* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
LINGUIST List logo Eastern Michigan University Wayne State University *
* People & Organizations * Jobs * Calls & Conferences * Publications * Language Resources * Text & Computer Tools * Teaching & Learning * Mailing Lists * Search *
* *
LINGUIST List 17.2296

Thu Aug 10 2006

Qs: The Etymology of Egyptian;Ambiguity and 'that' in (wh-) Questions

Editor for this issue: Kevin Burrows <kevinlinguistlist.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.    Sandro Capochichi, The Etymology of Egyptian
        2.    John Winward, Ambiguity and 'that' in (wh-) Questions


Message 1: The Etymology of Egyptian
Date: 03-Aug-2006
From: Sandro Capochichi <Sandro.Capochichiwanadoo.fr>
Subject: The Etymology of Egyptian


Greetings,

I would like to know if there exist any cognates to the Ancient Egyptian root
Sekhem meaning ''power(ful)''. Has anyone written on this issue?

Thanks in advance,

Sandro Capochichi

Linguistic Field(s): Historical Linguistics

Message 2: Ambiguity and 'that' in (wh-) Questions
Date: 03-Aug-2006
From: John Winward <winwardtu.ac.th>
Subject: Ambiguity and 'that' in (wh-) Questions


I'm doing research on the acquisition of wh- movement by Thai L1 speakers,
using truth value judgement tests on ambiguous question structures that can
be disambiguated by using island effects, superiority etc.

There's an issue here that looks really basic, but for which I can't seem
to find any references in the literature:

a. Why does John believe Mary is unhappy?
b. Why does John believe that Mary is unhappy?

To my ears at least, while a. is ambiguous between a matrix and embedded
clause reading: 'because he saw her crying' vs. 'because she failed her
exams', b. forces a matrix-clause reading: 'because he saw her crying';
*'because she failed her exams' (it doesn't seem to apply in relative
clauses though).

Is there a standard explanation, that I've somehow managed to miss? Sorry
if this is a dumb question - I'm working a long way away from the
mainstream out here...

j

Linguistic Field(s): Syntax

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




Please report any bad links or misclassified data

LINGUIST Homepage | Read LINGUIST | Contact us

NSF Logo

While the LINGUIST List makes every effort to ensure the linguistic relevance of sites listed
on its pages, it cannot vouch for their contents.