Field stations for linguistic research: A blueprint of a sustainable model

Language ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 95 (2) ◽  
pp. e327-e338
Author(s):  
Maria Polinsky
2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 927-960
Author(s):  
Jarod Jacobs

In this article, I discuss three statistical tools that have proven pivotal in linguistic research, particularly those studies that seek to evaluate large datasets. These tools are the Gaussian Curve, significance tests, and hierarchical clustering. I present a brief description of these tools and their general uses. Then, I apply them to an analysis of the variations between the “biblical” DSS and our other witnesses, focusing upon variations involving particles. Finally, I engage the recent debate surrounding the diachronic study of Biblical Hebrew. This article serves a dual function. First, it presents statistical tools that are useful for many linguistic studies. Second, it develops an analysis of the he-locale, as it is used in the “biblical” Dead Sea Scrolls, Masoretic Text, and Samaritan Pentateuch. Through that analysis, this article highlights the value of inferential statistical tools as we attempt to better understand the Hebrew of our ancient witnesses.


2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 5-10
Author(s):  
Gianina Iordăchioaia ◽  
Elena Soare

Nominalization has been at the forefront of linguistic research since the early days of generative grammar (Lees 1960, Vendler 1968, Lakoff 1970). The theoretical debate as to how a theory of grammar should be envisaged in order to capture the morphosyntactic and semantic complexity of nominalization, initiated by Chomsky’s (1970) Remarks on nominalization, is just as lively today, after five decades during which both the empirical scope and the methodology of linguistic research have seen enormous progress. We are delighted to be able to mark this occasion through our collection, next to the anniversary volume Nominalization: 50 Years on from Chomsky’s Remarks, edited by Artemis Alexiadou and Hagit Borer, soon to appear with Oxford University Press.


1997 ◽  
Vol 75 (11) ◽  
pp. 1790-1795 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chantal Bois ◽  
Michel Crête ◽  
Jean Huot ◽  
Jean-Pierre Quellet

Morphologic and mass measurements were taken on 24 complete white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) carcasses of varying ages and both sexes in southern Quebec. Each carcass was divided into three parts (skin, viscera, rest) to determine water, protein, fat, and ash content by chemical analyses. Fat content of carcasses varied between 0.8 and 17.4%. Multiple linear regression models were selected to predict carcass composition from morphologic and mass measurements. Two situations were considered: measurements taken at the laboratory on whole animals and measurements taken at field stations on eviscerated carcasses provided by hunters. All selected models can be applied to any deer without taking into account age or sex; they include 1 – 4 independent variables. For whole animals, adjusted R2 of models varied between 0.99 (water) and 0.89 (ash); models developed for field stations were less precise, the lowest R2 values being 0.82 and 0.73 for ash and fat, respectively. These models can be useful for research and management purposes.


Diachronica ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 373-404 ◽  
Author(s):  
Søren Wichmann ◽  
Arpiar Saunders

Several databases have been compiled with the aim of documenting the distribution of typological features across the world’s languages. This paper looks at ways of utilizing this type of data for making inferences concerning genealogical relationships by using phylogenetic algorithms originally developed for biologists. The focus is on methodology, including how to assess the stability of individual typological features and the suitability of different phylogenetic algorithms, as well as ways to enhance phylogenetic signals and heuristic procedures for identifying genealogical relationships. The various issues are illustrated by a small sample of empirical data from a set of Native American languages.


Nature ◽  
1946 ◽  
Vol 157 (3993) ◽  
pp. 606-606
Author(s):  
E. ASHBY

Language ◽  
1981 ◽  
Vol 57 (1) ◽  
pp. 242
Author(s):  
Marianna D. Birnbaum ◽  
Andrew Kerek

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document