LINGUIST List 2.181

Wednesday, 1 May 1991

Disc: Comparatives, ICLA, Wolof/West Armenian, and more

Editor for this issue: <>


Directory

  1. Vicki Fromkin, Comparatives
  2. Paul Saka, ROOM SHARING AT SANTA CRUZ
  3. Ellen Broselow, Wolof or Western Armenian
  4. Vicki Fromkin, Re: Women in Linguistics
  5. Dominique Estival, Women in Linguistics
  6. Paul Saka, Manaster-Ramer on "formal"
  7. "Hi, 'lo", Re: PSE

Message 1: Comparatives

Date: Sun, 28 Apr 91 17:49 PDT
From: Vicki Fromkin <IYO1VAF%MVS.OAC.UCLA.EDUCORNELLC.cit.cornell.edu>
Subject: Comparatives
Query from Rochel Gelman (Rochelcognet.ucla.edu) of the Psych Dept, UCLA.

Reference needed re languages which do not differentiate between
comparative and superlative forms of adjectives in either
morphologically complex forms, like BIG/BIGGER/BIGGEST or in phrases like
INSANE,MORE INSANE, MOST INSANE. This would be of interest since in
lg acquisition there are young children who do not distinguish between
these. There are of course many but she would like some specific references
if possible.
You can send your replies through LINGUIST and I will send them on to
her or directly to her e-mail address above.
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Message 2: ROOM SHARING AT SANTA CRUZ

Date: Mon, 29 Apr 91 17:49:30 -0700
From: Paul Saka <sakacogsci.Berkeley.EDU>
Subject: ROOM SHARING AT SANTA CRUZ
I will be attending the ICLA conference during the LSA Institute,
July 28/29 thru Aug 2/3. If you would like to share an apartment
or a motel room during this period, please let me know.
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Message 3: Wolof or Western Armenian

Date: Tue, 30 Apr 91 10:11:57 EDT
From: Ellen Broselow <BROSELOWccvm.sunysb.edu>
Subject: Wolof or Western Armenian
I'd like to contact people who are working, or have worked, on Wolof or Modern
Western Armenian.
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Message 4: Re: Women in Linguistics

Date: Sun, 28 Apr 91 14:30 PDT
From: Vicki Fromkin <IYO1VAF%MVS.OAC.UCLA.EDUCORNELLC.cit.cornell.edu>
Subject: Re: Women in Linguistics
re: Women in Linguistics -- information can be obtained from LSA
 (e-mail: zzlsagallua.bitnet)

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

Message 5: Women in Linguistics

Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1991 09:59:55 +0200
From: Dominique Estival <estivaldivsun.unige.ch>
Subject: Women in Linguistics
Rebecca Burns Hoffman asks about the panel on Women in Linguistics
at the 1982 LSA meeting in San Diego. I still have the handbook 
and could send you copies of the abstracts, but there were no 
proceedings that I know of. 
Here is the list of the six women linguists honored during that 
session, with the names of the speakers.

. Marguerite Durand (John Ohala)
. Eli Fisher-Jo/rgensen (Arthur S. Abramsom)
. Kerstin Hadding (Mona Lindau)
. Ruth Hirsch Weir (Jean Berko Gleason)
. Adelaide Hahn (Robin Tolmach Lakoff)
. Mary R. Haas (Sally McLendon)

 Dominique Estival
 ISSCO, 54 rte des Acacias
 CH-1227 Geneve
 tel: +41-22-705-7116 
 fax: +41-22-300-1086
 <estivaldivsun.unige.ch>
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Message 6: Manaster-Ramer on "formal"

Date: Tue, 30 Apr 91 16:57:57 -0700
From: Paul Saka <sakacogsci.Berkeley.EDU>
Subject: Manaster-Ramer on "formal"
 Manaster-Ramer's point that "formal" has (at least) two distinct
uses is well taken. I would just like to point out that there is good
reason for this "ambiguity". If an algorithm is formal in Manaster-Ramer's
"form" sense (in the sense that its operations are defined over shapes),
then the algorithm is also formal in the "rigorous" sense: there is much
less room for disagreement about the SHAPE of an object than there is
about the INTERPRETATION of an object. 
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Message 7: Re: PSE

Date: Wed, 1 May 1991 11:27 EST
From: "Hi, 'lo" <SDFNCRritvax.isc.rit.edu>
Subject: Re: PSE
With regard to the debate on whether PSE is a natural language or not, I would
claim that it *is* natural, but that perhaps it is not a language. There *are*
artificial systems used in schools, but PSE is a natural system that
incorporates elements of both ASL and English. It is used by deaf people, even
native signers (who often use it very well) as well as hearing people, though
the "deaf dialect" may be closer to ASL than the "hearing dialect." It
develops very naturally, and can contain some fairly sophisticated grammar. 
Since there's no documentatin of anyone learning it natively (it turns into
ASL), it is probably not a language.
Susan Fischer

[End Linguist List, Vol. 2, No. 181]
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue