9.797, Disc: Recent Change in English

[LINGUIST Network]

LINGUIST List:  Vol-9-797. Thu May 28 1998. ISSN: 1068-4875.

Subject: 9.797, Disc: Recent Change in English

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

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

Editors:  	    Brett Churchill <brett at linguistlist.org>
		    Martin Jacobsen <marty at linguistlist.org>
		    Elaine Halleck <elaine at linguistlist.org>
                    Anita Huang <anita at linguistlist.org>
                    Ljuba Veselinova <ljuba at linguistlist.org>
		    Julie Wilson <julie 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: Martin Jacobsen <marty at linguistlist.org>

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

1)
Date:  Wed, 27 May 1998 20:30:39 -0400 (EDT)
From:  manaster at umich.edu
Subject:  Re: 9.795, Disc: Recent change in English

2)
Date:  Wed, 27 May 1998 17:31:41 -0700 (PDT)
From:  Johanna Rubba <jrubba at polymail.cpunix.calpoly.edu>
Subject:  Disc: Recent change in English

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

Date:  Wed, 27 May 1998 20:30:39 -0400 (EDT)
From:  manaster at umich.edu
Subject:  Re: 9.795, Disc: Recent change in English

I am an idiot not to have noticed that.  'Fun game' seems to behave
like 'super game' in this regard and surely no one will take 'super'
to be a noun (except in the irrelevant NYese sense of 'janitor').
Indeed, we could construct an accentual minimal pair:

'super game' meaning 'great game' is not pronounced the same as

'super game' meaning 'game in which one pretends to be a NY janitor'.

There is also perhaps the conjunction test. We can say 'a card or
checkers game' but not 'a card or fun game'.  But here I am concerned
about the influence of semantics/pragmatics.

Alexis MR

On Wed, 27 May 1998, LINGUIST Network wrote:
> From:  Mark Mandel <Mark at dragonsys.com>
>
> Beyond that, it is only in writing that Herrick's two examples have
> the same syntax. At least in my speech, and in any that I would
> expect to hear, "This is a fun game" puts primary stress on both
> "fun" and "game", while "This is a card game" puts primary stress of
> the NP on "card" and a secondary stress on "game". The second stress
> pattern is also possible for the first sentence, but not vice
> versa. Or am I behind the times?


-------------------------------- Message 2 -------------------------------

Date:  Wed, 27 May 1998 17:31:41 -0700 (PDT)
From:  Johanna Rubba <jrubba at polymail.cpunix.calpoly.edu>
Subject:  Disc: Recent change in English


Benji Wald writes,

>"traditional parts of speech would turn out to be polarised
>stereotypes of the nature of lexico-grammatical categories, and there
>would be an orderliness to the complex hierarchy (or something like
>that) of intermediate 'parts of speech'."

This is exactly what Cognitive Grammar proposes -- that parts of
speech have the organization of prototype categories. The orderliness
would not be hierarchical, however: lexical items would be more or
less 'nouny', 'verby', etc. according to where they land on different
parameters of meaning (e.g. transitivity for verbs but not nouns). And
there would be more than one parameter per category.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Johanna Rubba	Assistant Professor, Linguistics              ~
English Department, California Polytechnic State University   ~
San Luis Obispo, CA 93407                                     ~
Tel. (805)-756-2184  E-mail: jrubba at polymail.calpoly.edu      ~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-9-797