Lindsay J. Whaley

Government and Binding Theory and the Minimalist Program

Introduction: Gert Webelhuth (University of North Carolina). 1. X--Bar Theory and Case Theory: Gert Webelhuth (University of North Carolina). 2. Theta Theory: Edwin Williams: (Princeton University). 3. Logical Form: C. T. James Huang (University of California, Irvine). 4. Binding Theory, Control and Pro: Wayne Harbert (Cornell University). 5. The Empty Category Principle: Norbert Hornstein & Amy Weinberg (University of Maryland). 6. Morphosyntax: Randall Hendrick (University of North Carolina). 7. The Minimalist Program: Alec Marantz (M. I. T.). 8. Bare Phrase Structure: Noam Chomsky (M. I. T.).

REVISITING TUNGUSIC CLASSIFICATION FROM THE BOTTOM UP: A COMPARISON OF EVENKI AND OROQEN

uses a tree model, is even less successful in indicating the relationships among languages at a finer level of detail. This article demonstrates that two Tungusic languages, Evenki and Oroqen, which have long been treated as a single language for classification purposes, are better treated as distinct linguistic varieties. The article raises fundamental questions about the current classification of Tungusic languages and suggests a renewed examination of the role of dialect continua and contact languages in understanding the composition of the family. Finally, we question whether a tree-based model is appropriate for classifying languages that have had a high degree of contact and are found in families or branches of a shallow time depth.*

Prepositional analysis within the framework of role and reference grammar

Traditional analyses of prepositions have customarily overlooked, subdivided or analyzed away the category. This study, based on the theoretical framework of Role and Reference Grammar, provides a means of unifying the traditional bisection of prepositional analysis. Following an extensive review of the literature, prepositions are analyzed interactively, in terms of their functions within the clause, and componentially, in terms of their semantic roles.

Some Ways to Endanger an Endangered Language Project.

The success of programs that are focused on revitalizing an endangered language depends on careful implementation. This paper examines four common mistakes that are made when linguists and anthropologists get involved with documenting endangered languages or participating in revitalization efforts: a failure to appreciate the complexity of the notion of ‘the community’; an overly simple understanding of the notion of ‘the language’; a neglect of the social dynamics and needs that underlie language use; and assuming too much control of the revitalization efforts. In the process of laying out these issues, a framework for how cultural outsiders can participate in an endangered language project will emerge. Fundamental to this framework is the recognition that language is a social practice, and as a consequence, working with an endangered language entails engagement with a range of complex, and often countervailing, social dynamics.

Emphatic reduplication in Oroqen and its Altaic context

Abstract Oroqen, a Tungusic language spoken in China, uses the partial reduplication of adjective stems to indicate intensity. This process of “emphatic reduplication” is widespread in Altaic languages, which raises the question of whether it might be a reflex of an archaic genetic trait of Altaic. We argue, to the contrary, that the presence of reduplication in Oroqen is the result of borrowing, most likely from a Mongolic language. Inter alia, the highly restrictive nature of the reduplication in Oroqen, its failure to adhere to Oroqen phonotactics, and the distribution of reduplication in other Tungusic and Mongolic languages are offered as evidence to support this position. Finally, we also provide data that point to the disappearance of emphatic reduplication in Oroqen.

Dying words: endangered languages and what they have to tell us

method of teaching initial reading used in Malawi, which helps the children understand ‘the letter-sound correspondences of written language’ (p. 169). Phonological decoding does not seem to be used by Malawian children in English reading and, if it were, it would not help much, given the students’ very low lexical competence in English. In Zambia, where the ‘whole word’ reading approach is applied, children do not seem to develop strategies to decipher new words in either their own language or in English. Third, English discriminates against rural children and girls in Malawi (predominantly rural), whereas Chichewa does not. Of course, such findings pose once again the thorny question of which language should be used to help students master other subjects (mathematics, geography, science, and so on). Williams’ recommendation here to reduce the dominance of English as a medium and to improve the teaching of it as a subject sounds very realistic. The task is huge, however, given the poor state of the school system in both countries and the political reluctance to entertain new language policies. In his section on ‘Possibilities for Amelioration’, Williams responds thoroughly to potential counterarguments to which his propositions might give rise. The issues faced by Malawian and Zambian children are not very different from those affecting other sub-Saharan Africans, although language policies may differ slightly across sociolinguistic environments. A point that Williams does not touch upon is that school hardly provides the ticket to socioeconomic progress or success in many parts of Africa today. The failure of the economic system, often linked to the mismanagement of the state (or what is left of it), has led to the pauperisation of the population. African economies rely heavily on informal pillars, for which school degrees do not matter as much as the social network one has been able to establish. Thus, reading English may no longer secure a job in the public administration and, even when it does, a person still must work at several jobs in order to make ends meet while waiting for her/his salary to be paid. Promoting African literacy cannot succeed if school does not hold any promise for a better socioeconomic future. The task is enormous because, as the author acknowledges, school by itself cannot resolve everything. Yet, the question I am left with after reading his book has less to do with language than with economy. What kind of socioeconomic model should be promoted in African countries in order to secure people’s basic needs? Will the increase of formal education in whatever language necessarily translate into social and economic development? History has shown us that lack of education correlates with increased proletarisation, and the African case acutely reminds us that, by training good readers, education can produce informed and critical citizens who are able to challenge their living conditions. My concerns notwithstanding, I highly recommend Williams’ book, not only to those who are interested in Africa but to anybody who values education as a tool for the social emancipation of individuals and communities.