LINGUIST List 15.1015

Fri Mar 26 2004

Qs: Mandarin Locatives; Communication/Meaning

Editor for this issue: Naomi Fox <>

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


  1. Drew Foerster, References Mandarin Locative Semantics and Syntax
  2. Steve Deiss, Looking for Ludwig?

Message 1: References Mandarin Locative Semantics and Syntax

Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 19:42:16 -0500 (EST)
From: Drew Foerster <>
Subject: References Mandarin Locative Semantics and Syntax

To Whom It May Concern:

I'm desperate to find any and all articles/books etc. that treat the
syntax and/or semantics of Mandarin Chinese locative expressions
e.g. ''zai/dao/cong zhuozi limian'' and similar constructions. I'd be
happy to post a list of all those references I receive back on the
list! Thanks a ton!

Subject-Language: Chinese, Mandarin; Code: CHN 
Language-Family: Sino-Tibetan; Code: ST 
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Message 2: Looking for Ludwig?

Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 19:50:51 -0500 (EST)
From: Steve Deiss <>
Subject: Looking for Ludwig?

In a recent brainstorm (brainout depending on your viewpoint), I
proposed that meanings have partly to do with the recipient of a
message 'getting' the intent, aka what is meant, by the sender by
knowing what to do, or say (out loud or not), or how to react
(according to script) in response. Most importantly, I have said that
the recipient becomes aware of having understood through a conscious
feeling of comprehension or knowing, a sort of 'warm-fuzzy' which is a
kindred spirit to Festinger's old work on cognitive dissonance and
consonance. This view goes with the mantrum - ''Words do not have
meaning by themselves, people mean things with words.'' (If the word
''hello'' popped out of the vacuum in a universe without people, it
would be meaningless). Note that misunderstanding comes from having
the feeling but not demonstrating the performance the sender expects.
(Profs. and T.A.'s know what I am saying here, especially during
finals week.)

I would like to know if this is old news or a well worn trail from the
linguistic point of view. I am planning some experiments. If anyone
knows of related views that attempt to ground meaning, I'd like to
hear more. If you don't feel you understand, I'd be glad to clarify.

Stephen Deiss (deiss at appliedneuro dot com)
Applied Neurodynamics
Encinitas, CA
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue