Re: Defining "Language"

In a message dated 7/19/2007 2:23:39 AM Central Daylight Time,
ray@CAROLANDRAY.PLUS.COM writes:


> > If we define language as recursive, then Piraha is perhaps not a
> language.
>
> David did say "if that whole Piraha business is accurate." The accuracy
> of the current description of Piraha has been questioned before. Also,
> of course, David did add that if the Piraha business is accurate "I
> suppose language doesn't have to be recursive."
>
Yes, David did say that.  Everyone seems to assume that Piraha is a language
and go from there.  If recursion is a requisite of language, then maybe what
the Piraha people have is something not quite a language.  The interesting
question is not whether the Piraha speech has recursion, but the more general
question of speech without recursion.  Does it constitute a language?  If not,
what is it?  How useful can it be?  Does it have any advantages over recursive
language?

stevo   </HTML>

Reply