Re: free word-order conlangs

Patrick Littell, On 17/07/2006 18:43:
> On 7/17/06, Eldin Raigmore <eldin_raigmore@...> wrote:
>> Words may be re-ordered within phrases; phrases may be re-ordered within
>> clauses; and clauses may be re-ordered within sentences.
>
> This sort of nonconfigurationality -- order is free but constituency
> is still respected -- is a more common than the Warlpiri sort.  Moreso
> at the clause and VP level than within the NP level, I believe.  (That
> is, it's more likely to be able to rearrange clauses (like in, say,
> English) and arguments of verbs (like in, oh, lots of languages) than
> play around with the order inside NPs.)
What evidence is there that Warlpiri doesn't respect constituency? I don't know
much about Warlpiri, but the traditionally cited examples have always struck me
as analysable in terms of an unusually flat clause structure with lots of
secondary predicates.

[...]
> a word can "leave home" in Russian to be fronted, as in 3 below.
>
> 1. I met interesting-ACC boy-ACC today. (Neutral)
> 2. Interesting-ACC boy-ACC I met today (Emphasis on the interesting boy)
> 3. Interesting-ACC I met boy-ACC today. (Emphasis on the interestingness)
>
> I think there's only one topic slot for the sort of thing illustrated
> in 3, though.  I don't think you're allowed to have multiple
> "runaways" all leaving their "homes" at once.
Assuming that "interesting" must be within the NP unless fronted, this is a better
example of runawayhood, though of course it is one we are familar with from
English (though of course attributive adjectives aren't extractable in
English).

--And.