auto; word-spacing:0px">
Randy</div>
<div class="" style="font-family:Arial; font-size:13px; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:normal; letter-spacing:normal; orphans:auto; text-align:start; text-indent:0px; text-transform:none; white-space:normal; widows:auto; word-spacing:0px">
<br class="">
</div>
<div class="" style="font-family:Arial; font-size:13px; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:normal; letter-spacing:normal; orphans:auto; text-align:start; text-indent:0px; text-transform:none; white-space:normal; widows:auto; word-spacing:0px">
<br class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">On 19 Jan 2016, at 9:01 pm, Matthew Dryer <<a href="redir.aspx?REF=rfZPU4W2gI7iagDQQdRqFnDf0q66z6uwCtHFAUguJm5lknT-9SDTCAFtYWlsdG86ZHJ5ZXJAYnVmZmFsby5lZHU." class="" target="_blank">dryer@buffalo.edu</a>> wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div class="">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" class="">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'">
My point is actually independent of the question of whether there are crosslinguistic categories.<span class=""> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span>Even if there are/were crosslinguistic categories, it doesn’t follow that typological classification
is based on those categories. My statement that “<span class="">classifying languages typologically does not entail that the terms employed in the typological classification correspond to categories in the language</span>” is consistent with a position that
classifying languages typologically sometimes classifies them on the basis of crosslinguistic categories and sometimes on the basis of semantically-defined notions or other notions independent of crosslinguistic categories. Randy’s statement that classifying
a language as SVO implies that the language has categories of subject and object seems to imply that typological classification MUST be based on categories that exist within the individual languages.</div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'">
</div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'">
But there is a good argument that in the case in question, any typological classification that was based on categories that exist in individual languages and on languages in which word order codes subject and object would be inadequate. As I argued in Dryer
(1989), languages in which word order does not code grammatical relations and in which the word order is not based on grammatical relations but in which VO word order is more common tend to have word order properties associated with VO<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>
word order, like prepositions, while analogous languages in which OV word order is more common tend to have word order properties associated with OV word order, like postpositions. What this means is that the GRAMMARS of what I classify as VO languages have
nothing in common. It is only the languages that have something in common at the level of usage. Hence any notion of SVO language restricted to languages in which there are subject and object categories and in which word order is determined by grammatical
relations will necessarily fail as the basis of word order correlations.</div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'">
</div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'">
The problem with Randy’s position (and perhaps Jan’s) is that he is making an a priori assumption on what is actually an empirical question.</div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'">
</div>
<span class="" style="font-size:12pt">Matthew<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span><br class="">
<br class="">
On 1/18/16 11:12 PM, Martin Haspelmath wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">Unfortunately, to many people (not only generativists) it isn't obvious at all that "classifying languages typologically does not entail that the terms employed in the typological classification<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>
correspond to categories in the language" (in other words, that comparative concepts are distinct from descriptive categories).<br class="">
<br class="">
It seems that the default assumption of many people when they hear a term like "dative" or "clitic" is that they are concepts like "copper" or "red fox", i.e. natural kinds that exist independently of individual language systems, just as red foxes can be recognized
independently of their habitats, and copper can even be recognized independently of the planet on which is occurs. This is false, but it hasn't been very widely recognized.<br class="">
<br class="">
In the 1980s, typologists discovered the important differences between agents, topics, and syntactic pivots (as noted by Randy), but such more fine-grained categories are still not sufficient for describing any language. Agents can be different across languages,
topics can be different, and syntactic pivots can be different. Thus, even "agent", "topic" and "pivot" can only be used as comparative concepts, not as universally applicable descriptive categories that would somehow have the same meaning in different languages.<br class="">
<br class="">
Thus, it is not just confusing terminology (like Y.R. Chao's "subject"), but also the presupposition that categories can be carried over from one language to another that has confused linguists.<br class="">
<br class="">
Martin<br class="">
<br class="">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 19.01.16 07:52, Matthew Dryer wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Randy says that calling Chinese SVO implies that Chinese has such categories. I am surprised that he would say that. I would have thought it was obvious that classifying languages typologically does not entail that the terms employed
in the typological classification correspond to categories in the language. Nor does it mean that these categories determine or are determined by word order. I have certainly made that clear in my work that classifying a language as SVO makes no claim about
the categories in the language, nor that these categories determine word order even if the language has such categories.<br class="">
<br class="">
Matthew<br class="">
<br class="">
On 1/18/16 7:42 PM, Randy John LaPolla (Prof) wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" class=""><font class="" face="Verdana" size="4">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 class="" face="Verdana" size="4"><br class="">
</font></div>
<div class="">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:3pt 0cm 0.0001pt 18pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'; text-align:justify; text-indent:-18pt; line-height:15pt">
<span class="" style="font-size:12pt" lang="EN-AU">LaPolla, Randy J. & Dory Poa. 2006. On describing word order.<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><i class="">Catching Language: The Standing Challenge of Grammar Writing,<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></i>ed.
by Felix Ameka, Alan Dench, & Nicholas Evans, 269-295. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:3pt 0cm 0.0001pt 18pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'; text-align:justify; text-indent:-18pt; line-height:15pt">
<span class="" style="font-size:12pt" lang="EN-AU"> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span class="" lang="EN-US"><a href="redir.aspx?REF=hAoVrPPyseHs3TOLVq2KsnyDzHYJuFHYxww6HjDrvAxlknT-9SDTCAFodHRwOi8vcmFuZHlsYXBvbGxhLm5ldC9wYXBlcnMvTGFQb2xsYV9hbmRfUG9hXzIwMDZfT25fRGVzY3JpYmluZ19Xb3JkX09yZGVyLnBkZg.." class="" target="_blank"><span class="" style="font-size:12pt" lang="EN-AU"></span></a><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="redir.aspx?REF=hAoVrPPyseHs3TOLVq2KsnyDzHYJuFHYxww6HjDrvAxlknT-9SDTCAFodHRwOi8vcmFuZHlsYXBvbGxhLm5ldC9wYXBlcnMvTGFQb2xsYV9hbmRfUG9hXzIwMDZfT25fRGVzY3JpYmluZ19Xb3JkX09yZGVyLnBkZg.." target="_blank">http://randylapolla.net/papers/LaPolla_and_Poa_2006_On_Describing_Word_Order.pdf</a></span><span class="" style="font-size:12pt" lang="EN-AU"></span></p>
<div class="">
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""><font class="" face="Verdana" size="4">Randy</font></div>
<div class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">
<div class="" style="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 |<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="redir.aspx?REF=MaoLCkDidBeNnth4Odkn2L4nkn2819vmOcx96crBKbdlknT-9SDTCAFodHRwOi8vcmFuZHlsYXBvbGxhLm5ldC8." class="" target="_blank"></a><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="redir.aspx?REF=MaoLCkDidBeNnth4Odkn2L4nkn2819vmOcx96crBKbdlknT-9SDTCAFodHRwOi8vcmFuZHlsYXBvbGxhLm5ldC8." target="_blank"></a><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="redir.aspx?REF=MaoLCkDidBeNnth4Odkn2L4nkn2819vmOcx96crBKbdlknT-9SDTCAFodHRwOi8vcmFuZHlsYXBvbGxhLm5ldC8." target="_blank">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 class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">On 19 Jan 2016, at 10:21 am, Everett, Daniel <<a href="redir.aspx?REF=G8OylviC4qFs0Nz_Ym532md7z10cyWysiaY2H3lS9jRlknT-9SDTCAFtYWlsdG86REVWRVJFVFRAYmVudGxleS5lZHU." class="" target="_blank">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 class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="redir.aspx?REF=rfZPU4W2gI7iagDQQdRqFnDf0q66z6uwCtHFAUguJm5lknT-9SDTCAFtYWlsdG86ZHJ5ZXJAYnVmZmFsby5lZHU." target="_blank">dryer@buffalo.edu</a>> wrote:<br class="">
<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'">
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.</div>
<div class=""> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'">
But Jan seems to think that this presents some sort of problem for the work I have done in word order typology.<span class=""> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span>He says “<span class="" style="font-family:Times" lang="UZ-CYR">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<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><u class="">formal</u><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>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.</div>
<div class=""> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'">
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.</div>
<div class=""> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'">
There is, I admit, a<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><i class="">potential</i><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>problem.<span class=""> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></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.</div>
<div class=""> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<span class="">Matthew</span><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">
<br class="">
On 1/18/16 4:41 AM, Jan Rijkhoff wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="" style="direction:ltr; font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt">
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'">
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.<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></div>
<div class=""> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'">
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:</div>
<div class=""> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'">
<u class=""><span class="">Kiribati<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span></u><span class="">(Ross 1998: 90)</span></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'">
<span class="">(1)<i class=""><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></i><i class="">te<span class=""> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span>uee<span class=""> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span>ae<span class=""> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span>e<span class=""> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span>tikiraoi</i><span class=""> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span>(relative
clause)</span><span class=""></span></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'">
<span class=""><span class=""> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span>art<span class=""> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span></span><span class="">flower <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="" style="font-variant:small-caps">rel <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span>3<span class="" style="font-variant:small-caps">sg.s
<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><span class=""></span></span>be.pretty<span class=""> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span></span><span class=""></span></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'">
<span class=""><span class=""> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span>‘a pretty flower’ (lit. ‘a flower that pretties’)<span class=""> </span></span></div>
<div class=""><span class=""> </span><br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'">
<u class=""><span class="">Makwe</span></u><span class=""><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>(Devos 2008: 136)</span></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'">
<span class="">(2)<span class=""></span><i class=""> muú-nu<span class=""> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span>w-á=ki-búúli</i><span class=""> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span>(genitive)</span></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'">
<span class=""><span class=""> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span class="" style="font-variant:small-caps">nc1</span>-person <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="" style="font-variant:small-caps">pp1-gen=nc7</span>-silence</span></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'">
<span class=""> ‘a silent person’ (lit. ‘person of silence’)</span></div>
<div class=""> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'">
Relative Clause and Genitive are, however, also semantic categories in their own right in word order studies by Dryer and Hawkins.</div>
<div class=""> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'">
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<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><u class="">formal</u><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>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).</div>
<div class=""> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 13.75pt 0.0001pt 0cm; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'">
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.</div>
<div class="" style="margin-right:13.75pt"> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid">
<span class="" lang="EN-GB">(3)<span class=""><i class=""> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></i></span><i class="">Heaviness Serialization Principle</i></span><span class="" lang="EN-GB"><span class="">:<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span>Rel<span class=""> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span>≥<sub class="">R</sub><span class=""> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span>Gen<span class=""> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span>≥<sub class="">R</sub><span class=""> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span>A<span class=""> <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span>≥<sub class="">R<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></sub><span class=""> </span>Dem/Num</span></div>
<div class="" style="margin-right:13.75pt"> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 13.75pt 0.0001pt 0cm; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'">
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<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><i class=""><span class="" lang="EN-GB">Heaviness
Serialization Principle</span></i>.</div>
<div class="" style="margin-right:13.75pt"> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'">
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’.</div>
<div class=""> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'">
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).<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></div>
<div class=""> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'">
* 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.</div>
<div class=""> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'">
<font class="" size="2"><b class="">References</b></font></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'">
<font class="" size="2">Devos, M. 2008.<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><i class="">A Grammar of Makwe</i>. München: Lincom Europa.</font></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'">
<font class="" size="2">Dryer, M. S., 1992. The Greenbergian word order correlations.<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><i class="">Language</i><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>68-1, 81-138.</font></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 14.2pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'; text-indent:-14.2pt">
<font class="" size="2">Greenberg, J. H. 1963. Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. In J. H. Greenberg (ed.),<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><i class="">Universals of Language</i>, 73-113. Cambridge
MA: MIT.</font></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 14.2pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'; text-indent:-14.2pt">
<font class="" size="2">Hawkins, J. A., 1983.<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><i class="">Word Order Universals: Quantitative analyses of linguistic structure</i>. New York: Academic Press.</font></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0px 0cm 0px 14.2pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:Courier; text-indent:-14.2pt">
<font class="" size="2"><span class="">Rijkhoff, J. 2009a.<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span class="">On the (un)suitability of semantic categories.<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><i class="">Linguistic Typology</i><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>13-1,
95‑104.</span></font></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 14.2pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'; text-indent:-14.2pt">
<font class="" size="2"><span class="">Rijkhoff, Jan. 2009b.<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span>On the co-variation between form and function of adnominal possessive modifiers in Dutch and English.<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="">In
William B. McGregor (ed.),<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><i class="">The Expression of Possession</i><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>(</span>The Expression of Cognitive Categories [ECC] 2),<span class=""><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>51‑106.
Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.</span></font></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 14.2pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'; text-indent:-14.2pt">
<font class="" size="2"><span class="">Rijkhoff, J. 2015. Word order. In James D. Wright (editor-in-chief),<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><i class="">International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (Second Edition)</i>, Vol. 25,
644–656. Oxford: Elsevier.</span><span class=""></span></font></div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 14.2pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'; text-indent:-14.2pt">
<font class="" size="2">Ross, M. 1998. Proto-Oceanic adjectival categories and their morphosyntax.<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><i class="">Oceanic Linguistics</i><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>37-1, 85-119.</font></div>
<div class="" style="margin-left:14.2pt; text-indent:-14.2pt"><span class="p-match" style="font-family:'Times New Roman'"> </span><br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<div class="" style="margin:0cm 0cm 0.0001pt 14.2pt; font-size:12pt; font-family:'Times New Roman'; text-indent:-14.2pt">
<span class="p-match" style="font-family:'Times New Roman'">Jan Rijkhoff</span></div>
<div class=""> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="" style="font-family:Tahoma; font-size:13px"></div>
</div>
<div class="">
<hr tabindex="-1" class="">
<div id="divRpF867311" class="" style="direction:ltr"><font class="" face="Tahoma" size="2"><b class="">From:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Lingtyp [<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="redir.aspx?REF=V8acvO0FrP7rLYflQgLJ0SvkH6sX1zt8a_DZRP4ow6dlknT-9SDTCAFtYWlsdG86bGluZ3R5cC1ib3VuY2VzQGxpc3RzZXJ2Lmxpbmd1aXN0bGlzdC5vcmc." target="_blank"></a><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="redir.aspx?REF=V8acvO0FrP7rLYflQgLJ0SvkH6sX1zt8a_DZRP4ow6dlknT-9SDTCAFtYWlsdG86bGluZ3R5cC1ib3VuY2VzQGxpc3RzZXJ2Lmxpbmd1aXN0bGlzdC5vcmc." target="_blank">lingtyp-bounces@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>]
on behalf of Alan Rumsey [<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="redir.aspx?REF=KX9e36Tg1wV8OiQE2YlqjA5q91ifR_6xbPCYhDXH4wVlknT-9SDTCAFtYWlsdG86QWxhbi5SdW1zZXlAYW51LmVkdS5hdQ.." target="_blank"></a><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="redir.aspx?REF=KX9e36Tg1wV8OiQE2YlqjA5q91ifR_6xbPCYhDXH4wVlknT-9SDTCAFtYWlsdG86QWxhbi5SdW1zZXlAYW51LmVkdS5hdQ.." target="_blank">Alan.Rumsey@anu.edu.au</a>]<br class="">
<b class="">Sent:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Monday, January 18, 2016 12:23 PM<br class="">
<b class="">To:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="redir.aspx?REF=u_PjANH9WDoNYAX9cRlRyGvypB0pHXwngGZ0791KJoRlknT-9SDTCAFtYWlsdG86bGluZ3R5cEBsaXN0c2Vydi5saW5ndWlzdGxpc3Qub3Jn" target="_blank"></a><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="redir.aspx?REF=u_PjANH9WDoNYAX9cRlRyGvypB0pHXwngGZ0791KJoRlknT-9SDTCAFtYWlsdG86bGluZ3R5cEBsaXN0c2Vydi5saW5ndWlzdGxpc3Qub3Jn" target="_blank"></a><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="redir.aspx?REF=u_PjANH9WDoNYAX9cRlRyGvypB0pHXwngGZ0791KJoRlknT-9SDTCAFtYWlsdG86bGluZ3R5cEBsaXN0c2Vydi5saW5ndWlzdGxpc3Qub3Jn" target="_blank">lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br class="">
<b class="">Subject:</b><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>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="">
<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 class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="redir.aspx?REF=x3PNcIsLwNvK_J-E4WloKt5GKpMc5tDS6I9R_7GBX99lknT-9SDTCAFodHRwOi8vam91cm5hbC5mcm9udGllcnNpbi5vcmcvYXJ0aWNsZS8xMC4zMzg5L2Zwc3lnLjIwMTUuMDE5NjQvYWJzdHJhY3Q." target="_blank">http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01964/abstract</a></div>
</span>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">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=""><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 class="" lang="EN-US">Structural Congruence as a Dimension of Language Complexity: </span></span><span class="" lang="EN-US">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>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Alan</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br class="">
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader" target="_blank"></fieldset><br class="">
<pre class="">_______________________________________________
Lingtyp mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="redir.aspx?REF=CB44cEgbIGSah_c4Hj6KE9SJ8jR_Dq2w0IV469Sh09hlknT-9SDTCAFtYWlsdG86TGluZ3R5cEBsaXN0c2Vydi5saW5ndWlzdGxpc3Qub3Jn" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="redir.aspx?REF=UjpanjfeOguYNjyC-kdZWGytjrKca8YCCpcaRHKstDdlknT-9SDTCAFodHRwOi8vbGlzdHNlcnYubGluZ3Vpc3RsaXN0Lm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL2xpbmd0eXA." target="_blank">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="redir.aspx?REF=CB44cEgbIGSah_c4Hj6KE9SJ8jR_Dq2w0IV469Sh09hlknT-9SDTCAFtYWlsdG86TGluZ3R5cEBsaXN0c2Vydi5saW5ndWlzdGxpc3Qub3Jn" class="" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a></span><br class="">
<span class=""><a href="redir.aspx?REF=UjpanjfeOguYNjyC-kdZWGytjrKca8YCCpcaRHKstDdlknT-9SDTCAFodHRwOi8vbGlzdHNlcnYubGluZ3Vpc3RsaXN0Lm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL2xpbmd0eXA." class="" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a></span><br class="">
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">
Lingtyp mailing list<br class="">
<a href="redir.aspx?REF=CB44cEgbIGSah_c4Hj6KE9SJ8jR_Dq2w0IV469Sh09hlknT-9SDTCAFtYWlsdG86TGluZ3R5cEBsaXN0c2Vydi5saW5ndWlzdGxpc3Qub3Jn" class="" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="redir.aspx?REF=UjpanjfeOguYNjyC-kdZWGytjrKca8YCCpcaRHKstDdlknT-9SDTCAFodHRwOi8vbGlzdHNlcnYubGluZ3Vpc3RsaXN0Lm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL2xpbmd0eXA." target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br class="">
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<hr class="">
<font class="" 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 class="">
Towards a sustainable earth: Print only when necessary. Thank you.</font><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><br class="">
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader" target="_blank"></fieldset><br class="">
<pre class="">_______________________________________________
Lingtyp mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="redir.aspx?REF=CB44cEgbIGSah_c4Hj6KE9SJ8jR_Dq2w0IV469Sh09hlknT-9SDTCAFtYWlsdG86TGluZ3R5cEBsaXN0c2Vydi5saW5ndWlzdGxpc3Qub3Jn" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="redir.aspx?REF=UjpanjfeOguYNjyC-kdZWGytjrKca8YCCpcaRHKstDdlknT-9SDTCAFodHRwOi8vbGlzdHNlcnYubGluZ3Vpc3RsaXN0Lm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL2xpbmd0eXA." target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br class="">
<br class="">
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader" target="_blank"></fieldset><br class="">
<pre class="">_______________________________________________
Lingtyp mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="redir.aspx?REF=CB44cEgbIGSah_c4Hj6KE9SJ8jR_Dq2w0IV469Sh09hlknT-9SDTCAFtYWlsdG86TGluZ3R5cEBsaXN0c2Vydi5saW5ndWlzdGxpc3Qub3Jn" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="redir.aspx?REF=UjpanjfeOguYNjyC-kdZWGytjrKca8YCCpcaRHKstDdlknT-9SDTCAFodHRwOi8vbGlzdHNlcnYubGluZ3Vpc3RsaXN0Lm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL2xpbmd0eXA." target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br class="">
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Martin Haspelmath (<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="redir.aspx?REF=4uOEzncUnsLj4Y6aQH0W-FyG4kv_gA3uh4zbwkKLnEFlknT-9SDTCAFtYWlsdG86aGFzcGVsbWF0aEBzaGgubXBnLmRl" target="_blank">haspelmath@shh.mpg.de</a>)
Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History
Kahlaische Strasse 10
D-07745 Jena
&
Leipzig University
Beethovenstrasse 15
D-04107 Leipzig
</pre>
<br class="">
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader" target="_blank"></fieldset><br class="">
<pre class="">_______________________________________________
Lingtyp mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="redir.aspx?REF=CB44cEgbIGSah_c4Hj6KE9SJ8jR_Dq2w0IV469Sh09hlknT-9SDTCAFtYWlsdG86TGluZ3R5cEBsaXN0c2Vydi5saW5ndWlzdGxpc3Qub3Jn" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="redir.aspx?REF=UjpanjfeOguYNjyC-kdZWGytjrKca8YCCpcaRHKstDdlknT-9SDTCAFodHRwOi8vbGlzdHNlcnYubGluZ3Vpc3RsaXN0Lm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL2xpbmd0eXA." target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br class="">
</div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">
Lingtyp mailing list<br class="">
<a href="redir.aspx?REF=CB44cEgbIGSah_c4Hj6KE9SJ8jR_Dq2w0IV469Sh09hlknT-9SDTCAFtYWlsdG86TGluZ3R5cEBsaXN0c2Vydi5saW5ndWlzdGxpc3Qub3Jn" class="" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br class="">
<a href="redir.aspx?REF=UjpanjfeOguYNjyC-kdZWGytjrKca8YCCpcaRHKstDdlknT-9SDTCAFodHRwOi8vbGlzdHNlcnYubGluZ3Vpc3RsaXN0Lm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL2xpbmd0eXA." class="" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br class="">
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br class="">
</div>
</div>
<span class="" style="font-family:Arial; font-size:13px; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:normal; letter-spacing:normal; orphans:auto; text-align:start; text-indent:0px; text-transform:none; white-space:normal; widows:auto; word-spacing:0px; float:none; display:inline!important">_______________________________________________</span><br class="" style="font-family:Arial; font-size:13px; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:normal; letter-spacing:normal; orphans:auto; text-align:start; text-indent:0px; text-transform:none; white-space:normal; widows:auto; word-spacing:0px">
<span class="" style="font-family:Arial; font-size:13px; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:normal; letter-spacing:normal; orphans:auto; text-align:start; text-indent:0px; text-transform:none; white-space:normal; widows:auto; word-spacing:0px; float:none; display:inline!important">Lingtyp
mailing list</span><br class="" style="font-family:Arial; font-size:13px; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:normal; letter-spacing:normal; orphans:auto; text-align:start; text-indent:0px; text-transform:none; white-space:normal; widows:auto; word-spacing:0px">
<a href="redir.aspx?REF=CB44cEgbIGSah_c4Hj6KE9SJ8jR_Dq2w0IV469Sh09hlknT-9SDTCAFtYWlsdG86TGluZ3R5cEBsaXN0c2Vydi5saW5ndWlzdGxpc3Qub3Jn" class="" style="font-family:Arial; font-size:13px; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:normal; letter-spacing:normal; orphans:auto; text-align:start; text-indent:0px; text-transform:none; white-space:normal; widows:auto; word-spacing:0px" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br class="" style="font-family:Arial; font-size:13px; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:normal; letter-spacing:normal; orphans:auto; text-align:start; text-indent:0px; text-transform:none; white-space:normal; widows:auto; word-spacing:0px">
<a href="redir.aspx?REF=UjpanjfeOguYNjyC-kdZWGytjrKca8YCCpcaRHKstDdlknT-9SDTCAFodHRwOi8vbGlzdHNlcnYubGluZ3Vpc3RsaXN0Lm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL2xpbmd0eXA." class="" style="font-family:Arial; font-size:13px; font-style:normal; font-variant:normal; font-weight:normal; letter-spacing:normal; orphans:auto; text-align:start; text-indent:0px; text-transform:none; white-space:normal; widows:auto; word-spacing:0px" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a></div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>