komen ‘come’ + Verb of Movement: Diatopic and Semantic Variation in Spoken Varieties of Dutch

Periphrastic constructions with come have primarily been grammaticalized to express tense in Indo-European languages (Devos & van der Wal 2014). In the Germanic language group, come has not undergone grammaticalization to the same degree that related go has. Nevertheless, this verb has acquired some special functions when used in combination with other elements. One of them concerns the combination of come with a motion verb. In Standard Dutch, the choice of the morphological form (inf/ ptcp) of the movement verb in this construction is variable (Haeseryn et al. 1997): De agent kwam de straat ingefietst.ptcp /infietsen.inf ‘The police officer came cycling into the street’. This contribution investigates this special construction in terms of diatopic and register variation as well as from a semantic-functional perspective. We performed an experiment in which we tested for geographic and semantic factors. The results show that the distribution of the variants is not regionally conditioned contrary to our expectations. Instead, the infinitive variant is the preferred variant across all regions in regional Dutch. We then discuss the results for the semantic factors that we systematically integrated into the test conditions, i.e. lexical semantics and path and manner as has been previously proposed in the literature (Ebeling 2006, Honselaar 2010, Beliën 2016). The results of a regression analysis do not conform to expectations. We reflect on the results and propose an alternative hypothesis, based on Schäfer (2020), proposing that the infinitive variant is the result of a stalled grammaticalization process, in which komen is – or better was – on its way toward becoming a future auxiliary. Future work will have to test this hypothesis

Typology of Signed Languages: Differentiation through Kinship Terminology

Nearly all such studies have sought to understand the linguistic constraints of spoken languages, while largely neglecting signed languages. Despite the fact that spoken languages can be classified into types, signed languages are generally assumed to be clustered all together in one type which the current study challenges. Exploring the potential for a varied typology among signed languages requires identifying patterns across a sampling of geographically distinct and historically unrelated signed languages to formulate linguistic generalizations. To that end this study adopts Greenbergs 1966 analysis of Universals of Kinship Terminology, it examines the linguistic patterns that emerge from a comparison of kinship terminology in 40 signed languages, specifying what patterns can be seen in visual-gestural languages. Findings of this study revealed that form-function mappings of specific semantic domains are constructed by different strategies including: iconicity motivated by universal human and cultural-specific traits, arbitrary elements, and linguistic economy (semantic derivation). Patterns reveal that kin terms are motivated yet contain degrees of arbitrariness, suggesting a continuum of interaction of arbitrariness and iconicity. While iconicity is undeniably pervasive in signed languages, salient properties manifested in signed kinship terminology are not universal, but instead reflect the cultural and cognitive perception experienced by deaf people within their linguistic communities. As a result iconic properties framed by language-specific and cultural specific mappings lend to variations in signs, describing the trend that signed forms\u27 phonological properties are not simply phonemic representations, but instead are phonological properties that inherently signify semantic properties. In turn, iconicity emerges as an undeniable and powerful tool of schematization used to form signs in a visual-spatial modality. Data showed some kin terms were motivated by patterns of specific semantic-phonological interdependency. These patterns identified occurrences of semantic derivation and semantic extension within language-specific sets of kin terms. Signed kin terms are formed by combinations of initialization, fingerspelling/character writing constructions, and iconic and arbitrary descriptions. However, organization of kin terms by linguistic processes may not parallel what Greenberg found in his study of spoken languages. The nature of modality clearly manifests in different ways of organizing signed languages and spoken languages; illustrated by how markedness manifests differently. The extent of linguistic phenomenon seen in the domain of kinship terminology underscores the importance of exploring semantics through studies of phonology, morphology, and grammar in signed languages. Typological analyses of signed languages contribute significantly to understanding what linguistic traits appear consistently through all languages, both spoken and signed, by revealing more about the effects of the modality-independent and modality-dependent behaviors of languages in defining language universals

Comparative analysis of semantic distinctions between synonymous adjectives in Tatar and English

Many linguistic researches are devoted to the issues of defining the valid criteria of emergence and preservation of semantically synonymous relations between words, the conditions of their system-based organization in a synonymic row. The aim of the paper is to indicate and analyze the types of semantic distinctions between synonymous adjectives in Tatar and English, thus determine features common for the two non-related languages. Based on the broad review of the theoretical data it is stated in the paper that a synonymic row represents a specific type of word relations based on the sameness/ similarity of meaning and distinction. The distinctions which bear semantic, expressive and stylistic nuances, that serve to preserve gradation inside a synonymic row, are called shades of meaning. The comparative analysis of the examined data let us identify types of semantic distinctions in gradation, motivating circumstances, duration and frequency, nature of outward expression of the quality, range of described objects, semantic associations, evaluative attitude, logical emphasis, emotional coloring. We believe the paper findings may be useful for researchers who deal with contrastive linguistics, typology of non-related languages, lexicographic practice and may help those who study the English language to solve the difficulty of choosing the appropriate word in the communication discourse.peer-reviewe

New directions in the study of family names

This paper explores and explains recent radical developments in resources and methodology for studying the origins, cultural associations, and histories of family names (also called ‘surnames’). It summarizes the current state of the art and outlines new resources and procedures that are now becoming available. It shows how such innovations can enable the correction of errors in previous work and improve the accuracy of dictionaries of family names, with a focus on the English-speaking world. Developments such as the digitization of archives are having a profound effect, not only on the interpretation and understanding of traditional, ‘established’ family names and their histories, but also of names in other languages and other cultures. There are literally millions of different family names in the world today, many of which have never been studied at all. What are good criteria for selection of entries in a dictionary of family names, and what can be said about them? What is the nature of the evidence? How stable (or how variable) are family names over time? What are the effects of factors such as migration? What is the relationship between family names and geographical locations, given that people can and do move around? What is the relationship between traditional philological and historical approaches to the subject and statistical analysis of newly available digitized data? The paper aims to contribute to productive discussion of such questions

Towards controlled terminology for reporting germline cancer susceptibility variants: an ENIGMA report.

The vocabulary currently used to describe genetic variants and their consequences reflects many years of studying and discovering monogenic disease with high penetrance. With the recent rapid expansion of genetic testing brought about by wide availability of high-throughput massively parallel sequencing platforms, accurate variant interpretation has become a major issue. The vocabulary used to describe single genetic variants in silico, in vitro, in vivo and as a contributor to human disease uses terms in common, but the meaning is not necessarily shared across all these contexts. In the setting of cancer genetic tests, the added dimension of using data from genetic sequencing of tumour DNA to direct treatment is an additional source of confusion to those who are not experienced in cancer genetics. The language used to describe variants identified in cancer susceptibility genetic testing typically still reflects an outdated paradigm of Mendelian inheritance with dichotomous outcomes. Cancer is a common disease with complex genetic architecture; an improved lexicon is required to better communicate among scientists, clinicians and patients, the risks and implications of genetic variants detected. This review arises from a recognition of, and discussion about, inconsistencies in vocabulary usage by members of the ENIGMA international multidisciplinary consortium focused on variant classification in breast-ovarian cancer susceptibility genes. It sets out the vocabulary commonly used in genetic variant interpretation and reporting, and suggests a framework for a common vocabulary that may facilitate understanding and clarity in clinical reporting of germline genetic tests for cancer susceptibility

Regional variation of habitat tolerance by some European spiders (Araneae) - a review

The data presented by HÄNGGI et al. (1995) and BOLAÑOS (2003) on the habitats of a large number of European spiders are examined, most of which appear to show non-specific preferences. The abundance and frequency peaks of the 384 species graphs (HÄNGGI et al. 1995) can be explained by assuming that habitat tolerance varies with geographical location. This can be demonstrated on a local level within a particular country or throughout the European range of a species. Examples are described. Many published ecological studies of spider faunas seem to have assumed that the habitat preferences of a species is a fixed characteristic wherever they occur but evidence is presented to show that this may apply to only a few species. A number of examples are described showing how preferences change with latitude and longitude within Europe. It is proposed that most species can be categorised as stenotopic, mesotopic or eurytopic, although there is a gradual change from one group to another, with no clear boundaries. Supporting evidence for regional variation in habitat tolerance is scarce. More studies are required of individual species throughout their European distribution and detailed descriptions of their habitats in different parts of their range. Definitions of micro-, macro- and minor habitats are presented as useful tools for field studies of spider faunas. It is also recommended that future faunal surveys should use the same system of habitat classification so that the results are comparable with other studies. The most appropriate method is described by BUCHAR & RŮŽIČKA (2002) but could be made more precise by the use of scientific measuring equipment for light/shade, dryness/humidity and temperature. Finally the importance of checking the validity of some published records is stressed because misidentifications are sometimes frequent