"Buenos dias", "buenas noches" -- this was the first words in a foreign language I heard in my life, as a three-year old boy growing up in developing post-war Western Germany, where the first gastarbeiters had arrived from Spain. Fascinated by the strange sounds, I tried to get to know some more languages, the only opportunity being TV courses of English and French -- there was no foreign language education for pre-teen school children in Germany yet in those days. Read more
To find some answers Tim Machan explores the language's present and past, and looks ahead to its futures among the one and a half billion people who speak it. His search is fascinating and important, for definitions of English have influenced education and law in many countries and helped shape the identities of those who live in them.
This volume provides a new perspective on the evolution of the special language of medicine, based on the electronic corpus of Early Modern English Medical Texts, containing over two million words of medical writing from 1500 to 1700.
Current interactional linguistic research appears to be crystallizing around systematic themes, which are all represented in this collection of papers. In the first section, where the relation between language and interaction is viewed from the perspective of language structure, several articles deal with the potential of a single structure for both turn and sequence construction, revealing a play-off between planned and occasioned syntax with potentially far-reaching consequences for language development. Other articles deal with lexical expressions as resources for the conduct of interaction, showing how they are heavily dependent on turn position and sequential context for their meaning potential. In the second section, with a view from the perspective of the interactional order, a systematic focus of interest lies on three different conversational tasks: projecting turn and turn-unit completion, starting up turns with 'non-beginnings' and self-repairing. The cross-linguistic studies here all agree that common interactional tasks may well be carried out by quite different linguistic practices and that these practices are dependent to a certain extent on language features which are typologically distinct.