Re: Free word order in analytical languages
- From: "mb" <azythos2@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 30 Jun 2006 19:41:44 -0700
me wrote:
mb wrote:
me wrote:
Gorol wrote:...
Hi, which grammatical means can be used to allow free word order of
actants except of rich inflection?
No inflections here; only agglutinations:
6) while comprehensible, this order is never used; it would be considered
a odd/clumsy way to express #5.
Think of it, in an agglutinative language, purely theoretically there
could be no incomprehensible permutation re relationships.
Isn't that true of inflected languages too? Can't (whatever are the 3 words
for) "the dog chased the cat" be permuted in 6 ways in Latin without
changing the meaning?
There seems to be a distance limit, though. Of course you can permute
everything if you are working with few elements, as long as the case of
each element of your utterance is sufficient to indicate all the
relationships within it. And of course the supposed advantage of the
so-called agglutinating system is just theoretical. The difference in
theoretical elasticity is due not to the case vs case-suffix itself,
but the ability to add a large number of successive suffixes/infixes to
the same word. They become "portable" with the word to mark multiple
conditions, so one would have, always theoretically, less of a
constraint for a minimum of order. In fact, it's fun to play it as a
relatively simple game of computer modeling, assigning relationship
markings to a series of "suffixes", then an allowed order of
consecutive agglutinations and see how far you can complicate your
sentences and keep every word randomly permutable.
Agreed that the usual disclaimer applies, i.e. that reality is a whole
nother game.
.
- Prev by Date: Re: arabic alphabet, two "ha" letters ?
- Next by Date: Re: Latin and Oscan
- Previous by thread: Re: Free word order in analytical languages
- Next by thread: Re: Free word order in analytical languages
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|