LINGUIST List 7.321

Thu Feb 29 1996

Qs: Trade Names,Intonational Contours,Peripheral Coordinators

Editor for this issue: Annemarie Valdez <avaldezemunix.emich.edu>

Directory

1. Andreas Westerhoff, Trade names
2. Alicia Spiegel, Intonational contours
3. Ed Zoerner, Peripheral coordinators

Tradenames/Trademarks are a very special kind of words. Most authors
classify them as proper names, proper nouns or as common nouns. But there is
a minority calling tradenames adjectives. I like to discuss, if this
qualification of trademarks makes sense to you in a general or restricted
 way.

I quote two rather typical statements:
"Finally, trademarks have in common with adjectives the fact that they are
very often employed as such, or at least in a parallel position, c.f. 'SHELL
oil' and 'thick (or good, etc.) oil'. Others are already adjectives in
themselves: LIGHT AND BRIGHT." (Werkman, Caspar J.: Trademarks.Their
Creation, Psychology and Perception. Amsterdam 1974 p. 4)
Legal advisors like to classify them as adjectives:
Trademarks should always be used as adjectives, never as nouns, e.g.:
Proper use	Get into Wrangler jeans now!
Improper use	Get into Wranglers now!=93
(Graham and Peroff in Murphy, John M. :Branding: A key marketing tool
Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire and London 1987 p.45 f.)

In German, tradenames are nouns syntactically, they can be replaced by
pronouns, and most of them can be used with articles. But I made one
contradictory observation:
German nouns need a gender, and tradenames receive their gender from a basic
word, which is somehow understood. For instance, MERCEDES, AUDI, and
PORSCHE have a masculine gender, probably because the basic word is "der
Wagen" which is masculine.
I'd like to know, how other languages deal with this.
I will send a summary to the list, if I receive interesting answers.

If you like to answer to this query, please forward to:
Andreas.Westerhoffuni-essen.de

I am currently working on my master's thesis which concerns the
intonational contours found in Gullah and Jamaican Creole (mesolect,
basilect, acrolect). I am looking for bibliographic references pertaining
to this area of study. I will post any/all responses that I may receive.
Thank you.

Hello all,

 I am interested in languages that permit "peripheral" coordinators.
That is, some languages allow an overt coordinator before the first
conjunct; others allow one after the final conjunct:

			1. And A and B and C
			2. A and B and C and

 I know that Dutch and Serbo-Croatian permit constructions like that
in (1), while Japanese and Korean for example show constructions like
that in (2). If you can inform me of other languages that permit
peripheral coordinators, I will appreciate it very much.

 I am also interested in learning about the compatibility of a
peripheral coordinator with a collective reading. In other words, is
a sentence like the following grammatical?

			3. And Robin and Kim met

 Dutch and Serbo-Croatian do not allow sentences like (3); Japanese
and (I think) Korean do. I wonder if there's a general
head-initial/head-final distinction to be found here.
 Please address responses directly to me. I will post a summary if
interest warrants it. Many thanks.
					Ed Zoerner
					UC Irvine
					ezoernerorion.oac.uci.edu