Re: CHAT: _Describing Morphosyntax_

> ------------------------------
>
> Date:    Sun, 29 Aug 2004 15:50:15 -0500
> From:    "Mark P. Line" <mark@...>
> Subject: Re: CHAT: _Describing Morphosyntax_
>
> The IPA is for phonetic transcription, although the symbols are often
> adopted for the representation of phonemes and morphophonemes when the 26
> letters can't be made to suffice.
>
> Payne's examples are phonemic or morphophonemic, not phonetic.
>
> It's not necessary for you to be able to put specific sounds to the
> examples he gives in order to understand the points he's making about
> morphosyntax. (That doesn't mean you can do fieldwork in morphosyntax
> without a good grasp of phonetics and phonology, of course.)
>
> In any event, you couldn't know how to pronounce his phonemic
> representations without seeing a phonological description of the language
> in question.
Oh, well, no wonder my head hurt so!  Gah, maybe I'm not quite the
linguistic idiot I felt like when I tried to beat that book into my head.

> So far, there's no adequate description of any natlang using any kind of
> technical jargon or formalism -- so you may be setting a standard for
> yourself that even descriptive linguists don't set for themselves.
>
>
> -- Mark
Sadly enough, that's a recurring pattern of behavior for me.  It is
occasionally frustrating, but it also occasionally pays off.  I find
myself stretching far beyond my limitations to discover new things.
_Describing Morphosyntax_ was like that for me.
Yesterday, I was at a used bookstore and bought three language related
books.  One was a much more modern looking textbook than any I've had so
far.  Another was a book on phonetics.  Since that seems to be a weak
point for me, it seemed like a good buy.  And, lastly, I got a pidgin
dictionary.  I've added them to my "to read" stack.  Along with a bunch
of other things.  I guess I'm going to hunt down a linguistics
dictionary, too.  Most likely, Trask's since that comes with at least
one reccomendation.  And, eventually, I'll go back to _Describing
Morphosyntax_ again.  There's still a lot in there that I'd like to get out.

Thanks,
Jim
--
Visit my resume at http://www.ryumaou.com/hoffman/resume.html

Why am I adding this to my sig?  Because I was Googlespammed!
Read more about it here:
http://www.ryumaou.com/ryumaou-com.htm

Reply