I’ve posted a draft of my MA thesis, Aspects of Yaghnobi Grammar, on the Yaghnobi blog. I welcome any comments or suggestions. I will be submitting a final draft to the University of Oregon graduate school in a week and a half.

Draft of Aspects of Yaghnobi Grammar « The Yaghnobi

Academic papers in the field of linguistics are often written folowing LSA style, which is the style used in Language, the journal of the Language Society of America. One of the aspects of style that is fairly unique to linguistics writing is the way linguistic data is presented. The following quatation is from the Language style sheet:

7. NUMBERED EXAMPLES, RULES, AND FORMULAS
a. Type each numbered item on a separate indented line with the number in parentheses; indent after the number; use lowercase letters to group sets of related items:

(2)  a.  Down the hill rolled the baby carriage.
      b.  Out of the house strolled my mother’s best friend.

b. In the text, refer to numbered items as 2, 2a, 2a,b, 2(a- c).

The Problem

One of the problems I run into when writing long papers, is keeping the numbered examples synchronized with my references to them in the text of the paper. If I add an example, remove an example, or change their order, then I have to go through the whole paper and update the references.

Fortunately, Microsoft Word has a solution to that problem. If you insert a paragraph number (using the “numbered” button, right next to the bullet button) then you can insert cross-references in the text that can be automatically updated. You insert the references by clicking on ‘Insert’, ‘Reference’, ‘Cross-reference’ and then selecting the item you want to cross reference from a list box. But, there’s a potential problem. The format of the cross-reference will be the same as the format of the paragraph (example) number. If the example number has paranthesis around it, so will the cross-refernce. Here’s an example:

The suffix -tit is used to form third person plural pronouns and plural demonstrative pronouns as shown in (2).

(2)  iʃ  -tit     man -ik       or
       this -3PL   I    -3S.Poss  are
       ‘These are mine.’

This is fine, unless you’re using LSA format. In LSA format, the reference in the text should not have parenthesis around it.

The Solution

I searched everywhere for a way to control the formating of the cross-reference in Word, but there is no way to automatically remove the parenthesis. You can delete them by hand, but as soon as you update the cross-reference, the parenthesis reappear. So, my solution was to write a macro that goes through the entire document and removes parenthesis around cross-references. It won’t remove any other parenthesis. This solution has been working quite well for me. Here is the VBA macro:

Sub DeleteParensInXRef()
   Dim doc As Document
Dim fld As Field
Set doc = ActiveDocument   

For Each fld In doc.Fields
fld.Select
If fld.Type = wdFieldRef Then
fld.Result.Text = Replace(fld.Result.Text, "(", "")
fld.Result.Text = Replace(fld.Result.Text, ")", "")
      End If
   Next     

Set fld = Nothing
   Set doc = Nothing
End Sub

To add this macro to your document do the following:

1. Select the text containing the macro in this post.
2. In the ‘Tools’ menu click on ‘Macros, Visual Basic Editor’.
3. In the project pane, right click on the project with the name of your doucment and select ‘Insert’, ‘Module’
4. Double-click on the newly created module (probably named ‘Module 1′) and then right click in the editor pane and select ‘paste’.
5. Click on the tool-bar button with the floppy disk icon to save the macro with your document.
6. Close the Visual Basic editor.

To run the macro while editing your document you can click on the menu item ‘Tools’, ‘Macro’, ‘Macros…’ and then double click on ‘DeleteParensInXRef’.

November 10, 2007 Update: Once you have removed the parenthesis and are ready to print your document, you will first need to lock the cross-reference fields. If you don’t lock the fields, they will be updated when you print, and all the parenthesis will reappear. You can lock all the fields in your document by pressing CTRL-F11. You can unlock them by pressing CTRL-SHIFT-F11.

If you have any questions about how to use this macro, or suggestions for improving it, feel free to leave a comment!

Related Links

• Tech Republic, 2007, Remove Field Codes from Word Documents with this Handy Macro. I modified the VBA macro in this article to create the macro for stripping parenthesis from cross-references.
• Microsoft Office Developer Center, 2007, Word Developer Reference: wdFieldTypeEnumeration. This is where I found the name of the cross-reference field type.
• Allen Wyatt, Word Tips: Controlling the Format of Cross-References. This article didn’t solve my problem, but it solves a similar one and provides a nice VBA macro to do it.
• Travis G. Bradley, 2004, Using Microsoft Word for Writing Papers in Linguistics. Bradley presents a manual (no macro required) solution to cross-referencing data citations, but his solution is a bit awkward (requires a lot of keystroks) and leaves parenthesis around the cross-reference in the text, so the result does not exactly conform to LSA style.
• Key XL: Microsoft Word 2003 Keyboard Shortcuts.

A new free, peer-reviewed linguistics journal was announced in this post on Living Languages:

The e-journal Language Documentation & Conservation (LD&C) was launched last month by the University of Hawai‘i Press to journal endangered language issues.

Persian complex predicates are of particular interest because their semantics are often idiosyncratic and their structure frequently deviates from general rules of Persian syntax. In spite of these peculiarities, Persian complex predicates are not a marginal part of the language. They form an open, productive class, and are more common than simple verbs. 

One puzzling theoretical question about Persian complex predicates is how they are represented in the mental lexicon. Since the meaning of a complex predicate is not entirely predictable based on the individual semantics of the preverb, or non-verbal element (NV) and the verb (V), it is hypothesized that NV and V must be stored in the mental lexicon as a single construct with a single meaning. But this hypothesis is complicated by the fact that in some clauses, the NV and V can be separated by other morphemes.

In this paper, I will present a hypothesis based on Construction Grammar that will: (a) account for the productivity of the Persian complex predicate constructs; (b) describe the way instances of this construction are stored in the mental lexicon; and (c) explain how they are unified with other constructions in a clause-including clauses in which the NV and V become separated.

Click this link to read more: Tajik Persian Complex Predicates.

I just read an announcement for a new book: What Counts as Evidence in Linguistics,  Edited by Martina Penke and Anette Rosenbach, and published this year by John Benjamins.  According to the description of the book on the LingusitList, this book focuses on the innateness debate and shows how formal and functional approaches to linguistics have different perspectives on linguistic evidence. The three guiding questions for this volume are: What type of evidence can be used for innateness claims (or UG)?; What is the content of such innate features (or UG)?; and, How can UG be used as a theory guiding empirical research?

This book will be on my list of books to read after I finish my MA Thesis.

The table of contents lists the following articles:

• What counts as evidence in linguistics? An introduction, by Martina Penke and Anette Rosenbach
• Typological evidence and Universal Grammar, by Frederick J. Newmeyer
• Remarks on the relation between language typology and Universal Grammar: Commentary on Newmeyer, by Mark Baltin
• Does linguistic explanation presuppose linguistic description?, by Martin Haspelmath
• Remarks on description and explanation in grammar: Commentary on Haspelmath, by Judith Aissen and Joan Bresnan
• Author’s response, by Martin Haspelmath
• From UG to Universals: Linguistic adaptation through iterated learning, by Simon Kirby, Kenny Smith and Henry Brighton
• Form, meaning and speakers in the evolution of language: Commentary on Kirby, Smith and Brighton, by William Croft
• Author’s response, by Simon Kirby, Kenny Smith and Henry Brighton
• Why assume UG?, by Dieter Wunderlich
• What kind of evidence could refute the UG hypothesis? Commentary on Wunderlich, by Michael Tomasello
• Author’s response: Is there any evidence that refutes the UG hypothesis?, by Dieter Wunderlich
• A question of relevance: Some remarks on standard languages, by Helmut Weiß
• The Relevance of Variation: Remarks on Weiß’s Standard-Dialect-Problem, by Horst J. Simon
• Author’s response, by Helmut Weiß
• Universals, innateness and explanation in second language acquisition, by Fred R. Eckman
• ‘Internal’ versus ‘external’ universals: Commentary on Eckman, by Lydia White
• Author’s response: ‘External’ universals and explanation in SLA, by Fred R. Eckman
• What counts as evidence in historical linguistics?, by Olga Fischer
• Abstraction and performance: Commentary on Fischer, by David W. Lightfoot
• Author’s response, by Olga Fischer

The NWO (Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research) Endangered Language Research Programme (ELP) will hold its 2nd International Workshop September 7, 2007,  at the University of Amsterdam. The theme of the workshop is Language Description and Linguistic Typology. The  keynote speakers will be Dr Peter Austin (SOAS, London), and Dr Claire Moyse-Faurie (CNRS-LACITO, Paris). Read more at:  NWO - Invitation to the 2nd International ELP Workshop, September 7, 2007 .

Birds’ Books just posted a review of Monica Whitlock’s Land Beyond the River,

An informative journalistic description of the social and political developments in Tajikistan, Afghanistan, and Uzbekistan during the 20th century.

The book gives accounts of the turbulent, and unfortunately often violent, recent events in the region such as:

unrest and revolution in Bukhara in the second decade of the 20th century, the Tajik civil war and its resolution in the 1990s, and ongoing displacement of Tajiks due to war, forced migration, and other hardships.

Read the review at: Land Beyond the River, by Monica Whitlock « Birds’ Books

I posted a copy of my handout on Yaghnobi grammar on The Yaghnobi blog. Read it here: Overview of Yaghnobi grammar « The Yaghnobi

Since I started posting about the Yahgnobi language three months ago, I have been delighted to discover others who are also interested in the Yahgnobi people and their language. Today, I decided it was time to create a new blog dedicated just to Yaghnobi and invite everyone who is interested in the Yaghnobi people, their language, history, and culture to contribute as authors. You will find this blog at: http://yaghnobi.wordpress.com

The University of Oregon Department of Linguistics and the Northwest Indian Language Institute (NILI) announce the 2007 session in Language Documentation June 25 - July 20 2007, Eugene, Oregon

As documenting languages takes on greater importance, there is a growing need for well-trained fieldworkers who are prepared to collaborate with community members. There are few places where students can gain practical, hands-on experience. The UO Linguistics Department focuses on lesser-known languages and empirical work. NILI has a ten-year history of working with tribes, communities and endangered languages. We look forward to having you join us!

Offered courses:

LING 410/510 — Language Documentation Methods (4 credits) CRN 42078/42079
This course gives fieldworkers an overview of current language documentation practices.
Topics include: audio and video equipment selection and use; data collection and processing; data management; archiving and access issues; “best practices.”

LING 408/508 — Language Documentation Lab (2 credits) CRN 42074/42075
In this hands-on lab, students put documentation methods into practice.

LING 407/507 — Curriculum Design and Development (2 credits) CRN 42072/42073
Students will learn how to produce useable teaching materials from documented speech (in written, audio and video forms). Basic elements of curriculum design and lesson planning will be taught. Please note that if you are a UO Linguistics undergraduate and want to use this course to fulfill the proseminar requirement, you must sign up for 2 additional 405 credits and complete a substantive research paper. Make arrangements for this with the instructor on the first day of class.

LING 408/508 - Topics in Documentary Linguistics (1 credit) CRN 42076/42077
This course covers essential topics for fieldworkers– Field Phonetics: how to collect and analyze phonetic and phonological data. Ethical Issues in Field Work: fieldworker responsibilities to communities and individuals. Grammar and Dictionary Writing: the how-tos of writing a grammar and dictionary useful for multiple audiences. Methods for Field Research: working with speakers to collect the best data possible.

Students should have completed at least introductory work in Linguistics. The four offered classes are designed to be taken together but may also be taken individually.

More information about courses, enrollment, tuition, and housing for the summer session in Language Documentation is available at www.uoregon.edu/~langdoc or contact us: langdoc@uoregon.edu