Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: THEORY: Re : THEORY: Natural language change (was Re: Charlie and I)

From:Charles <catty@...>
Date:Tuesday, September 21, 1999, 19:33
>From Http://Members.Aol.Com/Lassailly/Tunuframe.Html wrote: >=20 > Dans un courrier dat=E9 du 20/09/99 06:09:10 , Thomas a =E9crit :
> > people have been told to say "whom" as an objective relative pronoun=
> i'd think that the use of "who" even where acc/dat is expected is > linked to putting (resumptive) prepositions in the end of the (sub)clau=
se : I'm not going to get this right, but my 2 centimes say: There are several items required for an unambiguous relative clause: start marker, stuff, resumptive particle, more stuff, end marker. That is too many, so every natlang merges or drops a few of them. "the guy who i usedta date his sister comma is angry now" ^^^ ............. ^^^ ...... ^^^^^ This is illegal in American, we use something more complicated. But it works just fine in Farsi, I have heard tale of it.
> "the man (who) i walk with (him)" > "the man (who) i talk about (him)" >=20 > as if some head-resumptive pronoun were implied. > so incredibly similar to current - yet very incorrect - french slang's =
trend :
>=20 > "l'homme que je marche avec (lui)" > "l'homme que je parle de lui". >=20 > note that cr=E9ole and asian languages already use that handy - and > so beautiful to my own liking - syntactic device since ages.
I think the comma is the coolest device of all, but it is neglected. I can almost-just feel a tone-lang coming.