Naive linguistic explanation
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 7901586 |
|---|---|
| Authors | R M W Dixon (0000-0001-8294-5806, Australian National University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 1992 |
| Volume | 21 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 83-91 |
| Publication date | 1992-03-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Language in Society (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0047-4045 • E-ISSN: 1469-8013 |
| Publisher | Cambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1017/s0047404500015049 |
| OpenAlex | W2165948166 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 2 |
| References cited | 5 |
Five examples are presented of how native speakers may try to explain a grammatical point to a linguist, and, in the absence of a suitable metalanguage, adopt some “lateral” way of demonstrating the point. They may, for instance, give another paradigmatic form of a word under scrutiny to show its word class; they may switch to another dialect to clarify some ambiguity; they may add some extra sentence constituents to each noun in a lexical elicit, to reveal its gender class. (Field methods, grammatical explanation, use of informants/consultants, Australian Aboriginal languages, Amazonian languages
Ambiguity · Class (philosophy) · Field (mathematics) · Linguistics · Metalanguage · Noun · Part of speech · Point (geometry) · Scrutiny · Sentence · Sociology · Word (group theory) · Artificial Intelligence · Computer Science · Historical Linguistics and Language Studies · Language, Metaphor, and Cognition · Mathematics · Philosophy · Psychology · Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
| Unique citing works | 2 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,11 |
| Citation span | 2007 - 2023 (17) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 1 |