Re: Endless fun for linguists

Dorothy J Heydt wrote: 
In article <gbxv5j3nw2bk.v9rvaeabx1r7.dlg@xxxxxxxxxx>,
Brian M. Scott <b.scott@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Also, I think that Dorothy's probably right in thinking that
the comment refers also to the syntax: English and Chinese
are both largely analytic and even have similar word order.



Now SVO seems like such a *logical* word order to me.  That, of
course, is because I grew up with it.  Was it Suzette Hayden
Elgin who said SVO is evil and sexist because it involves a mean
macho verb ruthlessly inflicting its will upon the subservient
object?  Whoever it was, I perform irreverent gestures in its
direction.

SVO is found in a plurality -- in fact, I think it may be a majority -- of languages, though SOV, VSO, VOS, and even OSV and OVS are known.

Ergative languages such as Basque, however, in which the unmarked form of transitive verbs expresses the passive, somewhat confuse the issue.

--
John W. Kennedy
"Sweet, was Christ crucified to create this chat?"
  -- Charles Williams.  "Judgement at Chelmsford"
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Responding to a challenge
    ... For English, you have to handle the special case where the ... > There is no special case to handle at all for Chinese. ... Esperanto by "Tiu tek'o en'hav'as 10 dosier'o'j'n". ... (Neither is the word order in Esperanto simple. ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: Endless fun for linguists
    ... >the comment refers also to the syntax: English and Chinese ... Now SVO seems like such a *logical* word order to me. ...
    (rec.arts.sf.composition)