6.1603, Qs: Sound Change, A Nat. Amer. Lang., Stative vs. Active

[The Linguist List]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List:  Vol-6-1603. Sun Nov 12 1995. ISSN: 1068-4875. Lines:  135
 
Subject: 6.1603, Qs: Sound Change, A Nat. Amer. Lang., Stative vs. Active
 
Moderators: Anthony Rodrigues Aristar: Texas A&M U. <aristar at tam2000.tamu.edu>
            Helen Dry: Eastern Michigan U. <hdry at emunix.emich.edu>
 
Associate Editor:  Ljuba Veselinova <lveselin at emunix.emich.edu>
Assistant Editors: Ron Reck <rreck at emunix.emich.edu>
                   Ann Dizdar <dizdar at tam2000.tamu.edu>
                   Annemarie Valdez <avaldez at emunix.emich.edu>
 
Software development: John H. Remmers <remmers at emunix.emich.edu>
 
Editor for this issue: avaldez at emunix.emich.edu (Annemarie Valdez)
                           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:  Sun, 12 Nov 1995 08:17:24 EST
From:  amr at CS.Wayne.EDU (Alexis Manaster Ramer)
Subject:  Query: Possible Sound Change Interactions
 
2)
Date:  Sun, 12 Nov 1995 09:57:40 EST
From:  amr at CS.Wayne.EDU (Alexis Manaster Ramer)
Subject:  A gedankenexperimental query: A Native America Language
 
3)
Date:  Sun, 12 Nov 1995 17:16:33 EST
From:  gfowler at indiana.edu (George Fowler)
Subject:  Diagnostics For Stative vs. Active Participial Constructions
 
---------------------------------Messages------------------------------------
1)
Date:  Sun, 12 Nov 1995 08:17:24 EST
From:  amr at CS.Wayne.EDU (Alexis Manaster Ramer)
Subject:  Query: Possible Sound Change Interactions
 
I am trying to collect cases where two sound changes A and B
interact as follows: we find A in a whole group of dialects or
related languages, and B only in a subset of those, yet where both
A and B apply, B must have applied first.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2)
Date:  Sun, 12 Nov 1995 09:57:40 EST
From:  amr at CS.Wayne.EDU (Alexis Manaster Ramer)
Subject:  A gedankenexperimental query: A Native America Language
 
This may be an unfair query, but I thought it might be a good
experiment anyway: If a Native American language previously unknown
were discovered in some old records of which all we knew were the
following items, would anybody venture a guess as to which language
family it had belonged to:
 
saa-                          1st person
naa-                          2nd person
tee                           this
he'e                          that
het-                          wh-
netxal                        tongue
sax'ay                        arrow
goyan                         tooth
c^eyexeu                      tree
c^eke or s^eke                hand
enayon                        foot
enoc^an or enos^an            nose
(h)ac^e                       eye
wagate                        beard
nathan or nac^an or nas^an    water
koc^ or kos^                  house
tsaal                         testicles
tsool                         excrement
meem                          cheek
salal                         tears
saxan                         rib
taakey                        head
tan                           tail
teyey                         liver
xaa                           grease
x'aak                         head hair
kala                          mouth
ekwan                         dog
(If anybody is interested in taking up this challenge, I am
willing to provide a few more forms).
 
Alexis MR
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3)
Date:  Sun, 12 Nov 1995 17:16:33 EST
From:  gfowler at indiana.edu (George Fowler)
Subject:  Diagnostics For Stative vs. Active Participial Constructions
 
Greetings!
     A student and I are attempting to compile a list of stative/active
diagnostics for participial constructions, for example, to distinguish
between such pairs of sentences are:
 
stative:  The window was broken and the rain could get in.
 
active:   The window was broken by the boy at 3:15.
 
We are aware of a certain number of such diagnostics, such as the presence
of an agent (active) vs. absence of an agent (stative). However, we are
disappointed by the results we get when we apply the ones we have to
concrete material; very often we are still undecided which way to classify
a particular contextual example, and we wind up relying upon pure intuition
(not very scientific).
     We would greatly appreciate any suggestions as to literature which
contributes toward an inventory of such diagnostic tests. Our particular
problem involves Russian past passive participles with or without an
auxiliary; we have a large number of examples from literary and
non-literary texts, with full contexts. But tests which work in other
languages are likely to have analogues in Russian, so we welcome references
which investigate other languages as well.
     Thanks! We'll post a summary if the response justifies it.
     George Fowler
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
George Fowler                    [Email]  gfowler at indiana.edu
Dept. of Slavic Languages        [Home]   1-317-726-1482  **Try here first**
Ballantine 502                   [Dept]   1-812-855-9906/-2624/-2608
Indiana University               [Office] 1-812-855-2829
Bloomington, IN  47405  USA      [Fax]    1-812-855-2107
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-6-1603.