LINGUIST List 11.879

Sun Apr 16 2000

Qs: Syntax of also/too/as well,Past Ling Traditions

Editor for this issue: James Yuells <>

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. tanyaroy, The syntax of also/too/as well
  2. Lotfi, Linguistic traditions of the past

Message 1: The syntax of also/too/as well

Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 01:17:52 +0530
From: tanyaroy <>
Subject: The syntax of also/too/as well

Any hints on what to consult on the position of also/too/as well in
English and the changes in meaning with changes in position.
Tanya Roy
Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Message 2: Linguistic traditions of the past

Date: 14 Apr 2000 00:13:12 EDT
From: Lotfi <>
Subject: Linguistic traditions of the past

Dear Linguists,
The Quran, the religious book of Moslems, makes frequent cryptic
comments about language, like the following from Arrahman Chapter
(1-4: 55):
"Oh merciful! I taught the Quran to man, then brought him to life,
then I taught him speech."
Perhaps it was this Quranic interest in language that inspired
Moslem scholars to develop a rich tradition of linguistic studies
centuries ago. Just as an example, I make a quick translation of the
first two paragraphs from Toosi's Asas Al-Eghtebas, a long treatise
on logic and language written in Persian about 700 years ago:
"Word-makers created words for meanings so that the intelligent could
denote meanings via words, and this kind of denotation is termed
conventional denotation, which is man-specific. For in natural denota-
tion, like the birds' sounds denoting their conditions, man and other
animals are alike."
"Some meanings are included in some others, and some necessary for
others. For instance, the meaning of 'wall' is included in that of
'house' as a wall is a part of a house. But the meaning of 'wall' is
necessary for that of 'ceiling' as there is no ceiling without a wall.
Then to conceive some meaning necessitates the conception of some
others that are included in or necessary for the former."
Just note the psycholinguistic tone of the last sentence, and then you
might agree that it's a pity that modern linguistics began from scratch
with no concern for such a rich body of linguistic knowledge in non-
European cultures.
Are there similar linguistic traditions out there in European/non-
European academic cultures of the past that failed to come to the
modern linguist's attention? Can you think of any sources on such
traditions? If I receive sufficient replies, I'll post a summary.
- ------------------------------
Ahmad R. Lotfi.
Chair of English Dept.
Azad University at Khorasgan,
Esfahan, IRAN.
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue