26.3043, Review: Historical Ling; Morphology; Text/Corpus Ling; Typology: Bauer, Lieber, Plag (2013)

[The LINGUIST List via LINGUIST]

LINGUIST List: Vol-26-3043. Thu Jun 25 2015. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 26.3043, Review: Historical Ling; Morphology; Text/Corpus Ling; Typology: Bauer, Lieber, Plag (2013)

Moderators: linguist at linguistlist.org (Damir Cavar, Malgorzata E. Cavar)
Reviews: reviews at linguistlist.org (Anthony Aristar, Helen Aristar-Dry, Sara Couture)
Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

*****************    LINGUIST List Support    *****************
Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:
              http://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/

Editor for this issue: Sara  Couture <sara at linguistlist.org>
================================================================


Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2015 14:57:13
From: Isabel Oltra-Massuet [isabel.oltra at urv.cat]
Subject: The Oxford Reference Guide to English Morphology

 
Discuss this message:
http://linguistlist.org/pubs/reviews/get-review.cfm?subid=30862558


Book announced at http://linguistlist.org/issues/24/24-3548.html

AUTHOR: Laurie  Bauer
AUTHOR: Rochelle  Lieber
AUTHOR: Ingo  Plag
TITLE: The Oxford Reference Guide to English Morphology
PUBLISHER: Oxford University Press
YEAR: 2013

REVIEWER: Isabel Oltra-Massuet, Rovira i Virgili University

Review's Editor: Helen Aristar-Dry

SUMMARY

The Oxford Reference Guide to English Morphology offers a descriptive and
up-to-date overview of contemporary English morphology based on a large
collection of corpus data. Its main focus lies in describing patterns of
structure and current use in word-formation on the basis of attested examples,
pointing to their productivity and to some of the theoretical problems
associated with it. The volume intends to be a basic resource and reference
book for students and scholars interested in the morphology of English.

The book is divided into six parts. The first part is the introduction; it
encompasses the aims of the book, aspects of terminology, methodology, and
orthography. Parts two to five are mainly descriptive, and deal with
inflection [2], derivation [3], compounding [4], and how morphological
processes interact with each other [5]. The last part has to do with
typological issues as well as some theoretical issues that have been a matter
of longstanding debate in morphological theory. 

Part I – Introduction

Chapter 1 Aims and structures

In this very short chapter, the authors describe their aims, the scope of the
book, and how it is organized. They attempt to provide an overview of English
morphology which is as theory-neutral as possible, even if also theoretically
informed, that tries to combine recent findings in corpus linguistics,
theoretical linguistics, psycholinguistics, and computational linguistics, and
that also pays attention to the different varieties of English. 

Chapter 2 Basic principles: terminology

In this chapter, the authors provide a relatively theory-neutral terminology,
based on uncontroversial definitions of widely accepted terms that are to be
used throughout, which include well-known concepts such as word, word-form,
lexeme, citation form, grammatical word, morphosyntactic word, orthographic
word, phonological word, lexical item, morph, morpheme, allomorph,
competition, blocking, word classes, transposition, headedness, inflection,
derivation, lexicalization, and a few others that are less standard like
extenders, splinter, expletive insertion (which refers to the insertion of
forms like bloody, fucking in the middle of a word), availability,
profitability, or referencing.

Chapter 3 Basic principles: methods

This chapter provides information on the sources of data, methods of
obtaining, treating and analyzing data from the corpora, citing and
interpreting data, and the conventions used.

Chapter 4 Orthography

This chapter is concerned with the way morphology interacts with spelling, for
instance in the orthographic representation of vowel length when this is
affected by a morphological process, e.g. consonant doubling, loss of silent
<e>, in cases of replacement, velar softening, or hyphenation in derived
words, compounds, and phrasal constituents. 

Part II – Inflection

Chapter 5 Verb inflection

This chapter deals with the encoding of morphosyntactic categories in both
lexical and auxiliary verbs.  After distinguishing between lexical and
auxiliary verbs, it considers the verbal paradigm for lexical verbs and
regular vs. irregular verbs. It provides an overview of classifications for
irregular verbs and of the criteria to be taken into account for such a
classification. It further discusses the potential productivity of irregular
patterns on the basis of evidence from verbs showing two or more competing
patterns and experimental studies on nonce words. The chapter continues with
defective paradigms typical of core modals, a short description of the
semantics of modals, and a variety of issues that somehow interact with the
morphology of auxiliary verbs, such as auxiliary clitics, contracted negation,
and to-contraction in forms like ‘want to’ or ‘have to’. They close the
chapter with an appendix of 387 irregular verbs, which includes some notes on
parallel regular forms.

Chapter 6 Adjective and adverb inflection

This chapter deals with the morphological marking of degree in adjectives and
adverbs. After a brief description of the semantics of degree, a brief
distinction between qualitative and relational adjectives, and affixal degree
morphology, it discusses cases of double comparison, irregular cases, and the
factors involved (phonological, morphological, lexicalization, semantic,
syntactic, dialectal) in affixal versus periphrastic degree morphology. The
authors make use of corpus-based studies and attested examples to conclude
that the choice between the analytic and the synthetic comparative is
probabilistic rather than strictly grammatically or lexically determined. 

Chapter 7 Noun inflection

The chapter is concerned with plural marking and possessive marking in nouns.
It describes the orthography and pronunciation of plural marking, as well as
the different types of plural (umlaut, n-plurals, unmarked plurals, foreign
plurals, and plurals of complex lexical items). It briefly deals with the
semantics of the genitive, its spelling, pronunciation, and factors
influencing the choice of genitive ‘s or of (animacy, semantic relationship,
semantic category of the possessively-marked noun, length and processing
constraints, quality of the final segment, etc.).

Chapter 8 Function words: pronouns, determiners, wh-forms, deictics

Chapter 8 is a short chapter dealing with other categories that are subject to
inflection marking. Among them we find personal pronouns, possessives,
reflexives, demonstratives, relative pronouns, what they call compound
determinatives (existential, universal and negative pronouns, i.e. indefinite
pronouns), and deictic pro-forms. They discuss alleged sub-morphemic structure
in these forms.

Part III – Derivation

Chapter 9 Derivation: phonological considerations

The first chapter of this third part provides an overview of phenomena related
to the morphology-phonology interactions in the realm of derivation and the
principles that govern them. It introduces issues that have to do with
allomorphy, such as prosodic restrictions, truncation, syllabification,
(de)gemination, vowel/consonant alternation, or affix allomorphy (partially
summarized in tables). It addresses the segmental relevance of extenders; it
discusses questions of prosody, e.g. auto-stressed affixes, stress-shifting
affixes, stress-preserving affixation; it further introduces the notion of
haplology, and continues with an introduction to those prosodic processes that
manipulate the syllabic structure of the base to create the derivative, namely
clippings, hypocoristics in -ie, and expletive insertion. Finally, it includes
an overview of additional phonological restrictions (stress position, number
of syllables, foot structure) that different suffixes impose on their bases,
and closes with a summary. 

Chapter 10 Derived nouns: event, state, result

This chapter deals with the affixes -ing, -ation, -ment, -al, -ure, -ance and
the process of conversion to nouns denoting events, states, and results. As in
all subsequent chapters dealing with word-formation processes, the description
and classification of these affixes takes into account the productivity of
each individual affix (or process, in the case of conversion), and the type of
affix and base (whether native or non-native). The chapter also discusses a
number of semantic considerations related to the range of readings expressed
by these nominalizations, the kinds of thematic relations expressed by the
affixes, the predictability of nominal semantics, i.e. the relationship
between the semantic class of the base verb and the interpretation of the
derived nominal, and the degree of predictability of the count versus mass
interpretation on the basis of the degree of lexicalization of the derived
nominal. 

Chapter 11 Derived nouns: personal and participant

It is concerned with morphological processes that derive nouns denoting
participants in the event/action/state, be they agents, patients, instruments,
locations, gendered forms. They distinguish between (i) subject-referencing
affixes, i.e. -er, -ant, -an, -ist, -meister, -ster, -nik, -arian (some attach
to V, others to N, and others to other minor categories); (ii)
object-referencing affixes, i.e. -ee; (iii) affixes referring to inhabitants
and languages, i.e. -ite, -ese, -ish, -i; (iv) gender-related affixes, i.e.
-ess, -ette, -trix; and (v) prefixes such as grand-, great-, step-, vice-.
These are semantically described on the basis of the polysemy they exhibit
along basic thematic domains, i.e. agent, experiencer, stimulus, instrument,
patient/theme, goal, location, measure, means. Derivational affixes are
characterized as linked to these thematic domains or being athematic.  Among
the latter we find those nouns denoting inhabitants, followers of a person,
names of languages, biological, chemical, geological terms, feminine gendered
terms, and kinship terms.

Chapter 12 Derived nouns: quality, collective, and other abstracts

This is the third chapter dealing with derived nouns, which includes all those
affixes that form nouns whose interpretation cannot be included in the two
previous chapters. The authors  provide  the formal properties of the affixes
first, i.e. category and type, native or non-native nature of the affix and of
the base, whether they trigger stress shift or allomorphy, whether they induce
an haplology effect, and their productivity, and treat aspects of their
semantics afterwards. They include here (i) -ness and -ity, which prefer
adjectival bases; (ii) -dom, -ship, and -hood, which prefer noun bases, and
typically form abstract nouns; (iii) -ery, -age, -ana, -ia, which prefer
nominal bases and typically form collective nouns; (iv) -ism, which prefers
noun bases and typically forms nouns expressing system of belief, action, or
scientific study; (v) and the suffix -y. They describe their various formal
properties together with aspects of their semantics, partially on the basis of
an analysis of non-standard derivations. 

Chapter 13 Derived verbs

As the authors themselves mention, the derivation of verbs is tackled in
different parts of the book, not just in this chapter. Here, they first
consider a few non-productive unstressed prefixes (a-, be-, for-, en-), and
then concentrate on the typical and very productive verb-forming suffixes
-ize, -ify, -ate, as well as conversion and backformation. The suffixes -ize
and -ify are treated together, as they are semantically similar and seem to
stand in an almost complementary distribution with respect to the phonological
conditions they impose on their bases. They look at the types of bases they
attach to, the presence of extenders, and the various phonological
restrictions and prosodic constraints they are subject to that give rise to
stress shift, stress reduction, allomorphy, and haplology effects. The suffix
-ate, which has a lower degree of productivity than the other two suffixes,
shows a more complex internal structure. Conversion is argued to be a
productive process of verb derivation. In this respect, and due to the
difficulty of establishing neologisms created through conversion, the authors
discuss the procedure they followed in extracting newly coined converted
verbs, showing also that the process applies to a variety of bases. As for the
process of back-formation, they provide a brief discussion on the kinds of
evidence one can find for back-formations, and contribute data that seem to
challenge the well-established definition of backformation as deletion of an
affix in a morphologically complex word, e.g. Bolshevik - bolsh, which they
claim would argue for an analogy analysis. They consider the semantic
contribution of these prefixes and suffixes, provide a table listing the
various paraphrases that -ize and -ify can obtain, discuss the semantic
flexibility of verbs derived by conversion and back-formation, and very
briefly discuss the competition among these verb-deriving processes. 

Chapter 14 Derived adjectives

After providing a table summarizing the formal characteristics of the
different adjective-forming affixes with respect to the category of the base,
status with respect to their etymology, either native or non-native, whether
it triggers stress shift, whether it can attach to a compound base, or whether
it induces allomorphy, these are treated one by one in the following
subsections, together with their productivity. Participial adjectives are here
just mentioned in a short paragraph, and their discussion is deferred up to
chapters 24 and more extensively 25. As in the previous chapters, after
looking at the formal properties of affixes, they turn to semantic aspects of
the affix and the derivative, specifically they examine them with respect to
their argument referencing properties, i.e. whether the derivative is
object-referencing, subject-referencing, event-referencing, or non-argumental.
Adjectives are further studied with respect to their relational or qualitative
nature, and their gradability properties. 

Chapter 15 Derived adverbs

The chapter begins with the old debate on the categorial status of adverbs
with respect to adjectives, and whether they belong to the same category or
not. The authors remain agnostic in this respect, and so the reason to have a
separate chapter on derived adverbs is practical rather than theoretical. The
chapter continues with an overview of the different adverb-forming affixes,
-ly, -s, -ward(s), -ways, -wise, the prefix a-, and conversion. 

Chapter 16 Locatives of time and space

This part deals with affixes that express spatial and temporal concepts. They
provide a table summarizing the formal properties of locative prefixes, which
are classified as native and non-native, before turning to their semantics.
Native prefixes and their non-native counterparts are contrasted, both
semantically and formally, and also with respect to possible argument
structure effects, so individual comparisons between native over- and
non-native super-, supra-, sur-; under- versus sub-; fore- versus ante-, pre-;
after- versus post-; by- versus peri-; out- versus extra-; in- versus intra-
are undertaken. 

Chapter 17 Negatives

Beginning with a table summarizing the formal properties of the various
negative affixes, namely whether they are category-changing or not, the type
of base they take and the category of the base, the chapter continues
examining the basic characteristics, phonological and orthographic properties
and productivity of negative affixes. It also includes a discussion of the
various types of negativity (contrary, contradiction, scale-external negation,
stereotype negation, reversative, privative, and pejorative), and provides a
table with the distribution of possible readings among the various affixes,
after which there is also an examination of affix rivalry. The chapter
concludes with a review of alleged semantic restrictions on negative bases. 

Chapter 18 Size, quantity, and attitude
This chapter deals with the various morphological means of marking size,
quantity, and attitude (evaluation) in English, specifically diminutives,
augmentatives, hypocoristics, affixes expressing quantification and measure,
and affixes forming cardinal and ordinal numbers. These include the native
diminutive affixes -let, -ling, -ie, and the minor suffixes -o, -s, -er, and
-kin; non-native affixes: -ette, hypo-, mini-, micro-, nano-. Hypocoristics,
clipped names, and suffixed hypocoristics such as -ie, -o, -s, -zza are
analyzed as diminutives and also as examples of evaluative morphological
derivation. Other attitudinal affixes are the prefixes pseudo- and quasi-. The
prefixes anti- and pro- illustrate the case of non-evaluative attitudinal
morphology. Among augmentatives, we find the prefixes hyper-, maxi- and midi-,
mega-, super-, ultra-, and turbo-. As in the previous chapter, there are also
sections on prefix rivalry. The affixes -ful, verbal re-, -fold, -some, -ton,
-ish, and hypo- exemplify the morphological ways to express quantification and
measure treated in this chapter. 

Part IV – Compounding

Chapter 19 Compounds: formal considerations
This first chapter on compounding deals with the formal properties of
compounds, beginning with the definition of a compound and whether it is to be
considered in the morphology or it is built in syntax. It also provides a
discussion on the differences and similarities between compounding, affixoids
and neoclassical compounds. It further deals with the internal structure of
compounds, questions of headedness, constituency, stress, and orthography.
Finally, it outlines the basic characteristics of the different types of
compounds, namely, nominal compounds, verbal compounds, adjectival compounds,
prepositional compounds, neo-classical compounds, phrasal compounds,
reduplicative compounds and blends. 

Chapter 20 Compounds: semantic considerations

This second chapter on compounding concentrates on a semantic classification
that takes into account the syntactico-semantic relationship between the
components of the compound, in order to distinguish between argumental
compounds and non-argumental compounds, showing that the distinction is not
clear-cut, in that for instance many argumental compounds can have
non-argumental interpretations. The semantic classification takes also the
basic notions of endocentricity and exocentricity into account, and provides a
semantic analysis of the various types of compounds presented in the previous
chapter, showing that the semantics of blends and neoclassical compounds
mostly parallel that of more standard compounds. 

Part V – Interaction

Chapter 21 Combination of affixes

Chapter 21 discusses complex words containing more than one affix, including
the few cases of parasynthetic affixation there are in English, cases
combining conversion and affixation, or cases combining inflection and
derivation. 

Chapter 22 Affixation on compounds and phrases
These pages deal with derived forms created through affixation to compound or
phrasal bases. The chapter provides five tables with examples illustrating
suffixes and that frequently take compounds as bases, suffixes and prefixes
that only occasionally attach to compounds, and affixes on phrasal bases. They
further discuss the factors involved in making affixation on compounds and
phrases available, and the role of lexicalization in this type of affixation,
concluding that it is by no means infrequent, though the only generalization
that can be established has to do with the productivity of the affix: where an
affix is productive it will be available for compound and phrasal affixation. 

Chapter 23 Paradigmatic processes

This chapter deals with cases of inflection, derivation, compounding, and
splinters, where the notion of paradigm is claimed to play a crucial role, in
the sense that such cases could only be analyzed by making reference to
paradigms and analogy.

Part VI – Themes

Chapter 24 Inflection versus derivation

This deals with the distinction between derivation and inflection, an old
problem in the morphological literature. The authors mention some cases that
have been discussed in the literature as showing mixed properties,
specifically the nominal plural, adverbial marking with -ly, ordinal -th, the
numerical formatives -teen and -ty, the participles, as well as other
clear-cut cases. The authors conclude that even though the distinction between
inflection and derivation can be maintained in English, it does not help to
understand any other aspect of the morphology of English.  

Chapter 25 The analysis and limits of conversion

This chapter discusses the process of conversion, focusing on two main
aspects: on the one hand, it attempts to delimit the properties of the process
of conversion, so that it can clearly distinguish between those cases that can
be said to be representative of this process and those that can not; on the
other hand, it seeks to assess the various theoretical approaches to
conversion that can be found in the literature. The process of conversion is
defined on the basis of three main canonical criteria, which are then used to
decide on a number of case studies, namely de-adjectival nouns preceded by
‘the’ such as ‘the rich’, de-adjectival nouns that take any determiner like
‘an intellectual’, adjectives with plural noun counterparts, like ‘news’,
cases where words are mentioned, as in ‘the buts’, formations related to
prepositions such as ‘a down’, cases with an additional phonological change,
either devoicing, as in ‘believe - belief’, or cases of stress shift, as in
‘frágment-fragmén’t, the various uses of participles, cases of type coercion
involving a subcategorization, e.g. count versus mass, transitive versus
intransitive, proper versus common, forms that can be used as either adjective
or adverb, and the use of compounds or phrases in categorically unexpected
contexts. In the second part of the chapter, after a revision of the main
approaches to conversion, the authors conclude that their approach based on
the cluster of conditions established at the beginning is to be preferred in
that it avoids a number of theoretical problems, such as positing zero
morphemes. 

Chapter 26 Blocking, competition, and productivity

This chapter discusses aspects related to the three notions of the title, as
they have been - and still are - central in some theories of morphology. The
authors conclude that the notion of blocking does not find support in their
data, which is incompatible with the notion of competition, which is
pervasive. As for the notion of productivity, even though it is clear that it
is important in the description of the data, it can be very difficult to
establish the productivity of individual morphological processes, and their
theoretical importance is open to interpretation and controversial. 

Chapter 27 The nature of stratification

This chapter is concerned with theoretical issues related to the interaction
between native and non-native aspects of the morphology of English. In
particular, it presents a study of the various combinatorial patterns of
(non)-native prefixes and suffixes, here presented in the form of eleven
tables, and the consequences that can be drawn for claims on stratification
made within theoretical frameworks like the Lexical Phonology and Morphology.
The authors conclude that neither native affixation nor non-native affixation
seems to be stratified. 

Chapter 28 English morphology in a typological perspective

These pages present a typological comparison between English, German, and
French. The chapter first considers a Humboldtian typological classification
of English and a classification based on Comrie’s (1981) intersecting indices
of synthesis and fusion. Then, it discusses aspects of the inflection
(word-based versus stem-based inflection, plural and case marking, etc.),
derivation (word-based versus stem-based derivation, headedness, etc.),
conversion, and compounding patterns of English in contrast to Germanic and
Romance in an attempt to offer a finer-grained typological view of the
morphology of English. 

Chapter 29 English morphology and theories of morphology

After a brief discussion of the different traditional approaches to
morphology, namely Item and Arrangement, Item and Process, and Word and
Paradigm, the authors consider also the appropriateness of realizational and
non-realizational models for the morphology of English, and discusses
analogical models of morphological analysis and Construction Morphology. They
further introduce a number of specific rules and claims made in the
literature, and discuss whether they can be maintained for English on the
basis of the data discussed in the previous chapters. They specifically
examine the Righthand Head Rule, the Unitary Base and Unitary Output
Hypothesis, blocking and the Elsewhere Condition, Level Ordering and Bracket
Erasure in the Lexical Phonology and Morphology model, the Monosuffix
Constraint, the First Sister Principle, and the Lexical Integrity Hypothesis.
They conclude with some implications of their study. 

EVALUATION

The book’s main aim is to provide a comprehensive overview of contemporary
English morphology. There is no doubt that the authors have achieved this main
goal. The data coverage is impressive, as it brings together a large quantity
of previously undiscussed data that covers all areas of the discipline, from
inflection to the various processes of word-formation. They discuss,  for
example, the high productivity of word-formation processes that take compounds
or phrasal constituents as bases, and the so-called minor word-formation
processes like blends or clippings. 

This book fills a gap in the literature and will be an essential reference for
anyone interested in the morphology of English. It can be of benefit to
instructors, linguistic researchers, and students, both beginners and
advanced, looking for a quick overview of the many issues, problems, and
intricacies of English morphology. 

One of the most exciting ideas that the reader may obtain from reading the
book is 
that there is still much to do, much to study, examine, and analyze to
understand the various processes of word building. So, despite its
characterization as a descriptive and theory-neutral overview of morphology,
the authors mention interesting examples that represent real theoretical
challenges, e.g. comparison in compounds, or the probabilistic nature of
degree inflectional marking (whether synthetic or analytic), or the possible
correlations that deserve further analysis, e.g. native vs. non-native
conversion forms in eventive contexts. 

Now I will point out some possible general drawbacks that have to do with
issues of organization, terminology, and the theory-neutral status of the
description. 

On the one hand, the chapters on derivation are organized on a semantic basis,
so that information on individual affixes is scattered throughout, i.e.
properties of a single affix are often to be found in different subsections or
even in different chapters. For instance, despite the semantic division of
nominalizing suffixes, words in “-age” that should be introduced in chapter 10
due to their semantics, are left for chapter 12, to keep them with other
“-age” words. Or, a suffix like “-y”, which can derive both event nominal and
abstract nouns, must be treated in separate chapters, even though, as the
authors already mention, it is difficult to distinguish both readings in some
cases. Even though one gets used to the organization of the book, this can
occasionally create some confusion. In any event, it is also true that the
book is full of indications referring the reader to (sub)sections or chapters
that provide further information. 

As for the terminological issue, at some points the authors create new
terminology, e.g. on referencing, on pronouns, even though they also say that
“we will continue using the established terminology, but without a commitment
to the derivational approaches that underlie this terminology” (p.164).
Besides, they introduce concepts without defining them, e.g. “haplology” is
first introduced on p.112, but its definition does not arrive until p.189; the
notions of trochee and dactyl are first introduced on p.112 without being
characterized; also, the section on compound determinatives, which does
actually not discuss them, creates confusion with this non-standard
terminology. Given that the book is addressed to “the widest possible
audience”, this can be problematic. 

Finally, one of the main aims of the book is to remain “as theory-neutral as
possible”, and I am not certain that it fully succeeds in this respect. On the
one hand, it is true that the authors tend to use traditional classifications
and standard terminological labels--although they do not always succeed, as
mentioned in the previous paragraph. However, the morphological description is
essentially restricted to lexicalist-oriented works, as well as the references
cited in the text, with just a couple of references to neoconstructionist or
syntax-oriented morphological literature. As a consequence the volume loses
the opportunity to be an all-inclusive reference book that gains insight from
all sides. 

On a more formal side, the style is clear, and the book is well produced and
almost free of typos. I have detected just these six: p.66: allomorphs;
p.146-147: no (58d), d has been skipped; p.414: (88) instead of (90); p.439:
the definition; p.440-441: there is no 19.2.2.2; p.616: heterogenous. 

The use of tables summarizing the main points discussed, presenting the main
characteristics of the various processes, or exemplifying processes help the
reader get a more general view of the phenomena. In this respect, it would
have been helpful to have some more summaries and concluding sections, which
are available only in a few chapters.  

To conclude, this volume is an excellent resource and reference book. It shows
that there is still a long way to go in understanding the morphology of
English, and this book will certainly be a helpful tool to use along the way.


ABOUT THE REVIEWER

I hold an SM and a PhD in Linguistics. My main research interests are
morphology and its interface with phonology, syntax, and semantics, as well as
the interface lexicon-syntax-semantics. I currently teach English grammar,
English linguistics, and Pragmatics in the English language classroom at the
Universitat Rovira i Virgili in Tarragona.





----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-26-3043	
----------------------------------------------------------
Visit LL's Multitree project for over 1000 trees dynamically generated
from scholarly hypotheses about language relationships:
          http://multitree.org/