LINGUIST List 11.1114

Wed May 17 2000

Qs: 17th/18th C English Dictionary,Suffixes -S & -T

Editor for this issue: James Yuells <jameslinguistlist.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.

Directory

  1. Martin, Greg, Looking for a 17th or 18th century English dictionary
  2. William Edmondson, Suffixation of -S and -T

Message 1: Looking for a 17th or 18th century English dictionary

Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 09:43:14 -0400
From: Martin, Greg <greg.martinjnli.com>
Subject: Looking for a 17th or 18th century English dictionary

Is there a 17th or 18th century English dictionary available[to sell/lend/or 
give] ? I would prefer to get 18th century American (or Colonial) English.

Thanks.

Gregory R. Martin
IT - Jackson National Life
(517) 367-3398
greg.martinjnli.com

Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Message 2: Suffixation of -S and -T

Date: Wed, 17 May 2000 17:04:58 +0100
From: William Edmondson <w.h.edmondsoncs.bham.ac.uk>
Subject: Suffixation of -S and -T

Hi.

I have a student who is interested to know whether or not the suffxation of '-s'
and '-t' in English (as in cats and walked) is unique to English.

Are there other languages which use one of these two suffixes, but not both?
Are there languages which use both?

The interest is in the sound, obviously enough, not the meaning, although we'd
like to know what the morphology is in all cases. We'd like too know also
whether or not the sounds are conditioned by their environments in the same way
as in English.

Thanks

William Edmondson
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue