Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 08:53:00 EST From: "Dennis.Preston" <22709MGR[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]MSU.BITNET> Subject: Re: modren metathesis Sali- I think the one-rule-per-function (and hence different grammar or lect) is an assumption of variationist studies within the implicational (or Bailey-DeCamp-Bickerton) model, more often associated with pidgin/creole studies. I'm not sure that the same assumption lurks beneath quantitativist approaches to variation which find a 'richer' life for alternatives, presumably in the same grammar. Now to the real problem. When you say that you don't object to what I find objectionable in the quote I gave from Chomsky, do you mean to don't object to what Chomsky says (and disagree with me) or that you don't object to my objection (and agree with me)? I've been parsing all night. (No puns here; my speech is r-full.) Dennis Preston