Editor for this issue: <>
Content-Length: 1953 Kroch 1989 argues that syntactic change progresses at the same rate in all contexts (using Ellegard's 1953 data on auxiliary do) - a challenge to the notion that changes diffuse. This is obviously an important claim, and Kroch's methodology - matching theoretical syntax with (to me) high-level stats - also seems an important advance for historical linguistics. *However* - Ogura 1993 is a direct challenge to Kroch, re-using the Ellegard data and the same statistical method, but claiming that the data actually shows the opposite of what Kroch claims: i.e. that the change in auxiliary do use *differs* in rate between contexts. I'm working on auxiliary do within a more variationist model, and I'm just not up to judging who is right in this argument: can a more stats literate person help, or is there a reply by Kroch I'm not aware of? Anthony Kroch, 1989, `Reflexes of grammar in patterns of language change', Language variation and change 1, pp. 199-244 Mieko Ogura, 1993, `The development of periphrastic do in English', Diachronica, X.1, pp 51-85 Jonathan Hope (J.R.HopeMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issueLeeds.uk.ac) School of English University of Leeds UK
Content-Length: 1170 A colleague is interested in where intermediate Bulgarian language classes might be offered this summer. First preference would be at a location in the United States. Please reply directly to me: Bret Parker bparkerMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issueuop.edu University of the Pacific Stockton, California 209-946-2029
How to get on ELSNET? ThanksMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue