Re: Re : Case, Innateness, Almost Allnoun, NGL.
|From:||Ed Heil <edheil@...>|
|Date:||Wednesday, August 4, 1999, 20:15|
I seriously believe Mathias is the great Verb-Sage of Conlang. I have
neither studied enough on verbs in real-world linguistics, nor worked
hard enough on my own on a verbal system for a conlang, to appreciate
much of the wisdom he imparts, but should I embark on either of those
endeavors I will become his attentive disciple.
Worship the potato? The idea seemed silly to me. But then
I thought, what else is more deserving of worship? It's simple,
it comes from the earth, and it can kill you if you disobey it.
-- Deep Thoughts by Jack Handey (Saturday Night Live - NBC)
From Http://Members.Aol.Com/Lassailly/Tunuframe.Html wrote:
> Dans un courrier dat=E9 du 30/07/99 03:09:35 , Jim a =E9crit :
> > [Main Point glk]:
> > xxxx an argument for a localist hypothesis of case roles and
> > clause structure as part of the genetic endowment of the human
> > species.
> > =20
> > =20
> > This post is a commentary on a web document with the above url, poin=ted
> > out on Conlang by Charles, which I find very interesting and I want =to
> > share my reactions to it. It has a lot to say about case, and I have
> > added some conclusions of my own about a verb-minimalist approach to
> > language. I have made very large unmarked deletions in it; it is bes=t
> > to read the original. VST stands for Vector Space Tense as I have
> > developed it in the Conlang posted series and Writekit. NGL stands f=or
> > Next Generation Language as published at firstname.lastname@example.org.
> > =20
> > NOTE:
> > Throughout this web document my (Gerald Koenig's) comments appear
> > initiated by my initials, glk, and ended by a line, thus:
> > =20
> > Scott DeLancy's words.
> i read it. the NGL stuff is slightly simplistic.
> you may want to listen to your children and ponder :
> (i) attribute vs. entity
> (ii) notional vs. spatio-temporal
> (iii) extent vs. extremal
> and a few other ***s when these above are cleared up.
> "tense" is off-topic : rather discuss "aspect".
> as for "verb-minimalist", i think speaking of "verb" is
> already mixing PoS and cases.
> and discussing "recipient" without pondering "result"
> is nonsense.