Editor for this issue: <>
Query: literature on lexical means to invoke strong/weak commitment Dear netters, In the area of modal auxiliaries, the distinctions between "desires/permission" and "certainties/obligations" (want/may vs. shall/must), or between "possibilities" and "certainties/ necessities" (can/may vs. shall/must) are well described. In my research project I am investigating the way interaction and/or collaboration influences (i.a.) the linguistic form of texts. From looking at some data, it became apparent that writers frequently in fact use LEXICAL means to invoke the same difference that is so well known in the area of modals. Sometimes they are writing with a high degree of commitment as to the contents or outcome of certain policies (using predicates like "is necessary", "is unavoidable"), but especially for lesser degrees of commitment, a whole lot of different things can be used (some aspect "will receive attention", or some type of action "is to be preferred", etcetera). Now what I would like to know is if there is any literature in which lexical meanings, esp. of verbs and adjectives, are discussed/ analyzed in terms of such distinctions as are common in the area of modals. I'll be happy to post a summary of the responses to the net. Thanks in advance! --Niels ============================================================ Niels van der Mast Centre for Language and Communication - Utrecht University Trans 10 3512 JK Utrecht The Netherlands phone: +31 30 - 53 8087 (office) fax: +31 30 - 53 6000 e-mail: Niels.vanderMastMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issuelet.ruu.nl ============================================================
Dear Linguist, I would be very grateful if you could provide me with information (phonological, morphological, syntactical and/or semantical) about Nepali , the national language of Nepal. (English, French and Nepali documents' references preferably.) Many thanks in advance. Gilles Boye Gilles.BoyeMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issueLinguist.Jussieu.fr
I am looking for information on the history ofMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue(the at sign). In a more general way, does anyone know of a general reference to the history of such signs ( # $ % &) and/or punctuation. Thanks Henry Rogers rogers
epas.utoronto.ca Dept. of Linguistics University of Toronto vox: 416-978-1769 Toronto, Ont., Canada, M5S 1A1 fax: 416-971-2688
Does anybody know of sound changes affecting vowel quality only in the environment after [hw]. I find myself having to assume that this happened in Tubatulabal, with [a]) [i-] (barred i, that is) and [i-]) [o] in this environment, and I would like to find some parallels. Alexis Manaster RamerMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue