Editor for this issue: <>
I have just suddenly remembered a comment made to me when I told my plans to a Latin faculty member at Brooklyn College when I was finishing up my senior year there - "Philology (by which she and I meant linguistics)! - I thought you were interested in substantive issues." Oh well. MargaretMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
Some years before I entered grad school in Linguistics (I'd never heard of linguistics at that point), I lived in DC. One afternoon, feeling kinda low, I envisioned the perfect pick-me-up. I went into a local bookstore and bought for myself a hardcover Roget's Thesaurus. (that was back in the days when it was a 'real' thesaurus, exhibiting conceptual categories, and analyzed by conceptual categories -- not like the current frequent alphabetized version) I immediately found a shady bench and lengthily pored over the conceptual analysis of English vocabulary. And felt MUCH better. Perhaps that it was also unusual that when in my early 20's, a man I was seeing asked me what I wanted for my birthday -- what I wanted was a Webster's Third International. So, now I'm a lexical semanticist -- Ph.D. dissertation was on the Lexical Entry of the English verb 'understand'. Just collected data from CD for 'analyze' last night. love it. rebecca wheeler rebwhlrMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issuecc.usu.edu
Reading the "how I became a linguist" stories is fascinating. Some of us may have been fated-- with a Classicist for one parent and an English teacher for the other, what else does one do if not languages? In my case, it has turned out to be primarily historical linguistics, but the impulse is the same-- patterns over time. L. MorganMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
Two recent though different topics, "How did we end up as linguists," and "Tributes to Zellig Harris" take me back to the exact same time and place so I feel compelled to comment. How we ended up as linguists is quite a different question from how we actually discovered linguistics. I prefer leaving aside the psychological and intellectual reasons for "ending up" as a linguist. But the story that I like to tell is that as a 2nd semester freshman at the University of Pennsylvania in the mid-sixties, I sat down with the college catalog to see what besides English and French literature I might study. (I thought there were too many majors in those departments.) I literally discovered linguistics from the catalog. So at the beginning of my sophomore year I took my first linguistics course to see if I liked it. I became one of only three undergraduate majors in linguistics at Penn. at the time and went on to do my graduate work there as well. I don't know whether Zellig Harris or Henry Hoenigswald or some combination of both of them plus others "created" linguistics at Penn, but I am grateful to them all. I studied with Zellig Harris for two and a half years. Despite his debated standing in our field today, he was an inspiration to me as a student. Whether or not he did us a disservice by his intellectual and professional isolationism, he talked to us about language in ways that were stimulating and exciting. He typically started his seminars, always held in his office, (which was always uncomfortably crowded), by asking if there were any questions. A single question would then become a two-hour lecture. His stream of consciousness lecturing style, which included a description of whatever piece of linguistic theory he was mulling over at the time, was more organized than many carefully prepared lectures I have heard. He covered the small blackboard in his office with his tiny handwriting and dispensed with all classroom formalities such as course requirements, grading and exams. He devoted his life to the study of language and assumed that his students were doing the same. I join others in mourning his death.Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue