Re: allnoun, Linear P

Dans un courrier dat=E9 du 21/04/99 22:39:29  , vous avez =E9crit :

<< Langacker theorizes that verbs are actually processed differently by the=20
mind
 when they are interpreted: the "scene" profiled by the verb is scanned
 sequentially in time rather than considered simultaneously in time.
 Adpositions do not call for sequential scanning in and of themselves.
=20
I don't know these guys and I don't understand all the words you use=20
(especially "scanning"). However, may I dare ask whether this has to do with=20
pidgin series of verbs ?
in French pidgins most actions are viewed as a sequence of verbs according t=
o=20
chronoexperience : a bit as if "I cut down a tree with an ax" would roughly=20
say "me take ax, use ax, cut tree, tree falls" :-)
but if an adposition attached to a verb is part of the semantic meaning of=20
that verb (and reversely), it seems rather difficult to separate the=20
adposition from that verb and use each of them "one after the other"=20
according to chronoexperience.
but that may not be what you wrote.
=20

 >Ah well.
 >But the point I was trying to make - I think - is that it is not going to
 >obvious to everyone that 'on' in 'table:on' is a noun, other
 >interpretations are possible.
=20
 Well, yes, depending on how you define nouns. :)  But "on" functions in all
 ways like a noun, grammar-wise, in "allnoun." >>

I was thinking : in sino-Japanese, "on" is "jou" (corresponding to the=20
Mandarin "shang") and comes after the noun in compound words (kai-jou =3D on=20
the sea) because apparently it derives from a noun, so "on the sea" is=20
"sea-top". But other sino-Japanese prepositions such as "han" (against) come=20
after the noun, apparently because they come from verbs.
A bit as if the word "top" carried in itself a locative meaning so that=20
itself becomes a locative instrument.

Mathias