LINGUIST List 9.70

Sat Jan 17 1998

Qs: Babbling Stage, Discourse, Binding Theory

Editor for this issue: Anita Huang <>

We'd like to remind readers that the responses to queries are usually best posted to the individual asking the question. That individual is then strongly encouraged to post a summary to the list. This policy was instituted to help control the huge volume of mail on LINGUIST; so we would appreciate your cooperating with it whenever it seems appropriate.


  1. coleman, Babbling Stage
  2. Ana-gomez Bravo, Monologue and Dialogue
  3. Lluke, Sources - Binding Theory

Message 1: Babbling Stage

Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 07:42:52 EST5EDT4,M4.1.0,M10.5.0
From: coleman <>
Subject: Babbling Stage

Does anyone know of studies that indicate that babies make 
similar babbling sounds regardless of the language they 
eventually acquire?

Please answer directly to

Charles Coleman
Dept. of English
York College CUNY
Jamaica, NY 11451
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Message 2: Monologue and Dialogue

Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 11:23:34 -0500 (EST)
From: Ana-gomez Bravo <>
Subject: Monologue and Dialogue

I have found a brief reference to the difference between monologue as 
hegemonic discourse and dialogue as cooperative and, therefore, more 
"democratic". The author that mentions this issue (Irene Lozano
Domingo, _Lenguaje femenino, lenguaje masculino_) puts in in the context of
gendered discourse: monologue would be predominantly male (as in cases like
preaching, traditional lecturing, etc) and dialogue would be a more appropriate
female discourse, since it allows cooperation and sharing of ideas. I am
currently working with late medieval manuscripts and have found some aspects of
this point of view relevant for my discussion. However, I have been unable to 
find any biliography on the difference between monologue and dialogue as power 
or hegemonic discourse vs. democratic, non hegemonic discourse. Does anybody
on this list have any suggestions as to studies on this particular subject?
Any help would be very much appreciated.

Ana M. Gomez-Bravo
Purdue University 
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Message 3: Sources - Binding Theory

Date: Fri, 16 Jan 1998 19:34:48 +0100
From: Lluke <>
Subject: Sources - Binding Theory

Dear everybody,

I am writing a thesis on binding and have run across difficulties in
identifying the true, original authors of some theories, proposals
etc. In recent articles I keep being redirected to more articles or
fooled by phrases like "the standard approach" or "it has been
generally assumed" or "there were linguists who suggested..."
Sincerely wishing to give credit where it is due, I now ask you to
enlighten me:

1. Who was the person who _first_ thought of all NPs (DPs) as having a
subject? 2. Who did the idea of psych-verbs being unaccusatives with
two object _originate_ with? 3. Who tried to solve the problem of
non-complementary distribution of reciprocals and pronouns (like in
"The children like each other's/their friends") by redefining the GC
for either of them, or both?

I would be extremely grateful if anybody could e-mail me and help me out.
Loads of thanks in advance,
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue