<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;color:#4c1130">Dear Cristian and everyone,</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;color:#4c1130"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;color:#4c1130">Read the comments more carefully before replying because I did not say nor imply that the concept should be dispensed with.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;color:#4c1130"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;color:#4c1130">Adam<br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, Jul 15, 2023 at 12:46 PM Christian Lehmann <<a href="mailto:christian.lehmann@uni-erfurt.de">christian.lehmann@uni-erfurt.de</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<div>Dear Adam and everybody,<br>
<br>
just a brief reply to this:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr"><br>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;color:rgb(76,17,48)"><span style="font-size:10pt;line-height:115%;font-family:monospace" lang="FI">For a functional-typological audience, I'm sort of
surprised the distinction is still brought up as if it was
discrete (or not just a matter of definition as Martin
points out), since Bybee discussed the issue of inflectional
status as a continuum with lexical/derivational in her
Morphology book some 30+ years ago. It's also well-known
that these notions of inflection/finiteness are tricky or
nonapplicable in many so-called polysynthetic languages
(e.g. de Reuse 2009).</span><span style="font-size:10pt;line-height:115%;font-family:monospace" lang="FI"><br>
</span></div>
</div>
</blockquote>
It is a recurrent misunderstanding among typologists, chiefly of
particularist persuasion, that a grammatical concept should be
dispensed with because it is not discrete, covers a continuum, is
not applicable to all languages or what not. If one takes this
position, then <b>no</b> grammatical concept whatsoever can be used
in the description of more than one language. It seems more
realistic, and even methodologically more fruitful, to live by
concepts whose cross-linguistic application is "tricky".<br>
-- <br>
<div>
<p style="font-size:90%">Prof. em. Dr. Christian Lehmann<br>
Rudolfstr. 4<br>
99092 Erfurt<br>
<span style="font-variant:small-caps">Deutschland</span></p>
<table style="font-size:80%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>Tel.:</td>
<td>+49/361/2113417</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>E-Post:</td>
<td><a href="mailto:christianw_lehmann@arcor.de" target="_blank">christianw_lehmann@arcor.de</a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Web:</td>
<td><a href="https://www.christianlehmann.eu" target="_blank">https://www.christianlehmann.eu</a></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Lingtyp mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br>
<a href="https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br clear="all"><br><span class="gmail_signature_prefix">-- </span><br><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><font face="times new roman, serif">Adam J.R. Tallman</font></div><div dir="ltr"><font face="times new roman, serif">Post-doctoral Researcher <br></font></div><div dir="ltr"><font face="times new roman, serif">Friedrich Schiller Universität<br></font></div><div><font face="times new roman, serif">Department of English Studies<br></font></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>