Re: Rotokas (was: California Cheeseburger)

Quoting "Mark P. Line" <mark@...>:

> Andreas Johansson said:
> > Quoting "Mark P. Line" <mark@...>:
> >
> >> Thomas R. Wier said:
> >> > From:    "Mark P. Line" <mark@...>
> >> >> I don't think we have any evidence that Rotokas has ever been
> >> analyzed
> >> >> with so many syllables. Seeing the number '350' in a single
> >> *secondary*
> >> >> source is not a good data point when we can find in a primary source
> >> >> that
> >> >> Rotokas has 11 phonemes and that its syllable structure is only (C)V.
> >> >
> >> > I'm jumping in here, and don't much of anything about Rotokas, but
> >> > how can it have a (C)V syllable structure when the name of the
> >> > language itself has a coda? Is there some constraint allowing word
> >> > final codas but not word internal ones?
> >>
> >>
> >> I must have been mistaken about Rotokas being (C)V.
> >>
> >> Clearly, those who don't know much of anything about Rotokas are in the
> >> majority here, so I'm outvoted hands-down.
> >
> > I'm quite convinced that Mr Wier was asking a honest question.
>
> So you're saying that, knowing not much of anything about a language, it
> makes perfect sense to question primary sources on the basis of a single
> form for which you have no particular reason to believe (due to the
> widespread occurrence of external language names) that that single form is
> even native to the language in question.
If pressed, I guess I'd confess to the view that any source might be
legitimately questioned.

But back to pragmatics, I cannot see what's so wrong about asking for
reconciliation of two apparently contradictory factoids. I can't read Mr Wier's
post as claiming that the claim of (C)V syllable structure is _wrong_; merely
wondering how it can be reconciled with the presence of a coda in the name
"Rotokas". One might hold that he should have realized it might be a non-native
name, but demanding that everyone always sees all possibilities is not going to
help anyone.

> Where I come from, that's not how linguistics is practiced. But we all
> know that I come from a different planet. :)
We've noticed.

> Me, I would have started from the assumption that the primary source
> giving us (C)V syllable structure is probably correct (not knowing any
> different), and asked if anybody knows where the name 'Rotokas' comes
> from, since it's clearly not well-formed phonotactically in Rotokas
> (according to that primary source).
And I would have asked whether Rotokas was an outsider's name. I don't see the
difference in practice.

> It's one thing to be disbelieved when there's no source in play. What
> astounds me is that I am so often disbelieved (usually by the same handful
> of people) even when there *is* a source and all I'm doing is repeating
> what it says.
Again, I did not interpret Mr Wier's question as implying disbelief in your
claims. His use of the phrase "jump in" and apparent ignorance of the previous
discussion of said coda suggests, to me, that he did not follow the thread from
the beginning.

> Something of a gunslinger mentality, I reckon: youngsters
> trying to see who's quicker at the draw than the aging, retired gunslinger
> who's really just in town to visit the saloon. You could say that the
> aging gunslinger brought this upon himself by the choices he's made, and
> you'd be right. New choices are in order, then.
I think you're interpreting stuff way too personally.

> Sorry to have been so obviously disruptive to the game as it is played
> here. I just can't get the hang of the rules.
Disruptive? You can't claim that title before you've started a proper flamewar! :)

                                                         Andreas