LINGUIST List 5.396

Wed 06 Apr 1994

Disc: Mainstream Linguistics

Editor for this issue: <>


Directory

  1. Larry Mitchell, Re: 5.537 Mainstream Linguistics
  2. , constituents and meaning

Message 1: Re: 5.537 Mainstream Linguistics

Date: Mon, 4 Apr 1994 13:56:04 -Re: 5.537 Mainstream Linguistics
From: Larry Mitchell <larrymtamuts.tamu.edu>
Subject: Re: 5.537 Mainstream Linguistics

I am glad that Margaret Winters is content in a FL department but do not
believe that her comments on the experience of linguists in English
departments will withstand scrutiny. Can I start by pointing out that one of
the moderators of the LINGUIST list (Anthony Aristar) has a home (happy, I
hope!) in the English department at Texas A&M? I spent nineteen good years at
Minnesota in the English department--including six as Chair--and certainly did
my best to make sure that the linguists among us felt welcome. It is true that
colleagues in literature don't always understand what linguists "do"--but I
cannot recall any negative tenure decisions resulting from such lack of
understanding. It is, of course, prudent for anyone in a "minority subfield"
--linguistics, rhetoric & composition,literary theory,folklore, etc.--in an
English department, to work at educating colleagues, building bridges, etc.
Moreover, after following the fascinating--and on the whole healthy--debate
about "mainstream linguistics," it occurs to me that unhappy/unemployed
linguists might indeed find a home away from home in an English department
somewhere. (Larry Mitchell, Head, Dept of English, Texas A&M)
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Message 2: constituents and meaning

Date: Tue, 05 Apr 1994 13:45:15 constituents and meaning
From: <MARONOFFDatalab2.sbs.sunysb.edu>
Subject: constituents and meaning

Those interested in the development of Bloomfield's attitude to
meaning and its influence on successor generations of theorists
should look at Peter Matthews's recent book : Grammatical theory in
the United States from Bloomfield to Chomsky, which is built around
this theme. Matthews's analysis of Bloomfield is very different from
what I at least was taught.
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue