Editor for this issue: Ljuba Veselinova <lveselin
emunix.emich.edu>
Dear Linguist list netters, Last week I posted a request for recommendations for textbooks and references to a graduate-level grammar course on language universals and linguistic typology. Below is a summary of the responses, and I am thankful to the following individuals for responding to my request: Jacob Caflisch, Sr. Bernard Comrie Matthew Dryer Don Dyer Sung-won Koo Stephen Matthews Mari Broman Olsen Robin Sackman Jae Jung Song Satoshi Uehara Lindsay Whaley Most recommended Comrie's book "Language universals and linguistic typology" (2nd ed., Univ. of Chicago, 1989), and more than half also recommended William Croft's book "Typology and universals" (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1990). The third book cited was Tim Shopen's (ed.) "Language typology and syntactic description" (3 vol. set from Cambridge Univ. Press, 1985). Others also referred to Mallinson and Blake's "Language typology" (1981), and Greenberg's writings. There were two responses with a detailed list of references. Keep me posted if anyone has further recommendations and comments. Thanks. Shin Ja Hwang SIL/UTA 7500 W. Camp Wisdom Dallas, TX 75236 E-mail: shinja.hwangMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issuesil.org P.S. If anyone is curious about the course, which is one of the advanced grammar courses for MA, I can send the course description individually. I've decided to adopt the Shopen set as the textbook, but will also use the books by Comrie and Croft along with some other articles. The decision was based on two factors: (1) I already use Comrie's book as one of the two textbooks in the first grammar course for MA (the other being Bob Longacre's "The grammar of discourse" --prepublication copy of the revised ed. in press), and (2) our graduate program at Univ. of Texas at Arlington/ Summer Institute of Linguistics has a number of field linguists (future, if not current) who would benefit from a strongly data-oriented approach in addition to a theoretical one.