LINGUIST List 11.879

Sun Apr 16 2000

Qs: Syntax of also/too/as well,Past Ling Traditions

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. tanyaroy, The syntax of also/too/as well
  2. Lotfi, Linguistic traditions of the past

Message 1: The syntax of also/too/as well

Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 01:17:52 +0530
From: tanyaroy <tanyaroymantraonline.com>
Subject: The syntax of also/too/as well

Any hints on what to consult on the position of also/too/as well in
English and the changes in meaning with changes in position.
Thanks.
Tanya Roy
Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Message 2: Linguistic traditions of the past

Date: 14 Apr 2000 00:13:12 EDT
From: Lotfi <Lotfiwww.dci.co.ir>
Subject: Linguistic traditions of the past

Dear Linguists,
The Quran, the religious book of Moslems, makes frequent cryptic
comments about language, like the following from Arrahman Chapter
(1-4: 55):
"Oh merciful! I taught the Quran to man, then brought him to life,
then I taught him speech."
Perhaps it was this Quranic interest in language that inspired
Moslem scholars to develop a rich tradition of linguistic studies
centuries ago. Just as an example, I make a quick translation of the
first two paragraphs from Toosi's Asas Al-Eghtebas, a long treatise
on logic and language written in Persian about 700 years ago:
>
"Word-makers created words for meanings so that the intelligent could
denote meanings via words, and this kind of denotation is termed
conventional denotation, which is man-specific. For in natural denota-
tion, like the birds' sounds denoting their conditions, man and other
animals are alike."
>
"Some meanings are included in some others, and some necessary for
others. For instance, the meaning of 'wall' is included in that of
'house' as a wall is a part of a house. But the meaning of 'wall' is
necessary for that of 'ceiling' as there is no ceiling without a wall.
Then to conceive some meaning necessitates the conception of some
others that are included in or necessary for the former."
>
Just note the psycholinguistic tone of the last sentence, and then you
might agree that it's a pity that modern linguistics began from scratch
with no concern for such a rich body of linguistic knowledge in non-
European cultures.
Are there similar linguistic traditions out there in European/non-
European academic cultures of the past that failed to come to the
modern linguist's attention? Can you think of any sources on such
traditions? If I receive sufficient replies, I'll post a summary.
- ------------------------------
Ahmad R. Lotfi.
Chair of English Dept.
Azad University at Khorasgan,
Esfahan, IRAN.
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue