Sociological Linguistics

[Patrick C. Ryan]

Dear Ralf-Stefan and IEists:

 ----- Original Message -----
From: Ralf-Stefan Georg <Georg at home.ivm.de>
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 1999 3:16 AM

>>Pat wrote:

>> As just the simplest example, a language which is unable to designate the
>> plural form of a noun, is bound to introduce an *ambiguity* into a
>> statement that a language which can does not exhibit.

>R-S responded:

> A language which is unable to designate the plural form of a noun (*unable*
> !) would be a language without numerals, and without a word for "many" othl.
> I strongly doubt that a lg. like this could still be called a natural
> language, iow. I doubt the existence of such a thing. Please, correct me.

Pat answers:

Since numerals in many languages do not automatically require a plural form
of a noun, I am not sure what relevance "numerals" have to the point I am
attempting to make. And, I perceive a difference between "Viele Hunde haben
Schwa{"}nze" and "Hunde haben Schwa{"}nze" --- do you not?

>R-S continued:

> But, seriously, there is of course sense in talking about a plural like
> "dogs" being simpler and producable with less effort than, say, "many dog"
> or "three (= many) dog". Othoh, "sheep", "brethren", "l'udi", and "d'on"
> aren't. Talking about an overall tendency of increasing complexity in
> language change makes thus less sense to me. We could go on and exchange
> endless lists of documented changes in languages increasing systemic
> complexity, followed by an equally long list showing simplifications (and
> all this without a proper definition of complexity/simplicity in hand).
> Should we ?

Pat rejoinds:

Without a proper definition of complexity/simplicity, I agree the discussion
can make little progress.

BTW, I spoke of "ambiguity" not "simplicity" or "complexity".

Pat

PATRICK C. RYAN (501) 227-9947; FAX/DATA (501)312-9947 9115 W. 34th St.
Little Rock, AR 72204-4441 USA WEBPAGES:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/2803 and PROTO-RELIGION:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/2803/proto-religion/indexR.html "Veit
ek, at ek hekk, vindga meipi, nftr allar nmu, geiri undapr . . . a ~eim
meipi er mangi veit hvers hann af rstum renn." (Havamal 138)