Re: Where does inflection change to agglutination?
|From:||Thomas R. Wier <trwier@...>|
|Date:||Saturday, December 28, 2002, 8:58|
Quoting Christophe Grandsire <christophe.grandsire@...>:
> En réponse à Roberto Suarez Soto <ask4it@...>:
> > On Dec/26/2002, Danny Wier wrote:
> > > Well you're on the right track. Remember that Proto-Indo-European
> > became
> > > inflected after various alternations of an originally agglutinative
> > form.
> > I didn't know that. Curious :-)
> Why? Language evolution is quite logically cyclic.
I think the term "cyclic" is too strong a word, since languages
can remain in a particular "phase" of the "cycle" for many
centuries or even millennia. "Cycle" in English thus suggests
a regularity which is not appropriate for language change. But what
you say about certain structural features favoring certain types
of structural change is true enough.
Thomas Wier "I find it useful to meet my subjects personally,
Dept. of Linguistics because our secret police don't get it right
University of Chicago half the time." -- octogenarian Sheikh Zayed of
1010 E. 59th Street Abu Dhabi, to a French reporter.
Chicago, IL 60637