<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=windows-1252"><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=windows-1252"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;">Coming soon ...<div><br></div><div>Expect end of May (and earlier online: <a href="https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/lity">https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/lity</a>), with only a wee delay, owing to unforeseen circumstances:<div><br><br><br><b style="font-size: 15px;">LT 21(1) 2017</b><br><br><b>Contents</b> <br><br>Articles<br><br><br>Marloes Oomen and Roland Pfau<br>Signing NOT (or not): A typological perspective on standard negation in Sign Language of The Netherlands <br> <br>Borja Herce<br>Past–future asymmetries in time adverbials and adpositions: A crosslinguistic and diachronic perspective <br> <br>Felicity Meakins and Rachel Nordlinger<br>Possessor dissension: Agreement mismatch in Ngumpin-Yapa possessive constructions <br> <br>Timothy C. Brickell and Stefan Schnell<br>Do grammatical relations reflect information status? Reassessing Preferred Argument Structure theory against discourse data from Tondano <br> <br>Pavel Ozerov and Henriette Daudey<br>Copy-verb constructions in Tibeto-Burman and beyond <br><br><br><div><br></div><div>***************</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>PS: In the recent lingtyp exchange about LT, somebody asked about the future orientation of the journal. Well, the past and present orientation of LT, as the journal of the Association for Linguistic Typology, obviously was/is to be a forum and voice for linguistic typology, and all of it. Naturally, LT's mission therefore was/is seen as pretty broad (check our mission statement at <a href="https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/lity">https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/lity</a>); but its defining differentia specifica among linguistic periodicals was/is the unnegotiable focus on the dialectic of diversity and unity. </div><div><br></div><div>Let's see where we will be heading in future, as a field, as an association, and as a journal. (If you ask me about priorities, the message still hasn't been hammered home with sufficient force that typological awareness is essential, whatever one's particular line in linguistics and beyond.) For the time being, If you want to see any new developments of the diversity/unity research programme strengthened -- novel specialisations within typology and pioneering outside cooperations that might hold promise -- do submit relevant work, and be assured the Editorial Board will be as open-minded and encouraging as it is constructively-critical.</div><div><br></div><div>Which reminds me, our forthcoming issue is another one rather weak on phonology (unless the manual/non-manual distinction in sign language is seen as one of phonology). Although phonology is not a wholly new development in linguistics, there is a feeling here that phonological typology/typological phonology seriously needs stepping up in LT in future! </div><div><br></div><div>Frans</div><div><br></div><div><br><br><div><span style="font-size: 13px;">Professor Frans Plank</span><br style="font-size: 13px;"><span style="font-size: 13px;">Senior Research Fellow</span><br style="font-size: 13px;"><span style="font-size: 13px;">Somerville College</span><br style="font-size: 13px;"><span style="font-size: 13px;">Oxford OX2 6HD</span><br style="font-size: 13px;"><br style="font-size: 13px;"><a href="mailto:frans.plank@ling-phil.ox.ac.uk" style="font-size: 13px;">frans.plank@ling-phil.ox.ac.uk</a><br style="font-size: 13px;"><a href="http://ling.uni-konstanz.de/pages/home/plank/" style="font-size: 13px;">http://ling.uni-konstanz.de/pages/home/plank/</a><br style="font-size: 13px;"><br><br><br><br><br><br></div><br></div></div></div></body></html>