Editor for this issue: <>
Elyse Rukkila [criseydeMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issueIMAP2.ASU.EDU], asks if anyone (and specifically myself) has information on the history of English phrasal verbs. I'm afraid that I don't have such information. The project that I work for concerns itself only with contemporary English useage, so there has been no need for us to undertake a historical analysis. We have indeed compiled a small corpus of phrasal verbs which are used in the domain with which we work (heavy equipment.) It has generally fallen to me to determine whether a particular useage will be classified in our analysis as a phrasal verb, or as a verb + preposition, or in some cases as a verb + adverb (e.g. "move up".) Sometimes there is no clearcut way to make these decisions, so we decide based on functionality--what is the most *useful* way to classify a particular term, for our application? (That is the engineering approach.) There are also other multi-word verbs that are not verb + particle combinations, which we have identified but have not attempted to classify beyond grouping them with semantically-similar verbs (verbs of physical movement, verbs of information manipulation, etc.) These include terms such as "blow dry", "jump start", "make sure", etc. These phrasal verbs don't include particles which are identical to prepositions, so they pose a different sort of ambiguity challenge for automatic analysis. Like the verb + particle sort of phrasal verb, they don't lend themselves to ordinary compositional analysis, and we handle them as idioms. I hope some other people on this list can provide references pertaining to the history of English phrasal verbs (the verb + particle variety.) It would be interesting to see how these useages developed. The process of creating verb + particle phrasal verbs seems to be a semi-productive one even today, but I do not know at what point in the past it was at its height. --Marion Kee --------------------- Marion Kee | All opinions are my own; Knowledge Engineer, Center for Machine Translation | CMU is not responsible Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA, USA | for what I write.
I have observed, beyond any possible doubt, that some speakers of American English project the tips of their tongues between their teeth when saying /l/ at least word-initially. I am going to look at /l/ in other positions soon. I am wondering if (a) this has been observed by others and (b) whether it has been discussed in the literature Alexis Manaster RamerMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
I am looking for good examples of a situation where some language or group is uncontroversially part of a larger family, and where we know of "internal" etymologies which seemed plausible before the larger grouping was discovered but are utterly refuted once we know of the larger grouping, and etymologies involving the larger grouping which would seem ludicrous if we only had "internal" evidnce from the one language or smaller group of languages. Alexis MRMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue