LINGUIST List 2.304

Tuesday, 18 June 1991

Disc: Lists, Articulation, Bachelard, Irish

Editor for this issue: <>


Directory

  1. sergio scalise, Re: For Your Information
  2. bert peeters, Double articulation
  3. , old flames can't hold a candle to you
  4. Sheila Hogg, Re: Responses: Voice, V2, address, Tongue Twisters

Message 1: Re: For Your Information

Date: Sat, 15 Jun 91 10:39:41 ITA
From: sergio scalise <G5GVEVD1ICINECA.CINECA.IT>
Subject: Re: For Your Information
 Answer to Ken Willing: you say that you have a list of some 1500 people work
 ing in the area of linguistics and that you hesitate about render this list
 public. I think that here there is a real issue in the sense that soon or
 later I am afraid that unwelcomeads will reach us (I mean commecials such as:
 buy this modem, a real linguist should have a real car such as... , why do not
 change your old computer and so on). I already sweared that as soon as will
 receive such an ad I will quit the Linguist net. But maybe we can deliberately
 and strongly opppose this possibility: in the meantime I think that lists can
 be rendered public: as a matter of fact they are already public such as the on
 of Amsterdam of Norval Smith which can be obtained writing to a server!
 Best wishes - Sergio Scalise
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Message 2: Double articulation

Date: Wed, 19 Jun 91 10:01:09 +1000
From: bert peeters <peeters%tasman.cc.utas.edu.auRICEVM1.RICE.EDU>
Subject: Double articulation
Double articulation came into being as a purely linguistic concept, and was
subsequently used by semioticians in a great deal of different contexts.
If anyone out there is interested in the original concept and reads French,
please do get in touch. A paper titled "Les articulations du langage:
combien y en a-t-il?" is now in the process of being updated. I had sub-
mitted it for publication in Andre Martinet's stronghold journal La linguis-
tique, but it was turned down (incidentally, may I say, against Martinet's
own advise). The reason for this, I guess, is that I'm claiming there are
four articulations, not two. Now, I'm not the first one to say that, and I
guess I won't be the last either. The paper is full of bibliographic material
about what others have said about this too.
Bert Peeters <peeterstasman.cc.utas.edu.au>
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Message 3: old flames can't hold a candle to you

Date: Fri, 14 Jun 91 15:46:30 est
From: <sr_willing%vaxa.mqcc.mq.oz.auRICEVM1.RICE.EDU>
Subject: old flames can't hold a candle to you
[from Ken Willing]
For anyone wishing to explore fire further, may I most warmly suggest...
Gaston Bachelard's brilliant _la Psychanalyse du feu_ (1965; and his
(1988) _Fragments d'une poetique du feu_ . [Both available in translation.]
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Message 4: Re: Responses: Voice, V2, address, Tongue Twisters

Date: Fri, 14 Jun 91 12:59:37 EDT
From: Sheila Hogg <AP201069brownvm.brown.edu>
Subject: Re: Responses: Voice, V2, address, Tongue Twisters
Re: Tongue twisters (one in Irish)
 Here is one in the Irish language that appeared not too long ago on
the GAELIC-L network: (acute accents appear as slash/)
 An bhfacha tu/ an bacach, no/ an bhfacha tu/ a mhac? Ni/ fhaca me/ a
n bacach is ni/ fhacha me/ a mhac, ach da/ bhfeicfinnse an bacach no/ da/ bhfei
cfinnse a mhac, ni/ bhacfainn leis an bacach is ni/ bhacfainn lena mhac!
 (translation very rough): Did you see the oaf or did you see his son
? I didn't see the oaf nor did I see his son, but if I should see the oaf or sh
ould I see his son, I'd ignore the oaf and I'd ignore his son!
 Sheila Hogg.
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue