0.1. Leonard Bloomfield was the first to state explicitly some of the assumptions that underlie the methods of linguistic science; his formulation of these axioms in the second volume of LANGUAGE has remained for more than twenty years the only attempt of its kind. We may find it necessary now, in the light of recent theoretical discussions, to make certain changes of detail in his list of assumptions; but the importance of his article as a contribution to linguistic theory is undiminished. Whoever undertakes, in future, to apply the postulational approach to linguistics, will find his task made easier by the model that Bloomfield has provided.

Haplology—the term was coined by Maurice Bloomfield—within a word is a familiar phenomenon. ‘Very many examples,’ says Sturtevant (An Introduction to Linguistic Science §130.5), 'might be cited, but a few will suffice.'

[Greek ἐννἐα and Latin quattuor have proved difficult to explain. After an examination of the explanations offered hitherto, the theory is advanced that the -vv- and -tt- of these words are instances of lengthening caused by the analogy of other numbers used in series with them.]

[Reexamination of the problem of taboo on animal names, with special reference to the IE names for the bear. Addition of the Dravidian words for ‘tiger’. The hypothesis of mere avoidance of animal names by hunters does not explain; it is probable that in almost all cases a religious attitude is to be looked for.]

The phonemes of Russian are as follows:

Consonants:

1. Plain and palatalized counterparts regardless of the following sound:

p pj b bj m mj f fj v vj

t tj d dj n nj s sj z zj

1 lj r rj

2. Plain or palatalized depending on the following sound: k g x

3. Plain only:

c š ž

4. Palatalized only:

c šč y žĵ

It seems fitting, in a number of LANGUAGE dedicated to Leonard Bloomfield, to apply the technique of phonemic analysis to one of the Germanic languages with which he has so long been associated. The present study attempts to analyze the segmental phonemes of Gothic, as far as the written evidence allows us to; and to sketch the changes between Proto-Germanic and Gothic.

The linguistic structure of an utterance is presumed to be fully stated by a list of the morphemes which constitute it, and by their order. The difference between two utterances is expressed by the difference in morphemic constituency between them. Frequently, however, we find that there is a set of morphemes in a language, such that each morpheme in the set is identified by its contrast with all the others in the set. Such morphemes are often arranged in paradigms, and the various crisscrossing relationships among the morphemes of the paradigm are often called categories. Thus there are such Latin morphemes as -us, -um, -ī, -ōs which are defined by their membership in a paradigm, and which are considered as expressing, within the paradigm, such categories as case and number.

Taki-Taki is the language of Paramaribo and other parts of Dutch Guiana, called by its own speakers tàkitáki or nèŋgeretóŋgo Negro language, in Dutch Neger-Engelsch, and in German Neger-Englisch. It and the closely related language of the Saramacca Bush-Negroes are creolized languages developed out of the jargonized English used by the slaves of English and Portuguese landholders who settled Dutch Guiana in the middle of the seventeenth century. Taki-Taki is spoken in several dialects, of which the chief is the Town-Negro speech of Paramaribo.

It is generally known that one of Leonard Bloomfield's life works is the descriptive and comparative study of Algonquian. It is also generally conceded that his work in this field is of considerable importance. But most of those who are quite willing to admit this do so on indirect evidence: since Bloomfield's other work proves him a sound scholar, his Algonquian studies must be sound too. Algonquian, after all, is an out-of-the-way language family, and few have concerned themselves with it. In view, particularly, of Bloomfield's endeavors in this field, this neglect is unfortunate. To the writer the following points seem beyond dispute: (1) careful study of Algonquian as Bloomfield has described it can be a fascinating, enlightening, and rewarding experience even for established comparatists and historical linguists; (2) for the newcomer to linguistics, a reading of Bloomfield's Algonquian works is one of the finest indoctrinations into the best of linguistic method.

[Phonemes and morphemes differ in two respects, among others. (1) Native speakers master the phonemes of their language completely, but learn the morphemes only in part. (2) In analyzing a language, linguists invoke distinctions of meaning to determine phonemes, but equivalence of meaning to determine morpheme alternants.]