8.1077, Disc: Evolution analytic > synthetic

[linguist at linguistlist.org]

LINGUIST List:  Vol-8-1077. Mon Jul 21 1997. ISSN: 1068-4875.

Subject: 8.1077, Disc: Evolution analytic > synthetic

Moderators: Anthony Rodrigues Aristar: Texas A&M U. <aristar at linguistlist.org>
            Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan U. <hdry at linguistlist.org>
            T. Daniel Seely: Eastern Michigan U. <seely at linguistlist.org>

Review Editor:     Andrew Carnie <carnie at linguistlist.org>

Associate Editors: Ljuba Veselinova <ljuba at linguistlist.org>
                   Ann Dizdar <ann at linguistlist.org>
Assistant Editor:  Martin Jacobsen <marty at linguistlist.org>

Software development: John H. Remmers <remmers at emunix.emich.edu>
                      Zhiping Zheng <zzheng at online.emich.edu>

Home Page:  http://linguistlist.org/


Editor for this issue: Ann Dizdar <ann at linguistlist.org>

=================================Directory=================================

1)
Date:  Fri, 18 Jul 1997 04:21:43 -0700 (PDT)
From:  bwald at HUMnet.UCLA.EDU (benji wald)
Subject:  Re: 8.1059, Disc: Evolution analytic > synthetic

-------------------------------- Message 1 -------------------------------

Date:  Fri, 18 Jul 1997 04:21:43 -0700 (PDT)
From:  bwald at HUMnet.UCLA.EDU (benji wald)
Subject:  Re: 8.1059, Disc: Evolution analytic > synthetic

On Sun, 13 Jul 1997  Bill Bennett wrote:

 If my language use sought conciseness
>(implicitness), than in time it might be working at the well-known
>"now for cocoa and I'll put the cat out" with one vocable, the
>language might end as "ugh" (synethesis) - unless the language were to
>be "saved" by a countering balance in explicitness.

I've always enjoyed the verbal humor of the Marx Brothers, what with
their puns and all (phonology is the beginning of humor), but only in
my dotage am I beginning to understand the exquisite wit and
profundity of Burns & Allens, e.g., what is going on in terms of
expectations for the discourse management of information in the
following exchange.

Gracie:  I cut myself with soup the other day.
George:  Hunh?
Gracie:  The other day I cut myself with soup.
George: You cut yourself with soup?
Gracie:  Yeah, I was opening the can and...

Keep it up with the implicit and the explicit and the concise and
economy for the speaker vs. intelligibility for the addressee
and-all-that.  In the final analysis, it is such exchanges as Burns &
Allens which ultimately explains why language will never reduce to
UGH.  Say goodnight...

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-8-1077