Re: "easiest" languages, SE Asian word-order typologies (was Rating Languages)

In a message dated 23.09.2001 08:10:52 PM, cowan@MERCURY.CCIL.ORG writes:

>AFAIK the big syntax differences between Standard Mandarin on the one
>hand, and Southern Mandarin and the other Sinitic langs on the other,
>are these:  the latter group puts DO before IO, adverb after verb,
>and the tendency to create noun+adj compounds instead of adj+noun
>(Mandarin gong1ji1 vs. Cantonese kaikong 'rooster').  These tendencies
>strengthen as one goes south, and may result from Tai influence (they are
>all typical Tai features).
    I hadda sneakin' suspicion from all the lil I DO know of these languages
that there was a general tendency of SE Asian languages to be
"head-first"/right-branching languages (pretty much in-line with Greenberg's
universals regarding verb-initial languages... nicely odd that ... ).

    Accordin' to quite some data & theories, Archaic Chinese was somewhat
influenced by south-eastern languages (esp'ly Tai-Kadai). The 1st
Sino-Tibetan speakers settled the Yellow River Valley region about 5,000 yrs.
ago. The Chinese language had its start when these Sino-Tibetans interacted
with these unknown aboriginal peoples (probably protoTai-Kadai & related
peoples) who they meet there.
    So I think Archaic Chinese had it's start as a pidgin & then around the
Shang Dynasty (1700 - 1100 BCE, roughly) it was well on its way to bein' a
native language (at least for the Han).

    Wonder what influences coulda made Mandarin become such a
"head-final"/left-branching language (modifier(s) + head word) ?

    czHANg ponderin' the big weirdnesses & mysteries of Sino-linguistics