Re: Tlvn, Uqbar, Orbis Tertius

Josh Roth wrote:
>
> In a message dated 9/13/1999 9:15:22 PM, fflores@ARNET.COM.AR writes:
> >The southern hemisphere Ursprache, says Borges, is an all-verb
> >language, while the northern hemisphere's one is all-adjective;
> >the main thing about this conception of the world is that there
> >are no things that exist on its own along time, so there isn't
> >a concept for nouns. Things are just described by actions and
> >attributes, never in themselves.
> I think the
> distinction of verbs and nouns and adjectives is somewhat arbitrary. Who's to
> say that in the "all verb" language, some of the words aren't really nouns?
> How could you prove it either way?
If one relaxes the constraint a little, to consider the possibility
of a *primarily* verbing or adjectivish or nountype language, it might
be more realistic: an *emphasis* on objects, or states, or relations.
According to my metaphysics, these are simply "valencies" 0, 1, and 2.
I tried to use a balanced combination of those 3 in the grammar of
Tomato, while fanatically excluding infidel valencies above 2.
But AFAIK there are no natlangs lacking fairly obvious verbs and
nouns, or excluding "valency" 3, the more-or-less indirect object.