4 ms·

> I don't know any other language where flexible argument order would work so well. What kind of sample size is that? A case system and flexible argument order

> I don't know any other language where flexible argument order would work so well. What kind of sample size is that? A case system and flexible argument order are largely the same thing. Note also that flexible argument order is a robust phenomenon in English: 1. Colonel Mustard killed him in the study at 5:00 with his own knife. 2. Colonel Mustard killed him at 5:00 in the study with his own knife. 3. Colonel Mustard killed him in the study with his own knife at 5:00. 4. Colonel Mustard killed him with his own knife at 5:00 in the study. 5. Colonel Mustard killed him at 5:00 with his own knife in the study. 6. Colonel Mustard killed him with his own knife in the study at 5:00. But if you insist on looking in other languages, there's a famous Latin poem beginning Quis multa gracilis te puer in rosa perfusus liquidis urget odoribus grato, Pyrrha, sub antro? Translating this as closely as possible to a one-word-for-one-word standard, it says What slender boy soaked [in] liquid odors presses you among many rose[s], Pyrrha, beneath [a] pleasant cave? (Notes: rosa is singular for unclear reasons. There is nothing corresponding to the in of "in liquid odors"; the relationship between the odors and the soaking is expressed purely by case. There is also nothing corresponding to the article in "a pleasant cave"; Latin does not mark definiteness in this way. Location inside a cave is expressed with "beneath"; compare English underwater.) Anyway, the actual word ordering, using this translation, is: What many slender you boy among rose[s] soaked liquid presses [in-]odors pleasant, Pyrrha, beneath [a-]cave? I've heard that Russian poetry is given to similarly intricate word orderings.

lolc 10mo ago
Yeah sure there are other languages where the cases allow flexible argument ordering. I should have written "another language" not "any other language" because I meant the languages I know. I can see how it'd work in Latin. Though poetry takes a lot of license with language, so by quoting from poetry, we're at the extreme end of what a language can do. From what little I remember in Latin there would be examples where one couldn't distinguish the cases. The only variation in your English examples is with the prepositions. English is a language where you just do not get that kind of flexibility. Unless, again, you do poetry. Can't even put the inflected pronoun first even though it would be unambiguous: Him Colonel Mustard killed. Let's look at this contrived example: The policeman bites the dog. Notice how in English I can't reverse them easily. Have to get creative: The dog the policeman bites. Stilted and prone to get misunderstood isn't it? In German, this is possible: Den Hund beisst der Polizist. Though if you do that, people think you made a mistake and will misunderstand you. The cases are rather weak in German. No comparison to Turkish: Köpeği ısırıyor polis. They do it for emphasis as part of everyday speech. You can put the subject first or last or in the middle and there is no confusion. Though admittedly that example is stretching it :-)
- thaumasiotes 10mo ago
  > Can't even put the inflected pronoun first even though it would be unambiguous: > Him Colonel Mustard killed. You can do that. It's called fronting, and it's not rare in English. It's not a case of the argument order being flexible, but what you said is just plain false. > The only variation in your English examples is with the prepositions. So? > English is a language where you just do not get that kind of flexibility. You mean the kind of flexibility I just illustrated? Or something else? You have a verb with 5 arguments. Two of them go in fixed locations. The other three don't go in fixed locations. It's not a coincidence that the arguments that are free to wander around the sentence are the ones that bear explicit markings of the nature of their relationship to the verb. > The dog the policeman bites. > Stilted and prone to get misunderstood isn't it? Not really. It's not a sentence, though; "the dog the policeman bites" is just a noun phrase referring to a dog. There's no verb. (Bites is a verb, but it's inside a relative clause.)
  - lolc 10mo ago
    I'm talking about how language can be used without misunderstanding. In what instances would you front a personal pronoun in English? > It's not a coincidence that the arguments that are free to wander around the sentence are the ones that bear explicit markings of the nature of their relationship to the verb. The thrust was that Turkish allows more liberties than other languages. Yes that is due to the Turkish language having more strict markings. What are we disagreeing about?

lolc 10mo ago

Yeah sure there are other languages where the cases allow flexible argument ordering. I should have written "another language" not "any other language" because I meant the languages I know. I can see how it'd work in Latin. Though poetry takes a lot of license with language, so by quoting from poetry, we're at the extreme end of what a language can do. From what little I remember in Latin there would be examples where one couldn't distinguish the cases. The only variation in your English examples is with the prepositions. English is a language where you just do not get that kind of flexibility. Unless, again, you do poetry. Can't even put the inflected pronoun first even though it would be unambiguous: Him Colonel Mustard killed. Let's look at this contrived example: The policeman bites the dog. Notice how in English I can't reverse them easily. Have to get creative: The dog the policeman bites. Stilted and prone to get misunderstood isn't it? In German, this is possible: Den Hund beisst der Polizist. Though if you do that, people think you made a mistake and will misunderstand you. The cases are rather weak in German. No comparison to Turkish: Köpeği ısırıyor polis. They do it for emphasis as part of everyday speech. You can put the subject first or last or in the middle and there is no confusion. Though admittedly that example is stretching it :-)

thaumasiotes 10mo ago
> Can't even put the inflected pronoun first even though it would be unambiguous: > Him Colonel Mustard killed. You can do that. It's called fronting, and it's not rare in English. It's not a case of the argument order being flexible, but what you said is just plain false. > The only variation in your English examples is with the prepositions. So? > English is a language where you just do not get that kind of flexibility. You mean the kind of flexibility I just illustrated? Or something else? You have a verb with 5 arguments. Two of them go in fixed locations. The other three don't go in fixed locations. It's not a coincidence that the arguments that are free to wander around the sentence are the ones that bear explicit markings of the nature of their relationship to the verb. > The dog the policeman bites. > Stilted and prone to get misunderstood isn't it? Not really. It's not a sentence, though; "the dog the policeman bites" is just a noun phrase referring to a dog. There's no verb. (Bites is a verb, but it's inside a relative clause.)
- lolc 10mo ago
  I'm talking about how language can be used without misunderstanding. In what instances would you front a personal pronoun in English? > It's not a coincidence that the arguments that are free to wander around the sentence are the ones that bear explicit markings of the nature of their relationship to the verb. The thrust was that Turkish allows more liberties than other languages. Yes that is due to the Turkish language having more strict markings. What are we disagreeing about?