13.584, Qs: Copy Vowels/Clarification, Data Elicitation

[LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List:  Vol-13-584. Sat Mar 2 2002. ISSN: 1068-4875.

Subject: 13.584, Qs: Copy Vowels/Clarification, Data Elicitation

Moderators: Anthony Aristar, Wayne State U.<aristar at linguistlist.org>
            Helen Dry, Eastern Michigan U. <hdry at linguistlist.org>
            Andrew Carnie, U. of Arizona <carnie at linguistlist.org>

Reviews (reviews at linguistlist.org):
	Simin Karimi, U. of Arizona
	Terence Langendoen, U. of Arizona

Editors (linguist at linguistlist.org):
	Karen Milligan, WSU 		Naomi Ogasawara, EMU
	James Yuells, EMU		Marie Klopfenstein, WSU
	Michael Appleby, EMU		Heather Taylor-Loring, EMU
	Ljuba Veselinova, Stockholm U.	Richard John Harvey, EMU
	Dina Kapetangianni, EMU		Renee Galvis, WSU
	Karolina Owczarzak, EMU

Software: John Remmers, E. Michigan U. <remmers at emunix.emich.edu>
          Gayathri Sriram, E. Michigan U. <gayatri at linguistlist.org>

Home Page:  http://linguistlist.org/

The LINGUIST List is funded by Eastern Michigan University, Wayne
State University, and donations from subscribers and publishers.



Editor for this issue: Karen Milligan <karen at linguistlist.org>
 ==========================================================================

We'd like to remind readers that the responses to queries are usually
best posted to the individual asking the question. That individual is
then strongly encouraged to post a summary to the list. This policy was
instituted to help control the huge volume of mail on LINGUIST; so we
would appreciate your cooperating with it whenever it seems appropriate.

In addition to posting a summary, we'd like to remind people that it
is usually a good idea to personally thank those individuals who have
taken the trouble to respond to the query.


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

1)
Date:  Fri, 01 Mar 2002 09:47:55 -0500 (EST)
From:  Nancy E Hall <nancyh at linguist.umass.edu>
Subject:  copy vowels

2)
Date:  Mon, 25 Feb 2002 17:48:55 +0200
From:  Diane Boonen <dboonen at pop.vub.ac.be>
Subject:  eliciting data from young deaf children

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

Date:  Fri, 01 Mar 2002 09:47:55 -0500 (EST)
From:  Nancy E Hall <nancyh at linguist.umass.edu>
Subject:  copy vowels

	I am reposting this query because it contained a typo that
made the question seem contradicted by the data given.

	There are examples where epenthetic copy vowels show
'overapplication' of a phonological process. For example, Winnebago
normally nasalizes vowels after a nasal consonant as in [wanIk] 'bird'
(capital = nasalized vowel). Winnebago also inserts a copy vowel into
obstruent + sonorant clusters. In these cases, the copy vowel will
undergo nasalization if the original vowel does, even though the copy
vowel is not on the surface in a position where nasalization is
expected: /knak/ -> [kAnAk] 'marry'.
	
I am looking for more examples of overapplication as well as
examples of 2 other possible behaviors of copy vowels:

1. Cases where a copy vowel and original vowel end up different due to
normal, contextual variation. For example, where different allophones
of the same vowel show up in the original and copy, or where one only
one vowel undergoes some process such as ablaut.

2. Cases where both the original vowel and copy vowel undergo a
process that only the COPY is in the normal position for.

This is part of a project to study subtypes of copy vowel epenthesis.
I will post a summary of responses.

Thank you,
Nancy Hall

nancyh at linguist.umass.edu
University of Massachusetts-Amherst

- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-13-552


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

Date:  Mon, 25 Feb 2002 17:48:55 +0200
From:  Diane Boonen <dboonen at pop.vub.ac.be>
Subject:  eliciting data from young deaf children

Dear members,
	
Recently I started working on a research project on language
acquisition (both Flemish Sign Language and Dutch) of prelingual deaf
children in a bilingual school system. The age of the children varies
between 3 and 10 years old.

I have now come across some methodology problems, more specific on how
to elicit data. Since the children vary in age so much, I wonder whether
it would be methodologically correct to use different materials /
techniques to elicit data in order to be able to select material which
will interest the child. For example: could I use cartoon x for one age
group and cartoon y for another (if both have a similar topic)?

Secondly I have tried out different types of material in order to elicit
data however, none of them produced a satisfactory result. Especially
the youngest group of children poses difficulties: cartoons nor comics
or toys worked. Do any of you have experience with elicitng data from
such young children or know any references?

I also wonder whether spontaneous conversation could be used since I am
afraid that if the data vary too much, no comparison will be possible.
Do any of you disagree?


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-13-584