[Lingtyp] Temporal features?

Wed Oct 3 07:31:44 UTC 2018

Islands quite often have UP vs DOWN directions where up is the middle of
the island and down is the sea.
When I was growing up on Oahu it was and east and west were Diamond Head (a
major landmark volcanic located to the east of Honolulu) and 'Ewa (a
popular beach to the west along the south coast shoreline); north (at least
from the south of the island where Honolulu  -- and 'Aeia where I lived --
are, and 90% of the population of the island lives) is mauka (mountainward)
and south is makai (seaward). (Windward and Leeward are also sometimes
used.)

In South Bali, north and south are kaja and kelod respectively; on the
north (Denpasar for example) of the island (Singaraja for example) it is
the opposite; east and west however are the same (sunrise and sunset don't
change directions based on whether one is on the north or south of the
central peak(s).
I have never spent enough time in the eats or west ends of the island to
know what their system is (since applying the standard Balinese system
would make, for example, Kaja (mountainward) ALSO the direction of sunset.

ANYWAY, my main purpose of this email however, is directions in sign
languages. As there may be variations according to which sign language, the
following is for Indian Sign Language, Japanese Sign Language and Nepali
sign languages (all work basically the same):
There are separate signs for the cardinal directions N, S , E  and W; these
are used almost exclusively on the macro scale. (For example, when people
ask where I am from -- a difficult question to answer -- I will locate the
US by saying AMERICA, CANADA NORTH, MEXICO SOUTH
At the local level however, as when giving road directions, there are THREE
systems:
1) real-world system. this is used if something is close enough to imagine
by just pointing in its real location in space
2) narrative-space system: in this case the signer "draws a map" by laying
things out in the space in front of them: TEMPLE THERE, OPPOSITE DRUG
SHOP... etc. Then the route is traced on that narrative-space map, either
with index finger or with hand open, fingers together (In Indian SL and
Nepali SL the sign for GO, also the classifier for for example bicycle,
restating important landmarks (for example esp where one turns)
3) egocentric system. Here the signer takes the role of the person going
along the route, and will will sign STRAIGHT-AHEAD, LEFT, TURN-LEFT, RIGHT,
TURN-RIGHT etc while also signing important landmarks and locating them
relative to him/herself (i.e. in the role of the person going)

USUALLY directions are given in a mixture of the above ways (and it is not
strange to have all three used in one instance of giving directions. You
can imagine (perhaps) the problems hearing L2 learners have (for example
sign language interpreter trainees and even long time interpreters
sometimes), and is one of the things I include when giving longer
(intermediate level) trainings for SL interpreters)

On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 11:25 AM Bill Palmer <bill.palmer at newcastle.edu.au>
wrote:

> Hi Hartmut
>
>
>
> Your anecdote about Florutz German is correct. The system is described by
> Rowley (1980). Similar facts pertain to other alpine dialects of German.
>
>
>
> Rowley, Anthony, 1980, Richtungs- und Ortsangabe in der Mundart von
> Florutz (Fierozzo)
>
> im italienischen Tirol. In Anthony Rowley, ed. Sprachliche Orientierung l.
>
> Untersuchungen zur Morphologie und Semantik der Richtungsadverbien in
> oberdeutschen
>
> Mundarten. Bayreuth: Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaftliche FakulUit
>
> (Jahrbuch der lohann-Andreas-Schmeller-Gesellschaft 1 980), 73-96.
>
>
>
> Best
>
> Bill
>
>
>
> *From:* Hartmut Haberland <hartmut at ruc.dk>
> *Sent:* Monday, 1 October 2018 8:05 PM
> *To:* Randy J. LaPolla <randy.lapolla at gmail.com>
> *Cc:* Bill Palmer <bill.palmer at newcastle.edu.au>; Bohnemeyer, Juergen <
> jb77 at buffalo.edu>; Heath Jeffrey <schweinehaxen at hotmail.com>;
> lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> *Subject:* SV: [Lingtyp] Temporal features?
>
>
>
> Hi Randy,
>
> Karen Ebert (who sadly died a while ago) told me once that when she
> studied in Kiel, she met a friend from her North Frisian home island of
> Föhr, and they used to speak their native language (Fering). Except when
> giving each other directions or describing their own movements. On their
> island, every place was either ‘up’ or ‘down’ or ‘over’ in relationship to
> every other place, and with movement verbs, the direction (‘up’ or ‘down’
> or ‘over’) was coded obligatorily. Outside of Föhr the system simply broke
> down.
>
> I have been told that in Florutz German (spoken in an Alpine valley) you
> have to put the potatoes that you have peeled down or up into the dish
> depending on whether the dish is between you and the stream in the middle
> of the valley (‘down’) or you are between the stream and the dish (‘up’).
> That might be a myth, but it is a nice story. Hartmut
>
>
>
> PS Has nobody ever had problems with their eye doctor when he talks about
> your right eye which you consider being your left eye?
>
>
>
> *Hartmut Haberland*
> Professor emeritus
>
> [image: Image removed by sender. RUC]
>
> *Roskilde University*
> Department of Communication and Arts
>
> Universitetsvej 1
> DK-4000 Roskilde
> Telephone: +45 46742841
>
>
>
> *Fra:* Randy J. LaPolla <randy.lapolla at gmail.com>
> *Sendt:* 1. oktober 2018 11:40
> *Til:* Hartmut Haberland <hartmut at ruc.dk>
> *Cc:* Bill Palmer <bill.palmer at newcastle.edu.au>; Bohnemeyer, Juergen <
> jb77 at buffalo.edu>; Heath Jeffrey <schweinehaxen at hotmail.com>;
> lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> *Emne:* Re: [Lingtyp] Temporal features?
>
>
>
> Hi Hartmut,
>
> It might be true that New Yorkers (talking about Manhattan) would say
> “uptown” and “downtown” rather than “north” and “south”, and we say
> “upstate” for the part of the state on the mainland north of the Bronx, but
> the sense of “up” meaning ‘north’ and “down” meaning ‘south’ is quite
> strong. Outside Manhattan in Long Island there is also “out” for ‘east”
> (e.g. "go out to East Hampton", from anywhere west of there, which is on
> the eastern end of the island, but "down to Jones Beach", if you are on the
> northern part of Long Island—Jones beach can be “out” if you are to the
> west of it), and “in” for west towards Manhattan. Even though I left NY 38
> years ago, I still need to orient myself on a N/S axis when I go to a new
> city. I found Manila particularly difficult in this regard, as north is to
> the right on the standard maps, i.e. not ‘up’, and no one talks in
> geocentric terms or up/down.
>
>
>
> Randy
>
> -----
>
> *Randy J. LaPolla, PhD FAHA* （羅仁地）
>
> Professor of Linguistics, with a curtesy appointment in Chinese, School of
> Humanities
>
> Nanyang Technological University
>
> HSS-03-45, 14 Nanyang Drive | Singapore 637332
>
> http://randylapolla.net/
>
> Most recent book:
>
>
> https://www.routledge.com/The-Sino-Tibetan-Languages-2nd-Edition/LaPolla-Thurgood/p/book/9781138783324
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 1 Oct 2018, at 4:31 PM, Hartmut Haberland <hartmut at ruc.dk> wrote:
>
>
>
> @Bill and Juergen: regular grid patterns of cities in Europe (where there
> exist at all) are rarely aligned N/S and E/W as on Manhattan. In Mannheim,
> one of the few German cities with a fairly large grid pattern, the
> orientation is almost exactly NW/SE and NE/SW, while in the small part of
> the center of Belfast that has a grid, it is N/S and E/W. One could test
> empirically if that has an effect on the way people give directions. On the
> other hand, I guess people on Manhattan actually say 'head uptown', not
> 'head North'.
>
>
>
> *Hartmut Haberland*
> Professor emeritus
>
> [image: Billede fjernet af afsender. RUC]
>
> *Roskilde University*
> Department of Communication and Arts
>
> Universitetsvej 1
> DK-4000 Roskilde
> Telephone: +45 46742841
>
> -----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
> Fra: Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> På vegne af Bill
> Palmer
> Sendt: 1. oktober 2018 03:42
> Til: Bohnemeyer, Juergen <jb77 at buffalo.edu>; Heath Jeffrey <
> schweinehaxen at hotmail.com>
> Cc: lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> Emne: Re: [Lingtyp] Temporal features?
>
>
>
> Hi Jeffrey
>
>
>
> On the issue of egocentric spatial strategies and urban environments, I
> agree with Juergen's suspicion that habituation to urban route-finding
> prompts an increased use of egocentric strategies, and the picture
> regarding this is quite complicated. Some studies have found a preference
> for egocentric strategies in urban communities vs absolute or geocentric
> strategies in rural communities in the same language group (such as
> Pederson's work on Tamil, e.g. 2006, and Mishra et al's work on Hindi,
> 2003). In my Atoll Space Group (e.g. Palmer et al 2017), we found a direct
> correlation with urban density and egocentric preference. However, speakers
> in all environments used both egocentric and geocentric strategies. The
> variation lay in proportion of various strategies employed in different
> environment. In Dhivehi (Maldives) in densely populated Male egocentric
> strategies were overwhelmingly preferred. In somewhat less urban Addu the
> preference was not as strong. In low density Laamu (across several
> locations) the average was about equal preference for egocentric and
> geocentric strategies. But density alone is not the only factor. In our
> Marshallese study, the Marshallese community in Springdale Arkansas shows
> an overwhelming preference for egocentric strategies, the opposite of what
> we found in the Marshall Islands itself. However Springdale is not
> particularly high density - more suburban than high density urban, and not
> much more high density than some of the Marshall Island locations. The
> urbanness factor there seems to be compounded by the unavailability of
> anchoring features for the usually high frequency Marshallese references to
> topographic features of the atolls, such as the lagoon.
>
>
>
> Urban configuration on a regular grid, as you suggest, is a factor, but
> actually a regular grid seems to have a somewhat lesser effect in promoting
> egocentric strategies than more irregular (and traditional) urban
> configurations. So, in cities with a very regular grid pattern, absolute
> strategies are more available. E.g. in New York terms such as uptown and
> downtown operate in absolute Frame of Reference (e.g. "go over to 7th then
> head uptown" rather than "go over to 7th and turn left"). In my view it's
> the irregularity of urban environments as well as reduced access to
> orienting factors in the environment that prompts increased use of
> egocentric spatial strategies. The difficulty in maintaining orientation in
> that kind of  environment seems to override what increasingly seems to be a
> cognitively more basic spatial anchoring in the physical environment, in
> line with Juergen's work on a pan-simian bias for absolute strategies and
> other work showing absolute cognitive strategies in great apes, and
> Juergen's work on mismatches between absolute and relative strategies in
> linguistic and non-linguistic behaviour, which always seem to be in the
> direction of relative in language and absolute in non-linguistic behaviour,
> and not the other way around.
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
> Bill
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> On Behalf Of
> Bohnemeyer, Juergen
>
> Sent: Monday, 1 October 2018 9:45 AM
>
> To: Heath Jeffrey <schweinehaxen at hotmail.com>
>
> Cc: lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
>
> Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] Temporal features?
>
>
>
> Jeffrey — The primary domain of egocentric frames are
> front/back/left/right terms. Such terms can be used both egocentrically and
> allocentrically (intrinsically). However, when it comes to ‘left’ and
> ‘right’ in particular, we’ve generally found that if a language bothers to
> extend them beyond the human body at all, they tend to be more frequently
> used egocentrically (and specifically relatively, i.e., transposing them
> from the body of an observer onto some reference entity) than intrinsically.
>
>
>
>
> There are probably a number of factors that make urbanization an
> egocentrism booster. I’ve been suspecting for a while that habituation to
> navigating urban roadways is one such factor, as you suggest. However, not
> everybody shares my intuition. Another is probably reduced accessibility of
> environmental cues in large urban settlements.
>
>
>
> As to your second point, we tried to compare these lexicalization
> strategies more systematically in the old Cut&Break project at MPI
> Nijmegen. See the special issue with case studies that came out in
> Cognitive Linguistics in 2007. One very interesting paper in the bunch that
> I think speaks to your point is Steve Levinson’s. He argued that Yélî Dnye,
> the language of Rossel Island in the Louisiade Archipelago off the eastern
> tip of PNG, lacks European-style cutting verbs. Instead of by instrument,
> the respective actions are lexicalized by physical properties of the object
> being acted on. He suggested that this might be explained with reference to
> the absence of metal tools in Rossel culture prior to European contact.
>
>
>
> Best — Juergen
>
>
>
> > On Sep 30, 2018, at 6:22 PM, Heath Jeffrey <schweinehaxen at hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
>
> > Juergen, if by egocentric you refer mainly to left/right as directions
> (turn left at the third set of lights), the question I have is to what
> extent it correlates with large-scale urban configurations based on
> rectangular grids (cf. your "population density").
>
> >
>
> > Another cultural-linguistic distinction worthy of consideration is the
> extent to which unmarked, basic action verbs (in domains like 'eat/drink',
> 'cut/break', 'transport/carry', 'hold', 'harvest') are lexicalized on the
> basis of function/result as in SAE or on the basis of manner/process, as
> systematically in Dogon languages. It is difficult to study this
> typologically since dictionaries don't contain the relevant information. I
> cannot even determine it from my own older dictionaries of non-Dogon
> languages. There are a number of cross-linguistic surveys of verbs in
> specific domains ('cut/break', 'give', 'eat/drink'), mostly limited to a
> few case studies, but none to my knowledge covers ALL action verbs in the
> languages compared.
>
> >
>
> > For example, if a specific event of 'carry' has been witnessed and is
> being reported, is it obligatory to specify the manner (e.g. with lexial
> verbs meaning 'carry on head' vs. 'carry on back') or can one use a general
> term 'carry' that doesn't specify manner? Likewise for the other
> action-verb domains.
>
> >
>
> > It is also difficult to interpret crosslinguistic differences on this
> point even when one has determined the facts. Are these differences in
> culturally favored epistemic stance? One can directly observe and report
> the manner, but specifying the purpose requires interpretation, intruding
> into others' minds, and the result may not be observable, as with 'eat'. Or
> do they reflect tighter real-world correlations between manner/process and
> function/result in small-scale societies as opposed to others (with more
> specialized and opaque occupations)?
>
> >
>
> > We did a paper on this (Dogon vs. English representing SAE) but it
> hasn't resonated. Heath & McPherson, Cognitive set and lexicalization
> strategy in Dogon action verbs, Anthropological Linguistics 51(1): 38-63
> (2009).
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > From: Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> on behalf of
>
> > Bohnemeyer, Juergen <jb77 at buffalo.edu>
>
> > Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2018 2:39 PM
>
> > To: Joo Ian; lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
>
> > Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] Temporal features?
>
> >
>
> > Dear Ian — Thanks for a great question! Are certain properties of
> individual languages typologically more prevalent at certain time periods
> than others? As far as I’m aware, all empirical research, and even
> “theorizing” (hypothesizing, really), that has intersected with this
> question has done so solely with a simpler version of it: Are certain
> properties of individual languages typologically more or less prevalent now
> than they were at earlier stages of the cultural evolution of human
> language?
>
> >
>
> > In this version, what is being compared is the distribution of the
> property in question as we can observe it now against the (hypothesized or
> reconstructed) distribution at some point in time that is substantially
> closer to the temporal origin point(s) of the currently extant languages
> (and I consider neither the question whether there is one single such
> origin point nor the one as to what members of the hominid lineage can
> rightfully be considered speakers of the earliest languages in the sense of
> language as we know it settled). I suspect we lack sufficient data to
> address the broader question you raised beyond this narrower version,
> comparing arbitrary points in time.
>
> >
>
> > Now, the narrower question has drawn particularly intense attention in
> phonology over the past 20 or so years. In addition to the literature Eitan
> Grossman mentioned, let me point to at least three strands of research:
>
> >
>
> > * Dediu & Ladd’s (2007) work on a possible genetic marker
>
> > codistributed with tone languages and the follow up studies it
>
> > generated;
>
> >
>
> > * The debate over the prehistory of clicks (Tishkoff et al 2007; Sands
>
> > & Güldermann 2009, Dimmendaal 2011; inter alia);
>
> >
>
> > * Various attempts at temporally projecting the evolution of phoneme
> inventories/diversity, including Atkinson 2011 and Perreault & Matthews
> 2012.
>
> >
>
> > Now, outside phonology, I wanted to mention an area of study that some
> consider part of the lexicon, others part of the grammar, and that in my
> view belongs to neither (it doesn’t form part of the grammar in the narrow
> sense of a combinatorial system), but rather to practices of language use:
> spatial referencing systems. Largely still unpublished work by my
> collaborators and myself in the second MesoSpace project (NSF BCS-1053123)
> suggests that the preference for egocentric reference frames in small-scale
> space is restricted to European languages and a few other languages spoken
> in globalized post-industrial societies, including Japanese and Mandarin.
>
> >
>
> > At the same time, our own work and a number of earlier small-scale
> studies have uncovered a number of populations that exhibit apparent
> mismatches between their behavior in verbal and in nonverbal tasks, with
> the former suggesting either unrestricted use of frame types or a
> preference for intrinsic frames, while the latter point in most cases
> toward a geocentrism bias. We think that this is line with the hypothesis
> of an innate geocentrism bias that in some populations gets overridden by a
> culturally (including notably linguistically) transmitted preference for
> egocentric frames. The hypothesis of the innate geocentrism bias and the
> cultural override was first proposed by Haun et al (2006) on the basis of
> research with non-human primates and human infants. Our typological
> evidence seems to support this idea.
>
> >
>
> > In addition, our regression models show that egocentrism is boosted
> independently by literacy and population density, whereas geocentrism is
> boosted by the availability of salient typological landmarks, the latter in
> line with Palmer et al (2017). All this evidence is consistent with an
> evolutionary scenario under which human populations would have until
> perhaps just a few millennia ago made no more than marginal use of
> egocentric frames (especially the subtype of egocentric frames Levinson
> calls ‘relative’) in both discourse and nonverbal cognition. Egocentrism
> would have developed and spread as a cultural adaptation once small-scale
> space became more clearly separated from geographic space as a domain, with
> speech, gesture, and other observable behaviors acting as transmission
> systems. At the same time, established practices of geocentrism within a
> community would counteract the spread of egocentrism (so it would be quite
> misleading to think of geocentric populations as less advanced compared to
> egocentric ones; especially as egocentric and geocentric strategies each
> have their strengths and weaknesses).
>
> >
>
> > Best — Juergen (apologies for the long response!)
>
> >
>
> > Atkinson, Q. D. (2011). Phonemic diversity supports a serial founder
> effect model of language expansion from Africa. Science 332: 346–349.
>
> >
>
> > Dediu, D., & Ladd, D. R. (2007). Linguistic tone is related to the
> population frequency of the adaptive haplogroups of two brain size genes,
> ASPM and Microcephalin. PNAS, 104, 10944-10949.
>
> >
>
> > Dimmendaal, Gerrit J. 2011. Historical linguistics and the comparative
> study of African languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
>
> >
>
> > Haun, D. B. M., C. Rapold, J. Call, G. Janzen, & S. C. Levinson. (2006).
> Cognitive cladistics and cultural override in hominid spatial cognition.
> PNAS 103: 17568–17573.
>
> >
>
> > Palmer, B., Lum, J., Schlossberg, J., et al. (2017). How does the
> environment shape spatial language? Evidence for sociotopography .
> Linguistic Typology, 21(3), pp. 457-491.
>
> >
>
> > Perreault, C., & Mathew, S. (2012). Dating the Origin of Language
>
> > Using Phonemic Diversity. PLoS ONE, 7(4),
>
> > e35289.https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%
>
> > 2Fdoi.org <http://2fdoi.org/>
> %2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0035289&data=02%7C01%7C%7C2a9b0
>
> > fccebf84f286ac808d627043bac%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0
>
> > %7C636739296461014684&sdata=M0Gp15OddozVtDfW7q8folu0jis9ZbFGsU40EP
>
> > CdQKQ%3D&reserved=0
>
> >
>
> > Sands, Bonny & Tom Güldermann. 2009. What click languages can and can’t
> tell about language origins. In The cradle of language, ed. by Rudolf Botha
> & Chris Knight, 204-218. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
>
> >
>
> > Tishkoff, Sarah A., Mary Katherine Gonder, Brenna M. Henn, Holly
>
> > Mortensen, Alec Knight, Christopher Gignoux, Neil Fernandopulle,
>
> > Godfrey Lema, Thomas B. Nyambo, Uma Ramakrishnan, Floyd A. Reed,
>
> > Joanna L. Mountain; History of Click-Speaking Populations of Africa
>
> > Inferred from mtDNA and Y Chromosome Genetic Variation, Molecular
>
> > Biology and Evolution, Volume 24, Issue 10, 1 October 2007, Pages
>
> > 2180–2195,
>
> > https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdoi.
>
> > org%2F10.1093%2Fmolbev%2Fmsm155&data=02%7C01%7C%7C2a9b0fccebf84f28
>
> > 6ac808d627043bac%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C63673929
>
> > 6461014684&sdata=Kfss2lUYCQLV74WSt13y02OQI9hBLCZxL178DXG1w8w%3D&am
>
> > p;reserved=0
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > > On Sep 30, 2018, at 12:04 AM, Joo Ian <ian.joo at outlook.com> wrote:
>
> > >
>
> > > Dear all,
>
> > >
>
> > > We all know that languages spoken in a certain area (for example,
> Mainland Southeast Asia) tend to share areal features. But what about time?
> Do languages spoken at a certain time period, such as say, Bronze Age,
> share a certain feature distinct from the features of languages spoken
> during, say, Iron Age?
>
> > > If so, then would a sample of languages spoken only at a certain time
> period (such as the 21st century) also be a temporally biased sample,
> similar to how a sample of languages spoken only in Europe would be an
> areally biased sample?
>
> > > In order to create a trully non-biased sample of languages, is it also
> necessary to avoid temporal bias?
>
> > >
>
> > > I can think of several “temporal features”:
>
> > >
>
> > >        • Vocabulary. Languages spoken before the 20th century would
> not have any words referring to “computer.” Bronze Age languages would have
> no words related to iron.
>
> > >        • Metaphors. Some have argued that some metaphors, such as TIME
> IS MONEY, arose only via industrialization (although I have argued against
> this, claiming that it has also existed in Classical Chinese)
>
> > >        • Gender-bias. Most languages we speak today are biased towards
> male, for example the generic pronoun being the masculine singular pronoun.
> But in the 21st century, where we strive for gender equality, we see that
> there are conscious changes being made to fix this gender-bias.
>
> > >
>
> > > But in terms of syntax, morphology, phonology, etc. are there specific
> temporal features?
>
> > > I would appreciate any insights on this issue.
>
> > >
>
> > > From Hong Kong,
>
> > > Ian Joo
>
> > > https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fian
>
> > > joo.academia.edu&data=02%7C01%7C%7C2a9b0fccebf84f286ac808d627043
>
> > > bac%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636739296461014684&
>
> > > amp;sdata=7WGdKTc5tsar2ujfUnWuGNHlclTzCREPXMCSat7PYl0%3D&reserve
>
> > > d=0 _______________________________________________
>
> > > Lingtyp mailing list
>
> > > Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
>
> > > https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flis
>
> > > tserv.linguistlist.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Flingtyp&data=02%7C
>
> > > 01%7C%7C2a9b0fccebf84f286ac808d627043bac%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaa
>
> > > aaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636739296461014684&sdata=%2FC4p9DtfrtaN0xD8WmS
>
> > > Nr53Pj6ntyuPLyYJAnsUMDmI%3D&reserved=0
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > --
>
> > Juergen Bohnemeyer, Professor and Director of Graduate Studies
>
> > Department of Linguistics and Center for Cognitive Science University
>
> > at Buffalo
>
> >
>
> > Office: 642 Baldy Hall, UB North Campus * Mailing address: 609 Baldy
>
> > Hall, Buffalo, NY 14260
>
> > Phone: (716) 645 0127
>
> > Fax: (716) 645 3825 * Email: jb77 at buffalo.edu * Web:
>
> > https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http:%2F%2Fwww.acs
>
> > u.buffalo.edu%2F~jb77%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C2a9b0fccebf84f286ac808d
>
> > 627043bac%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636739296461014
>
> > 684&sdata=mnFrO5fm656S1aLvMCsasPol%2F54mDKm8HROAXp8xnLk%3D&res
>
> > erved=0
>
> >
>
> > Office hours Mo 3:30-4:30 / F 2:00-3:00
>
> >
>
> > There’s A Crack In Everything - That’s How The Light Gets In (Leonard
>
> > Cohen)
>
> >
>
> > _______________________________________________
>
> > Lingtyp mailing list
>
> > Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
>
> > https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists
>
> > erv.linguistlist.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Flingtyp&data=02%7C01%7
>
> > C%7C2a9b0fccebf84f286ac808d627043bac%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaa
>
> > a%7C1%7C0%7C636739296461014684&sdata=%2FC4p9DtfrtaN0xD8WmSNr53Pj6n
>
> > tyuPLyYJAnsUMDmI%3D&reserved=0
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Juergen Bohnemeyer, Professor and Director of Graduate Studies Department
> of Linguistics and Center for Cognitive Science University at Buffalo
>
>
>
> Office: 642 Baldy Hall, UB North Campus * Mailing address: 609 Baldy Hall,
> Buffalo, NY 14260
>
> Phone: (716) 645 0127
>
> Fax: (716) 645 3825 * Email: jb77 at buffalo.edu * Web:
> http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~jb77/
>
>
>
> Office hours Mo 3:30-4:30 / F 2:00-3:00
>
>
>
> There’s A Crack In Everything - That’s How The Light Gets In (Leonard
> Cohen)
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Lingtyp mailing list
>
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
>
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Lingtyp mailing list
>
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
>
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
>

-- 
Dr Michael W Morgan
mwm || *U*C> || mike || माईक || માઈક || মাঈক || மாஈக ||  مایک ||мика ||
戊流岸マイク
sign language linguist / linguistic typologist / Deaf education consultant
"Have language, will travel"
=====================================
"People who are always looking down at the bottom line will always fail to
see the stars"
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20181003/d5e1b475/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 390 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20181003/d5e1b475/attachment.jpg>