LINGUIST List 4.772

Wed 29 Sep 1993

Qs: Yall, Transparency, Pronouns, Auditory model

Editor for this issue: <>

Directory

1. Rachel Lagunoff, Impersonal 2nd plural
2. "Dr. Michal Ephratt", Transparancy
3. Jeff Bishop, frozen pronouns
4. Geoffrey Williams, Auditory models for speech processing

>
 The recent discussion of second person plural pronoun forms in English has
 brought to my attention the question of whether 2nd person plural can have
 arbitrary reference, as do 1st and 3rd plurals. In my dialect, _you guys_ ,
 always has specific reference. Is this true for users of _y'all_, _you'uns_,
 etc.?

 This effect can be seen with unmarked _you_ and a singular or plural
 reflexive:

(1) a. If you want something done right, you have to do it yourself.
 b. If you want something done right, you have to do it yourselves.

 (1a) can be either arbitrary/generic/nonspecific or referential/specific,
 whereas (1b) must be addressed to a set of specific people (and would sound
 better if _something_ were replaced with a specific thing).

 So my query is the following: for native speakers of plural _you_ forms,
are these forms allowed with arbitrary reference in sentences like (1) and (2)?

 (2) You have to drive everywhere in L.A.

I expect that something like (3) will be ok, but is not arbitrary, referring to
one or more adressees and including other (unspecified) people in the group to
which they belong, as has been attested for _y'all_.

 (3) You (guys) have to drive everywhere in L.A.

Please respond to me directly, and I will post a summary. I also welcome any
comments on arbitrary/impersonal/generic pronouns and plurality in general.
(And yes, this is related to my 'singular they' query a while ago, but now I'm
also considering impersonal uses with no antecedent.)

 Rachel Lagunoff
 ihw1009mvs.oac.ucla.edu
 ihw1009uclamvs.bitnet

Hi Neters,
I am preparing a course on TRANSPARANCY: linguiatic transparancy,
morphological transparancy, semantic transparancy. transparant vs.
opaque.
I was quite disappointed by the small number of references on these
topics (Ullman's Semantics; Natural Morphology material).
Do any out there happen to know of more varied publications?
Please send ideas directly to me: RHLH702HAIFAUVM.
I shall send a summary to the group.
 Many thanks, Michal.

Acknowledge-To: <RHLH702HAIFAUVM>

Has anyone studied the tendency of many speakers to use only one case for
conjoined pronouns? We are all familiar with the accusative version:
 Me and Bob went bowling yesterday
which is generally corrected, producing no only:
 Bob and I went bowling yesterday
but also the equally illogical:
 This beer belongs to Bob and I
Where the rules that ordinarily govern the use of "me" and "I" appear to
be suspended. I have long presumed that to be in idiosyncratic
hypercorrection which affected only the first person, until one of my
roommates produced a similar utterance in the third person:
 They came to see she and Bob
 I worked for he and John
Is this simply an anomalous idiolect, or has this tendency been observed
and studied before?

Jeff Bishop
Northwestern University
jbishopnwu.edu

Dear Linguists,
I am looking for details of current auditory models for use in Speech
Recognition. Any information gratefully received, be it in the form of a
specification, program code, or just directions to relevant literature
as to the best place to start. I'm happy to post a summary if there's
sufficient interest.
Thanks in advance,
Geoff Williams,
Linguistics Dept
School of Oriental & African Studies, London