Re: Nouns, verbs, adjectives... and why they're p

> > Nouns are objects, adjectives are properties, verbs are actions.
>
> Or : permanence, immanence, remanence. with wild and endless landscapes
inbetween. syntax as road signs. thanks for your reminder, Nik. why replace
philosophy with math ? and expression with logics ? To each sovereign his
realm...

The distinction is arbitrary and sloppy, and is not even adhered to with any
hint of consistency (see my last post).  I won't attack anyone's realm for its
backwards ways, but myself I'm glad to be free of them :)


>   It's
> > as simple as that, at least as far as prototypes go.
> >
> > There are certain concepts that don't fit into any of these prototypes
> > perfectly, these are the ones that may differ from language to language,
> > being forced into one or another catagory.
>
> yes. but i think you 3 agree on that point : degrees of integration exists in
speech but their marking is not the same in all languages and some of us don't
even feel it necessary to mark them.

Mmm-hm.  Though I'd rather say: to distinguish between them -- I have things
which look like nouns, verbs, and adjectives, marked as such, but they're not
word classes.


> Just because a language can exist
> > without these catagories, as you claim for Danoven (altho I'm skeptical
> > that there's *no* distinction, including syntactic), doesn't mean that
> > they're unnecessary
>
> they operate before you can shoot at them.
Just what are you implying here? :-P
I haven't had PoS distinctions since March 1994.  Don't remember the exact
day I decided to get rid of them, sorry :-)



JJS