Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: more on adjectives

From:Christian Thalmann <cinga@...>
Date:Wednesday, September 5, 2001, 19:48
Brad Coon wrote:

> Combining all of these allows only one unmarked order for me, > He is a stupid, old, black and white hunting dog.
I agree, though I'm not native and thus not quite representative. For me, an old dog is more concrete and objective a concept than a stupid dog, which seems to be more of an opinion. In general, inherentness of a property is a very reliable criterion. It might not be readily comparable, as in the stupid/old question. I figured out another way of determining the "right" order of two adjectives... I can't say anything about its validity, but it seems somewhat intuitive. Try first removing one adjective, then the other. Which omission makes the expression less defined? Which adjective leaves a larger informational hole when removed? That's the one that should be nearer to the noun (in both head-first and head-last languages). Imagine a stupid dog. Well, that could be just about any dog. It doesn't really tell you much. It's also rather subjective, some people consider dogs in general to be stupid. You probably wouldn't recognize a stupid dog either, unless he were doing something exceptionally stupid while you saw him. Now imagine an old dog... now that's a more concrete image. Shaggy greyish fur, white whiskers, a propensity to lie around on warm places looking around with a tired eye, a reluctance to stand up and a laborous gait... Now imagine a stupid old dog. What does it look like? Basically, like an old dog. Remove the "stupid" and the image won't change much. The age even implies a bit of a slow mind. Remove the "old" and you're standing in the dark. Therefore, it should be a stupid old dog. -- Christian Thalmann