Search

It used to be thought that, just as word-initialfl…andfr…behaved likepl…, pr…, tr…, etc., in not producing a long syllable when following a word-final short vowel, just so word-internal…fl…and…fr…allowed both the short and, except for the pre-classical scenic poets, the long scansion. It was implied that these clusters oscillated with the same degree of freedom which is the well-known characteristic of the stop-and-liquid clusters. The difficulty is, of course, that evidence can be no more than minimal since in truly Latin (i.e. neither dialectal nor foreign) materialfoccurs only at the beginning of words or after a compounding seam. In fact, the argument, explicit or implicit, has turned on Horace,Sat.1.2.98:custodes lectica ceniflones parasitae; Horace,Sat.2.2.131:ilium aut nequities aut uafri inscitia iuris; Ov.Ars3.332:cuiue pater uafri luditur arte Getae; Martial 6.64.26:stigmata nec uafra delebit Cinnamus arte; 12.66.3:arte sed emptorem uafra corrumpis Amoene; Phaedrus 2.6.14:inducta uafris(cj. Festa)aquila monitis paruit; Silius 8.566:et quos aut Rufrae(cj. Heinse)quos aut Aesernia quosue, and Martial 4.71.1:quaero diu totam Safroni Rufe per urbem

The volume contains the texts of interviews realized with three linguists: the late Andre-Georges Haudricourt (1911-1996), Henry M. Hoenigswald (born in 1915) and Robert H. Robins (born in 1921). The book has a twofold objective: on the one hand, its goal is to bring together a number of "inside" testimonies on fundamental issues in linguistics; on the other hand, it is intended to provide a personalized documentation which is particularly relevant for a historiography of linguistics that does not limit itself to published sources. The issues addressed in these interviews concern the status of linguistics (and more particularly the relationship between the study of languages and history), the fundamental aims of the study of language, and the scientific and humanitarian status of linguistics. The three interviews also shed light on the intellectual itinerary of the three linguists and on the developments which took place in the linguistic landscape during the past 65 years. The three interviews are supplemented with useful bibliographical notes. The preface informs about the state of the art in the "oral archiving" of linguistics.

Herein follows a memento of a panel session held on April 29, 1989 at the spring meeting of the Classical Association of the Atlantic States in College Park, Maryland. The title of the session is an evocation of Vergil, Aeneid 1.203. With these words Aeneas tries to cheer a dispirited band of comrades by the observation that their painful present struggles may well become-over time and through memory-sources of pleasure. Lee Pearcy and I, the organizers of this session, chose this title because the circumstances of Aeneas' own, actual and projected, moments of remembrance have much in common with the atmosphere we hoped to create at the CAAS meeting. To be more specific, Aeneas speaks about future memories to a group of fellow Trojan males and approximate contemporaries. Yet when he actually remembers his own experiences of war and wandering, at a banquet in Queen Dido's court, it is to a far more diverse audience. His listeners include individuals, such as his hostess and addressee, of a gender and nation other than his own, as well as a representative-namely his own son Ascanius-of a generation younger than his own. Moreover, when Aeneas speaks to his own men about memories to come, he uses the first person as well as the second person plural. With sumus (in line 198, "we are not unaware of earlier misfortunes") and tendimus (in line 205, "we make our way into Latium"), Aeneas underlines the shared nature of past and present hardship-and, implicitly, the shared nature of future remembrance. Vergil, then, furnishes a model of collective remembrance, and delineates a context for remembrance which numbers males and females, close kindred and first-time acquaintances, those born in this country and those born abroad, and-most importantly-members of more than one generation. The week prior to our session, coincidently, marked the annual celebration of the Jewish Passover. As Vergil's poetry also evinces an informed interest in Semitic tradition, it perhaps bears noting that both Vergil's model of collective remembrance and the multigenerational, diversely populated context in which this remembrance occurs have striking affinities with the annual Passover ritual, the Seder. For, like Aeneas himself, the Passover Seder commemorates both an exodus and the painful circumstances which necessitated this mass departure. We should observe, too, that the events of Aeneid I merely mark a break in Aeneas' wars and wanderings. More travels, more battles, more sorrows lie on the way to a settled life in Latium. The period of American history on which we focused in this panel session, a difficult time of Depression at home and Hitler's rise to power in Europe

SUMMARYBloomfield worked in both historical and synchronic linguistics. To the former, he contributed: (1) a large amount of work in specific fields; (2) scrutiny of the nature of historical linguistic investigation; and (3) an analysis of the phenomenon of linguistic change. In his Language (1933), he did not narrate the procedures involved in synchronic investigation, nor did he set forth the steps to be followed in analysis. In his exposition of the results of diachronic linguistics, his approach was one of respect and admiration for the achievements of nineteenth-century historical linguistics. Since he accepted the (often disputed) postulate of the regularity of sound-change, he defended it by indirect persuasion in setting forth the arguments by which it is confirmed. His view of the causation of phonological and morphological change is interpreted as an anticipation of later sociolinguistics. In so doing, he restated his predecessors' and his own insights, thereby rescuing them from the ministrations of their would-be defenders.RESUMEBloomfield travailla dans la linguistique historique et dans la linguisti-que synchronique. A la premiere, il contribua: (1) une grande quantite de materiaux dans des champs specifiques; (2) l'examen de la nature des etudes historiques du langage; (3) une analyse du phenomene du changement linguistique. Dans son livre Language (1933), il n'enumera pas les procedes de l'investigation linguistique, ni les etapes a suivre dans l'analyse. En pre-sentant les resultats de la linguistique diachronique, l'approche de Bloom-field fut du a son respect et a son admiration pour les accomplissements de la linguistique historique du dix-neuvieme siecle. Puisqu'il acceptait le post-ulat (souvent dispute) de la regularity des changements phonetiques, il le defendit moyennant la persuasion indirecte, en presentant l'argumentation par laquelle il est confirme. L'auteur interprete les vues de Bloomfield sur les causes des changements phonologiques et morphologiques comme une anticipation de la sociolinguistique. En faisant ceci, Bloomfield reformula les aperCus de ses predecesseurs et de lui-meme, de sorte qu'il les sauva des plaidoyers de ceux qui voulaient les defendre d'une faCon maladroite.