Re: THEORY: NATLANGS: Pro-Forms

see below for interlinear thoughts.
kit

On May 24, 2006, at 11:15 AM, Eldin Raigmore wrote:
> Various content-full words or phrases can be represented in various
> languages by "pro-forms".
>
> [snip]
> ----
>
> Here're my questions, then;
>
> 1) What other "parts of speech" have pro-forms in various natlangs?
>
> --
>
> In particular:
>
> 2) Does any natlang have one or more pro-adposition(s)?
>
> 3) Does any natlang have one or more pro-conjunction(s)?
These are relations, rather than "lexically content-full" (a useful
term!) words.  i would doubt if there were any languages with pro-
adpositions and conjunctions

> 4) Does any natlang have one or more pro-interjection(s)?
> 4a) Does that question even make sense?
>
> 5) Does any natlang have one or more pro-pronoun(s)?
> 5a) Wouldn't that be gilding the lily and carrying coal to Newcastle?
That would never end; you could then have pro-pro forms, and pro-pro-
pro forms; but all utility would be lost at the first level of extra
pro-ing.

> 6) Does any natlang have one or more pro-adjective(s)?
Maybe more possible, but as the purpose of proforms *seems* to be to
allow grammatical sentences that don't repeat all the common ground,
and adjectives are essentially optional, it would be of small use:
consider, talking about 'the red dog', would you say 'the pro-adj
dog' or just 'the dog'?

> 7) Does any natlang have one or more pro-adverb(s)?
>
> --
>
> 8) What other lexically content-full meanings are there of verbs
> which also
> have a grammatical use as pro-verbs, in various natlangs?
>
> ---
>
> [snip]
> -------
>
> Thanks,
>
> -----
>
> eldin

Replies