paradigms

[Daniel L. Everett]

Well, the alternatives are not exhaustive. But, once again, I asked a
question that obviously is not appropriate for the give and take of a
list. The answers and questions take a larger context (primarily
empirical) than a list can accommodate well.

Thanks for the courtesy of offering answers, though. They did at least
give me some more insight into DM.

Best,

Dan


On Wednesday, Mar 10, 2004, at 20:48 Europe/London, Martha McGinnis
wrote:

>> Neither of these alternatives you propose is relevant to the
>> facts at hand.
>
> I must have been unclear.  The two alternatives were meant to be
> exhaustive: either the underlying syntactic structure of the
> synthetic and periphrastic forms is the same, or it's different.
> Different consequences follow from the two possibilities.
>
> Cheers,
> Martha
> --
> mcginnis at ucalgary.ca
>
>

------------------------------------------

Daniel L. Everett
Professor of Phonetics & Phonology
Postgraduate Programme Director
Department of Linguistics
The University of Manchester
Oxford Road
Manchester, UK M13 9PL
http://ling.man.ac.uk/info/staff/de
Fax: 44-161-275-3187
Office: 44-161-275-3158