Editor for this issue: Martin Jacobsen <marty
linguistlist.org>
I asked yesterday for reactions to the recently announced MRI research on language "locations" in the brain (allegedly a single location for all languages acquired in infancy, but separate ones for languages acquired as an adult) and have been getting responses asking for a proper reference. I apologize; I assumed that all of you would be way ahead of me on the curve with this article. It's by Hirsch and Kim, and appears in the July 10, 1997 issue of Nature. I have only read the newspaper articles reporting on the research, plus a lengthy news release about it from Memorial Sloan-Kettering (which you can get with a Net search using "language location in the brain," if you want to see it and it hasn't been removed from their page yet.) I remain extremely interested in linguist reactions; I'm getting a lot of questions about the work and would like to be able to answer them with reasonable accuracy. I'll be glad to post a summary of responses. Suzette Haden ElginMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
Thanks to Patrick Ryan for his review of _Comparative Kadai: The Tai Branch_. I would just like to correct two errors, one minor and one not. The minor error is the misspelling of my co-editor's name: Jerold A. Edmondson, not "Emondson" as in the title of the post (but correct in the body of the review). Secondly, Mr Ryan is in error in his statement, "proto-Tai Tone B is identified as a result of earlier voiced initials while proto-Tai Tone C reflects earlier non-voiced initials". The proto-tones ABCD occur with all initial types and are fully contrastive at the proto-Tai stage. *After* that stage, initial laryngeal features (including glottalization and aspiration as well as voicing) condition splits and sometimes mergers of the proto-tones. I would also quibble with Mr Ryan's wording in "very early forms that are semantically distinguished phonemically rather than tonally", if "phonemic" means contrastive. Perhaps he means "distinguished segmentally rather than tonally." It is of course possible for a non-tonal language to become tonal under the conditioning influence of laryngeal features of segments. Haudricourt's proposal of final consonant types as the origin of Vietnamese tones has been transferred to Chinese and is generally accepted. Evidence for a similar origin of Tai tones is presented in William Gedney's "Speculations on Early Tai Tones," in _Selected Papers on Comparative Tai Studies_," ed. Bickner, Hartmann, Hudak, and Peyasantiwong, U of Michigan Center for South and Southeast Asian Studies, 1989. -- David B Solnit 729 Elm St El Cerrito CA 94530 510-524-4744 dsolnitMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issueworldnet.att.net http://home.att.net/~dsolnit
I shall be arguing the history of the Bantu kin terms on the "ArcLing" list from time to time over the next two years. This will be in the context of work from the office and work from the field. I shall be grateful for comments on my reconstructions, responses to requests for published sources or contacts in the field, and so on. If you or any of your colleages would like to follow or participate in the discussion, subscription to ArcLing is accomplished with the following email message: To: listprocMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issuelistproc.anu.edu.au subscribe arcling Your Name Thank you, __________________________________________________________ Jeff Marck Health Transition Centre-NCEPH Australian National Univ. and Linguistics-RSPAS Australian National University Homepage: http://coombs.anu.edu.au/~marck/marck.htm ___________________________________________________________