Publishing Partner: Cambridge University Press CUP Extra Publisher Login
amazon logo
More Info


New from Oxford University Press!

ad

Oxford Handbook of Corpus Phonology

Edited by Jacques Durand, Ulrike Gut, and Gjert Kristoffersen

Offers the first detailed examination of corpus phonology and serves as a practical guide for researchers interested in compiling or using phonological corpora


New from Cambridge University Press!

ad

The Languages of the Jews: A Sociolinguistic History

By Bernard Spolsky

A vivid commentary on Jewish survival and Jewish speech communities that will be enjoyed by the general reader, and is essential reading for students and researchers interested in the study of Middle Eastern languages, Jewish studies, and sociolinguistics.


New from Brill!

ad

Indo-European Linguistics

New Open Access journal on Indo-European Linguistics is now available!


Query Details


Query Subject:   Subject/topic-prominent languages
Author:   K K Grohmann
Submitter Email:  click here to access email

Linguistic LingField(s):  General Linguistics

Query:   I'm wondering about Keenan's and Li & Thompson's categorization of
subject-prominent languages, topic-prominent languages, mix of both
languages and lack of both languages (as L&T propose in their paper in
C. Li (ed.), 1996, _Subject and Topic_, New York: Academic Press,
457-489.).

First of all, what is the current status of this distinction (across
theories)? Is is--at least roughly--correct, or is it completely flawed
due to apparent misanalyses of subjects as topics in certain languages?

My second question concerns L&T's categorization of languages. So on p.
460 they give us the following picture:

(i) subject-prominent languages: Indo-European, Niger-Congo, Finno-Ugric,
Semitic, Dyirbal, Indonesian, Malagasy...
(ii) topic-prominent languages: Chinese, Lahu, Lisu...
(iii) both-prominent languages: Japanese, Korean...
(iv) neither-prominent languages: Tagalog, Illocano...

If the two-way (or even four-way) distinction holds, or has some merit,
has anything changed with respect to the status of the languages cited,
i.e. have people continued to work on this topic and either found that
some language(s) better be placed in a different rubric or added new
languages to the list(s)?

I would appreciate any replies, and I get enough responses I will
post a summary.

Thanks to everyone in advance,
Kleanthes



@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
@ KLEANTHES KOSTAS GROHMANN @
@ @
@ Department of Linguistics, University of Maryland @
@ 1401 Marie Mount Hall, College Park, MD 20742 @
@ @
@ Phone: (301) 405-4936 - Fax: (301) 405-7104 (dept) @
@ Phone: (202) 483-8113 - Fax: (202) 483-4439 (home) @
@ Email: grohmann@wam.umd.edu OR kleanthes@hotmail.com @
@ Homepage: http://www.wam.umd.edu/~grohmann @
@ @
@ BRANDNEW--PLEASE VISIT: wam.umd.edu/~grohmann/ling @
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@






Thu, 5 Nov 1998 12:20:45 -0500 (EST)
Treffers-Daller, Jeanine
Jeanine.Treffers-Daller@uwe.ac.uk
CD rom Linguistics



I have seen references to a CD rom in Linguistics but have
lost track of the details. Could any of the colleagues give
me info about existing CD rom(s) in Linguistics?
thanks a lot.

Jeanine Treffers-Daller


--------------------------------------
Treffers-Daller, Jeanine
Email: Jeanine.Treffers-Daller@uwe.ac.uk
''University of the West of England''






Mon, 09 Nov 1998 09:52:21 -0500
Nick Bibis
nbibis@chass.utoronto.ca
Semantic features



Is any linguist aware of any data of a language (or languages) whose
nouns are marked overtly (with affixes) for ''experiencer'' AND ''animate''
semantic features?

References regarding this matter are more than welcome.

Thank you very much,

Nick Bibis
Dept. of French,
University of Toronto






Mon, 9 Nov 1998 15:59:58 +0400
Debra M. Hardison
dmhardison@ucdavis.edu
''Semilingualism''



One of my graduate students in linguistics is interested in any
references that readers may be able to suggest on a topic referred to
by some as ''semilingualism''.

The student is familiar with numerous examples of children who have
moved from one language environment (e.g., U.S.) to another (e.g.,
Japan) and then returned to the original environment, but are not
fluent in either language. For some of these children, ESL instruction
has been insufficient to improve their skills to age-appropriate
levels. As a result, they are being assessed for special education.

A preliminary search of various databases and back issues of LINGUIST
has been done; however, given time constraints on the project, we are
hoping LINGUIST readers may be able to provide information on specific
references, especially recent ones, which may be helpful. Replies
should be sent to

Thank you.

********************************
Debra M. Hardison, Ph.D.
Program in Linguistics/ESL
University of California, Davis
One Shields Avenue
Davis, CA 95616
LL Issue: 9.1575
Date posted: 09-Nov-1998



Back

Sums main page