Re: Irregularity in human languages (was Re: irregular conlangs)

Carlos Thompson wrote:
> Most irregularities are either sound changes (like {e} -> {ie})
Some consider those to be a regular subclass of verbs, and indeed, if
you look at BOTH infinitive AND third person singular present
indicative, most of those are predictable.

> while a phonetic change are those you can predict in present language).
Then they aren't irregular verbs at all, if predictable, like
-Vcer/-Vcir changing c to zc before o or a.

> Of those, probably _andar_ is the most tricky and the one most people treat
> as regular, not because is not a children verb, but because the full
> paradigm is rare among children is my guess.
Why would children not use _anduve_, etc. much?

> Most of those changes
> are phonetic, like _poner_ -> _pongo_.
-go verbs aren't predictable, are they?  You said that "phonetic change"
is predictable.

> Actually, the English counterparts are irregular as well.
Well, "walk" isn't irregular, but yeah, the point's mostly valid.

--
Oh Lord, grant that we may always be right, for thou knowest we will
never change our mind. - Scots Prayer
http://members.tripod.com/~Nik_Taylor/X-Files/
http://members.tripod.com/~Nik_Taylor/Books.html
ICQ: 18656696
AIM Screen-Name: NikTailor