[YG Conlang Archives] > [westasianconlangs group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
Hi! Adam Walker <carrajena@hidden.email> writes: >... > What I'm wondering is, do any of you find the original > difficult to parse? ... No problems in parsing -- but my L1 is German and it has dative case, so I'm used to this, I suppose. That's not the same, of course, but word order is often very different in German than in English and your example did not seem to be weird. However, why is it not '...pera junu cadoligu undrari ils...'? >.. > Do you think the addition of "to" marking the clause > boundary makes thing clearer, more confused or just > silly? Hmm -- I'd not add it, I think. Not only because German does not express this analytically, but also since virtual oppositely structured langs that are very analytical don't seem to need many connecting words. Like Chinese. I was fascinated by the lack of 'that': wo3 kan4 ta1 chi1 fan4. I see he eat cooked.rice 'I see that he eats/is eating.' 'I watch him eat.' You cannot even judge whether the structure in Chinese is equivalent to 'I see him eat food' (raising) or 'I see he eats food' (dropped conjunction). It's just the same in Chinese. It does not matter. Very nice. So there is no exact need for any additional words. Of course, my example is totally different, but it illustrates that other langs lack linking words needed in German and there's no problem parsing them, I think. *If* you want to add anything, my intuition suggests adding 'di'/'de' or the equivalent in Carrajena for addtion passive construction subjects: ...pera undrari di junu cadoligo ils... Additional of 'ad' sounds strange to me, actually. More strange than the unexpected word order in the first place. Is this what you wanted to know? :-) **Henrik