LINGUIST List 4.243

Sun 04 Apr 1993

Qs: Reported, Nicaragua & Scandinavia, interference, have

Editor for this issue: <>

Directory

1. , directly vs. indirectly reported speech
2. , Nicaraguan linguist request
3. , Query: interference in intonation
4. Forrest Braze, query: "have," "have got," and "got"

 A quick version of my request is:

 I need as many examples as possible of languages in which, in
narrative, reported speech is always or usually direct rather than
indirect; that is, languages in which one readily says/writes, in
effect:

 He said: I am hungry.

but not (or usually not):

 He said (that) he was hungry.

 I'm especially interested in languages which in your opinion
do not have the grammatical means to construct indirectly reported
speech--if such there be--but are obliged to attribute actual words
to the third party.

 A longer version especially for those knowledgeable about
Biblical Hebrew:

 Robert Alter in _The Art of Biblical Narrative_ (NY:Basic
Books, 1981) is puzzled that in Biblical Hebrew so much "thought should
be reported as speech." [p 68] "By and large, the biblical writers
prefer to avoid indirect speech" [p67] "...thought is almost
invariably rendered as actual speech, that is, as quoted
monologue."

 It is clear that what Alter is describing is the overwhelming
preference for directly reported speech in Biblical Hebrew. On p.
69 he gives "an extreme instance: the report of inquiry of an
oracle as dialogue." This is II Samuel ii.1 in which David
presumably consults an oracle; there is evidence that the
consultation was by means of the ephod and the Urim & Thummim, yet
the narration goes:

 ...David inquired of the Lord, "Shall I go up into any of
 the cities of Judah?" And the Lord *said to him, "Go
 up."* [emphasis mine-KM]

 Alter's example is weak in that we must *assume* that the
method of consultation was non-verbal. A stronger example (which
Alter does not cite) is I Samuel xxiii.9-12, where we *know* --
because of the reference to the ephod in v. 9 (cf. the notes in the
New Oxford Annotated Bible, p 362) -- that the consultation was by
lot, probably by means of Urim and Thummim, yet we have "the Lord
said" followed by directly reported speech, vv 11, 12, to render
the answers.

 Several questions arise: (a) Should we attribute the lack or
scarcity of indirectly reported speech in a language to grammar or
to something else? (b) Are there languages in which we can
establish that indirectly reported speech is impossible, so that a
speaker is obliged to attribute actual words to a speaker?

 Any relevant comments welcome.

 - Ken <minerkuhub.cc.ukans.edu>

I am writing on behalf of a linguist in Nicaragua, Danilo Salamanca.
He is currently the Director of CIDCA (Centro de Investigaciones y
Documentacion de la Costa Atlantica), a research center in Managua.
The center is concerned with all areas of research pertaining to the
Atlantic Coast of Nicaragua from Agriculture to Linguistics to
Zoology.

CIDCA has been involved in creating dictionaries of languages
indigenous to Nicaragua, including Miskito and Rama. It has also
been very involved in the bi-lingual education program on the Atlantic
Coast including both the above languages and an english Creole spoken
on the Coast.

Danilo is travelling to Norway and Sweden in the near future and would
like to meet any linguists interested in linguistics in the "third
world" and in theoretical linguistics; he is an MIT trained linguist.

Please contact him at CIDCAnicarao.apc.org. ALso if anyone knows the
address of either Tarald Taraldsen and/or Lars Hellan, please send
them to Danilo.

Theresa A. Tobin
MIT Humanities Librarian
Cambridge, MA

I am posting this query for a linguist friend who does not currently
subscribe to Linguist. Please send any responses directly to me, and I will
forward them, as well as post a summary if there is interest in one.

The question is: has anything ever been written on L2 interference in
bilingual speakers' L1 intonation? References of both SLA and maintenance/shift
oriented literature would be helpful.

Thanks,

Anna Fenyvesi
fenyvesivms.cis.pitt.edu

I am looking for leads to research on the use of "have," "have got,"
and "got," where the meaning is 'possess,' in Modern English. I am
particularly interested in quantitative studies dealing with the
regional and social distribution of these forms. I am, however, also
interested in the syntactic and semantic analysis of these forms. Any
leads to research on this matter will be much appreciated. Thanks.

Dave Braze