Re: Greenberg's Word Order Universals

> Date:         Thu, 14 Sep 2000 19:08:08 -0400
> From:         Nik <fortytwo@...>
>
> Lars Henrik Mathiesen wrote:
> >   Some nouns have a marked singular, some have a marked plural, none
> >   have both. (Old French was almost like this at one stage, I think).
> In Old French, the nominative singular and the oblique plural of at
> least some nouns were marked, and nominative plural and oblique singular
> were unmarked.  For example:
>   S    P
> N fils fil
> O fil  fils
That raises the question whether it's the nominative or oblique that
counts for the 'unmarked singular' test.

That aside, ISTR that former Latin 3rd declension nouns went like
this:

  S     P
N flor flors
O flor flors

So if you look at the nominative only, -s marks either singular or
plural, depending on which nouns it is.

> If French had generalized the nominative, then it would've violated that
> universal, I think.
So if you believe in the universals, that's obviously the reason why
it didn't generalize it.

Lars Mathiesen (U of Copenhagen CS Dep) <thorinn@...> (Humour NOT marked)