Editor for this issue: Annemarie Valdez <avaldez
emunix.emich.edu>
It is a commonly held view among linguists that, linguistically, all language varieties are of equal value, and 'standard' languages are no 'better' than non-standard; however, I wonder if we really 'practise what we preach' in this regard. For example, does anyone encourage students to submit work in non-standard English, or non-standard varieties of other languages? Has anyone tried to get their institution to uphold the rights of speakers of non-standard varieties not to be penalised for submitting work including aspects of the grammar of these varieties? It seems to me that many students are penalised for using 'non-standard' grammar - an issue which often gets confused with being able to write in a clear style, produce good argumentation etc, which is of course quite different. Any views?Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
In his book The Chinese Language: Fact and Fantasy, John DeFrancis mentions a system of notation which the Japanese (of a unspecified period) used to convert a string of sinographs in Chinese word order into Japanese word order. He writes that it is similar to the system that medieval scholars and students of Latins used to rearrange Latin word order into that of the vernacular, as in: Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres 2 3 1 4 5 7 6 or (in English word order): 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Omnis Gallia est divisa en tres partes I have a number of references to construe marks in Latin. Are there any Japanese or Chinese scholars out there who can tell me more about the system that DeFrancis is talking about? If anything interesting turns up, I'll post a summary. Thanks in advance. Michael Erard Department of English UT-AustinMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
Query for Information on Equipment for Simultaneous Interpreting One of the Translation Laboratory's clients is seeking information on equipment for simultaneous interpreting. Can anyone provide some information as to the nature of such equipment and where it is available in the United States or abroad. Do you know of anyone that offers access to such equipment? If so, do you have any idea as to the cost of such services? What all does such equipment include? Please respond as soon as possible. Any information you might have will be helpful. Thank you for your time and assistance. Sincerely, Gardenia Hung, Polyglot, Inc. Communications for Translation, Interpreting & Consulting Language Services."Communicate in Any Language!" P.O. Box 1807, Lombard, IL 60148 USA Call (312) 463-7952 or Fax: (708) 261-9906 e-mail: wittle19Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issuestarnetinc.com Visit http://www.naftaconnect.com/communications
Dear friends, I am writing my thesis on Tibetan tonal analysis. I have some data on monosyllabic words of some dialects of Khams Tibetan, but I am short of data on tonal patterns in disyllabic words (for Khams). Could any of you refer me to any works done on tonal analysis on Khams Tibetan? Information about Batang Tibetan, Changdu Tibetan( or Chamdo Tibetan), or Dege Tibetan will be expecially helpful for me. (The only source I have on Batang Tibetan is a paper from Gesang Jumian (1989): Phonological analysis of Batang Tibetan .) Thanks in advance! -Seldron DSG1433Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issueutarlg.uta.edu