bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025_split huggingface dataset:
F. Max Müller and the Development of Linguistic Science
Authors: Jankowsky Kurt R. 
Published: November 2010

Summary
The article examines the voluminous work of Friedrich Max Müller (18231900), a German scholar who had chosen England as his home in 1846 and lived there for 54 years until his death. Basically a Sanskritist, whose studies, however, spilled over into numerous adjoining disciplines, Müller was both highly praised and severely criticized during his life-time. Almost immediately after his death silence settled upon him.
The author argues that Müller’s outstanding achievements, firmly acknowledged by authoritative critics in his time, should make him important enough for us to study his amazingly wide-ranging work very carefully again. Müller’s contribution to linguistic science and to human knowledge is particularly significant. He began his work in the pioneering stage of linguistics and, for fear of losing sight of the larger framework, deliberately avoided concentrating on one single specialty of study. Instead, starting with books, translations, and editions involving Sanskrit, he enlarged his scope into Indian history, philosophy and religion. He conducted, and published extensively on, comparative studies in philology, religion and mythology and undertook to explore the interrelationship of thought and language. His writings on German literature and his translation of Kant’s “Kritik der reinen Vernunft” were acclaimed as solid accomplishments, no less thorough than his many volumes dealing with a large variety of aspects concerning Indian language, literature, history, and religion.
Müller never thought of himself as a linguist in the technical sense of the word. Instead, he attempted to apply his linguistic knowledge within the larger framework of the “science of man”. He worked to achieve an overall foundation, for which it became necessary to transcend disciplinary boundaries. Such an objective was unavoidably accompanied by the risk of spreading oneself too thin. At least part of the criticism he drew was on that score. The author concludes that, if we would ask not so much for what Müller did as a linguist but what he did for linguistics, we would even today gain significant insights from his work.
Is “Canis Currit” Ungrammatical?
Authors: Ebbesen Sten 
Published: November 2010

Summary
The main theme of Aristotle’s Sophistici Elenchi is false but apparently valid reasoning. Aristotle operates with a special class of fallacies depending on features of language. In that connection he touches on many questions of relevance to the grammarian. In their commentaries on the Elenchi, medieval scholars develop the hints given by Aristotle and introduce new problems of their own invention. Thus they discuss the generic use of singular nouns, the scope of conjunctions and modal expressions, suprasegmental phonemes, constructional ambiguities, the tense of participles, and parsing. Discussions of the last-named point revolve around the example canis currit. Canis is an equivocal term. Is it then one constituent of a sentence (one pars orationis) or is it more than one pars orationis? If it is several partes orationis, why is canis currunt ungrammatical? To save the grammatically of canis currit modistic logicians split the modi significandi into modi significandi ‘activi’ and modi significandi ‘passivi’, the latter attaching to the ‘things’ qua conceptualized in a certain way and signified as such by means of words, the former attaching to the words qua significative in some definite way. By letting the active modi significandi be the basis of construction they could save the grammaticality of canis currit. But the solution breaks with the fundamental idea of modistic grammar, the derivation of grammatical categories relevant to syntax from the conceptualized reality, and introduces an explanation of syntax founded on surface categorization of words. There was a reaction against this about 1300. Later Elenchi commentators seem to have lost interest in the subject.
Universal Grammar According to Some 12th Century Grammarians
Authors: Fredborg Karin Margareta 
Published: November 2010

Summary
As early as the 12th century the concept of universal grammar became a commonly discussed and accepted doctrine among the Latin grammarians. Universal grammar is discussed within the context of whether grammar (and the other Liberal Arts) could be diversified into species, i. e., the grammar of the individual languages. Some grammarians accepted the existence of ‘species grammaticae’ but only with the proviso that there were to be two kinds of grammarians: the teacher of grammar expounding the universal grammar and the person exercising his linguistic competence in the individual languages. Along with the interest in the ‘species grammaticae’ grew a continuous interest in crosslinguistc analysis by appeal to the vernacular on matters of pronunciation, semantics and syntax. By the end of the century more determined efforts were made to solve the questions of the identity of words in different languages. These attempts proved abortive with respect to the precise description of pronunciation, orthography and morphosyntactical features, whereas a more dialectically orientated analysis of requirements for sentence-constituents is handled successfully. Further, a good deal of the upsurge of cross-linguistic analysis is hampered by the stricter adherence to the formal features as found in the established theoretical framework of Latin grammar, to the detriment of linguistic description of the vernacular, to which no theoretical foundation is conceded.
Albert the Great on the Semantics of the Categories of Substance, Quantity, and Quality
Authors: McMahon William E. 
Published: November 2010

Summary
The underlying theory for modistic grammar is Aristotelian metaphysics, especially the theory of the categories. This paper deals with the semantics of the categories as viewed by one of the most important medieval commentators, Albert the Great. Albert’s comments on the categories of substance, quantity, and quality are considered, and the relation of these to the other seven categories is also discussed. The categories are modes of predicating with respect to what the predicates signify. Substance words are predicated univocally while terms signifying accidents are predicated paronymously. Secondary substance signifies quale quid; hence common nouns are names of kinds. Primary substance signifies hoc aliquid, the concrete individual; for this reason proper nouns are grammatical subjects but not genuine predicates. Quantity and quality are simple and absolute modes or predication. They are intrinsic accidents because they are based on the matter-form composition of substance. An interesting aspect of the Aristotelian conception of quantity is the view that speech is a discrete quantity. Quality words signify quale rather than quale quid; hence the distinction between sortal and characterizing predicates is a basic idea of Aristotelian ontology. As for the other categories, relation is a simple but not an absolute mode of predication. The other six categories all express some mode of relatedness and thus are regarded as extrinsic principles of being.
The Teaching of Latin as a Second Language in the 12th Century
Authors: Murphy James J. 
Published: November 2010

Summary
One of the most obvious, yet little studied, facts about Europe of the High Middle ages is that Latin was in all times and all places a foreign language. It had to be learned as an overlay on some other native language like Old French, Irish, or Middle High German. How was this second language acquired? A survey of textbooks and teaching methods indicates that by the 12th-century European schoolmasters had evolved an effective, commonly-used mode of instruction utilizing the best elements of ancient, patristic, insular, and Carolingian programs. At the heart of the system was a sequence of Christian (or Christianized) progymnasmata. Both dialectic and rhetoric were elementary subjects along with grammar until the burgeoning university structure preempted dialectic and displaced rhetoric to leave grammar the basic subject for elementary education. In 12th-century schools pupils started with sounds, not rules, with writing and speaking skills taught together. This carefully devised educational plan contributed a good deal to the quality of Latin literature of the period.
Adam Wodeham on the Meaning of Declarative Sentences
Authors: Nuchelmans Gabriel 
Published: November 2010

Summary
In the Middle Ages, the view that complexa or declarative sentences, mental, spoken, or written, have a peculiar significate which is fundamentally different from the significate of simple acts of apprehending with their corresponding expressions had as its most notable defenders Peter Abelard and Gregory of Rimini. The question whether there was a continuous line of thought connecting these two authors has become susceptible of a somewhat less speculative answer since relevant texts of William Crathorn and Adam Wodeham, who advocated a similar doctrine several years before Gregory of Rimini, have been made available. In this article, it is submitted that Wodeham’s theory should be viewed in the light of the debates concerning the identity of the articles of faith and the immutability of God’s knowledge that had begun in the course of the twelfth century. Wodeham rejected both the view that the object of assent is the complexum whose formation is presupposed by the act of assenting and the view that it is the thing signified by the subject-term of such a complexum. Instead, he argued for a theory according to which the object of assent is the total significate of a proposition and according to which this significate is a mode of being that essentially includes a complexio or predicative combination and the time consignified by the copula, and cannot, therefore, be subsumed under any of the Aristotelian categories. Nearly all the crucial theses and arguments involved in this position can be traced back to the traditional debates concerning the articles of faith and God’s knowledge. So, if there is a connection between Abelard’s doctrine and the views defended by 14th-century authors, it is most likely to lie in the writings containing those debates.
Can constructions be construed?
Authors: Pinborg Jan 
Published: November 2010

Summary
The syntactical theory of the Medieval speculative grammarians is based on the concept of syntactical features (modi significandi) and their interdependence. A construction is defined as a combination of two words by reason of at least one pair of corresponding syntactical features. This conception makes it difficult to account for constructions between compound constituents. The paper is an attempt to account for this phenomenon which involves the status of phrases and propositions and the possibility of syntactical features belonging to this kind of construct. Texts by Boethius of Dacia, Radulphus Brito and an Anonymus Norimbergensis are discussed. An appendix adds a summary description of the Anonymus Norimbergensis.
Each Man’s Ass is not Everybody’s Ass
Authors: Rijk L. M. De 
Published: November 2010

Summary
The well-known controversy about the (supposed) difference between sentences such as “cuiuslibet hominis asinus currit ”and “asinus cuiuslibet hominis currit ”is delineated and discussed. It is argued that the issue involved is entirely focused on the question whether or not nouns (names), by their own nature (secundum propriam inventionem), refer to existing things alone. The different answers to this problem (by Bacon, William of Sherwood, and others against certain Parisian masters, among others) are placed within the general framework of medieval semantic thought.
Richard Lavenham and the Cambridge Logic
Authors: Spade Paul Vincent 
Published: November 2010

Summary
This paper argues that the 14th-century Oxford Carmelite Richard Lavenham was the author of the treatise De syncategorematibus that was used as a textbook in 15th-century Cambridge, a version of which was printed several times in the late 15th and early 16th centuries in the Libellus sophistarum ad usum Cantabrigiensium. The manuscript versions of this treatise differ significantly from one another and from the printed editions, so that the claim of Lavenham’s authorship needs to be carefully considered. The evidence for this claim is described briefly. The identification of the De syncategorematibus in the Cambridge Libellus as Lavenham’s provides the first real indication that Lavenham, whose works testify to the influence of other authors on logico-linguistic studies in late 14th-century Oxford, was himself not without influence as late as the early 16th century. On the other hand, the De syncategorematibus is not a very competent treatise, so that its inclusion as a textbook in the Libellus sophistarum is an indication of the decline of the logical study of language in England during this period. A brief analysis of the contents of the treatise supports this observation.
The Canadian ‘Winter’ of Edward Sapir
Authors: Murray Stephen O. 
Published: November 2010

Summary
Contrary to the commonly-held view advanced in the literature and by Edward Sapir (1884–1939) himself that he hibernated in Canadian exile, most of the linguistic work and the initial culture and personality theorizing upon which his reputation rests were done while he was head of the Division of Anthropology within the Canadian Geological Survey, Ottawa (1910–25). Despite personal tragedy and successful competition for funds with the (World War I) effort, Sapir professionalized ethnolinguistic work on Canadian native languages, co-ordinated and did fìeldwork, and published more than he had or would in positions he held in the United States (University of Chicago, 1925–31, and Yale University, 1931–39)
Thomas stackhouse’s theory of linguistic rhetoric
Authors: Subbiondo Joseph L. 
Published: November 2010

Summary
Thomas Stackhouse’s (1657–1752) Reflections On the Nature and Property of Languages (1731) was directly concerned with two areas critical to an understanding of 18th century English linguistic theory: the nature and origin of language, and rhetorical grammar. Stackhouse’s method was as follows: he defined language according to its origins and history, and he identified those rhetorical universals which he believed were essential for the refinement of language. Assuming that all languages were equal in their capacity to communicate, Stackhouse argued that perspicuity, purity, copiousness, neatness, energy, sublimity, and number increased the effectiveness of language. A study of Reflections suggests that theories of language, thought, and society must dovetail if we are to ever explain communication.
Medieval donatus commentaries
Authors: Bursill-Hall G. L. 
Published: November 2010

Summary
The rich treasure-house of unedited grammatical material, some of which has already been reported, held in various manuscript collections dating from the Middle Ages contains a number of versions of the grammatical works of Donatus and more than 200 commentaries, most of them anonymous, on various aspects of the Donatus corpus. The purpose of these notes is to draw attention to these commentaries dating from the period 11th – 15th centuries and to suggest that a reappraisal of Donatus’s status in medieval grammatical study is needed.
Observations Sur La Genèse De La Signification Générale Et Particulière Dans Une Épître De Al-Marzuqi
Authors: Anghelescu Nadia 
Published: November 2010

Résumé
L’auteur de l’épître “Les mots qui expriment la globalité et la généralité et la différence entre tes deux”, un grammairien arabe du V/XI siècle assez peu connu, al-Marzūqī, se propose de montrer comment fonctionnent les éléments se rapportant à la totalité (la globalité) et à l’espèce, en partant du postulat que la langue doit posséder des moyens pour exprimer les “espèces intelligibles” (al-’ajnās al-maclūma), tout comme elle possède des moyens pour exprimer les “choses concrètes perceptibles” (al-’acyān al-makhṣūṣa). Ces significations sont étudiées par rapport à d’autres, telles que le défini/l’indéfini, l’unité/la pluralité, etc. Ce qui confère un intérêt spécial à cet opuscule qui sort, d’une certaine manière, du cadre de la problématique traditionnelle des ouvrages grammaticaux arabes, n’est pas seulement le groupement de certains éléments que la linguistique moderne envisage comme ‘quantitatifs indéfinis’, mais aussi la position adoptée par le philologue arabe, qui examine le rapport entre le général et le particulier dans une perspective dynamique, comme un mouvement de la pensée déterminée par la norme, l’usage, la raison. De ce point de vue, l’analyse que l’auteur propose pour une série d’éléments qui servent à l’interrogation — par exemple kayfa “comment” — est très significative. Ces éléments sont, par eux-mêmes, généraux et indéfinis dans la ‘langue’ et deviennent particuliers dans la ‘parole’, dans le cadre de l’interaction des interlocuteurs qui se connaissent, qui partent de certaines présuppositions en laissant de côté ‘exception faite’ (dit al-Marzūqī) de tout ce qui ne les intéresse pas. Par l’analyse nuancée du fonctionnement des éléments de la langue dans le cadre d’une stratégie de la conversation, par l’attention prêtée à la constitution de la signification dans le cadre d’une situation donnée, l’épître se situe dans une direction de pensée qui aboutit aux théories modernes des actes de langage.
The Treatment of Nasal Elements by Early Arab and Muslim Phoneticians
Authors: Bakalla M. H. 
Published: November 2010

Summary
This article attempts to give a summary of the contribution made by early Arabs and Muslims in the field of phonetic sciences. Works by scholars like al-Khalīl (d.175/791), Sībawayhi (d.177/793), Ibn Jinnī (d.392/1002), Ibn Sīnā or Avicenne (d.428/1037) and others will be given special attention in this connection. In particular, it presents the various treatments of the Arabic nasal sounds and the phenomenon of nasalization. As a term of reference, the Arab and Muslim phoneticians divided the Arabic phonemes into categories such as: glottals, pharyngeals, palatals, dentals /l, r, n/, and labials /f, b, m, w/. Al-Khalīl is one of the first Arab phoneticians to order the Arabic phonemes in terms of place of articulation along the vocal tract from the glottis upward to the lips. His student, Sībawayhi, and later phoneticians also recognized other categories in terms of manner of articulation such as: voiced/voiceless, stop/ non-stop, rolled, lateral, nasals/m, n/, including variants, e.g. [ŋ, N]. Further, Sībawayhi and Ibn Jinnī seem to lay more emphasis on treating ghunna or nasality and other features in terms of binary distinctive feature analysis. The Muslim phoneticians also recognized that in certain contexts /n/ and /m/ may influence non-nasals, both vowels and consonants. In sum, a close look at the early Arab grammatical works reveals an underlying systematic approach and a rich mine of terminology which are relevant both to modern Arabic phonetics and general phonetics. Some instrumental (spectographic and mingo-graphic) data are included at the end of the article in order to support some of the descriptive techniques used in early phonetic heritage.
Arabic Grammatical Terminology in Pedro De Alcalá
Authors: Cowan William 
Published: November 2010

Summary
In 1505 a Spanish priest, Pedro de Alcalá, published a short descriptive grammar and a dictionary of the Arabic dialect spoken in Granada. Although most of the grammatical concepts and terminology he used in this description were those of Latin grammar, he did use some concepts and terms taken from the tradition of the Arab grammarians in their analysis of Classical Arabic. These terms are presented here with commentary on Pedro de Alcalá’s use of them.
A Dissenting Grammarian Qutrub on Declension
Authors: Versteegh C. H. M. 
Published: November 2010

Summary
This paper is concerned with a theory held by the Arab grammarian Qutrub (d.206/821) with regard to the inflectional vowels of the noun in Arabic. Contrary to what most grammarians believed, he asserted that these vowels do not serve to indicate (syntactic) functions, but to prevent the combination of two consonants. We examine the methodological background of this theory and argue in particular that (1) Qutrub’s theory about the inflectional vowels is connected — both substantially and terminologically — with his ideas about speech in general. He regards the Arabic language as essentially flexible, since speakers are allowed to choose among alternatives; (2) this same idea is reflected by Qutrub’s interest in ‘addād, i.e., homonyms with contrary meanings, and in mutashābihāt, i.e., Qur’ānic verses which seemingly contradict each other; (3) the clue to his theory is the term
cilla “cause”. Basing himself on the doctrine of his Muctazilite teacher al-Nazzām, Qutrub argues that in order to be valid linguistic reasoning must meet certain logical conditions, in particular the condition of reversibility: unless cause and effect, or sign and referent, coexist they cannot be regarded as such. As there is no one-to-one relation between the inflectional vowels and the alleged cause, the accepted opinion about declension cannot be correct; (4) Qutrub’s own solution — the inflectional vowels are used for euphonic reasons — coincides with his interest in phonetic variants and pausal phenomena.
Royal investigations of the origin of language
Authors: Campbell Robin N. , Grieve Robert 
Published: November 2010

SummaryOne method applied to the problem of language origins has been an experimental one: to examine the speech produced by a group of children who have been isolated from exposure to language at birth and cared for by (usually) dumb foster-mothers. Three such early investigations are acknowledged — those of Psamtik I of Egypte (663–610 B.C.), Frederick II of Sicily (1192–1250), and James IV of Scotland (1473–1513). A fourth such royal investigation by Akbar the Great (1542–1605) is less well-known. Historical evidence pertaining to each of these investigations is located and analysed, and an estimate is made of their authenticity and plausability. It is concluded that the experiments attributed to Psamtik I and James IV very probably did not take place and that, while Frederick II’s experiment may very well have occurred, nothing can be learned from it. The remaining experiment, that of Akbar the Great, almost certainly did occur, but its outcome remains ambiguous. Finally, the question asked by these ancient experiments is treated as a special limiting case of a more general question, namely, what are the characteristics of the function which relates properties of the child’s language to properties of the language to which he/she is exposed? Some evidence from more recent ‘natural’ experiments is reviewed and it is concluded that there are some grounds for supposing that this function may be augmentative. That is, it may alter or add to the properties of the language to which the child is exposed.