3 ms·
I would say that Turkish is just "normal". Very typical. Often used alongside Japanese or Cree in linguistics textbooks as an example of how a "typical" langu
by retrac 3y ago
I would say that Turkish is just "normal". Very typical. Often used alongside Japanese or Cree in linguistics textbooks as an example of how a "typical" language works. Fully regular affixes (what you call modular concatenation is known as agglutination in linguistics). And it has a heavy focus on verb modality.
Japanese and Mongolian grammar has many syrprising similarities to Turkish (all those languages are unrelated as far as anyone knows). "I was made to read it repeatedly" can be one word, a verb with the right suffixes.
The Indo-European languages with their irrgular suffixes and inflections are actually unusual. Many languages have no irregular verbs, for example. Most that have irregular verbs, only have a couple. For some inexplicable reason, many Indo-European languages have dozens and dozens. This is a major outlier.
- rurban 3y agoUnrelated? Japanese derived from Turk languages, sorry. Ant the whole study doesn't take into account the speed of spoken languages, where and how the vocals or consonants are formed. Guttural consonants need much more time to be formed than labial. We had that simplification (ie speedups) with the German Second Lautverschiebung (and elsewhere), and then we can see how English bypassed Bavarian German in terms of simplicity and speed. or the esp. new greek, which consists mostly of labially formed sounds, just to be able to speak faster. Greek is missing which is highly suspect, because because every linguist should know that Greek should be the fastest spoken language. Now slow guttural sounds.
- Asraelite 3y ago> Unrelated? Japanese derived from Turk languages, sorry. Yes, unrelated. Please don't perpetuate the now widely discredited Altaic hypothesis. If you must bring it up, at least acknowledge that it's highly controversial.