Editor for this issue: <>
*******PLEASE NOTE: I am putting this information on these******* *******bulletin boards for colleagues who do not subscribe******* *******Please send expressions of interest to the address******* *******below, not to me. Thanks for your cooperation. Andy******* At Dublin City University, we run a degree programme in Applied Computational Linguistics. Corpus Linguistics is one of the modules on the second year curriculum. Due to unforeseen circumstances, we find ourselves without anyone to teach the course in corpus linguistics in the Jan-March 1995 term. The entire module is approx 25 hours and the objective of the course is to familiarize students with the study of language based on machine readable corpora. It was envisaged that the course would consist of an introduction (3 hours), overview of statistical methods of corpus analysis (4 hours), followed by overview of applications of corpora in lexicography, terminography, linguistic research, computational linguistics (taggers and parsers), speech processing and machine translation combined with practical work (a total of 18 hours). As you can see, the outline is fairly general, giving a lot of scope for changes. Would anyone be interested in giving this module to our students? We imagine that such a person might come to the university for 2 or 3 visits of a few days at a time and give the course in intensive bursts. If you are interested, please contact Professor Michael Townson at Aston University. Professor Townson has joined the staff of Dublin City University and is head of the School of Applied Languages. His telephone number is -44 21 359 36 11 ext 4225 (office in Birmingham) or -353 1 704 5193 (office in Dublin), email: "M.R.TOWNSONMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issueASTON.AC.UK". Many thanks and best wishes, Jennifer Pearson
Dear folks, This year, I started to teach linguistics at a graduate school. I'm wondering if you have any list of "core readings" in linguistics (including some pre-structuralist stuff, phonetics/phonology, grammar, semantics, pragmatics, socio things, etc.) at your department. I'm thinking about compiling my own, so please send me any kind of list that may help (snail mail is fine too). I'll be happy to recompile the whole stuff and send a copy back to each of you. Thank you in advance. Toshio Ohori Language and Information Sciences University of Tokyo 3-8-1 Komaba, Meguro-ku Tokyo 153, Japan tohoriMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issuetansei.cc.u-tokyo.ac.jp
I was very interested in David Branner's question, and in the responses to it, especially Anthony Woodbury's. Woodbury writes, "it was in connection with this point [about how words order, and don't merely reflect, the natural world] that discussion of Eskimo words for snow first arose (in the writings of two major 20th Century anthropological linguists, Franz Boas and Benjamin Lee Whorf). Unfortunately, their point has been pretty much missed by those who insist on counting." This emboldens me to ask a question of my own, namely, is an examination of the lexicon sufficient if that examination is detached from an examination of how speakers use the lexicon? Suppose, for instance, that in one language there are n words for kinds of snow, but that by and large people don't use them - meteorologists and hunters and skiers do, but by and large people just call the stuff "snow" and add some adjectives? Suppose, then, that in another language there are also n words for snow, but that in this language by and large people use them all, in preference to less specific terms? Wouldn't that distinction in usage do much of the same work (for Whorf and Sapir and company) that the distinction in lexicon is said to do? Best, Larry RosenwaldMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
I've been doing some research on the role of personality factors in foreign language learning. And just few days ago I laid my hands on Schumann's 1978 article on "Social and psychological factors in second lanaguage acquisition". From what I can see there are 4 personality factors that seem to be very important in second language acquisition: (1) tolerence for ambiguity, (2) sensitivity to rejection, (3) introversion/extroversion and, (4) self-esteem. But since the article was written almost 20 years ago, I suspect that those factors might be out of "actuality" by now. Actually, I've noticed that for some SLA researchers Schuamann's personality factors are simply affective factors. When for Schumann affective factors are something else. I just wonder what could be today's personality factors. Are Schumann's factors still valid? And what's your opinion on his factors? Would there be anybody kind enough to provide me with a bibliography on personality factors or point out some new reearch done on the subject? I would appreciate a lot. Please e-mail any available information to: kowaljMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issueere.umontreal.ca Thanks a lot for your help. -- Jerzy KOWAL Linguistics, University of Montreal kowalj
ERE.UMontreal.CA \\|// -- -- O O --ooO--U--Ooo-- Non cercare! E' troppo tardi!