<b>Between grammar and lexicon.</b> Ed. by Ellen Contini-Morava and Yishai Tobin. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2000. Pp. xxxii, 365.

Reviewed by: Between grammar and lexicon ed. by Ellen Contini-Morava, Yishai Tobin Alan S. Kaye Between grammar and lexicon. Ed. By Ellen Contini-Morava and Yishai Tobin. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2000. Pp. xxxii, 365. This work consists of thirteen essays dealing with number, gender, and verbal systems in a crosslinguistic perspective. Many of these articles were presented at the Fifth International Cognitive Linguistics Conference (Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, July 1997). As the editors correctly note in the introduction, ‘in one form or another, virtually every linguistic theory makes a distinction between lexicon and grammar’ (ix), and these papers show that the traditional dichotomy between lexicon and grammar might better be abandoned. I must perforce restrict my comments to but a few of the papers selected in accordance with my background and interests. Ellen Contini-Morava’s ‘Noun class as number in Swahili’ (3–30) proposes that ‘number as expressed by the Swahili noun class prefixes is a scale of individuation rather than a binary opposition between “singular” and “plural”’ (18). She convincingly explains that ‘noun class markers form a kind of super-lexicon, mediating between the lexicon proper . . . and grammar’ (23), further demonstrating much more semantic unity than has been presupposed by other investigators, e.g. there is a class of revered or feared things uniting words such as kaburi ‘grave, tomb’ and ziara ‘tomb, pilgrimage’ (15). Yishai Tobin’s ‘The dual number in Hebrew: Grammar or lexicon or both’ (87–119) argues against the notion that the dual is dying. The author presents numerous examples for his contention that the dual -ayim is productive and belongs to both the grammatical [End Page 210] and lexical components. Using the principle of ‘semantic integrality’ (100–4) as the marker-distinguisher of -ayim, one can appreciate the very subtle nuances differentiating, say, šaɁtayim and štei šaɁot ‘two hours’, since the examples convincingly point out, as Tobin states, ‘cognitively and perceptually speaking’, the connotational difference that the former represents a shorter period of time than the latter (105). Ricardo Otheguy and Nancy Stern’s ‘The acategorial lexicon and the pairing strategies: A critical account of inherent gender in Spanish’ (123–57) disputes two commonly held assumptions about Spanish grammar—the noun-adjective dichotomy and that the Spanish lexicon is categorial and marked for gender. As evidence for their point of view, they note that ‘female lawyer’ is either la abogado or la abogada (151), whereas el profeta ‘male prophet’ contrasts with la profeta ‘female prophet’. I am skeptical, since it seems to me that the exceptions have been singled out and overemphasized to ‘prove the rule’ (the editors would not agree with me [xxiii]). Based on her (1991) unpublished PhD dissertation (Gender in Modern English: The system and its uses, Université Laval), Lori Morris’s ‘The grammar of English gender’ (185–203) rightly questions the approach based on biological features, viz., male, animate, etc. (186). One of the strengths of her argument is her large corpus of actual data. Although the author’s bibliography is comprehensive (202), there is one glaring omission: Muhammad Hassan Ibrahim’s Grammatical gender: Its origin and development (The Hague: Mouton, 1973) (cf. my review in Afro-asiatic Linguistics 3(8). 143–9, 1976). Mary Ellen Ryder’s ‘Complex -er nominals’ (291–331), one of the most fascinating of the presentations, convincingly argues for the early stages of the grammaticalization of -er based on numerous cogent examples, some of which are, however, context-dependent, e.g. one-notcher’ a dinner that makes you let out your belt’ (307) or ‘dropper’, as in ‘Don’t let him play—he’s a dropper!’ (with reference to a game of catch which ends when a player drops the ball) (308). The implications of the research support the gradual nature of linguistic change. Dorit Ravid and Yitzhak Schlesinger’s ‘Modern Hebrew adverbials: Between syntactic class and lexical category’ (333–51) assembles good examples for their case that the distinction between adjectives and adverbs as well as that between morphology and syntax is blurred. Once again, subtle differences are noted which the...

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.