Editor for this issue: <>
context G. Gautier's "hsiang" example, picked up on by J. Guy, is an example of what I have called UTTERANCE POTENTIAL (Lattey, Elsa. Utterance Potential, Code-Switching and Speech Errors. in: Langage et L'Homme 41 (Oct. 1979): 51-58). The effect of the environment is so strong that it overrides even the usual speech habits of native-to- native speaker in a "foreign language" environment. An example from the German setting is the use of "Pause" and "Pausenbrot" for "recess" and "sandwich for the recess period" even among native English speakers in the setting of the German school, WHILE THEY ARE SPEAKING ENGLISH. This reflects the associations that go along with the lexical item -- its being embedded in the local German culture -- and seems to be a very natural social and linguistic adjustment to a bi- or multilingual life experience. I wouldn't call this language evolution, though. It's not a feature of English, but of the context of use. Elsa Lattey, Univ. of Tuebingen, Germany (latteyMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issuemailserv.zdv.uni-tuebingen.de)
Marilyn Silva recently wrote: )Following this line of inquiry, Tony Bex offers an enlightening pair )of examples: ) )[1] The teacher asked the child to leave the room. )[2] The child asked the teacher to leave the room. ) )He contends that these sentences "are typically interpreted )pragmatically taking into account perceived authority; i.e., in [1] )the teacher TELLS the child to leave; in [2] the child asks WHETHER )s/he can leave." In either case, it is likely that it is the child who )will be leaving. I should note that this pair of examples proved to be )particularly amusing and illuminating to my students--especially to )those who, like me, found the 'permission' reading peculiar. Tony's )examples demonstrated to them to what extent pragmatic knowledge plays )a part in interpretation. The contrast between [1] and [2] becomes particularly clear when the two are shortened: [1a] The teacher asked the child to. [1b] ??The teacher asked the child. [2a] The child asked the teacher. [2b] *The child asked the teacher to. (Needless to say, [1b] and [2b] are acceptable when they do not correspond in meaning to [1] and [2].) --Leo ConnollyMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue