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

Quoting Isidora Zamora <isidora@...>:

> >I found out about those universals long after most of Rhean had taken
> >shape, and while Tolborese and Omurax were still only sketches. I see them
> >as interesting observations on existing natural languages, not rules to
> >be "broken". Although, setting out to violate every one of them in one
> >language would be an interesting project, and likely to produce a rather
> >convoluted, "inside-out" feeling grammar.
>
> Of course, it isn't actually possible to violate *all* of them at once,
> since many of them are applicable only to certain types of languages, but
> you could certainly hold a contest to see who could violate the most
> universals at one time.  Some of those universals state that something is
> likely or unlikely, some of them state that something almost always or
> almost never occurs, and a few of them are stated as *absolute*
> restrictions.  These universals express differing degrees of likelihood,
> from "far better than average chance" to "always."
I note with a certain dismay that #40, which as I said appears to be the only
one that Tairezazh defies, appears to belong to the "absolute" category:

Universal 40. When the adjective follows the noun, the adjective expresses all
the inflectional categories of the noun. In such cases the noun may lack overt
expression of one or all of these categories.

I guess I shall put my trust in ALF on this point ...

                                                      Andreas

Replies