16.1627, Qs: Negation Systems; Referential Competence

[LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List: Vol-16-1627. Sat May 21 2005. ISSN: 1068 - 4875.

Subject: 16.1627, Qs: Negation Systems; Referential Competence

Moderators: Anthony Aristar, Wayne State U <aristar at linguistlist.org>
            Helen Aristar-Dry, Eastern Michigan U <hdry at linguistlist.org>
 
Reviews (reviews at linguistlist.org) 
        Sheila Dooley, U of Arizona  
        Terry Langendoen, U of Arizona  

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org/

The LINGUIST List is funded by Eastern Michigan University, Wayne
State University, and donations from subscribers and publishers.

Editor for this issue: Naomi Fox <fox at linguistlist.org>
================================================================  

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.

In addition to posting a summary, we'd like to remind people that it
is usually a good idea to personally thank those individuals who have
taken the trouble to respond to the query.

To post to LINGUIST, use our convenient web form at
http://linguistlist.org/LL/posttolinguist.html.


===========================Directory==============================  

1)
Date: 20-May-2005
From: Claire Lampp < lampp at email.unc.edu >
Subject: Negation Systems 

2)
Date: 21-May-2005
From: José Luis González Escribano < scribby at telecable.es >
Subject: Referential Competence 

	
-------------------------Message 1 ---------------------------------- 
Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 16:56:15
From: Claire Lampp < lampp at email.unc.edu >
Subject: Negation Systems 
 

Dear Linguists,

I am a graduate student working on a master's thesis dealing with the
development of systems of negation.  More specifically, I am looking at the
three negators in Hindi.  Bhatia (1995) has classified these as ''mat''
(non-honorific imperative), ''na'' (subjunctive, honorific, imperative,
conditional, participial and gerundive phrases), and ''nahi?:'' (elsewhere).
 Thus far most of the research I am aware of has focused on the formal
split in their development.  I am looking for information on other
languages with multiple negators whose use is divided along similar
functional lines. Information on the historical development of such systems
would be especially welcome.  Thank you for your help. 

Linguistic Field(s): General Linguistics
                     Genetic Classification
                     Historical Linguistics
                     Language Description
                     Typology

Subject Language(s): Hindi (HND)



	
-------------------------Message 2 ---------------------------------- 
Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 16:56:18
From: José Luis González Escribano < scribby at telecable.es >
Subject: Referential Competence 

	

Dear colleagues,

I am interested in exploring in some depth the referential competence of
typical educated native speakers. The ultimate source of that interest, of
course, is Putnam's well-known story about the division of linguistic labour and
subsequent literature (Fodor on elms, etc.). After taking all that more or less
for granted for many years, it suddenly dawned on me that I had never seen
empirical confirmation of the extent to which use of core
vocabulary is expert-dependent, and that, in case such a study really does
not exist, it might well be worth undertaking! I have tried to find
psycholinguistic literature on the specific topic of mature speakers'
referential competence, but without much success so far, so I am tempted to
believe that perhaps nobody has taken the trouble to examine Putnam's claim
in detail. Of course, my more sensible half tells me that that just can't be
true, so here is my query to you all:

Does anybody know of any (preferably experimental) empirical work in which
Putnam's classic claim is really subjected to careful scrutiny?

Any information, or help, in any guise, I receive from you on this matter
will be much appreciated and explicitly acknowledged in any future work on
the topic. I will also post a summary to the list if the number and quality
of the replies justifies it.

Best regards

JLG Escribano
Universidad de Oviedo
scribby at telecable.es
http://www.telecable.es/personales/escri 

Linguistic Field(s): Linguistic Theories
                     Psycholinguistics




 



-----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-16-1627