dialect in novels

[Dennis R. Preston]

>Rules of evidence are examples of "regulatory" rules, not
>constitutive rules, which are "discovered." We are having, it seems
>to me, a basic disagremment about the kinds of rule we are talkng
>about. Rules of evidence are, in my opinion, like "rules" which say
>"don't put prepositions at the ends of sentences." Not like ones
>which say "English is not a V2 language."


dInIs (trying to keep his rules straight)



>I think an exception can only arise if there is something from which it
>is excepted. Exceptions to a rule have no "status" without a rule in
>place from which they deviate. My thought was simply that possibly
>enough exceptions (to a rule) of a similar nature can be identified so
>as to constitute a new rule in and of themselves. For example, there are
>a number of exceptions to the hearsay rule in law. One of the categories
>of exceptions is business records. This is a somewhat fluid group and,
>in effect, is open-ended. Thus, the business records exception has
>become a sub-rule and might even be considered as a rule of evidence all
>by itself.
>
>Bob
>
>Salikoko Mufwene wrote:
>>
>>  At 11:08 AM 3/2/2001 -0500, Bob Fitzke wrote:
>>  >By all means. The exceptions all arise out of a common ancestor,
>>  i.e.,
>>  >"the rule".
>>  >
>>  How come? Exceptions are exceptions because a rule did/does not cover
>>  them in the first place. Are you suggesting that exceptions are
>>  (necessarily) divergences from an earlier evolutionary stage when they
>>  were covered by the same more general rule? Do speakers really acquire
>>  a language by rules or are rules essentially a by-product of how
>>  analysts want to account for linguistic behavior (i.e., the behavior
>>  of speakers)?
>>
>>  Sali.
>>
>>  >Salikoko Mufwene wrote:
>>  >>
>>  >> At 09:14 AM 3/2/2001 -0500, Bib Fitzke wrote:
>>  >> >Or, perhaps, when enough of the exceptions coalesce to form a new
>>  >> rule
>>  >> >of their own; sort of a "rule within a rule". A type of
>>  speciation?
>>  >> >
>>  >> "Speciation" presupposes some sort of common evolutionary history,
>>  a
>>  >> sort of divergence after evolving together. Would that be the case
>>  >> here?
>>  >>
>>  >> Sali.
>>  >>
>>  >> **********************************************************
>>  >> Salikoko S. Mufwene                        s-mufwene at uchicago.edu
>>  >> University of Chicago                      773-702-8531; FAX
>>  >> 773-834-0924
>>  >> Department of Linguistics
>>  >> 1010 East 59th Street
>>  >> Chicago, IL 60637
>>  >>
>>  http://humanities.uchicago.edu/humanities/linguistics/faculty/mufwene.html
>>  >> **********************************************************
>>  >
>>  **********************************************************
>>  Salikoko S. Mufwene                        s-mufwene at uchicago.edu
>>  University of Chicago                      773-702-8531; FAX
>>  773-834-0924
>>  Department of Linguistics
>>  1010 East 59th Street
>>  Chicago, IL 60637
>>  http://humanities.uchicago.edu/humanities/linguistics/faculty/mufwene.html
>>  **********************************************************

--
Dennis R. Preston
Department of Linguistics and Languages
Michigan State University
East Lansing MI 48824-1027 USA
preston at pilot.msu.edu
Office: (517)353-0740
Fax: (517)432-2736