ATS2667: Language Across Time

Assignment 1: 15%; Assignment 2: 15%; Assignment 3: 30%; Exam: 40%
Assignment 1 and 2 entailed of numerous short-answer-cum-problem-solving questions, quite similar to those presented in some of first year Linguistics. In Assignment 3, you had a choice of either a reconstruction exercise or a major essay. I am horrible at reconstruction (i.e. looking at old languages and working out which of those languages are related to others, and why), so I chose the major essay. In hindsight, doing the reconstruction exercise would have been much more beneficial in preparation for the exam.

Two primary things stand out for me about this unit:

1. Olav is a legend. One of my favourite lecturers. There were times during the week where I would honestly look forward to listening to his seminars, as he made me laugh and was just a generally excellent fellow. He does go on tangents, sometimes. He certainly knows what he's talking about, though - that much is very clear. I had him in first year Linguistics, so I knew that I liked him and his lecturing style.

2. If I were to name this unit, it would be 'Historical Linguistics' rather than 'Language Across Time.' I was expecting slightly more emphasis on the nature of change and why it occurs. There was, of course, a lot of this in the unit, but I found the last few weeks of content a little dry and uninteresting. That's probably just me, and more a reflection of the time of semester. It should be noted, too, that I was extremely inattentive during all of Olav's numerous practical examples, which may be a contributing factor as to why I didn't like the last few weeks (which focused on what we had learned (or, more accurately, what we were supposed to have learned) during those examples). Specifically, this was in regard to the comparative method - a tool used by linguists to reconstruct old proto-languages.

Overall, though, I enjoyed the unit. Olav provides good and fair feedback on the assignments, and is always more than happy to have a chat about any concerns. He is rather flexible, too, and understands that his students have more to their lives than just his one particular unit.

The exam is reasonable, testing a wide range of skills acquired during the semester. For us, it started with some short answer questions, then a few using a case study, moved on to the comparative method (these questions were, unfortunately, worth the greatest proportion of marks), and then some longer response questions (almost like a very, very small essay).
Looking back on it, the unit is almost sub-divided into a few different parts, including the types of linguistic change, the reasons for linguistic change, and then the comparative method. So, on the assumption that you are interested in the first two, and actually pay attention for the third, I would highly recommend this unit.

Olav Kuhn

No idea, but Olav presented a sample exam (with subsequent suggested solutions) in the weeks leading up to the actual exam

3.5 out of 5

Yes, with screen capture (I was thankful for this, as the seminars were 3pm - 5pm, and I otherwise didn't have classes on that day)

Trask's Historical Linguistics, 2nd edition. Revised by Robert McColl Millar. Hodder Education, 2007
I'm not sure that you need it, as such, but I certainly found it useful (mainly for the major essay, which I wrote on euphemism).

1x two hour seminar per week

2014, Semester 1

86