6.425 Qs: Turn measurement, Chinese grammar, Slang and rock music

[The Linguist List]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List:  Vol-6-425. Fri 24 Mar 1995. ISSN: 1068-4875. Lines: 147
 
Subject: 6.425 Qs: Turn measurement, Chinese grammar, Slang and rock music
 
Moderators: Anthony Rodrigues Aristar: Texas A&M U. <aristar at tam2000.tamu.edu>
            Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan U. <hdry at emunix.emich.edu>
 
Asst. Editors: Ron Reck <rreck at emunix.emich.edu>
               Ann Dizdar <dizdar at tam2000.tamu.edu>
               Ljuba Veselinova <lveselin at emunix.emich.edu>
               Annemarie Valdez <avaldez at emunix.emich.edu>
 
                           REMINDER
[We'd like to remind readers that the responses to queries are usually
best posted to the individual asking the question. That individual is
then  strongly encouraged to post a summary to the list.   This policy was
instituted to help control the huge volume of mail on LINGUIST; so we
would appreciate your cooperating with it whenever it seems appropriate.]
 
-------------------------Directory-------------------------------------
 
1)
Date:          Wed, 22 Mar 1995 12:44:14 GMT+0200
From: "MS SA HUNT" (LISH at warthog.ru.ac.za)
Subject:       TURN MEASUREMENT
 
2)
Date:         Wed, 22 Mar 95 21:55:09 SST
From: David Gil (ELLGILD%NUSVM.bitnet at CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU)
Subject:      QUERY: CHINESE GRAMMATICAL MARKERS
 
3)
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 1995 12:12:13 -0500
From: CAROZA at aol.com
Subject: Inquiry re: slang and rock music
 
-------------------------Messages--------------------------------------
1)
Date:          Wed, 22 Mar 1995 12:44:14 GMT+0200
From: "MS SA HUNT" (LISH at warthog.ru.ac.za)
Subject:       TURN MEASUREMENT
 
Dear Linguists
This is a desperate plea for information regarding software which
enables one to time turn-taking in natural conversation.  I have
followed up a number of references to such devices in the literature
but to no avail!  What I need is something which will time
(more accurately than Me plus Stopwatch) turns, silence between
turns, and, if possible, overlaps.
Anyone who knows of something which could be persuaded to do this for
me, please let me know as this is becoming rather urgent.
 
 
 
Sally Hunt
Linguistics Department
Rhodes University
Grahamstown 6140
South Africa
e-mail: lish at warthog.ru.ac.za
Phone: +27 - 461 - 318105/6 (W)
Fax: +27 - 461 - 25049
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
2)
Date:         Wed, 22 Mar 95 21:55:09 SST
From: David Gil (ELLGILD%NUSVM.bitnet at CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU)
Subject:      QUERY: CHINESE GRAMMATICAL MARKERS
 
 
I'm interested in any information regarding the diachronic
development of the following grammatical markers in various
Chinese languages (apologies for the email-mutilated
transcriptions):
 
(1) Mandarin:
    [de]  (the "genitive"/"relative" marker)
(2) Mandarin:
    [ge]  (the general numeral classifier)
(3) Shanghainese:
    [ge]  (the "genitive"/"relative" marker)
(4) Hokkien:
    [e]   (a) (the "genitive"/"relative" marker)
          (b) (the general numeral classifier)
(5) Teochew:
    [kai] (a) (the "genitive"/"relative" marker)
          (b) (the general numeral classifier)
(6) Cantonese:
    [ge]  (the "genitive"/"relative" marker)
    [go]  (the general numeral classifier)
    [dik] (the ligature)
 
More specifically:
 
QUESTION 1:  Which of the above markers are historically /
etymologically related to which others, ie. deriving from a
diachronically reconstructable common source?  (eg. are
Mandarin [de] and Cantonese [dik] diachronically related?,
etc. etc.)
 
QUESTION 2:  (Specific to Hokkien and Teochew)  Most native
speakers of Hokkien and Teochew, who are also speakers of
Mandarin, are of the opinion that there are two distinct
markers exhibiting accidental homophony:  a
"genitive"/"relative" [e]/[kai] corresponding to Mandarin
[de], and a "classifier" [e]/[kai] corresponding to
Mandarin [ge].  QUESTION 2A: Is it demonstrably the case
that [e] and [kai] are the respective products of DIACHRONIC
coalescence of distinct forms at some earlier stage of the
language?  QUESTION 2B: Are there any valid SYNCHRONIC
arguments for positing two distinct lexical items, ie. two
[e]'s in Hokkien, and two [kai]'s in Teochew?  (I consider
the choice of characters conventionally used to represent
these markers as irrelevant.)
 
Note:  I am a general linguist, not a Sinologist, and I
don't read or speak Chinese.  I would greatly appreciate
either your own views on the above questions, or references
to published works addressing these questions.  However, if
the references happen to be in Chinese, I would be
extremely grateful if you could provide a synopsis of their
contents.
 
Thanks,
 
David Gil
National University of Singapore
ellgild at nusvm.bitnet
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
3)
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 1995 12:12:13 -0500
From: CAROZA at aol.com
Subject: Inquiry re: slang and rock music
 
I am working on a project where I need to explore the relationship between
rock & roll music and current slang.  Any suggestions on previous studies or
books or any contributions would be greatly appreciated.  I will post a
summary and E-mail directly to anyone who requests a follow up.
 
Thank you
 
Carolyn Chriss
Caroza at aol.com
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-6-425.