P. M. Fraser
- Published in print:
- 2009
- Published Online:
- January 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780197264287
- eISBN:
- 9780191753978
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- British Academy
- DOI:
- 10.5871/bacad/9780197264287.003.0014
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Literary Studies: Classical, Early, and Medieval
The text of the Epitome of Stephanus contains no preliminary statement of principle regarding grammatical rules for individual ethnics, and although reference may be made under individual ethnics to ...
More
The text of the Epitome of Stephanus contains no preliminary statement of principle regarding grammatical rules for individual ethnics, and although reference may be made under individual ethnics to regional or local usage, the information is repetitive and simply ad hoc. We are not in a position to say whether that is how the text was left by Stephanus, or whether an opening section or sections were excised by the epitomator(s). There are two recognisable features of the Epitome as a whole: (a) the inclusion in it, with corresponding ‘ethnics’ or a similar term, of a number of items which cannot by their very nature have had a civic role, and thus could not strictly have generated an ἐθνικόν, since they do not belong to that category of names. Alongside these irregular entries, there is another group of linguistic terms (b), which Stephanus uses to express departure from either an analogistic or local form, in such phrases as ‘it should be … ’. This chapter presents a list of some typical examples of the first class of entry; a second list illustrates different principles of linguistic usage recorded by Stephanus for features which have no independent political (including tribal) existence, but are included by him in his text; that is to say, forms which are justified or rejected by him in terms of the rules of ‘ethnic’ usage.Less
The text of the Epitome of Stephanus contains no preliminary statement of principle regarding grammatical rules for individual ethnics, and although reference may be made under individual ethnics to regional or local usage, the information is repetitive and simply ad hoc. We are not in a position to say whether that is how the text was left by Stephanus, or whether an opening section or sections were excised by the epitomator(s). There are two recognisable features of the Epitome as a whole: (a) the inclusion in it, with corresponding ‘ethnics’ or a similar term, of a number of items which cannot by their very nature have had a civic role, and thus could not strictly have generated an ἐθνικόν, since they do not belong to that category of names. Alongside these irregular entries, there is another group of linguistic terms (b), which Stephanus uses to express departure from either an analogistic or local form, in such phrases as ‘it should be … ’. This chapter presents a list of some typical examples of the first class of entry; a second list illustrates different principles of linguistic usage recorded by Stephanus for features which have no independent political (including tribal) existence, but are included by him in his text; that is to say, forms which are justified or rejected by him in terms of the rules of ‘ethnic’ usage.
Johan Rooryck and Guido Vanden Wyngaerd
- Published in print:
- 2011
- Published Online:
- May 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780199691326
- eISBN:
- 9780191731785
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199691326.003.0001
- Subject:
- Linguistics, Theoretical Linguistics, Syntax and Morphology
This introductory chapter presents the main thesis adopted in this book: there are no grammatical rules that are specifically designed to account for the distribution of anaphors and pronouns in the ...
More
This introductory chapter presents the main thesis adopted in this book: there are no grammatical rules that are specifically designed to account for the distribution of anaphors and pronouns in the grammar. Instead, the syntax of simplex and complex reflexives are related to that of constructions that share morphological and distributional properties with them. Anaphoricity is derived by the syntactic mechanism of Agree. This chapter also contains an outline of the rest of the chapters, which serves as a roadmap for the book.Less
This introductory chapter presents the main thesis adopted in this book: there are no grammatical rules that are specifically designed to account for the distribution of anaphors and pronouns in the grammar. Instead, the syntax of simplex and complex reflexives are related to that of constructions that share morphological and distributional properties with them. Anaphoricity is derived by the syntactic mechanism of Agree. This chapter also contains an outline of the rest of the chapters, which serves as a roadmap for the book.
Ernie Lepore and Matthew Stone
- Published in print:
- 2014
- Published Online:
- March 2015
- ISBN:
- 9780198717188
- eISBN:
- 9780191785931
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198717188.003.0018
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Philosophy of Language
This Summary looks back at the arguments of the second part of this book. Chapter 6 discussed linguistic rules, arguing that they specify what contributions utterances can make and how those ...
More
This Summary looks back at the arguments of the second part of this book. Chapter 6 discussed linguistic rules, arguing that they specify what contributions utterances can make and how those contributions fit together into coherent discourse. Chapter 7 illustrated how that these contributions are often parameterized by elements drawn from the discourse context, and stated that grammatical rules constrain how parameter values are obtained. Chapter 8 looked at how speakers use additional grammatical devices to mark distinctions in information structure, including what parts of the utterance answer implicit open questions, what parts contrast with alternatives, and what parts need to be followed up.Less
This Summary looks back at the arguments of the second part of this book. Chapter 6 discussed linguistic rules, arguing that they specify what contributions utterances can make and how those contributions fit together into coherent discourse. Chapter 7 illustrated how that these contributions are often parameterized by elements drawn from the discourse context, and stated that grammatical rules constrain how parameter values are obtained. Chapter 8 looked at how speakers use additional grammatical devices to mark distinctions in information structure, including what parts of the utterance answer implicit open questions, what parts contrast with alternatives, and what parts need to be followed up.
