LINGUIST List 7.885

Thu Jun 13 1996

Qs: Clitics, Answering machines, SSILA, Data reliability

Editor for this issue: Ann Dizdar <dizdartam2000.tamu.edu>

Directory

1. "Paul de Lacy", Q: Subject Clitics
2. Veronesi Daniela, Qs: answering machine messages
3. Dieter Stein, SSILA Bulletin
4. Allan Wechsler, Data reliability

I'm looking for references to work in Subject Clitic Pronouns over
the last decade. As I am ignorant of most of the work in clitics
over this period, any more generalised references (i.e. to 'Clitics'
in general) would also be appreciated.
(More specifically, I am interested in approaches to clitics within
Minimalism, altho' G/B approaches are still important (and
relevant).)

Many thanks.

Paul de Lacy.
University of Auckland.
<delacyvoyager.co.nz> OR <pvlantnov1.auckland.ac.nz>

Dear linguists,

I am carrying out a research on messages of answering machines, i.e. the
message the owner himself/herself speaks for the listeners who phones
him/her. The context is an informal one; what I am interested in is the
language and structure of such "private" (although they are public)
communication among friends and acquaintances (which does not exclude the
fact that the use of private telephone may be related, every now and again,
with work matters), the possible interaction of language and background
music and, also, the possibile changes of the message during a certain
period of time (1-2 months). Does anybody know of similar researches or has
comments and suggestions to give?
Please send your reply to my e-mail address, I will post a summary of all
the answers on the list.

Thanks a lot,


Daniela Veronesi

Accademia Europea di Bolzano
via Weggenstein 12/a
39100 Bolzano, Italy
veronesims.sinfo.interbusiness.it

To whom it may concern,

what is the SSILA Bulletin and what does the abbreviation stand for?

Dieter Stein

rely to: steindphil-fak.uni-duesseldorf.de

In the context of his recent adventure with an anomalous
putatively-Spanish subjunctive, Alan King [7.869 (1)] wonders in
general about the reliability of email informants.

Even more in general, I would like to collect anecdotes from field
linguists about unreliable or misunderstood data. In particular, has
it ever happened to you that you got a grammatical point very wrong
due to a misunderstanding between you and your native consultants, or
due to the consultant not being as expert as was claimed?

I'll anthologize the responses in a later issue.

(I love good fieldwork stories, and even if your favorite doesn't fit
the mold above, do share it. I prefer stories about your own
research, to avoid having to do extra legwork to verify the story.)

-A