Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Never violate a universal unless it seems like a good idea at the time

From:JS Bangs <jaspax@...>
Date:Thursday, September 4, 2003, 17:35
Peter Bleackley sikyal:

> Reading Greenberg's list of universals > > http://angli02.kgw.tu-berlin.de/Korean/Artikel02/Appendix3.html > > I've discovered that Khangaþyagon violates universals 2,3,6,10,12, and > possibly 23 although I'm not sure of his terminology. This is mainly > because Khangaþyagon is based on what seemed plausible to me without > reading the list. > > I'd be interested to know how many universals other people's conlangs > violate, and whether this came about naively or deliberately.
Yivrian violates #s 10, 39, and 40. None of these decisions were made with conscious knowledge that I was violating a "universal", but I'm sticking by them anyway. As the text of most of these universals admits, these are *near* universals, or statistical universals, and counterexamples are to be expected. I'm glad to let Yivrian be a counterexample to at least a few. -- Jesse S. Bangs jaspax@u.washington.edu http://students.washington.edu/jaspax/ http://students.washington.edu/jaspax/blog Jesus asked them, "Who do you say that I am?" And they answered, "You are the eschatological manifestation of the ground of our being, the kerygma in which we find the ultimate meaning of our interpersonal relationship." And Jesus said, "What?"

Reply

Peter Bleackley <peter.bleackley@...>