Scott,
You said much more pithily and gracefully what I tried to say in my last posting on "Standard English."
Thanks,
Herb
-----Original Message-----
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Scott
Sent: Monday, August 02, 2010 1:33 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: ATEG Digest - 31 Jul 2010 to 1 Aug 2010 (#2010-115)
The answer to your question depends upon what is meant by "properly."
I am quick to note pronunciations that differ from mine but do not criticize even internally those that are appropriate for the milieu. I drawl more and occasionally drop final -g from words ending in -ing if I am speaking with someone on a Mississippi farm: it's not a deliberate act--I sometimes hear myself and say "Hawnh?" I was not "bone in a bahn" nor do I "pahk mah cahr in the yahd" or support attacking "Cewber with vigah" but I would not consider such pronunciations as improper. On the other hand, I have little regard for educated persons who commonly mispronounce everyday words. A few words do annoy me but I joke about them. If someone mentions a crick, I always say with a smile that my only experience with cricks is in my neck and then mention the creek near the farmhouse where I was born and spent 15 summers.
Do you have a better explanation than intellectual lazyness?
Scott Catledge
-----Original Message-----
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of ATEG automatic digest system
Sent: Monday, August 02, 2010 12:01 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: ATEG Digest - 31 Jul 2010 to 1 Aug 2010 (#2010-115)
There are 4 messages totalling 747 lines in this issue.
Topics of the day:
1. question about negative contractions (4)
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2010 11:52:27 -0400
From: Craig Hancock <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: question about negative contractions
Herb,
I agree that we may not need this level of distinction outside of linguistics classes. But I wonder how you might advise countering the notion that people are being lazy when they don't pronounce things "properly" when they speak. I think it might help to say that there is a more or less "scientific" explanation for it, but how might we water that down without being inaccurate?
Craig
>
Brett,
>
> I suspect you misspoke below when you wrote "for reasons why -N'T
> should be considered an inflectional ending (or "clitic" in technical terms)."
> The point of Zwicky&Pullum's argument is that inflectional endings and
> clitics aren't the same thing, and "n't" is an inflectional ending,
> not a clitic.
>
> Clitic is a useful category in grammatical analysis, although it's not
> easy to define. Contrasting clitics with inflectional endings is one
> thing. Defining clitics across languages or even across English is a
> little harder. Roughly speaking, on a scale of how bound they are and
> what they bind to, affixes are the most bound and words the least,
> hence Bloomfield's definition of "word" as a "minimal free form."
> Clitics sit between affixes and words. They are bound to grammatical
> categories, like NP, not to roots or stems as affixes are. Unstressed words like "the,"
> "and," prepositions, "that" as a subordinating conjunctions, etc.
> behave like clitics rather than words.
>
> While the affix/clitic/word distinction is important in grammatical
> analysis, I doubt that it has much of a place in teaching grammar in
> high school or college.
>
> Herb
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Brett Reynolds
> Sent: Saturday, July 31, 2010 7:56 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: question about negative contractions
> Importance: Low
>
> On 2010-07-28, at 3:53 PM, Tony DeFazio wrote:
>
>> Can someone explain, please, why we can say "Why don't you like her?"
>> but not "Why do not you like her?" A student asked and I was at a
>> loss for an explanation.
>
> Zwicky & Pullum (1983)
> <http://www.stanford.edu/~zwicky/ZPCliticsInfl.pdf>
> put forth the argument that -N'T, though historically a contraction,
> has actually become an inflectional ending for auxiliary verbs. That
> is, they say it's like the past tense -ED or third person -S. This
> approach is followed in the recently mentioned grammars by Huddleston
> & Pullum. See the paper linked to above for reasons why -N'T should be
> considered an inflectional ending (or "clitic" in technical terms).
>
> If -N'T is a negative inflection, and I think it is, then the reason
> we can say "Why don't you like her?" (or "Why can't you be there"
> etc.) is because the inflection simply can't be separated from the auxiliary verb.
> The other question, why you can't say "Why do not you like her?", is a
> question about adverb placement in general, not just "not". You can't
> say "Why do never you go there?" "Why do always you say that?" etc.
>
> Best,
> Brett
>
> -----------------------
> Brett Reynolds
> English Language Centre
> Humber College Institute of Technology and Advanced Learning Toronto,
> Ontario, Canada [log in to unmask]
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
> interface
> at:
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
> interface
> at:
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2010 16:13:46 -0400
From: "Spruiell, William C" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: question about negative contractions
Potential extra spin on the "Questions split the subject and aux" = approach (and apologies if someone's already said this -- I'm losing = track of the thread). I'm adapting it from Halliday, but if there are = parts that don't work, blame me -- I don't have the book handy, and am = going on memory.=20
In your average statement, you can negate the auxiliary that carries the = tense (the "finite marker"), and you can negate the predicate (among = other things). The contracted version is a negation of the finite, so = "Bjorn isn't reading that book" has a negated finite, while "Bjorn's not = reading that book" has a negated predicate. The contraction vs. = non-contraction distinction is thus marking a difference in what's being = negated. In a lot of cases, the distinction may not have much direct = bearing on the truth-value of the statement in traditional terms, but it = shows up interestingly in tag questions: "Bjorn's not reading that book, = is he?" sounds more awkward (to me at least) than does "Bjorn isn't = reading that book, is he?"=20
Questions usually have the finite before the subject, so whether you're = negating the finite or the predicate determines whether the negative = comes before or after the Subject. When it's before the Subject, in an = interrogative it thus has to be a finite-negator, and hence sounds odd = unless contracted. So, "Why doesn't S V O" is the usual for a negated = finite, with "Why does S not V O" being the equivalent for the negated = predicate.
=20
--- Bill Spruiell
-----Original Message-----
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar on behalf of Craig = Hancock
Sent: Sun 8/1/2010 11:52 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: question about negative contractions
=20
Herb,
I agree that we may not need this level of distinction outside of linguistics classes. But I wonder how you might advise countering the notion that people are being lazy when they don't pronounce things "properly" when they speak. I think it might help to say that there is a more or less "scientific" explanation for it, but how might we water that down without being inaccurate?
Craig
>
Brett,
>
> I suspect you misspoke below when you wrote "for reasons why -N'T =
should
> be considered an inflectional ending (or "clitic" in technical =
terms)."
> The point of Zwicky&Pullum's argument is that inflectional endings and
> clitics aren't the same thing, and "n't" is an inflectional ending, =
not a
> clitic.
>
> Clitic is a useful category in grammatical analysis, although it's not
> easy to define. Contrasting clitics with inflectional endings is one
> thing. Defining clitics across languages or even across English is a
> little harder. Roughly speaking, on a scale of how bound they are and
> =
what
> they bind to, affixes are the most bound and words the least, hence
> Bloomfield's definition of "word" as a "minimal free form." Clitics =
sit
> between affixes and words. They are bound to grammatical categories, =
like
> NP, not to roots or stems as affixes are. Unstressed words like "the,"
> "and," prepositions, "that" as a subordinating conjunctions, etc. =
behave
> like clitics rather than words.
>
> While the affix/clitic/word distinction is important in grammatical
> analysis, I doubt that it has much of a place in teaching grammar in =
high
> school or college.
>
> Herb
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Brett Reynolds
> Sent: Saturday, July 31, 2010 7:56 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: question about negative contractions
> Importance: Low
>
> On 2010-07-28, at 3:53 PM, Tony DeFazio wrote:
>
>> Can someone explain, please, why we can say "Why don't you like her?"
>> but not "Why do not you like her?" A student asked and I was at a =
loss
>> for an explanation.
>
> Zwicky & Pullum (1983) =
<http://www.stanford.edu/~zwicky/ZPCliticsInfl.pdf>
> put forth the argument that -N'T, though historically a contraction, =
has
> actually become an inflectional ending for auxiliary verbs. That is, =
they
> say it's like the past tense -ED or third person -S. This approach is
> followed in the recently mentioned grammars by Huddleston & Pullum. =
See
> the paper linked to above for reasons why -N'T should be considered an
> inflectional ending (or "clitic" in technical terms).
>
> If -N'T is a negative inflection, and I think it is, then the reason =
we
> can say "Why don't you like her?" (or "Why can't you be there" etc.) =
is
> because the inflection simply can't be separated from the auxiliary =
verb.
> The other question, why you can't say "Why do not you like her?", is a
> question about adverb placement in general, not just "not". You can't
> =
say
> "Why do never you go there?" "Why do always you say that?" etc.
>
> Best,
> Brett
>
> -----------------------
> Brett Reynolds
> English Language Centre
> Humber College Institute of Technology and Advanced Learning Toronto,
> Ontario, Canada [log in to unmask]
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web =
interface
> at:
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web =
interface
> at:
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web = interface at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2010 19:10:48 -0600
From: Webmail bdespain <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: question about negative contractions
--000325572daafb712e048cccde8c
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
My take on, "*Bjorn's not reading that book, is he?"* is that the speaker anticipates being surprised to find that Bjjorn is reading that book.
My take on, "*Bjorn isn't reading that book, is he?"* is that the speaker has reasons to think that Bjorn is not reading that book and wants confirmation.
The normal intonation on these tag questions is quite different.
Bruce
On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at 2:13 PM, Spruiell, William C
<[log in to unmask]>wrote:
> Potential extra spin on the "Questions split the subject and aux"
> approach (and apologies if someone's already said this -- I'm losing
> track of the thread). I'm adapting it from Halliday, but if there are
> parts that don't work, blame me -- I don't have the book handy, and am going on memory.
>
> In your average statement, you can negate the auxiliary that carries
> the tense (the "finite marker"), and you can negate the predicate
> (among other things). The contracted version is a negation of the
> finite, so "Bjorn
isn't
> reading that book" has a negated finite, while "Bjorn's not reading
> that book" has a negated predicate. The contraction vs.
> non-contraction distinction is thus marking a difference in what's
> being negated. In a lot of cases, the distinction may not have much
> direct bearing on the truth-value of the statement in traditional
> terms, but it shows up interestingly in tag questions: "Bjorn's not reading that book, is he?"
> sounds more awkward (to me at least) than does "Bjorn isn't reading
> that book, is he?"
>
> Questions usually have the finite before the subject, so whether
> you're negating the finite or the predicate determines whether the
> negative comes before or after the Subject. When it's before the
> Subject, in an interrogative it thus has to be a finite-negator, and
> hence sounds odd unless contracted. So, "Why doesn't S V O" is the
> usual for a negated finite, with "Why does S not V O" being the
> equivalent for the negated predicate.
>
>
> --- Bill Spruiell
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar on behalf of Craig
> Hancock
> Sent: Sun 8/1/2010 11:52 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: question about negative contractions
>
> Herb,
> I agree that we may not need this level of distinction outside of
> linguistics classes. But I wonder how you might advise countering the
> notion that people are being lazy when they don't pronounce things
> "properly" when they speak. I think it might help to say that there is
> a more or less "scientific" explanation for it, but how might we water
> that down without being inaccurate?
>
> Craig
>
>
> >
>
> Brett,
> >
> > I suspect you misspoke below when you wrote "for reasons why -N'T
> > should be considered an inflectional ending (or "clitic" in technical terms)."
> > The point of Zwicky&Pullum's argument is that inflectional endings
> > and clitics aren't the same thing, and "n't" is an inflectional
> > ending, not
a
> > clitic.
> >
> > Clitic is a useful category in grammatical analysis, although it's
> > not easy to define. Contrasting clitics with inflectional endings
> > is one thing. Defining clitics across languages or even across
> > English is a little harder. Roughly speaking, on a scale of how
> > bound they are and
> what
> > they bind to, affixes are the most bound and words the least, hence
> > Bloomfield's definition of "word" as a "minimal free form." Clitics
> > sit between affixes and words. They are bound to grammatical
> > categories,
like
> > NP, not to roots or stems as affixes are. Unstressed words like "the,"
> > "and," prepositions, "that" as a subordinating conjunctions, etc.
> > behave like clitics rather than words.
> >
> > While the affix/clitic/word distinction is important in grammatical
> > analysis, I doubt that it has much of a place in teaching grammar in
high
> > school or college.
> >
> > Herb
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
> > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Brett Reynolds
> > Sent: Saturday, July 31, 2010 7:56 PM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: question about negative contractions
> > Importance: Low
> >
> > On 2010-07-28, at 3:53 PM, Tony DeFazio wrote:
> >
> >> Can someone explain, please, why we can say "Why don't you like her?"
> >> but not "Why do not you like her?" A student asked and I was at a
> >> loss for an explanation.
> >
> > Zwicky & Pullum (1983) <
> http://www.stanford.edu/~zwicky/ZPCliticsInfl.pdf>
> > put forth the argument that -N'T, though historically a contraction,
> > has actually become an inflectional ending for auxiliary verbs. That
> > is,
they
> > say it's like the past tense -ED or third person -S. This approach
> > is followed in the recently mentioned grammars by Huddleston &
> > Pullum. See the paper linked to above for reasons why -N'T should be
> > considered an inflectional ending (or "clitic" in technical terms).
> >
> > If -N'T is a negative inflection, and I think it is, then the reason
> > we can say "Why don't you like her?" (or "Why can't you be there"
> > etc.) is because the inflection simply can't be separated from the
> > auxiliary
verb.
> > The other question, why you can't say "Why do not you like her?", is
> > a question about adverb placement in general, not just "not". You
> > can't
say
> > "Why do never you go there?" "Why do always you say that?" etc.
> >
> > Best,
> > Brett
> >
> > -----------------------
> > Brett Reynolds
> > English Language Centre
> > Humber College Institute of Technology and Advanced Learning
> > Toronto, Ontario, Canada [log in to unmask]
> >
> > To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
> interface
> > at:
> > http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> > and select "Join or leave the list"
> >
> > Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
> >
> > To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
> interface
> > at:
> > http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> > and select "Join or leave the list"
> >
> > Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
> >
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
> interface
> at:
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
> interface
> at:
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
--000325572daafb712e048cccde8c
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div>My take on, "<strong>Bjorn's not reading that book, is he?&qu= ot;</strong></div> <div>is that the speaker anticipates=A0being surprised to find that Bjjorn = is reading that book. </div> <div>My take on, "<strong>Bjorn isn't reading that book, is he?&qu= ot;</strong></div> <div>is that the speaker has reasons to think that Bjorn is not reading tha= t book and wants confirmation.=A0 </div> <div>The normal intonation on these tag questions is quite different.</div> <div>=A0</div> <div>Bruce</div> <div><br>=A0</div> <div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at 2:13 PM, Spruiell, Willia= m C <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">sprui1wc@cm=
ich.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex= ; PADDING-LEFT: 1ex" class=3D"gmail_quote">Potential extra spin on the &quo= t;Questions split the subject and aux" approach (and apologies if some= one's already said this -- I'm losing track of the thread). I'm= adapting it from Halliday, but if there are parts that don't work, bla= me me -- I don't have the book handy, and am going on memory.<br> <br>In your average statement, you can negate the auxiliary that carries th= e tense (the "finite marker"), and you can negate the predicate (= among other things). The contracted version is a negation of the finite, so= "Bjorn isn't reading that book" has a negated finite, while = "Bjorn's not reading that book" has a negated predicate. The = contraction vs. non-contraction distinction is thus marking a difference in= what's being negated. In a lot of cases, the distinction may not have = much direct bearing on the truth-value of the statement in traditional term= s, but it shows up interestingly in tag questions: "Bjorn's not re= ading that book, is he?" =A0sounds more awkward (to me at least) than = does "Bjorn isn't reading that book, is he?"<br> <br>Questions usually have the finite before the subject, so whether you= 9;re negating the finite or the predicate determines whether the negative c= omes before or after the Subject. When it's before the Subject, in an i= nterrogative it thus has to be a finite-negator, and hence sounds odd unles= s contracted. So, "Why doesn't S V O" is the usual for a nega= ted finite, with "Why does S not V O" being the equivalent for th= e negated predicate.<br>
<br><br>--- Bill Spruiell<br>
<div>
<div></div>
<div class=3D"h5"><br><br>-----Original Message-----<br>From: Assembly for = the Teaching of English Grammar on behalf of Craig Hancock<br>Sent: Sun 8/1=
/2010 11:52 AM<br>To: <a href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">ATEG@LIST=
SERV.MUOHIO.EDU</a><br>
Subject: Re: question about negative contractions<br><br>Herb,<br>=A0 I agr= ee that we may not need this level of distinction outside of<br>linguistics= classes. But I wonder how you might advise countering the<br>notion that p= eople are being lazy when they don't pronounce things<br> "properly" when they speak. I think it might help to say that the= re is<br>a more or less "scientific" explanation for it, but how = might we water<br>that down without being inaccurate?<br><br>Craig<br><br> <br>=A0><br><br>=A0Brett,<br>><br>> I suspect you misspoke below w= hen you wrote "for reasons why -N'T should<br>> be considered a= n inflectional ending (or "clitic" in technical terms)."<br> > The point of Zwicky&Pullum's argument is that inflectional end= ings and<br>> clitics aren't the same thing, and "n't"= is an inflectional ending, not a<br>> clitic.<br>><br>> Clitic is= a useful category in grammatical analysis, although it's not<br> > easy to define. =A0Contrasting clitics with inflectional endings is on= e<br>> thing. =A0Defining clitics across languages or even across Englis= h is a<br>> little harder. Roughly speaking, on a scale of how bound the= y are and what<br> > they bind to, affixes are the most bound and words the least, hence<br=
>> Bloomfield's definition of "word" as a "minimal
>fr=
ee form." =A0Clitics sit<br>> between affixes and words. They are b= ound to grammatical categories, like<br> > NP, not to roots or stems as affixes are. Unstressed words like "= the,"<br>> "and," prepositions, "that" as a sub= ordinating conjunctions, etc. behave<br>> like clitics rather than words= .<br> ><br>> While the affix/clitic/word distinction is important in gramma= tical<br>> analysis, I doubt that it has much of a place in teaching gra= mmar in high<br>> school or college.<br>><br>> Herb<br>><br> > -----Original Message-----<br>> From: Assembly for the Teaching of = English Grammar<br>> [mailto:<a href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]"=
>[log in to unmask]</a>] On Behalf Of Brett Reynolds<br>> Sent:
>Sa=
turday, July 31, 2010 7:56 PM<br>
> To: <a href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]
DU</a><br>> Subject: Re: question about negative contractions<br>> Im=
portance: Low<br>><br>> On 2010-07-28, at 3:53 PM, Tony DeFazio wrote= :<br> ><br>>> Can someone explain, please, why we can say "Why don&= #39;t you like her?"<br>>> but not "Why do not you like her= ?" A student asked and I was at a loss<br>>> for an explanation.= <br> ><br>> Zwicky & Pullum (1983) <<a href=3D"http://www.stanford.= edu/~zwicky/ZPCliticsInfl.pdf" target=3D"_blank">http://www.stanford.edu/~z=
wicky/ZPCliticsInfl.pdf</a>><br>> put forth the argument that -N'= T, though historically a contraction, has<br> > actually become an inflectional ending for auxiliary verbs. That is, t= hey<br>> say it's like the past tense -ED or third person -S. This a= pproach is<br>> followed in the recently mentioned grammars by Huddlesto= n & Pullum. See<br> > the paper linked to above for reasons why -N'T should be considere= d an<br>> inflectional ending (or "clitic" in technical terms)= .<br>><br>> If -N'T is a negative inflection, and I think it is, = then the reason we<br> > can say "Why don't you like her?" (or "Why can'= t you be there" etc.) is<br>> because the inflection simply can'= ;t be separated from the auxiliary verb.<br>> The other question, why yo= u can't say "Why do not you like her?", is a<br> > question about adverb placement in general, not just "not". = You can't say<br>> "Why do never you go there?" "Why = do always you say that?" etc.<br>><br>> Best,<br>> Brett<br> ><br>> -----------------------<br>> Brett Reynolds<br>> English= Language Centre<br>> Humber College Institute of Technology and Advance= d Learning Toronto,<br>> Ontario, Canada <a href=3D"mailto:brett.reynold= [log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</a><br>
><br>> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list'= ;s web interface<br>> at:<br>> =A0 =A0 =A0<a href=3D"http://listserv.= muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html" target=3D"_blank">http://listserv.muohio.edu=
/archives/ateg.html</a><br>
> and select "Join or leave the list"<br>><br>> Visit AT= EG's web site at <a href=3D"http://ateg.org/" target=3D"_blank">http://= ateg.org/</a><br>><br>> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please v= isit the list's web interface<br> > at:<br>> =A0 =A0 =A0<a href=3D"http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/=
ateg.html" target=3D"_blank">http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html<=
/a><br>> and select "Join or leave the list"<br>><br>> V= isit ATEG's web site at <a href=3D"http://ateg.org/" target=3D"_blank">= http://ateg.org/</a><br> ><br><br>To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list'= s web interface at:<br>=A0 =A0 <a href=3D"http://listserv.muohio.edu/archiv=
es/ateg.html" target=3D"_blank">http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.ht=
ml</a><br>
and select "Join or leave the list"<br><br>Visit ATEG's web s= ite at <a href=3D"http://ateg.org/" target=3D"_blank">http://ateg.org/</a><=
br><br><br>To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the
br>list's=
web interface at:<br>
=A0 =A0 <a href=3D"http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html" target=3D= "_blank">http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html</a><br>and select &q= uot;Join or leave the list"<br><br>Visit ATEG's web site at <a hre= f=3D"http://ateg.org/" target=3D"_blank">http://ateg.org/</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
<p>
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
--000325572daafb712e048cccde8c--
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2010 23:39:52 -0400
From: "STAHLKE, HERBERT F" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: question about negative contractions
Craig,
That's the approach I typically take to the question. People tend to think= about English pronunciation as if it's derived somehow from English spelli= ng, assuming, as people tend to, that the written form is what's important.=
So when you speak and you leave out things that are clearly written it mu= st be because you're being sloppy and lazy. Taking writing as basic is suc= h a deep article of faith that I've had people react in utter disbelief whe= n I tell them that writing is secondary, a surrogate for speech. It's rare= that such a discussion goes on into the nature of speech. =20
In my classes, where I have time to explain in greater detail, I use the no= tion of stress-timing as an entry point. It's not hard to demonstrate the = roughly regular spacing of stressed syllables in spoken English and then to= show that the number of syllables between stresses can vary. Obviously th= ere has to be a lot of syllable reduction going on for stress-timing to wor= k.
Herb
-----Original Message-----
From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:[log in to unmask] OHIO.EDU] On Behalf Of Craig Hancock
Sent: Sunday, August 01, 2010 11:52 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: question about negative contractions
Herb,
I agree that we may not need this level of distinction outside of lingui= stics classes. But I wonder how you might advise countering the notion that= people are being lazy when they don't pronounce things "properly" when the= y speak. I think it might help to say that there is a more or less "scienti= fic" explanation for it, but how might we water that down without being ina= ccurate?
Craig
>
Brett,
>
> I suspect you misspoke below when you wrote "for reasons why -N'T=20
> should be considered an inflectional ending (or "clitic" in technical
> ter=
ms)."
> The point of Zwicky&Pullum's argument is that inflectional endings
> and=20 clitics aren't the same thing, and "n't" is an inflectional
> ending,=20 not a clitic.
>
> Clitic is a useful category in grammatical analysis, although it's
> not=20 easy to define. Contrasting clitics with inflectional endings
> is one=20 thing. Defining clitics across languages or even across
> English is a=20 little harder. Roughly speaking, on a scale of how
> bound they are and=20 what they bind to, affixes are the most bound
> and words the least,=20 hence Bloomfield's definition of "word" as a
> "minimal free form." =20 Clitics sit between affixes and words. They
> are bound to grammatical=20 categories, like NP, not to roots or stems
> as affixes are. Unstressed wor=
ds like "the,"
> "and," prepositions, "that" as a subordinating conjunctions, etc.=20
> behave like clitics rather than words.
>
> While the affix/clitic/word distinction is important in grammatical=20
> analysis, I doubt that it has much of a place in teaching grammar
> in=20 high school or college.
>
> Herb
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar=20
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Brett Reynolds
> Sent: Saturday, July 31, 2010 7:56 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: question about negative contractions
> Importance: Low
>
> On 2010-07-28, at 3:53 PM, Tony DeFazio wrote:
>
>> Can someone explain, please, why we can say "Why don't you like her?"
>> but not "Why do not you like her?" A student asked and I was at a=20
>> loss for an explanation.
>
> Zwicky & Pullum (1983)=20
> <http://www.stanford.edu/~zwicky/ZPCliticsInfl.pdf>
> put forth the argument that -N'T, though historically a
> contraction,=20 has actually become an inflectional ending for
> auxiliary verbs. That=20 is, they say it's like the past tense -ED or
> third person -S. This=20 approach is followed in the recently
> mentioned grammars by Huddleston=20 & Pullum. See the paper linked to
> above for reasons why -N'T should be=20 considered an inflectional ending (or "clitic" in technical terms).
>
> If -N'T is a negative inflection, and I think it is, then the
> reason=20 we can say "Why don't you like her?" (or "Why can't you be
> there"=20
> etc.) is because the inflection simply can't be separated from the
> auxili=
ary verb.
> The other question, why you can't say "Why do not you like her?", is
> a=20 question about adverb placement in general, not just "not". You
> can't=20 say "Why do never you go there?" "Why do always you say that?" etc.
>
> Best,
> Brett
>
> -----------------------
> Brett Reynolds
> English Language Centre
> Humber College Institute of Technology and Advanced Learning
> Toronto,=20 Ontario, Canada [log in to unmask]
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web=20
> interface
> at:
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web=20
> interface
> at:
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface =
at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
------------------------------
End of ATEG Digest - 31 Jul 2010 to 1 Aug 2010 (#2010-115)
**********************************************************
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
|
