[Lingtyp] grammaticalized v grammaticized

[Dan I. SLOBIN]

Hmm...I never thought of that parameter, but can certainly sympathize with
it.  I wonder how many other linguistic terms are tongue-twisters
for non-native speakers (including terms from other languages that may be
hard for English-speakers, of course).  What about, for example,
defamiliarization, anacoluthon, switch reference, zeugma, inalienable,
coindexed, exclusivity, haplology, hypotaxis, irrealis, scrambling,
theta, tmesis, reflexivity, parallelism, pleonastic, expletive,
exclusivity...  It would be pretty hard to come up with linguistic terms
that could
be easily pronounced in any language, like the famous invention of
"Kodak."  I'm afraid we're stuck with what we've got.

Dan :)

On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 9:12 AM Östen Dahl <oesten at ling.su.se> wrote:

> Dan Slobin said: “Like Joan Bybee, I opted for *grammaticization* for its
> economy and elegance”. The only thing I have against *grammaticization *is
> that in spite of its elegance, it can be a tongue twister for a non-native
> speaker like me, with three different fricatives and two different
> diphthongs in a row at the end.
>
> Btw, I remember that Microsoft Word used to tell you: “Avoid jargon words
> such as *grammatic**al**ization**”.*
>
>    - östen
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> *On Behalf Of
> *MM Jocelyne Fernandez
> *Sent:* Monday, 10 June 2019 16:50
> *To:* Aimée Lahaussois <aimee.lahaussois at cnrs.fr>; Dan I. SLOBIN <
> slobin at berkeley.edu>
> *Cc:* lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Lingtyp] grammaticalized v grammaticized
>
>
>
> This "equipping" was also actually implied in my use of the term
> "grammaticisation"– and I did collaborate with Auroux while being both
> members of the CNRS National Commission 30 years ago, although he may have
> preferred a still shorter form of the word!
>
> Any way, not a mere whim of field linguists, the difference between
> "grammati(ci)sation" and "grammaticalisation" remains an essential one:
> the creation of grammar tools is only one of the explaining factors for the
> typological evolution of a language, since it is not automatically
> validated by language users.
>
> M.M.Jocelyne Fernandez-Vest
>
> Le 10/06/2019 à 08:42, Aimée Lahaussois a écrit :
>
> And for yet another usage of ‘grammatisation’: historians of linguistics
> use the term for the process of ‘equipping’ languages with tools such as
> grammars or dictionaries.  Sylvain Auroux was a big promoter of the
> concept.
>
>
>
> https://www.persee.fr/doc/hel_0247-8897_1995_num_11_1_3396
>
>
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Aimée
>
>
>
>
>
> On Jun 10, 2019, at 5:00 AM, Dan I. SLOBIN <slobin at berkeley.edu> wrote:
>
>
>
> Just to muddy the waters a bit further, in the two volumes emerging from
> the 1988 Oregon conference (Traugott & Heine, 1991),
>
> Jim Matisoff went even further in his paper, "Areal and Universal
> Dimensions of Grammatization in Lahu (Matissof, 1991: 381):
>
> "The term *grammaticalization*, despite its heptasyllabic cacophony (the
> more concise *grammaticization*, or even* grammatization*
>
> would be preferable) represents one of the most important phenomena in
> diachronic linguistics.  Grammat(ic[al])ization is
>
> inherently a diachronic concept."
>
>
>
> Like Joan Bybee, I opted for * grammaticization* for its economy and
> elegance, as I saw it; I continue to use that form, avoiding
>
> the nuances that have emerged since between the erstwhile synonyms.
>
>
>
> I appreciate Bernhard's placing of the emerging distinction between
> *grammaticalization* and *grammaticization* in the context of
>
> a general psycholinguistic process, citing Bréal and Eve Clark who
> elaborated the point I made in an earlier posting.
>
>
>
> The editors of the Oregon conference volume accepted all three variants as
> titles of individual papers.
>
>
>
> Dan
>
>
>
> Elizabeth Closs Traugott & Bernd Heine (Eds.) (1991). *Approaches to
> grammaticalization.  *Vol. 1: *Focus on theoretical and*
>
> *methodological issues. *Vol. 2: *Focus on types of grammatical markers.
> *Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
>
>
>
> James A. Matisoff (1991). Areal and universal dimensions of grammatization
> in Lahu.  *Ibid., *383-454.
>
>
>
>
>
> Aimée Lahaussois
> Histoire des théories linguistiques
> CNRS & Université Paris Diderot
> 01 57 27 57 78
>
> http://htl.linguist.univ-paris-diderot.fr/laboratoire/membres/lahaussois-en
>
> --
> Prof. Marie-Madeleine Jocelyne FERNANDEZ-VEST
>
> CNRS & Université Sorbonne Nouvelle
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
>


-- 

*<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> *

*Dan I. Slobin *

*Professor Emeritus of Psychology and Linguistics*

*University of California, Berkeley*

*email: slobin at berkeley.edu <slobin at berkeley.edu>*

*address: 2323 Rose St., Berkeley, CA 94708*

*http://ihd.berkeley.edu/members.htm#slobin
<http://ihd.berkeley.edu/members.htm#slobin>*

*<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> *
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20190610/4ad149c2/attachment.htm>