LINGUIST List 14.3456

Fri Dec 12 2003

Qs: Scandanavian Adverb Position; Estuary English

Editor for this issue: Naomi Fox <foxlinguistlist.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. Tomohiro Yanagi, adverb position
  2. Tanguy Vilboux, Estuary English

Message 1: adverb position

Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 04:09:10 -0500 (EST)
From: Tomohiro Yanagi <liuliufo.freeserve.ne.jp>
Subject: adverb position

Dear subscribers,

I have an interest in the relative word order between a participle and
an adverb in Mainland Scandinavian languages. In Icelandic, the
'adverb-participle' order is allowed, but the 'participle-adverb'
order is not. (English glosses are used in (1)-(2).)
(1) John has never read the-book.
(2) *John has read never the-book.
How about Mainland Scandinavian languages?

I'd be very grateful to anybody who could give me any information,
such as grammatical/ungrammatical sentences in the languages, and any
books or articles on this topic.

Thank you in advance.

YANAGI Tomohiro
liuliufo.freeserve.ne.jp 
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Message 2: Estuary English

Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 10:51:35 -0500
From: Tanguy Vilboux <tanguyvilbouxIFRANCE.COM>
Subject: Estuary English

Dear Linguists,

I am writing a thesis on the concept of Estuary English. At first, I
thought that it would be like studying any regional accent. But then,
when reading attempts made at describing this variety of English, my
major feeling was one of disappointment : not being able to know what
Estuary English really is. To discover that there is so much
controversy and so little consensus over this concept (on the name
itself so much as its phonetic description) makes my task all the more
difficult, but in the same time, I must say, quite thrilling.

I would be very pleased if linguists could share their points of view
with me and tell if Estuary English is as obscure as it really seems:

Does Estuary English really exist?

Is it only an accent rather than a dialect?

Could it be reduced to a form of Near-RP rather than invent a distinct
name which, thus, gives us the impression of dealing with a distinct
variety of English?

And last question, is it not exaggerated to claim that Estuary English
is an accent spreading in the South East of England, grounding this
assumption on the spread of a few variables such as L Vocalisation and
T Glottalling?

Thanks in advance.

Tanguy Vilboux

P.S.: I would also very much appreciate to have references of recent
studies on the Subject.

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