LINGUIST List 3.701

Thu 17 Sep 1992

Disc: Reanalyses

Editor for this issue: <>

Directory

1. , Re: 3.697 Reanalyses
2. Ian MacKay, reanalysis
3. AHARRIS - Alan Harris, RE: 3.697 Reanalyses
4. AHARRIS - Alan Harris, RE: 3.697 Reanalyses
5. , Reanalyses

Message 1: Re: 3.697 Reanalyses

Two reanalyses, one from English (and my youth), one from ASL (a young deaf
girl):
When I was young and learning the alphabet by singing the alphabet song, I
used to think there were two kinds of Bs in the alphabet: a regular B ("A
_B_ C D E F G ...") and a special, "elemental B" ("H I J K elemental B").
Go figure...
The ASL reanalysis is difficult to describe (and I'm just awful at
describing how to form ASL words). Here goes. The ASL word BE-CAREFUL is
related to the word KEEP, certainly phonologically (two V or K hands) if
not also semantically. The ASL word LOOK is made with a V handshape. A deaf
girl that I know, quite intelligent little 6 year old, fluent in ASL and
(written/signed) English, one day noticed the written words "Be careful"
and saw her father sign in ASL BE-CAREFUL in translation. She expressed
surprise that the ASL BE-CAREFUL was "be careful" in English. She said she
always thought it meant something like "keep your eyes/gaze on it" (that
is, she reanalyzed BE-CAREFUL to KEEP-EYES). Not a bad reanalysis since for
a deaf person, to be careful often *is* to be on the (visual) alert.

Just where does one draw the line between reanalyses and slips of the ear?
Even if the slip of the ear occurs only one time, it is a reanalysis, since
perception is an active, analytical process. In any event, an example from
the classified ads: someone was selling an object described in the ad as
"a 4 stair furnace".
Ian MacKay (imackayacadvm1.uottawa.ca)

Message 3: RE: 3.697 Reanalyses

Re George Fowler's child's "asposed," I come from Dayton Ohio and I remember
distinctly a Tennesseean or Kentuckian adult pronunciation of "asposed" and
"susposed" as in: You're not asposed tah do thet OR You're not susposed tah do
thet. How that figures into Indiana child acquisition of subdialects, well
maybe it is an emerging isogloss (??)
======================================================================
Alan C. Harris, Ph. D. telno: off:
Professor, Communication/Linguistics 818-885-2853/2874
Speech Communication Department hm:
California State University, Northridge 818-780-8872
SPCH CSUN fax: 818-885-2663
Northridge, CA 91330
 Internet: AHARRISVAX.CSUN.EDU
======================================================================

Message 4: RE: 3.697 Reanalyses

<"Jack Smith in the LA Times occasionally refers to "mishpas," a reanalysis
based on a spelling metathesis (or a typo) that one of his fans performed in a
letter (=mishaps). And "posslq" has been reanalyzed to fit gay and lesbian as
well as heterosexual concerns.
While I am on the subject of analysis and reanalysis, about two blocks away
from me is an auto repair shop that proudly displays a very large sign above
the bldg: Come in and get your engine analized (!!).
Lastly, English pron. of 'sheik' is [shi:k] (rhymes with "sleek"); the Arabic
is [sheyx].
best to all, Alan
======================================================================
Alan C. Harris, Ph. D. telno: off:
Professor, Communication/Linguistics 818-885-2853/2874
Speech Communication Department hm:
California State University, Northridge 818-780-8872
SPCH CSUN fax: 818-885-2663
Northridge, CA 91330
 Internet: AHARRISVAX.CSUN.EDU
======================================================================

Someone (I am very sorry I can't recall the name) suggested
just recently that people who write 'imput' are thereby
showing that they are not aware that this word has something
to do with 'IN' (and is the opposite of 'OUTput). This is
a nonsequitur, since it is perfectly possible (and indeed
I would argue is actually the case, but that is another
matter) that the natural way to spell things is in terms
of a level of phonological representation close to what
has sometimes been called 'taxonomic phonemics', or, in
the more precise terminology I introduced in 1981, 'Leningrad
phonemics' (or perhaps at a level even somewhat shallower
than that). In other words, it would not matter what the
morphological analysis of the word is, it would only matter
how it is actually pronounced. Presumably, speakers of
Dutch have no trouble connecting the form HUIS 'house'
with its plural 'HUIZEN', even though the former indicates
in its spelling the final devoicing of the /z/. The same
would be true with the English example under discussion.