[Lexicog] palm trees

[Lou Hohulin]

You may know this, Ron, having worked on an Austronesian language. In the two languages that I know, palms are not trees. The reason given by native speakers is that palms cannot be used as wood, i.e. firewood, or lumber. The word referring to trees may also refer to lumber. 

On Tue, 19 May 2009 12:12:26 -0700
 "Ronald Moe" <ron_moe at sil.org> wrote:
>This fall I'm going to Uganda for three and a half months to attempt(!) to
>elicit the emic (emic = the way speakers view things) classification system
>of the Ik language. It is remote and for various reasons there has not been
>a lot of education in the area. So I am hoping it will be minimally
>influenced by outside classification systems. One purpose of this research
>is to see where the DDP domains do not fit another language. Eventually I
>hope to get enough data to start making judgments on which domains are
>universal (if any) and how languages vary. My thesis depends on the
>assumption that there are semantic universals and universals of human
>experience that influence how various languages conceptualize reality and
>experience.
>
> 
>
>For instance research into color terms reveals a wide variety of lexemes.
>But when people are asked to point to a prototypical 'red' or 'blue', they
>frequently point to the same square on a color chart. English has its
>prototypical 'blood red' 'sky blue' and 'leaf green'. This holds true from
>individual to individual and from language to language. If a language has
>one lexeme that includes 'blue' and 'green' (what the researchers label
>'grue'), people will point to two prototypical squares on the color chart,
>one the prototypical blue and the other the prototypical green. Research
>into the physics of the eye shows that this is actually determined by the
>wavelengths of the light that the cones and rods in the eye can detect. So
>there is a physiological basis for these lexical universals.
>
> 
>
>One implication of this is that a standardized list of domains will be
>partly applicable to any language. This is why DDP works well but not
>perfectly. DDP is somewhat standardized, but in reality is basically an
>English list. What we need is a truly standardized list and an indication of
>where languages vary. I liken the need to the role of IPA in phonological
>study of particular languages. IPA gets us started, but we then have to do
>research and analysis to determine how the phonology of our language works.
>
> 
>
>Once I've done my research in the Ik language, I will want to describe the
>process and results. I'm then hoping other people will do the same sort of
>research so that we can compare numerous emic classification systems.
>
> 
>
>Ron Moe
>
> 
>
>  _____  
>
>From: lexicographylist at yahoogroups.com
>[mailto:lexicographylist at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Wayne Leman
>Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2009 9:10 AM
>To: lexicographylist at yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [Lexicog] palm trees
>
> 
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Greg, if you are attempting to reflect the lexicon of a language, what is
>the purpose of using a semantic taxonomy that does not reflect the lexical
>relationships of that language?
>
>It seems to me that using an "external" taxonomy to aid English readers
>creates a distorted view of the lexical relations within the language, which
>includes taxonomic relationships.
>
>By the way, it is not necessary to have superordinate category
>classification words in order for a people to have the concept of a semantic
>grouping, although it definitely helps. Not every concept that people have
>is lexicalized, including in English.
>
>Wayne
>-----
>Ninilchik Russian dictionary online:
>http://ninilchik. <http://ninilchik.noadsfree.com> noadsfree.com
>
>--------
>
>Hi Ron,
>
>I was not thinking of using a vernacular classification because the
>vernacular I am studying actually seems to have few classification words of
>levels that I can find. Also, I want my semantic domain list to reflect a
>likely folk classification of English readers because it will mostly be
>English readers who access the (English) sematic domain list. I know you do
>not want an English folk classification. Sorry.
>
><snip>
>
>Regards, Greg
>
>
>
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>Version: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.34/2122 - Release Date: 05/19/09
>06:21:00
>
>



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

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lexicographylist/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lexicographylist/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:lexicographylist-digest at yahoogroups.com 
    mailto:lexicographylist-fullfeatured at yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    lexicographylist-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/