Newsgroups: sci.lang
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!gatech!news.sprintlink.net!news.indirect.com!ftilley
From: ftilley@indirect.com (Felix E. Tilley Jr.)
Subject: Re: Korean and Japanese (was Scots and English (was: Re: Flemish and Dutch))
Message-ID: <D97F3I.Ftz@indirect.com>
Sender: usenet@indirect.com (Internet Direct Admin)
Organization: Internet Direct, indirect.com
Date: Fri, 26 May 1995 21:16:30 GMT
References: <3nqtn1$b7v@bertha.gssec.bt.co.uk> <D8rGGz.5FM@midway.uchicago.edu> <3ph342$o3m@clarknet.clark.net> <D8uF69.1v9@rheged.dircon.co.uk> <D8uxuw.4wG@midway.uchicago.edu> <johna.59.000BD048@tiny.me.su.oz.au>
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Lines: 31

John Atkinson (johna@tiny.me.su.oz.au) wrote:
: deb5@ellis.uchicago.edu (Daniel von Brighoff) writes:

: >More specifically, lexicon; two languages can have identical or nearly
: >identical grammar (e.g. Korean and Japanese) and still not be considered
: >related.                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 

: Nearly identical grammar?  Not as I recollect.  Both are verb-final and 
: have most of the other properties which frequently correlate with this 
: (and which they may have inherited from proto-Altaic, if you believe that 
: theory).  Both have borrowed extensively from Chinese (mostly lexicon, 
: but some grammar).  But other than that their grammar is anything but  
: "identical".  

: Maybe someone who actually knows these languages can comment.

: Anyway, I'm sure there are much better examples of the point you're 
: trying to make!

: John

--

Latin was usually verb-final too.  So what?


---------------------------
| Felix Tilley            |
| Tucson, AZ, USA         |
| ftilley@indirect.com    |
---------------------------
