Re: THEORY: Re : Universal Translation Language

Dans un courrier dat=E9 du 29/05/99 04:54:38  , Gary a =E9crit :

> >"man he talk address me regard problem-this but mother-me she no already
>  know
>  >it and you no future say it address her no time, ok ?"
> =20
>  >Mathias
> =20
>  Pardon my abysmal ignorance of basic comparative linguistics, but I've=20
never
>  seen anything quite like that before!  That's really cool!
(sorry, i really don't know if you are serious or not, so i answer like you=20
were :-)

That's basic SVO pidgin all around the world. and Indonesian, khmer, and=20
other languages i don't know.

  Are there any
>  conlangs out there that use this approach?  If so, I'd like to have a loo=
k
>  at them. Which languages, specifically, use that kind of structure?=20
all my svo conlangs work like that because i want to be able to speak them,=20
but i'm sure you would find them difficult to learn. this example above look=
s=20
easy but isn't quite because it already uses implied PoS like "already"=20
(adverb) or "address" (verb). if you want to make it strictly parseable then=20
you must tag somehow PoS and then it becomes difficult. but it makes clear=20
that ditransitive verbs are usually broken down into "serial" verbs. =20

 I'd
>  like to learn more about how it all works.
> =20
learn french creole then.

Mathias