252 Matching Annotations
  1. Jun 2016
  2. www.glottotopia.org www.glottotopia.org
    9.pdf
    136
    6. NealWhitman 28 Jun 2016
      rt III Sync

      This comment is actually about the subsequent "however," whose comment seems to have gotten corrupted. Oh, well, you know what I'm going to say about it.

    14. NealWhitman 28 Jun 2016
      ‘long (pred.)’guhkkiNorthern Saamikuhk’Kildin Saamib.Adverb ‘(going) far’(adverbalizer suffix (non-palatalized)(*-s)guhkásNorthern SaamikugkasKildin Saamic.Attributive form ‘long (attr.)’(attributive suffix (palatalized)(*-s’)guhkesNorthern Sa

      The glossing pattern seems to be to use single quotation marks when only the translation is given, and square brackets with no quotation marks when the translation plus grammatical information is given. That's not the pattern used in these examples. Make sure these examples are following whatever rule you're using. Also cite examples in text.

    16. NealWhitman 28 Jun 2016
      Strong (str) and weak (wk) consonant grade in adjectives and nounsa.kugk’(wk)-es’guhke(wk)-slong-attrsuhk(str)suohkku(str)stockingKildin SaamiNorthern Saami‘the long stocking’b.suhk(str)-es’suohkku(str)-sstocking-poss:3sglīleaiskuhk’(str)guhkki(str)long.pred.Kildin SaamiNorthern Saami‘her stocking is long’c.kugk’(wk)-es’guhke(wk)-slong-attrsugk(wk)-es’tsuohku(wk)-sstocking-loc.sgKildin SaamiNorthern Saam

      Italicize Northern Saami forms. Also cite (24) in text.

    17. NealWhitman 28 Jun 2016
      25)**/kuh:.ke.-sē/long-poss:3sg)**/kuh.ke-s/long-attrSubsequently, the stem gradation rules were applied regularly and yielded theshort consonant grade of the adjective stem equipped with the affixal attributivemarker. The noun equipped with the possessive marker, however, kept its opensecond syllable even after the apocope. The non-affixal possessive suffix – as aphonological word of its own – remained outside the phonological domain ofstem gradation.(26)**/suoh:.ku.=sē/stocking=poss:3sg)**/suoh:.ku.=s/stocking=poss:3sg

      Cite examples in text.

    24. NealWhitman 28 Jun 2016
      , however

      You probably expected me to refer to my earlier comments on "however". But sometimes, like here, it sounds OK in this position. It makes sense to move "In Finnic" to the front, and because it's such a short phrase, postponing the "however" until after it is not a problem. Similar considerations apply to the other "however"s that I didn't comment on.

    53. NealWhitman 28 Jun 2016
      borrowed from < Proto-North Germanic-Rm.nom.sg•derived (historically) from(lative case

      The < and <== don't seem to fit in this sentence. I'm expecting both sides to consist of linguistic material, not part of the main text.

    56. NealWhitman 28 Jun 2016
      Locative adjective derivation

      Use words to remind reader of "functional extension of adjective derivational marker" hypothesis. You have "adjective" and "derivation", but do more, just so reader knows they have followed correctly.

    62. NealWhitman 28 Jun 2016
      Northern Saamismávva[small.attr]smáves‘smal

      Does <-- indicate a borrowing? Make sure <, <--, and <== are all included in the explanation of the notation, wherever you provide it.

    68. NealWhitman 28 Jun 2016
      Northern Saamismáves‘small’(Proto-Saamic

      Should the double arrow be <? This goes for all the items in this list. If there is a difference between <== and <, is it explained in the front matter?

    74. NealWhitman 28 Jun 2016
      Loan adjectives

      I was expecting this section to be about grammatical borrowing from IE. Is it? If so, use words in the title that recall this hypothesis from the list above.

    78. NealWhitman 28 Jun 2016
      D-Elemente breiten sich von pragmatisch-definiten Kontexten auf seman-tisch-definite aus, während Possessivpronomina sich umgekehrt von einemsemantisch-definiten Kontext auf einen bzw. mehrere pragmatisch-definiteKontexte ausdehnen. (Himmelmann 1997: 221)

      Provide translation.

    86. NealWhitman 28 Jun 2016
      substitutes

      "replaces" ("substitute" is undergoing some changes, which could lead to confusion: Earlier stage: substitute NEW for OLD Next stage: substitute OLD with NEW Emerging now: substitute OLD for NEW)

    97. NealWhitman 15 Jun 2016
      Against his own suggestion that in Baltic/Slavic anti-construct state agreementmarking originates from nominal relative constructions, in other words

      Sentence fragment.

    99. NealWhitman 15 Jun 2016
      dass wir fürs Slavische vollständig auskommen ohne die Annahme rel-ativer Pronominalformen vom idg. Stammeie/io-, und dass dasselbe für dasBaltische gilt. (van Wijk 1935: 28

      Provide English translation in a footnote.

    107. NealWhitman 15 Jun 2016
      Leaving the question about the further development of the anti-construct stateagreement marker*-jь-in different Baltic and Slavic languages aside

      I would keep the two elements of the phrasal verb "leaving aside" together, as the complement NP is a bit too long to comfortably come between them.

    123. NealWhitman 09 Jun 2016
      (4)Juxtaposition versus anti-construct state agreement marking (i.e. in con-trastive focus)

      Refer to in text, preferably not just as (4), but as (4.a.i), etc., since there's a lot of data here to connect to the argumentation.

    124. NealWhitman 09 Jun 2016
      9 The evolution of attribution marking(3)[NP[NP’ AbigHEADØ-nmlz]Nhouse]]

      I see no difference between (2) and (3). Also, neither one is referred to in the text.

    133. NealWhitman 09 Jun 2016
      adjective attribution marking devices

      I recommend judicious use of hyphens for this 4-part compound, to disambiguate between [[[A B] C] D], [[A B] [C D]], [[A [B C]] D], [A [[B C] D]], and [A [B [C D]]]. Context will make it clear, but redundancy won't hurt, and it will help the reader who hasn't paid close attention.

    134. NealWhitman 09 Jun 2016
      , however,

      If you stylistically prefer "however" in Wackernagel position, that's fine. However, if you put it there because of a prescriptive rule against having "however" at the left periphery where many other sentential adverbs appear, I recommend ignoring that rule. First of all, it's widely ignored. Second, following it makes the reader have to read well into the sentence before they can establish the relation between the current sentence and the previous one.

    Visit annotations in context

    Annotators

    URL

    glottotopia.org/riessler/9.pdf
  3. Apr 2016
  4. www.glottotopia.org www.glottotopia.org
    10.pdf
    35
    5. NealWhitman 09 Apr 2016
      The study examines thetiming and degree patterns of acoustic vowel nasality across contrastive and coar-ticulatory contexts [...] With respect to patterns within the vowel, in the absenceof nasal consonant context, contrastive vowel nasalization is generally greatestin degree late in the vowel. Low nasal vowels in carryover contexts parallel thispattern (despite the location of the nasal consonant before the vowel), and lownasal vowels in anticipatory contexts are most nasal at the start of the vowel.”(Scarborough et al. in press)

      block quote?

    9. NealWhitman 09 Apr 2016
      “It seems clearthat [...] [the] stops systematically become/became the corresponding sonorants.This is relatively clear from the inventory of reflexes [...] alone: of these, m, n,ŋ and l are sonorants. Only b and g are stops and phonetic obstruents. But al-though they are phonetic stops, they have residual voicing left over from theirsonorant phonological status. I would claim that, even synchronically, the mys-terious voiced stop codas are actually variants not of the underlying, voicelessstops but of voiced sonorants.”

      This quotation is long enough to be treated as a block quote.

    19. NealWhitman 06 Apr 2016
      šuŋ[ŋ](g)’

      If we actually have the optional [g], then what we have is a case of (b), optional voicing of the stop /k/, plus the INSERTION of a nasal consonant, assuming you can tell the difference between a nasalized [u] followed by angma followed by [g], and just a nasalized [u] followed by [g]. I'm not sure you can, but maybe spectrographic evidence would be convincing.

    25. NealWhitman 04 Apr 2016
      these clusters

      If you're referring to the clusters mentioned on the previous page, I recommend writing them out again, because in the meantime we've had some other information about [k] and [kh] intervene, and as a result, "these clusters" is hard to assign a referent to.

    26. NealWhitman 04 Apr 2016
      SV].

      [sv]? I don't understand what [SV] means. I'm assuming V means a vowel, so does S represent a sibilant? In any case, I'm not used to seeing abbreviations like this in IPA brackets.

    27. NealWhitman 04 Apr 2016
      <žíg>

      What do the angle brackets show? Not orthography, since you're using double quotation marks for that. Is it showing the morpheme boundaries for a reduplicated string? If so, introduce this convention in the earlier comments.

    29. NealWhitman 04 Apr 2016
      Aspirationon stops may therefore sometimes be represented by ȟ instead of “h”.

      I don't understand (A) how aspiration can be represented with the h-hacek, or (B) why this follows logically from the previous sentence.

    31. NealWhitman 04 Apr 2016
      , however,

      The "however" would flow better at the beginning of the sentence. It's hard to wait for the connector until the end of this first clause, and then try to harmonize it with the next contrast signal of "though".

    32. NealWhitman 04 Apr 2016
      kin (2001), an unpublishedconference paper, examined much of the same data and came to similar c

      I am accustomed to the polysemy of NAME (YEAR) referring to either the author(s) or the paper itself. However, the zeugma of having both int hesame sentence is distracting: It sounds like you're saying Rankin the person is an actual conference paper.

    Visit annotations in context

    Annotators

    URL

    glottotopia.org/rudin/10.pdf
  5. Mar 2016
  6. www.glottotopia.org www.glottotopia.org
    15.pdf
    29
    3. NealWhitman 30 Mar 2016
      WITH-languages,” which have only a comitative (NP with NP) or subordinatingstrategy for conjoining NPs , and “AND-Languages,

      Would small caps look better in "WITH-languages" and "AND-languages"?

    4. NealWhitman 30 Mar 2016
      some having onlyclausal coordination, while others can coordinate NPs and other types of con-stituents as well, and some may have no true coordination at all, but use varioustypes of subordination, co-subordination, or simple concatenation to express therelations English expresses with ‘and’/‘or’/‘but’.

      The grammar's fine here, but stylistically, it would be better to have all three situations described in similar clause types: all finite, all independent, for example.

    6. NealWhitman 30 Mar 2016
      ‘or’:naíŋš

      The way I use it, when I use a colon to identify something, the sentence then must end. If you want to identify the word for "or" and then continue with the sentence, I would put it in parentheses, and then do the same with the words for "but" for the sake of parallelism.

    22. NealWhitman 23 Mar 2016
      “introducers” in that it has a meaning of ‘again’ or ‘marks repetition’

      I don't understand the difference in usage between single and double quotation marks in this line.

    24. NealWhitman 23 Mar 2016
      ‘and’

      Now we're dealing with two object languages, so do you want to use italics for both? Actually, this probably needs to be decided for the book as a whole, and stated in the front matter: Italics for Siouan data, single quotes for English words mentioned, double quotes for actual quotations from people?

    28. NealWhitman 23 Mar 2016
      coordinator: “

      Be consistent in when/how you refer to "coordinating conjunctions" or "coordinators". Readers might think there's a subtle distinction here, like between nouns and nominals, or determiners and determinatives.

    Visit annotations in context

    Annotators

    URL

    glottotopia.org/rudin/15.pdf