Literal-Minded

Linguistic commentary from a guy who takes things too literally

The Literal-Minded Linguistics Supplement

Posted by Neal on November 29, 2006

UPDATE, May 31, 2011: This file is no longer available.

This posting is primarily for instructors of introductory linguistics classes. If you’ve sometimes directed your students to read linguistics-related blog postings, or have put linguistics humor into course packets, then I offer The Literal-Minded Linguistics Supplement for your consideration, just in time for planning winter semester/quarter syllabuses. (Yes, I say syllabuses.)

It’s 76 pages of selected and revised postings from this very blog, formatted, with table of contents, organized into sections on phonetics, phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics, and pragmatics. Within each section, the first entries are of general interest within the particular field. They’re followed by entries concerning language acquisition (i.e., stuff I’ve written about Doug and Adam and their peers), and then entries that deal with variation among people or over time.

Best of all, it’s freely reproducible (for a period of time). Put particular entries in course packets, or copy the whole thing if you want, with none of the troublesome “fair use” questions you’d need to ask with other material. All I ask is that you email me later and tell what worked, what didn’t, how you used it, etc.

About these ads

7 Responses to “The Literal-Minded Linguistics Supplement

  1. Bridget said

    Wow, fantastic! I’m definitely going to hang on to this.

  2. Rachel Klippenstein said

    I think I found a typo. The example box at the top of page 22 contrasts:

    5. I like booger-eating.
    4. I like to boogers.

    Earlier in the post, 4 is ‘I like to eat boogers’, and I’m guessing that’s what’s supposed to be in this case too.

  3. Neal said

    Bridget: Thanks!
    Rachel: Thanks for noticing; it’s all fixed now.

  4. Zohar said

    I think this is a typo (page 21):
    “meaning difference between in and (2),” I think “in” should be “it”

  5. Neal said

    Thanks, Zohar. I’ve fixed it.

  6. The Ridger said

    Any chance you’ll make this available again? For those of us who just found your blog?

  7. Neal said

    The link has now been updated.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 485 other followers

%d bloggers like this: