"the Asymmetrical SVO Middle Path" ;) (was Re: Branching typologies)

In a message dated 27.09.2001 08:28:46 AM, bc_@MAIL.RU writes:

>On Wed, 26 Sep 2001 14:42:35 -0500, Thomas R. Wier
><trwier@...> wrote:
>
>>I'm curious: what is the most common branching typology for our
>>conlangs?
    Tr:pang is neither predominately right- or left-branching SVO. I am
interested in utilizing the implicational universals theories of HSP
(Heaviness Serialization Principle) & MP (Mobility Principle) [see Hawkins
book cited below].
    Briefly, HSP (Heaviness Serialization Principle) postulates
left'n'right-branchin' asymmetry - that light modifiers prefer a
left-branching, heavy modifiers right-branching.
    Light modifiers tend to be demonstratives & numerals/number-classifiers,
various grammatical particles, etc.; heavy modifiers tend to be adjectives,
relative clauses, etc..
    Intermediate modifiers - havin' neither enough lightness or heaviness -
can conceivably shift either direction - syntactically and/or historically...
hence the Mobility Principle!
    Vive _mutatis mutandi_!!!!
    I very much like calling this combination of HSP and MP "the Asymmetrical
SVO Middle Path" ;)   it pretty much sums it up & it's easier than sayin' all
that other long-winded, overly technical stuff... *gigglabyte*...

    ::straightens self up, gets serious::

    The above branching typology ideas I gleaned from _Word Order Universals_
by John A. Hawkins, Quanitive Analyses of Linguistic Structure Series,
Academic Press, 1983 [this maybe O.P. - outta print]. It is one of the best
post-Greenberg typology book I have encountered, but quite dense
[academically wordy] in places.

    Also the very best -current & easily readable- book in print regarding
typology (as well as morphology) I have had the wisdom to acquire was a book
suggested by members of this esteemed email list: _Describing Morphosyntax: A
guide for Field Linguists_ by Thomas E. Payne, Cambridge University Press,
1997, reprinted 1999.
    One can just go through this book and make a conlang ;) Esp'ly since it
has much & many examples from non-Indo-European languages!!!

    All I wish for now is a good comparative multilingual dictionary with
words in more than 50 languages, esp'ly non-European languages like Sanskrit,
Pali, Bahasa Indonesian/Malay, Maori, etc..  - with decent Romanization(s),
phonetic spelling & IPA.
    But I'd settle for a good comparative dictionary of Indo-European
languages (Latin and its descendants, Greek, Sanskrit, Prakrit - esp'ly Pali,
etc.) with basic Romanization(s), phonetic spelling & IPA... and a big bonus
would be lil brief linguistic histories.

    czHANg