Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: THEORY: Adpositional Heads

From:Costentin Cornomorus <elemtilas@...>
Date:Wednesday, September 10, 2003, 19:36
--- Rob Haden <magwich78@...> wrote:
> In the grammars of most languages, when > discussiong adpositional (post- > /prepositional) phrases, the adpositions are > treated as the heads. What's > the reasoning for this? It seems > counter-intuitive to me. My opinion is > that, at least in many languages (like > English), the "objects" of the > adpositional phrases are the heads, and the > adpositions themselves are > modifiers. What do y'all think?
I guess that makes sense in typical grammatical formats. I've done some looking into native grammatical systems devised by speakers of my conlangs. The fullest example I have on hand is that devised for Talarian by Telerani scholars. For them, it is totally intuitive to consider the postpositions the "heads" in adpositional phrases. What's more, they don't ascribe these words mere modifier roles; they are the "authorities", the words that regulate the roles of the substantive words (nouns and verbs). From their perspective, language happens because of these authorities. Otherwise, it's just a string of unconnected words. Padraic. ===== - Per la maxam pas e drancoueletate di nusteor tempuroer; per l' echluys catholeg, ke 'sta di bille do bille et dol fine le munnem - A Ddon ten mezercorth! -- Come visit The World! -- <> .