Re: Evolution of Language
- From: Matthew Huntbach <mmh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 09:37:56 +0100
On Wed, 19 Oct 2005, Bill Bonde ('by a commodius vicus of recirculation') wrote:
Bob Cunningham wrote:
I don't think it's right to say "all", though. I think an important element in language evolution is a tendency to consciously choose easier ways to say things.
That's certainly true but these ways would be wrong to those who cling to the old ways. Like I was saying, trivial.
There is also an opposing tendency to make things more complex in order to make meaning clearer. As a good example, look at how in modern English the verb "to have" is evolving so that it is often replaced by "have got". How could it be "easier" to add an extra word?
I suspect that the elaborate inflections of earlier versions of languages were not lost due to error, but rather because people saw no need for them and dropped them.
There's no reason to believe that highly inflected languages are an earlier state of language, the end of which is more modern. There is no objective reason to include anything within the conjugated verb form yet we often see person, number, tense, mood and other aspects attached or otherwise made a part of these forms.
The inflections would have evolved from what were once individual words. In modern English the words that do the job that inflections did in early Indo-European occur before the verb stem. Consider how "gonna-" might be considered a prefix that forms the future tense as an example. Given time and no literature that reminds us of what the "correct" form is, the tense system which English constructs from auxiliary verbs could easily evolve in an elaborate system of prefixes.
Matthew Huntbach .
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Evolution of Language
- From: Robert Bannister
- Re: Evolution of Language
- References:
- Evolution of Language
- From: Tom Robertson
- Re: Evolution of Language
- From: Don Phillipson
- Re: Evolution of Language
- From: Bill Bonde ('by a commodius vicus of recirculation')
- Re: Evolution of Language
- From: Bob Cunningham
- Re: Evolution of Language
- From: Bill Bonde ('by a commodius vicus of recirculation')
- Evolution of Language
- Prev by Date: Re: Toast Soldiers - non-standard usage?
- Next by Date: Re: This is bad!
- Previous by thread: Re: Evolution of Language
- Next by thread: Re: Evolution of Language
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading