Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

[mosling] TALK: РГГУ: Лекция Гревила Корбета

Expand Messages
  • Vera Podlesskaya
    Äîðîãèå êîëëåãè, 24 ìàÿ â 16-00 â Ïðîôåññîðñêîé àóäèòîðèè ÐÃÃÓ ñîñòîèòñÿ ëåêöèÿ
    Message 1 of 1 , May 15, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      Дорогие коллеги,

      24 мая в 16-00 в Профессорской аудитории РГГУ состоится лекция
      замечательного британского лингвиста Гревила Корбета.

      Студентам, магистрантам и преподавателям Института лингвистики РГГУ
      будет особенно интересно узнать, что в лекции будет содержаться ответ
      на один из вопросов нашего государственного экзамена, а именно:

      "Поморфемная нотация как инструмент представления языкового
      многообразия. Стандарты поморфемной нотации."


      Лекция будет прочитана на английском языке. Приглашаются все желающие.
      Авторская версия аннотации приводится ниже. Тех, кому нужен пропуск в
      РГГУ, просим написать по адресу latyp@... до 22 мая. Мы
      передадим список гостей на вахту.

      В.И.Подлесская


      Paradigms: How we represent them and what we mean

      Greville G. Corbett

      Surrey Morphology Group


      Until recently the glossing of examples even in major linguistics
      journals was often unsatisfactory. That situation is being improved,
      in part because of the availability of the Leipzig Glossing Rules. In
      a similar way, we can now consider how we represent the forms of
      lexemes. For some linguists, this reflects key issues in inflectional
      morphology; others treat paradigms as epiphenomena, but it is still
      important to know what can and cannot be inferred from their choices
      of representation. The need for greater clarity arises because others,
      such as psycholinguists, are increasingly interested in paradigms, and
      we risk misleading them by our unstated conventions. And within
      morphology, recent entropy based and principal part based approaches
      start from paradigms, implicitly or explicitly, and evaluating their
      conclusions depends on our understanding the starting point. I will
      suggest some possible conventions, ranging from superficial
      presentation to issues with greater analytical significance, and will
      give some difficult examples. I conclude that: (i) of course, the
      substance matters more than the representation; conventions should
      help make clear what the analyst intends, so that the reader is able
      to agree or disagree with the actual intention; (ii) the
      representation has enormous potential: it can clarify our
      understanding of our material (so that claims are made with full
      awareness)or it can mislead the unwary; (iii) since we are doing
      better with regard to morphosyntactic glossing, it is time to begin
      being more explicit about how we represent the forms of lexemes. Our
      current, largely unspoken, conventions form a good basis for this.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.