Re: My Digression from Boreanesia

Kristian Jensen wrote:

> Verbal phrases do not exist. Only nominal
> phrases. The idea of verbs and nouns in human
> languages is given as events in this language.
> Events are classified according to permanence.
> Events range from being instantaneous to
> permanent:
..
>    /event8/  'event lasting a life-time'
>    /event9/  'non-permanent event lasting longer
>               than a life-time'
>    /event10/ 'permanent event'
..
> Another example 'I stomped on the gecko and ate
> it'
>
>    /  event1   / /GEN/ /GEN/ /diminutive/ /event10/
>    <stomp> <eat> < 1 > <
> lizard           >
>
> 'My stomping and eating event (which I did
> instantly) of the little lizard (which is,
> otherwise, always a lizard)'
An immortal lizard? Shouldn't this be event8?
Or less, if lizards don't live as long as
homonids (almost certain...)

Assuming that "lifetime" is defined as that of
an average homonid (i.e. a standard lifetime),
you'd have to classify animals into those that
have longer lives and those that have shorter
lives ... which would make biological knowledge
a prerequisite for good grammar. Of course,
biology /would/ be a central part of their
lives and vital knowledge lest you be eaten.

Also, in your examples, "lizard" had an event
number but "nut" didn't. The lifetime of a nut
would be one season, yes?

To distinguish between very-long-lasting and
permanent events, you'd be relying on cultural
memory to tell you if the object had ever been
different. Again, this is not impossible. And
what about astronomy? Is it the same sun every
time (permanent) or a different one each day?
Is it a different moon each month, or always
the same one?

The language assumes a predictable environment
where it is known how long things will last.
A major change to their environment could have
severe consequences as grammatical
classifications would no longer be known. I
imagine the language would evaporate very
quickly if their world changed in some
fundamental way (e.g. change in climate or
contact with another intelligent culture).

I'm not at all convinced about this scheme, it
seems such a strange way of classifying things.
Why is measure of permenance so important to
them? Rather than, say, measure of threat?

But ... surprise me.

Adrian.
--
http://www.netyp.com/member/dragon
http://www.flinders.edu.au