<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
  </head>
  <body>
    <p>Dear all,</p>
    <p>Some additional data:  In my ongoing cross-linguistic Association
      Experiment, I tested 4 sentences of N V N structure to see if they
      permitted Pat V Ag interpretations, in (among others) three
      Sinitic varieties.  (Of these 4 sentences, 2 were semantically
      symmetric while 2 were asymmetric.)  For each variety I tested
      approximately 30 subjects.  The availability of such Pat V Ag
      interpretations was as follows:</p>
    <p>Mandarin (Beijing): 8%<br>
      
Cantonese (HK): 7%
<br>
      Mandarin (overseas Chinese, Jakarta): 18%</p>
    <p>What these results show is that while there is a strong
      disfavouring of Pat V Ag interpretations in such constructions,
      they are nevertheless available. <br>
    </p>
    <p>Best,</p>
    <p>David</p>
    <p><br>
    </p>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 23/08/2023 18:24, Chao Li wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAL3Jw8TgxfqkbCdt0-WZBE3oObkX+_FkZkt+H8qiCsYcaJnWEA@mail.gmail.com">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div dir="ltr">
          <div
            id="m_-197487478029998947m_-3494078813807167779gmail-:36m">
            <div
              id="m_-197487478029998947m_-3494078813807167779gmail-:65t"
              aria-label="Message Body" role="textbox"
              aria-multiline="true" aria-controls=":6xe">Dear Randy,
              <div><br>
              </div>
              <div>You have cited Y. R. Chao a few times and apparently
                you adopt the position that Chinese can be sufficiently
                explained with the notions of topic and comment. I do
                not think that anyone working on Chinese would deny the
                importance of the notions of topic and comment in
                describing and explaining the functioning of Chinese.
                Also, probably no one working on Chinese would deny the
                fact that Chinese exhibits flexibility in word order, as
                shown by the examples you cited in your messages.
                However, IF your position is that Chinese (essentially)
                has no argument structure or that word order has no
                place in Chinese grammar, Jianming (as can be seen from
                his earlier discussion with you), I, and very likely
                many others would think that this position is too
                extreme. Word order (and argument structure) actually
                has an important place in Chinese grammar. Otherwise,
                why (1) has to be interpreted as "the cat is/was chasing
                the dog" (even though in the real world cats are timid
                and it is more likely for a dog to chase a cat than for
                a cat to chase a dog), why (2b) is odd or bad
                (particularly when previous clauses in the same Chinese
                sentence, as can be viewed by clicking on the link,
                remain unchanged), or why 'that girl' in (3), not '(the)
                flower' or 'flowers' in the same sentence, has to be
                understood as the entity that was consumed? All the
                three examples contain a transitive verb and in spirit
                they are all of the "N-V-N’" format. </div>
              <div><br>
              </div>
              <div>(1) Māo zài                  zhuī      gǒu. </div>
              <div>      cat   Progressive   chase   dog</div>
              <div>      'The cat is/was chasing the dog.'</div>
              <div><br>
              </div>
              <div>(2) a. ... wǒ  hē-le                   nà      bēi   
                guǒzhī. </div>
              <div>              I     drink-Perfective  that    cup 
                 juice</div>
              <div>          '...I drank that cup of juice.'  (<a
href="https://cn.nytimes.com/style/20170209/the-stir-fried-tomatoes-and-eggs-my-chinese-mother-made/zh-hant/"
                  target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
                  class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://cn.nytimes.com/style/20170209/the-stir-fried-tomatoes-and-eggs-my-chinese-mother-made/zh-hant/</a>)</div>
              <div>    b. ??... nà     bēi    guǒzhī    hē-le           
                        wǒ. </div>
              <div>                that   cup   juice     
                 drink-Perfective   I</div>
              <div><br>
              </div>
              <div>(3) Huā      chī-le                 nà      nǚhái.
                (name of a movie)</div>
              <div>     flower    eat-Perfective   that   girl</div>
              <div><br>
              </div>
              <div>Best regards,</div>
              <div>Chao</div>
              <div><br>
              </div>
              <div><br>
              </div>
            </div>
          </div>
        </div>
        <br>
        <div class="gmail_quote">
          <div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at
            11:52 PM Randy LaPolla <<a
              href="mailto:randy.lapolla@gmail.com" target="_blank"
              moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">randy.lapolla@gmail.com</a>>
            wrote:<br>
          </div>
          <blockquote class="gmail_quote">
            <div dir="auto">Thanks Christian,
              <div>Chao’s point in using the analogy of the function in
                logic is just to explain how the position of reference
                phrases in the clause is not related to semantic role,
                as it is in English, so N-V-N’ (actually [Topic
                N]-[Comment V-N’]) can be almost any set of semantic
                roles, depending only on contextual factors for their
                interpretation, as long as the addressee can create a
                meaning from it. The examples I gave are only a few of
                the possibilities. This is also why he argued there is
                no passive/active distinction in Chinese. It is a matter
                of inferring the direction of action from the overall
                context/situation. </div>
              <div><br>
              </div>
              <div>It is common now for us to assign roles to positions
                of arguments of functions, but Chao was assuming
                (explicitly) that the order of the arguments of the
                function does not influence the interpretation. <br>
                <br>
                <div dir="ltr">All the best,</div>
                <div dir="ltr">Randy </div>
                <div dir="ltr"><br>
                  <blockquote type="cite">On 23 Aug 2023, at 9:44 AM,
                    Christian Lehmann <<a
                      href="mailto:christian.lehmann@uni-erfurt.de"
                      target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
                      class="moz-txt-link-freetext">christian.lehmann@uni-erfurt.de</a>>
                    wrote:<br>
                    <br>
                  </blockquote>
                </div>
                <blockquote type="cite">
                  <div dir="ltr">Hi Randy,
                    <p>thanks for this report. There would be no point
                      in criticizing Chao, doubtless an eminent
                      grammarian. However, it does not seem that his use
                      of the term 'argument' throws much light on
                      Mandarin grammar. Given your examples, nothing, of
                      course, prevents you from defining a function
                      die(x, y) such that x is a being touched by the
                      death and y is the dying being. You then get a
                      multiplicity of functions die(v,w), where v and w
                      play different roles. I am not sure that this use
                      of the word 'argument' helps in understanding how
                      the Chinese constructions work. - On the other
                      hand, the analysis in terms of topic and comment
                      seems to have gained foot in the literature. It
                      does not seem to necessarily involve the
                      function-argument analysis.<br>
                    </p>
                    <p>Best, Christian</p>
                    <p>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
                    </p>
                    <div>Am 22.08.2023 um 18:52 schrieb Randy J.
                      LaPolla:<br>
                    </div>
                    <blockquote type="cite"> Hi Christian,
                      <div><span lang="EN-US">Y. R. Chao argued that the
                          arguments in Chinese are like the arguments of
                          a mathematical function. He argued
                          (1968:69-70) that Chinese clause structure is
                          simply topic and comment, and “A corollary to
                          the topic-comment nature of predication is
                          that the direction of action in an action verb
                          in the predicate need not go outward from
                          subject to object.  Even in an N-V-N´
                          sequence, such as [</span><span lang="EN-US">gǒu
                          yǎo rén</span><span lang="EN-US"> (dog bite
                          man)], it is not always certain that the
                          action goes outward from N to N´.” (1968:
                          70). </span></div>
                      <div>
                        <p><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
                        <p><span lang="EN-US">Chao (1955, 1959) also
                            argued that word order is not determined by,
                            and does not affect the interpretation of
                            actor vs. non-actor; he said the clause is
                            analogous to a function in logic: the
                            argument is an argument of the function, and
                            the truth value is unaffected by its
                            position in the clause (1959:254).  </span></p>
                        <p><span lang="EN-US"><br>
                          </span></p>
                        <p><span lang="EN-US">He used the terms
                            “subject” for the topic and “object” for a
                            reference phrase (regardless of the semantic
                            role of the referent in the event), as in
                            Chinese many sorts of semantic roles can
                            appear after the verb (e.g. 'I eat rice’, ‘I
                            eat restaurant’, 'I eat big bowl’,' I eat
                            chopsticks’, 'this pot of rice eats ten
                            people (can feed ten people), ‘He died
                            father’ = 'he suffered the event of his
                            father dying’,' fall rain CHANGE OF STATE’ =
                            It is raining’. In all of these cases he
                            would call the postverbal reference phrase
                            the “object”.</span></p>
                        <p><span lang="EN-US"><br>
                          </span></p>
                        <p><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
                        <p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB">Chao
                            Yuen Ren. 1955[1976]. Notes on Chinese
                            grammar and logic. In <i>Aspects of Chinese
                              sociolinguistics: Essays by Yuen Ren Chao,</i> Anwar
                            S. Dil (ed.), 237-249. Stanford: Stanford
                            University Press.</span></p>
                        <p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB"><span>Chao
                              Yuen Ren. 1959[1976]. How Chinese logic
                              operates. In</span><span> </span><i>Aspects
                              of Chinese sociolinguistics: Essays by
                              Yuen Ren Chao,</i><span> </span><span>Anwar
                              S. Dil (ed.), 250 259. Stanford: Stanford
                              University Press.</span><span> </span></span></p>
                        <p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB">Chao
                            Yuen Ren. 1968. <i>A grammar of spoken
                              Chinese</i>. Berkeley/Los Angeles:
                            University of California Press.</span></p>
                        <p><span lang="EN-US"><br>
                          </span></p>
                        <p><span lang="EN-US">All the best,</span></p>
                        <p><span lang="EN-US">Randy</span></p>
                        <div>
                          <div dir="auto">
                            <div dir="auto">
                              <div dir="auto">
                                <div dir="auto">
                                  <div dir="auto">
                                    <div dir="auto">
                                      <div dir="auto">
                                        <div dir="auto">
                                          <div><span>——</span></div>
                                          <div><span>Professor Randy J.
                                              LaPolla</span><span>(罗仁地)</span><span>,
                                              PhD FAHA </span></div>
                                          <div><span>Center for Language
                                              Sciences</span></div>
                                          <div><span>Institute for
                                              Advanced Studies in
                                              Humanities and Social
                                              Sciences</span></div>
                                          <div><span>Beijing Normal
                                              University at Zhuhai</span></div>
                                          <div><span>A302, Muduo
                                              Building, #18 Jinfeng
                                              Road, Zhuhai City</span><span>,
                                              Guangdong</span><span>,
                                              China</span></div>
                                          <div><span><br>
                                            </span></div>
                                          <div><span><a
                                                href="https://randylapolla.info/"
                                                target="_blank"
                                                moz-do-not-send="true"
                                                class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://randylapolla.info</a></span></div>
                                          <div><span>ORCID ID: <span><a
href="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6100-6196" target="_blank"
                                                  moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6100-6196</a> </span></span> 
                                             </div>
                                          <div><span><br>
                                            </span></div>
                                          <div><span>邮编:519087</span><br>
                                            <span>广东省珠海市唐家湾镇金凤路18号木铎楼A302</span><br>
                                            <span>北京师范大学珠海校区</span><br>
                                            <span>人文和社会科学高等研究院</span><br>
                                            <span>语言科学研究中心 </span></div>
                                        </div>
                                      </div>
                                    </div>
                                  </div>
                                </div>
                              </div>
                            </div>
                          </div>
                        </div>
                      </div>
                      <br>
                      <div><br>
                        <blockquote type="cite">
                          <div>On 22 Aug 2023, at 11:19 PM, Christian
                            Lehmann <a
                              href="mailto:christian.lehmann@uni-erfurt.de"
                              target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><christian.lehmann@uni-erfurt.de></a>
                            wrote:</div>
                          <br>
                          <div>
                            <div>
                              <p>I am sure that what I am about to do
                                here is completely inappropriate on this
                                list. In the interest of improving
                                communication among us, allow me
                                nevertheless to use the message by Hans
                                Götzsche as support: If you think you
                                need to use the (mathematical and
                                logical) term 'argument' in a context
                                dealing with grammar, then please at
                                least make it  clear whether an argument
                                occupies a role in semantic
                                relationality or a syntactic function in
                                valency. Just one example: English <i>dine</i>
                                has two semantic roles, the eater and
                                the thing eaten (which may be called,
                                i.a., agent and patient). It has one
                                dependent controlled by its valency,
                                taking the form of a subject and
                                representing the eater. How many
                                arguments does it have?</p>
                              <p>----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                <br>
                              </p>
                              <div>Am 21.08.2023 um 08:03 schrieb Hans
                                Götzsche:<br>
                              </div>
                              <blockquote type="cite"> Begin forwarded
                                message:<br>
                                <div>
                                  <blockquote type="cite"><br>
                                    <div> <span><b>From: </b></span><span>Hans
                                        Götzsche <a
                                          href="mailto:goetzsche@ikp.aau.dk"
                                          target="_blank"
                                          moz-do-not-send="true"><goetzsche@ikp.aau.dk></a><br>
                                      </span></div>
                                    <div> <span><b>Subject: </b></span><span><b>Re:
                                          [Lingtyp] argument structure</b><br>
                                      </span></div>
                                    <div> <span><b>Date: </b></span><span>21
                                        August 2023 at 15.44.46 CEST<br>
                                      </span></div>
                                    <div> <span><b>To: </b></span><span>Vladimir
                                        Panov <a
                                          href="mailto:panovmeister@gmail.com"
                                          target="_blank"
                                          moz-do-not-send="true"><panovmeister@gmail.com></a><br>
                                      </span></div>
                                    <br>
                                    <div>
                                      <div>
                                        <div> Dear Vladimir,</div>
                                        <div> <br>
                                        </div>
                                        <div> allow me a late comment. I
                                          have no remarks on Christian
                                          Lehman’s comment, so I shall
                                          only mention that the notion
                                          of ‘argument’ in theoretical
                                          linguistics has, to my
                                          knowledge, ‘slipped through
                                          the back door’, via formal
                                          approaches, from mathematics,
                                          presumably 1865 (see *), and
                                          later computation theory;
                                          meaning</div>
                                        <div> <br>
                                        </div>
                                        <div> <span>An independent
                                            variable of a function</span><span>.</span></div>
                                        <div> <span></span><br>
                                        </div>
                                        <div> <span>I first encountered
                                            the technical use of the
                                            word <i>argument</i> at my
                                            ‘first course in formal
                                            logic’ (many years ago), and
                                            the use of the term in
                                            linguistics is one of the
                                            reasons why I decided to
                                            develop ‘my own’
                                            nomenclature in formal
                                            syntax. As is well known the
                                            way we, as linguists, use
                                            the myriad of technical
                                            terms depends on what club
                                            (guild, brotherhood, you
                                            choose) we are members of,
                                            and taken as a set of words
                                            covering all bits and pieces
                                            of (by some called) “the
                                            language sciences” the set
                                            is full of inconsistences,
                                            and sometimes
                                            contradictions. Thus, it is
                                            not quite true that “we all
                                            use the term “argument
                                            structure””, and I only use
                                            the word <i>argument</i> in
                                            the context of formal logic.
                                            The aim of my development
                                            mentioned above, which was
                                            published in</span></div>
                                        <div> <span></span><br>
                                        </div>
                                        <div> <span><b>Deviational
                                              Syntactic Structures</b></span><span>†</span></div>
                                        <div> <br>
                                        </div>
                                        <div> was to establish a
                                          nomenclature that was both
                                          consistent and would be able
                                          to cover all language domains,
                                          from speech sounds to
                                          semantics (but, so far, not
                                          pragmatics; which I prefer to
                                          see as a matter of cultural
                                          codifications). This was in
                                          line with the well known and
                                          acknowledged Danish tradition
                                          in Theoretical Linguistics
                                          (some scholars remember Rasmus
                                          Rask and Karl Verner, to name
                                          a few) and it was based on
                                          ideas by Otto Jespersen and
                                          Louis Hjelmslev – as for the
                                          formal systems – and the
                                          empirical achievements of the
                                          grammarian Paul Diderichsen.
                                          My suggestions were not all
                                          cheered by Danish
                                          linguistists, but the formal
                                          system – comparable to, e.g.,
                                          <span> Montague grammar – was
                                            the first and only
                                            amalgamation of Hjelmslev’s
                                            <i>Glossematics</i> and the
                                            descriptive tradition of
                                            Danish syntax.</span></div>
                                        <div> <span></span><br>
                                        </div>
                                        <div> <span>I once read a ‘Dear
                                            Sir’ letter to a Danish
                                            newspaper in which the
                                            writer offered the opinion
                                            (in translation): “why don’t
                                            everybody use words the way
                                            I do; it would make
                                            everything much easier”.
                                            But, of course, adopting
                                            such a view would be
                                            impertinent.</span></div>
                                        <div> <span></span><br>
                                        </div>
                                        <div> <span>Best wishes,</span></div>
                                        <div> <span></span><br>
                                        </div>
                                        <div> <span>Hans Götzsche
                                            (MA,PhD)</span></div>
                                        <div> <span><i>Former
                                              President, NAL</i></span></div>
                                        <div> <span><i>Nordic
                                              Association of Linguists</i></span></div>
                                        <div> <span>Emeritus Associate
                                            Professor</span></div>
                                        <div> <span>Director, Center
                                            for Linguistics</span></div>
                                        <div> <span>Aalborg University</span></div>
                                        <div> <span>Rendsburggade 14</span></div>
                                        <div> <span>9000 Aalborg</span></div>
                                        <div> <span>DENMARK</span></div>
                                        <div> <span><a
                                              href="mailto:goetzsche@ikp.aau.dk"
                                              target="_blank"
                                              moz-do-not-send="true"
                                              class="moz-txt-link-freetext">goetzsche@ikp.aau.dk</a></span></div>
                                        <div> <span><a
                                              href="http://www.cfl.hum.aau/"
                                              target="_blank"
                                              moz-do-not-send="true">www.cfl.hum.aau</a></span></div>
                                        <div> <span></span><br>
                                        </div>
                                        <div> <span>Dr Hans Goetzsche</span></div>
                                        <div> <span>Emerito Professore
                                            Universitario</span></div>
                                        <div> <span>Via S. Apollinare
                                            19,2</span></div>
                                        <div> <span>36063 Marostica
                                            (VI)</span></div>
                                        <div> <span>ITALIA</span></div>
                                        <div> <br>
                                        </div>
                                        <div> <span>*</span><a
href="https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/144141/what-is-the-sense-of-using-word-argument-for-inputs-of-a-function"
                                            target="_blank"
                                            moz-do-not-send="true"
                                            class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/144141/what-is-the-sense-of-using-word-argument-for-inputs-of-a-function</a></div>
                                        <div> <span><a
href="https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/144141/what-is-the-sense-of-using-word-argument-for-inputs-of-a-function"
                                              target="_blank"
                                              moz-do-not-send="true">terminology
                                              - What is the sense of
                                              using word "argument", for
                                              inputs of a function? -
                                              English Language &
                                              Usage Stack Exchange<span></span></a></span></div>
                                        <div> <span>† <a
href="https://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/deviational-syntactic-structures-9781472587961/"
                                              target="_blank"
                                              moz-do-not-send="true"> <span>https://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/deviational-syntactic-structures-9781472587961/</span></a></span></div>
                                        <div><br>
                                        </div>
                                        <div><br>
                                          <blockquote type="cite">
                                            <div>On 19 Aug 2023, at
                                              12.11, Vladimir Panov <a
href="mailto:panovmeister@gmail.com" target="_blank"
                                                moz-do-not-send="true"><panovmeister@gmail.com></a>
                                              wrote:</div>
                                            <br>
                                            <div>
                                              <div>
                                                <div dir="ltr">Dear
                                                  colleagues,
                                                  <div><br>
                                                  </div>
                                                  <div>I have a very
                                                    general question to
                                                    you. We all use the
                                                    term "argument
                                                    structure" and we
                                                    are used to semantic
                                                    labels like A, S or
                                                    P or syntactic
                                                    labels like subject,
                                                    direct and indirect
                                                    object. Many
                                                    linguistis,
                                                    especially those
                                                    adhering to "formal"
                                                    approaches, would
                                                    argue that there are
                                                    also adjuncts which
                                                    are not arguments.</div>
                                                  <div><br>
                                                  </div>
                                                  <div>Is anybody aware
                                                    of any attempts to
                                                    seriously challenge
                                                    the adequacy of the
                                                    very notion of
                                                    "arguments" in
                                                    general? After all,
                                                    ir seems that there
                                                    are languages which
                                                    do not encode or
                                                    encode little the
                                                    "roles" of named
                                                    entities (noun
                                                    phrases, pronouns
                                                    etc.) anywhere in
                                                    utterance,
                                                    especially in
                                                    colloquial language,
                                                    or encode entities
                                                    like the addressee
                                                    rather than the
                                                    agent or the
                                                    patient. My
                                                    intuition tells me
                                                    that there might be
                                                    such critical works
                                                    in the traditions of
                                                    usage-based
                                                    linguistics,
                                                    interactional
                                                    linguistics,
                                                    conversation
                                                    analysis or
                                                    linguistic
                                                    anthropology but I
                                                    have found very
                                                    little. Actually,
                                                    I've only discovered
                                                    the very recent
                                                    Heine's book in
                                                    which he argues for
                                                    a broader
                                                    understanding of
                                                    argument structure
                                                    which includes
                                                    speech situation
                                                    participants - a
                                                    very interestinng
                                                    view. So am looking
                                                    for more research in
                                                    this spirit.</div>
                                                  <div><br>
                                                  </div>
                                                  <div>I'm sorry if it
                                                    sounds a bit
                                                    confusing but if
                                                    anything like that
                                                    comes to you mind
                                                    I'll be happy if you
                                                    can share it.</div>
                                                  <div><br>
                                                  </div>
                                                  <div>Best,</div>
                                                  <div>Vladimir Panov</div>
                                                  <div><br>
                                                  </div>
                                                  <div><i>I condemn the
                                                      Russian agression
                                                      in Ukraine</i></div>
                                                </div>
                                              </div>
_______________________________________________<br>
                                              Lingtyp mailing list<br>
                                              <a
                                                href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org"
                                                target="_blank"
                                                moz-do-not-send="true"
                                                class="moz-txt-link-freetext">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br>
                                              <a
href="https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp"
                                                target="_blank"
                                                moz-do-not-send="true"
                                                class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
                                            </div>
                                          </blockquote>
                                        </div>
                                        <br>
                                      </div>
                                    </div>
                                  </blockquote>
                                </div>
                                <br>
                                <br>
                                <fieldset></fieldset>
                                <pre>_______________________________________________
Lingtyp mailing list
<a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>
<a href="https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a>
</pre>
                              </blockquote>
                              <div>-- <br>
                                <p>Prof. em. Dr. Christian Lehmann<br>
                                  Rudolfstr. 4<br>
                                  99092 Erfurt<br>
                                  <span>Deutschland</span></p>
                                <table>
                                  <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"
                                          moz-do-not-send="true"
                                          class="moz-txt-link-freetext">christianw_lehmann@arcor.de</a></td>
                                    </tr>
                                    <tr>
                                      <td>Web:</td>
                                      <td><a
                                          href="https://www.christianlehmann.eu/"
                                          target="_blank"
                                          moz-do-not-send="true"
                                          class="moz-txt-link-freetext">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" moz-do-not-send="true"
                              class="moz-txt-link-freetext">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br>
                            <a
href="https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp"
                              target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
                              class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
                          </div>
                        </blockquote>
                      </div>
                      <br>
                    </blockquote>
                    <div>-- <br>
                      <p>Prof. em. Dr. Christian Lehmann<br>
                        Rudolfstr. 4<br>
                        99092 Erfurt<br>
                        <span>Deutschland</span></p>
                      <table>
                        <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" moz-do-not-send="true"
                                class="moz-txt-link-freetext">christianw_lehmann@arcor.de</a></td>
                          </tr>
                          <tr>
                            <td>Web:</td>
                            <td><a
                                href="https://www.christianlehmann.eu"
                                target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
                                class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://www.christianlehmann.eu</a></td>
                          </tr>
                        </tbody>
                      </table>
                    </div>
                  </div>
                </blockquote>
              </div>
            </div>
            _______________________________________________<br>
            Lingtyp mailing list<br>
            <a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org"
              target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
              class="moz-txt-link-freetext">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br>
            <a
href="https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp"
              rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
              class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
          </blockquote>
        </div>
      </div>
      <br>
      <fieldset class="moz-mime-attachment-header"></fieldset>
      <pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
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="https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp">https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a>
</pre>
    </blockquote>
    <pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">-- 
David Gil

Senior Scientist (Associate)
Department of Linguistic and Cultural Evolution
Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology
Deutscher Platz 6, Leipzig, 04103, Germany

Email: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:gil@shh.mpg.de">gil@shh.mpg.de</a>
Mobile Phone (Israel): +972-526117713
Mobile Phone (Indonesia): +62-082113720302

</pre>
  </body>
</html>