Re: Telona grammar, part 1

yes, here it is! it's a vulgarization article in an old french edition of
Scientific American dated october 1997. an issue that is a MUT for all
linguistics amateurs with articles written by Meritt Ruhlen, Colin Renfrew, and
Cavali-Sforzza about languages, genetics, langfamilies, etc. only the best in a
hundred oversimplified pages that introduce to the basics.

in that article, A. Damasio apparently summarizes his book "L'erreur de
Descartes: la raison des émotions" ED. Odile Jacob, 1995-don't know about the
english version but i'm going to buy it when i have time to read it (otherwise i
know i'll read it and postpone everything else). at first sight i found the
article enigmatic because Damasio writes of "entity" and "verb" while here
linguistics books make a difference between entity and behaviour, not entity and
verb. but after re-reading it i think it's even simpler than that: D. says that
when a "word" (i guess he simplifies here on purpose since he mainly base his
observation on verbal utterance) semantically describes a behaviour ("verb"),
then it's processed differently from a word describing an entity ("noun"). so my
very unscientific guess is that even when you use a verb as an object ("i long
for swimming") it is still processed as a verb. in other words, whether a verb
is used as a predicate or as an argument doesn't make it change its verb nature.
but that's only my own understanding the article.

OBCONLANG this means that nominalizers used to make a verb into a noun don't
emasculate the verb. i imagine the nominalized verb as having trimmed, tiny
tentacles trying to grasp actors :-)))) the noun "quietness" i really a verb
lurking in the dark forest of words to catch a quiet actor to feed on!
reversely, you think you make a noun into a verb with a copula but truely you
just dress an already existing verb concept with the fleace of a noun.

also A.D. article is not clear about nouns of instruments and attribute verbs.
are the first ("hammer") closer to verbs since they are used for a specific
action? are the second (eg. "blue"--"le bleu" in french) closer to noun since
they are part of an entity? there is a paragraph about people remembering better
nouns of tools than nouns of animals but there is nothing about someone
remembering "blue" but not "asleep". and for that matter, what about words of
intrisinc attribute + comparative like "tall"? i definitely would like to read
that book.

Mathias
www.geocities.com/kalatunu/index.htm
>>>
Date:    Mon, 4 Feb 2002 15:01:56 +0100
From:    BP Jonsson <bpj@...>
Subject: Re: Telona Grammar, part 1
At 08:23 2002-02-04 +0100, Kala Tunu wrote:
>btw, i recently read an old article written in 1998 by a neurologue whose name
>is Damasio reporting tomographic surveys showing that entities and behaviours
>are not even processed in the same brain areas.
Do you have a reference for that article?
/BP 8^)>
--
B.Philip Jonsson mailto:bpX@netg.se (delete X)
<<<<