Re: LIFO languages (was Re: "Theory informs practice" - OK?)
| From: | Jörg Rhiemeier <joerg_rhiemeier@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Saturday, November 15, 2008, 20:22 |
|---|
Hallo!
On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 14:10:51 -0500, Mark J. Reed wrote:
> The Fith may routinely spout utterances that a human has no hope of
> deciphering in real time, and a human with time on his hands may of course
> put together such devious utterances, but I see no reason why two humans
> couldn't have a real-time conversation in Fith. They just wouldn't use the
> language to its fullest capabilities... but most real-time conversations
> aren't the epitome of eloquence in any language.
Indeed, if you restrict stack depth and disallow most of the
stack conjunctions, you get a human-parsable language. See
<shameless plug>
http://www.langmaker.com/shallowfith.htm
</shameless plug>
for a human-speakable subset of Fith. Shallow Fith is very
unsophisticated from a Fithian viewpoint, but this
"unsophisticatedness" makes it accessible to humans.
On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 21:05:52 +0100, Lars Finsen wrote:
> Den 15. nov. 2008 kl. 17.53 skreiv Jörg Rhiemeier:
>
> > In a LIFO language like Fith (
http://www.langmaker.com/fith.htm ),
> > a simple clause looks indeed quite much like one on an SOV language,
> > but that is only a superficial resemblance because the language is
> > processed in a way completely different from human languages.
>
> Not completely, I'd say. In a SOV language there's also some
> stacking. You need to stack both arguments, including attributes,
> before you 'process' them with the verb.