Re: Unmarked definiteness

Andreas Johansson wrote:
>
> Now, while it's not hard to see how this state of affairs came about - phonetic
> change simply ate the definite marker alive, but only snatched a leg from the
> indefinite one - but nonetheless seems remarkable; normally, we'd expect the
> indefinite to be the less marked form, wouldn't we? Is there any other
> languages which do the same?
It makes a certain amount of sense. The indefinite usually introduces a
new referent, while the definite refers to one that has already been
introduced. Since most conversations don't abruptly change subject with
every sentence, the definite is probably more common.