Re: why can't the BBC

On May 25, 2:01 am, Nathan Sanders <nsand...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In article

Without taking acoustics into account, these facts would be totally
arbitrary and unexplainable, just interesting, but inscrutable,
curiosities.

The _explanations_ of the changes are not at issue. Only the _facts_
of the contrasts.

As Joos put it in 1957, "children want explanations." There's a reason
descriptive linguistics is called "descriptive."

As I said, I'm a functionalist, and it's not in my nature to separate
out the acoustics from the observed patterns.

Until you've observed the patterns, you don't know what there is that
needs explaining.
.

Quantcast