<div dir="ltr"><div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><div style="text-align: center;">=========================================================================<br>L O W L A N D S - L - 17 July 2008 - Volume 02<br>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>Please set the encoding mode to Unicode (UTF-8).<br>If viewing this in a web browser, please click on<br>the html toggle at the bottom of the archived page <br>
and switch your browser's character encoding to Unicode.<br>=========================================================================<br></div><br>From: <span class="HcCDpe"><span class="EP8xU" style="color: rgb(200, 137, 0);">Jorge Potter</span> <span class="lDACoc"><<a href="mailto:jorgepot@gmail.com">jorgepot@gmail.com</a>></span></span><br>
Subject: <span class="HcCDpe">LL-L "Grammar" 2008.07.16 (03) [E]<br><br></span><div>Dear Ron,</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Oops! You reversed the pinyin.</div>
<div> </div><font color="#888888">
<div>Jorge Potter</div></font>
<div> </div>
<div style="margin-left: 40px;"><span></span>我想你。<br>Wǒ xiǎng nǐ.<br>"I think (of) thou."<br>I miss you.<br><br>你想我。<br>Wǒ xiǎng nǐ.<br>"Thou think (of) I."<br>
You miss me.<br></div>
</div><font style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" size="2"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><br>----------<br></span></font><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
From: </span><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" class="HcCDpe"><span class="EP8xU" style="color: rgb(91, 16, 148);">jonny</span> <span class="lDACoc"><<a href="mailto:jonny.meibohm@arcor.de">jonny.meibohm@arcor.de</a>></span><span class="lDACoc"></span></span><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
<span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">
Subject: </span><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" class="HcCDpe">LL-L "Grammar" 2008.07.16 (03) [E]<br><br></span><div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span>Ooops-</span></div>
<div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" class="Ih2E3d">
<div><span></span> </div>
<div><span>sorry, I
wrote:</span></div>
<div><span></span> </div>
<div><span><span>> No- kidding aside- I think that every experienced
member of this list (and even the Great </span></span></div>
<div><span><span>> Kahuna himself) is quite aware of the fact
that, regarding aspects which deal with any diffuse ><strong>
presumptions</strong>, YOU probably are one of the most
unwoundables.</span></span></div>
<div><span></span> </div>
</div><div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span>Of course
'<strong>prejudices</strong>' were meant!</span></div>
<div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><span></span> </div>
<div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" align="left">Allerbest!</div>
<div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" align="left"> </div>
<font style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" face="Courier New">Jonny Meibohm</font><br style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><div style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"><font style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" size="2"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><br>
----------<br>
</span></font><br>
From: <span class="HcCDpe"><span class="EP8xU" style="color: rgb(121, 6, 25);">Theo Homan</span> <span class="lDACoc"><<a href="mailto:theohoman@yahoo.com">theohoman@yahoo.com</a>></span></span><span class="HcCDpe"><span class="lDACoc"></span></span><br>
Subject: <span class="HcCDpe">LL-L "Grammar" 2008.07.16 (03) [E]</span><br><br>
> From: R. F. Hahn <<a href="mailto:sassisch@yahoo.com">sassisch@yahoo.com</a>><br>
> Subject: Grammar<br>
<br>
[...]<br>
<div class="Ih2E3d"><br>
So, folks, whenever you hear "X<br>
> is easy to learn" just<br>
> take it with a few grains of salt. Whatever comes easy in<br>
> one way will have<br>
> to be paid for in another way.<br>
><br>
> Regards,<br>
> Reinhard/Ron<br>
<br>
</div>Hi,<br>
<br>
A remark that is not completely out of way:<br>
<br>
When people say that an X-language is a difficult language or difficult
to learn, let's remember that billions [ a one followed by 9 zeros ] of
didactic hours are spent in the teaching of English [and maybe Latin],
and every few years someone find a new tiny didactic device to explain
a tiny small thing a bit better.<br>
<br>
And this is hardly comparable with fictionals like: 'The
self-instruction book for succesfull Tok Pisin in 60 hours' [120 pages].<br>
<br>
vr. gr.<br>
<font color="#888888">Theo Homan<br><br>----------<br><br></font>
From: <span class="HcCDpe"><span class="EP8xU" style="color: rgb(0, 104, 28);"><a href="mailto:heatherrendall@tiscali.co.uk">heatherrendall@tiscali.co.uk</a></span> <span class="lDACoc"><<a href="mailto:heatherrendall@tiscali.co.uk">heatherrendall@tiscali.co.uk</a>></span><span class="lDACoc"></span></span><br>
Subject: <span class="HcCDpe">LL-L "Grammar" 2008.07.16 (03) [E]</span><br>
<br><p>from <a href="mailto:Heatherrendall@tiscali.co.uk" target="_blank">Heatherrendall@tiscali.co.uk</a></p>
<p>Subject: <span>LL-L "Grammar" 2008.07.16 (01) [E]</span><br>Paul wrote: </p>
<p>"Grammar is basically the oil in the machine; it allows for subtleties, and smooths things over:</p>
<p>"You give book me" is perfectly clear at basic level (the person
wants the book), but is that "Gimme that book!" or "May I have that
book please"?"</p>
<p>I was once trying to explain grammar to a non-linguist and ended up
by saying (suggesting) that grammar (as syntax only) is " the
perspective of thought" so that :- </p>
<p> the German language sees the situation A B C D where A = a
person B is a verb C is the indirect object and D is the direct
object Reinhard gibt Jonny das Buch</p>
<p>whereas the French language sees it in an different order A B D
(inserting a preposition 'to'= 'à' ) C Reinhard donne le livre à
Jonny</p>
<p>And there is no other standard way of expressing this idea in these languages.</p>
<p>English being the child of both these languages is flexible enough
to have adopted BOTH sequences of thought. English can say both
"Reinhard gives Jonny the book" (Germanic sequence) and "Reinhard gives
the book to Jonny." This is the exception in languages- to have two
totally different sequences both acceptable/used as standard.</p>
<p>Welsh ( and Arabic ?) on the other hand prefer to emphasise the verb by putting it first.</p>
<p>The 'grammar' of a language is, surely, learning the order of words
in which that language expresses its concepts and its concepts come
from people's thoughts. This I think is why sign language, little as
I know of it, appears to be able to 'cut to the chase' and express
directly and often so succinctly from the thought. It seems to be able
to create a whole concept in a single gesture or a series of gestures
still fewer than the words or phrases linguistic language would need to
express the same idea.</p>
<p>Similarly Chinese sees a verb as a single action without time so has
no tenses. To indicate time a time phrase is used. Brilliant linguistic
logic. If I am going to use the word Tomorrow why do I need a verb in a
future tense ( and increasingly in some languages you don't .. Ich
gehe morgen I'm going tomorrow, je vais demain) If I use the phrase
200 years ago , why do I need a past tense, the idea/concept is obvious
from the phrase.</p>
<p>What fascinates me is how the order of concepts differs from
langauge to language and how sometimes despite their lack of
relationship directly in words, their use within a phrase or sentence
is the same. (Sorry difficult to express that idea) example</p>
<p>German prepositions that govern the genitive such as trotz wegen
have no 'word' to express/denote the gentive; rather it follows as the
article ending. However translate these into English and up pops a word
for 'of' - in spite of : because of.</p>
<p>So what is there essentially about the concept of trotz: in spite of / wegen : because of that requires a genitive??</p>
<p>Much puzzled but interested</p>
<p>Heather</p>----------<br><br><font style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" size="2"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">From: R. F. Hahn <<a rel="nofollow" href="mailto:sassisch@yahoo.com" target="_blank">sassisch@yahoo.com</a>>
<br>
Subject: Grammar<br><br>Heather,<br><br>You brought up several good points. I particularly like the one about redundancy:<br><br></span></font><div style="margin-left: 40px;"><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 153);">Similarly Chinese sees a verb as a single action without time so has
no tenses. To indicate time a time phrase is used. Brilliant linguistic
logic. If I am going to use the word Tomorrow why do I need a verb in a
future tense ( and increasingly in some languages you don't .. Ich
gehe morgen I'm going tomorrow, je vais demain) If I use the phrase
200 years ago , why do I need a past tense, the idea/concept is obvious
from the phrase.</span><br></div><br><font style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;" size="2"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">This is really important. Low Saxon and German, for instance have pretty much discarded the future tense in normal speech. That can be seen as an example of the "streamlining" I was referring to when I argued that simplification isn't necessarily a sign of deterioration. If the time context is clear, even if only by implication, it is not <i>really</i> necessary to make the grammatical tense fit it. In many dialects of German and pretty much everywhere in Low Saxon, and, yes, also in various English dialects, the same applies to the past tense. Once the time is clear, you can return to the default tense; e.g., "So I went to see Bill last night, to give him the news, and ... 'Don't you worry now,' I say (non-American often "I says"), and he gives me this look ... You know what I mean ... and he just mumbles, 'Easy for you to say,' he says and changes the subject."<br>
<br>The original version of the wren fable (<a href="http://lowlands-l.net/anniversary/nordneddersassisch.php">http://lowlands-l.net/anniversary/nordneddersassisch.php</a>) is exactly like that. It starts with something like a past aorist, then moves to past perfect, and once the tense has been established it defaults to present tense.<br>
<br>It is in particular prescribed "good style" that slows down the process of simplification, an important part of which is redundancy removal.<br><br>Regards,<br>Reinhard/Ron<br></span></font>
</div></div>