Manhart editing

[shokooh Ingham]

I wish I knew.  I haven't been able to find out
Bruce

--- On Mon, 26/9/11, Anthony Grant <Granta at EDGEHILL.AC.UK> wrote:

> From: Anthony Grant <Granta at EDGEHILL.AC.UK>
> Subject: Re: Manhart editing
> To: SIOUAN at listserv.unl.edu
> Date: Monday, 26 September, 2011, 15:10
> I agree, Bruce - it's made things
> increasingly difficult for
> Americanists in the UK.  Let's hope they haven't
> trashed them.
> 
> Anthony
> 
> 
> 
> >>> shokooh Ingham <shokoohbanou at YAHOO.CO.UK>
> 26/09/2011 13:48 >>>
> Thanks Willem.  Unfortunataly SOAS has stopped taking
> IJAL which is
> really short sighted of them.  They've even got rid of
> the old ones, but
> I believe I can look it up on line. SOAS used to be the
> 'designated'
> library for American Indian things and it seems a terrible
> shame.  If
> you've got the text and can send it to me on line, I would
> be grateful.
> Bruce
> 
> --- On Sat, 24/9/11, De Reuse, Willem <WillemDeReuse at MY.UNT.EDU>
> wrote:
> 
> > From: De Reuse, Willem <WillemDeReuse at MY.UNT.EDU>
> > Subject: Re: Manhart editing
> > To: SIOUAN at listserv.unl.edu
> > Date: Saturday, 24 September, 2011, 19:43
> > My two cents regarding all this are
> > in my review of this second edition, in IJAL Vol. 70,
> Number
> > 2, April 2004.
> >
> > Willem de Reuse
> > ________________________________________
> > From: Siouan Linguistics [SIOUAN at listserv.unl.edu]
> > on behalf of shokooh Ingham [shokoohbanou at YAHOO.CO.UK]
> > Sent: Saturday, September 24, 2011 1:03 PM
> > To: SIOUAN at listserv.unl.edu
> > Subject: Re: Manhart editing (Lakota=>Siouan
> polyandry
> > inquiry)
> >
> > Yes. I can see that point Jan. I suppose the idea of
> > republishing was to make a more visually readable
> dictionary
> > using modern technology.  Buechel/Manhart's use
> of dots
> > and commas to mark the plain and aspirated consonants
> is
> > very difficult to see in the small print and the
> second
> > edition doesn't make it any easier, but I would be
> > interested to know how much of the data you consider
> to be
> > inaccurate.  There are words which look dubious
> to put
> > it mildly, purely because of their morphology and
> most
> > learners with a reasonable basis in the language will
> have
> > had their doubts about these items, but is there
> really that
> > much wrong with it? Percentage wise how much would you
> say?
> > Bruce
> >
> > --- On Sat, 24/9/11, Jan Ullrich <jfu at LAKHOTA.ORG>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > From: Jan Ullrich <jfu at LAKHOTA.ORG>
> > > Subject: Re: Manhart editing (Lakota=>Siouan
> > polyandry inquiry)
> > > To: SIOUAN at listserv.unl.edu
> > > Date: Saturday, 24 September, 2011, 17:29
> > > > De mortuis non nisi bonum.
> > >
> > >
> > > Right!
> > > My comment was more about the alive who made the
> > decision
> > > to entrust Manhardt with the second edition,
> > especially at
> > > his advanced age.
> > >
> > > > We shouldn't forget that Manhardt seems to
> have
> > put a
> > > lot of effort into
> > > > that work with the meager facilities that he
> had,
> > also
> > > re-editing it at an
> > > > advanced age; and it was, after all, the
> only
> > thing
> > > around for a long time.
> > > > I couldn't have learnt Lakota without it.
> > >
> > > This was not to dismiss Manhardt's contribution
> in
> > making
> > > the first edition available to the public! I was
> > mainly
> > > referring to the decision to re-publish the
> dictionary
> > in
> > > the way it was done, i.e. without even the
> slightest
> > attempt
> > > to make corrections based on research (with
> speakers
> > or from
> > > texts). The problem of the Buechel manuscript is
> not
> > that it
> > > doesn't include valuable data, but that without
> much
> > > research it is impossible to tell which parts of
> the
> > data
> > > are reliable and which are not (e.g. entries and
> > definitions
> > > borrowed from unreliable or non-Lakota sources,
> like
> > Riggs,
> > > or sentences originating in non-idiomatic
> translations
> > of
> > > liturgical texts etc.). Of course, no dictionary
> is
> > perfect,
> > > but in this dictionary the problematic data
> > constitutes a
> > > major proportion.
> > > So, much of the learning from the dictionary
> > inevitably
> > > involves un-learning the incorrect stuff, if one
> is
> > able to
> > > figure out which parts are incorrect.
> > >
> > > Jan
> > >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> Based on an award-winning 160-acre Campus near Liverpool,
> Edge Hill
> University has over 125 years of history as an innovative,
> successful
> and distinctive higher education provider.
> 
> •Shortlisted for Times Higher Education University of the
> Year 2011 the
> third time in five years
>  •Top in Four in England for Graduate Employment (Higher
> Education
> Statistics Agency, 2010 all graduates, full & part
> time, first &
> foundation degrees)
> •Top Two in England (Second to Oxford) for students'
> Personal
> Development (National Student Survey 2011, out of 93 full
> English public
> universities)
> •Top Three in England for Assessment & Feedback
> (National Student Survey
> 2011, 93 full English public universities)
> •Top 20 position, and the highest ranked university in
> 'The Sunday Times
> Best Places to Work in the Public Sector 2010'
> •Grade 1 'outstanding' judgements made in all 33
> inspection cells,
> Ofsted Initial Teacher Education inspection report
> 12/5/2011
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------
> This message is private and confidential. If you have
> received this
> message in error, please notify the sender and remove it
> from your
> system. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of
> the author
> and do not necessarily represent those of Edge Hill or
> associated
> companies.  Edge Hill University may monitor email
> traffic data and also
> the content of email for the purposes of security and
> business
> communications during staff absence.
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------
>