"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.
Roots and Affixes is an investigation into the primitives of syntax. It focuses on
the lexical projection and the categorial head. Accordingly, it consists of two
parts. The first part argues that the features of lexical vocabulary items (such
as light and kiss) are not an active part of the syntactic derivation. The author
provides empirical support for the claim that vocabulary items are inserted post-
syntactically, adopting the view that syntax operates on UG-features only. She
argues that the root terminal node is a by-product of the operation Merge that is
characterized by the mere absence of features. It is further shown that
functional structure determines subcategories of lexical items. In the second
part of the thesis it is argued that categorial heads do not exist. As a result,
derivational affixes do not realize categorial heads. The author proposes instead
that derivational affixes are lexical vocabulary items which realize root
positions. It is shown that the abandonment of categorial heads does not lead to
a loss of explanatory adequacy. The general conclusion is that lexical categorial
features are not a primitive of syntax.