13.1531, Qs: Irregularity/Kinship Vocabulary, L2 Research

[LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List:  Vol-13-1531. Tue May 28 2002. ISSN: 1068-4875.

Subject: 13.1531, Qs: Irregularity/Kinship Vocabulary, L2 Research

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

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

Consulting Editor:
        Andrew Carnie, U. of Arizona <carnie at linguistlist.org>

Editors (linguist at linguistlist.org):
	Karen Milligan, WSU 		Naomi Ogasawara, EMU
	James Yuells, EMU		Marie Klopfenstein, WSU
	Michael Appleby, EMU		Heather Taylor, 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:  Mon, 27 May 2002 10:31:22 +0000
From:  Lise Dobrin <dobrin at virginia.edu>
Subject:  irregularity in kinship vocabulary

2)
Date:  Tue, 23 Apr 2002 01:19:05 +0900
From:  Rudolf Reinelt <reinelt at ll.ehime-u.ac.jp>
Subject:  L2 and L3 research

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

Date:  Mon, 27 May 2002 10:31:22 +0000
From:  Lise Dobrin <dobrin at virginia.edu>
Subject:  irregularity in kinship vocabulary

I'm looking for any references that might help explain the high degree
of formal irregularity one tends to find in kinship vocabulary --
unpredictable plurals, marked morphosyntactic behavior, etc. (Some of
my colleagues share my intuition that this is the case; others do
not. Any comments based on your experience?) The high frequency of
this area of the vocabulary doesn't entirely help in the cases I'm
most concerned with, since the irregularity in some ways varies
inversely with the use of kin terms in address (which ups their
frequency dramatically). Renewal of vocabulary in association with
linguistic taboos is also relevant but probably insufficiently general
to account for the phenomenon which is more widespread. Cultural
factors are surely the key but the question is how to convert
something like "cultural salience" into lexical irregularity in an
explanatory way.

Thanks,
Lise


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

Date:  Tue, 23 Apr 2002 01:19:05 +0900
From:  Rudolf Reinelt <reinelt at ll.ehime-u.ac.jp>
Subject:  L2 and L3 research


Dear colleagues,

Presently we are researching the following problem, mainly from a
second foreign language learning point of view (but possibly with
ramifications for second language learning too): On the one hand,
every language learning is different according to a host of factors
science has not been able to grasp fully but is constantly trying to
systematize.  On the other hand, even the circumstances and factors of
learning a third language, for example L3 German, L3 French, L3
Chinese, etc. are comparable. This holds at least for the most
important actants, the students who have to make a choice. Thus
despite the diversity of students, the languages themselves, the
varying teaching methods, materials and circumstances, valid (and
financially influential) comparisons are made regularly, especially at
the beginning of a term or shortly afterwards, e.g. at Japanese
universities after two weeks, when signing in ends. Thus not comparing
these learning processes would come to closing the eyes before the
difficulties of reality.

Here is my question Do you know of any studies, where third or other
foreign language learning of different languages e.g. on the same
institutional  level has been compared, e.g. as regards ease,
progress, etc.

Any hints would be welcome. I post a summary of the results
 

Rudolf Reinelt, Universitaet Ehime, Lit.- jur. Fakultaet, Abteilung
fuer Humanwissenschaften Ehime University, Fac. of Law & Letters,
Dept. of Humanities Bunkyo-cho 3, Matsuyama 790-8577 JAPAN

Tel& Fax (W) -81-89-927-9359
E-mail: reinelt at ll.ehime-u.ac.jpreinelt@iname.com
JALT OLE affiliate SIG Coordinator, CAJ Chuugoku/Shikoku Chapter Coordinator

Auf Wiedersehen bei
 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-13-1531