Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: I came in + the things + OO theories

From:From Http://Members.Aol.Com/Lassailly/Tunuframe.Html <lassailly@...>
Date:Sunday, July 25, 1999, 15:48
Dans un courrier dat=E9 du 25/07/99 09:45:35  , Barry a =E9crit :

> i think this is because we're in it for the fun, not to prove anything to > anyone (for the most part :) )
well, i feel like i was too much trying to prove something here and i feel sorry for that. but the question was there and whatever my answer was it did not deserve flat denial. i wrote a few plain gibberish that fortunately were not responded by others out of both amusement and friendship, i guess. this one was not to prove i was right and Nik was wrong, but only to explain why japanese was so and why it is nothing special like japanese bray it over and over. english is a hundred times more exotic to me. Godbless picton dwarves :-). there is always a way to prove that someone is wrong or right in anything and whatever facts are. for instance, i think that japanese "non-morphological" comparative really stems from japanese adjective takai being verbal (takai =3D to be tall - takai no =3D the tall one ichiban takai no =3D the tallest one). "grand" is "epith=E8te" and considered by french as definite noun rooted ("le grand" - "le plus grand") while english allows both references ("the tall one" - "the tallest/most tall"). Jim's question was very precise, reading about "attributive" adjectives. maybe verbal adjectives are not really attributive. that's why i said that i was maybe missing the point. depends what attributive means. so maybe the question itself is wrong. that must be it. i'm right and Jim and Nik and Barry are wrong. mathias