This study examines the productivity of five English derivational affixes in a British newspaper, the Times (London), in the period from September 1989 to December 1992. This diachronic corpus of roughly 80 million word tokens contains large numbers of neologisms. Thus, this corpus offers a good opportunity to test both qualitative and quantitative theories of morphological productivity. Our investigations support the usefulness of the quantitative formalization of the notion DEGREE OF PRODUCTIVITY developed in Baayen 1992, 1993a. At the same time, they illustrate that productivity is a function of both text type and real time. An investigation of the morphological structure of the neologisms provides strong support for Aronoff s (1976) claim that the productivity of an affix may vary significantly with the morphological structure of the base word to which it attaches.

What would it mean to build an archive not of texts or images, but of tastes, sounds, silences, and gestures, the fleeting traces through which memory takes shape? This essay proposes “taste archives” as a method within the public humanities for engaging communities around everyday acts of remembering and belonging. Beginning with chai as a personal anchor of migrant memory, I move outward to imagine a framework for archiving food-related stories and practices. The process unfolds in three movements: (1) gathering oral histories through food-centered conversations; (2) recording recipes, smells, tastes, and the sonic-material rhythms that accompany them; and (3) curating these into accessible, community-based collections, whether in libraries, cultural centers, or digital spaces. Along the way, I reflect on questions of consent, ownership, and the difficulty of translating sensory experience into archival form. “Taste archives,” I suggest, democratize heritage by placing ordinary rituals-meals, drinks, shared preparation at the center of cultural memory. By making the invisible histories of migration and daily life tangible and audible, the public humanities can reimagine the archive itself as something that can be sipped, smelled, and heard: a living practice of remembering together.

Judgments of linguistic acceptability constitute an important source of evidence for theoretical and applied linguistics, but are typically elicited and represented in ways which limit their utility. This paper describes how MAGNITUDE ESTIMATION, a technique used in psychophysics, can be adapted for eliciting acceptability judgments. Magnitude estimation of linguistic acceptability is shown to solve the measurement scale problems which plague conventional techniques; to provide data which make fine distinctions robustly enough to yield statistically significant results of linguistic interest; to be usable in a consistent way by linguistically naive speaker-hearers, and to allow replication across groups of subjects. Methodological pitfalls are discussed and suggestions are offered for new approaches to the analysis and measurement of linguistic acceptability.