Editor for this issue: <>
Regarding Tony Hall's amusing suggestions, if the benighted masses ask us now what we do as 'linguists', imagine the questions aroused by our proclaiming ourselves 'tonguesters'! --Jules Levin "Slavic linguists are the most amusing linguists around" --Roman JakobsonMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
Anyway, linguistic nomenclature always depends on the Linguistics Nomenklatur. Celso Alvarez-Caccamo lxalvarzMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issueudc.es
Lou Burnard posted some data on the -one/-body taken from a sample from the British National Corpus. Just for fun, I ran a chi-square analysis on the data. Chi-square is a nice and simple analysis method that tells us if a matrix is non-randomly put together or not. So, here are the data, again: written spoken total anyone:anybody 57:31 17:32 74:63 someone:somebody 72:38 36:64 108:101 no-one:nobody 18:57 2:18 20:75 everyone:everybody 81:43 12:23 93:66 and if we reformulate them: ANY- wr sp total -one 57 17 74 -body 31 32 63 total 88 49 137 and run a chi-square test, all the tables, except "NO-", test significantly (0.001) positive for non-random distribution. (The "NO-" table has too few occurrences in one of its cells for chi-square to be reliable anyway.) ANY- X2 = 11.4643 SOME- X2 = 18.1925 NO- X2 = 1.86200 EVERY- X2 = 10.8296 So, chi-square tells us that there is some (ir)regularity in the data. However, chi-square gives no explanation. There is something there; now try find out what it is! (It is surprisingly difficult to determine this sort of frequency distribution thing by impressionistic inspection -- one of the three matrices below could represent a random distribution. The other two likely don't. 107 56 90 70 100 56 123 64 136 25 123 34 J Jussi Karlgren, fil. lic. Jussi.KarlgrenMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issuesics.se Sw Inst of Comp Sc (SICS) Spr}kteknologi / Natural Language Processing Box 1263, 164 28 Kista ph +46 8 752 15 00, fax +46 8 751 72 30 Stockholm, Sweden http://sics.se/~jussi/jussi-karlgren.html
While Linguist may be an international list for linguistics, it is strikingly parochial in many of its attitudes and discussion. It is taken for granted that US terms of education etc are universal. E.g. 'doctoral programs' are reserved in England for students who are not good enough for proper Ph.D.s.; i.e. the meaning of a program is quite different in the two educational systems. So you're not going to get, say, UK universities answering such surveys because they're not particularly proud of programs. Hence such a list is going to make it appear that you have to go to the US to do a Ph.D., when large numbers of UK universities would offer the qualification, and many now have a program. I.e. the question about Ph.D.s is culturally loaded and ethno-centric. Vivian CookMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue