Re: [glosalist] Glosa grammar and universal grammar (it was: Glosa on web)

I think that languages are too different. There are some universals alright,

but a universal grammar is something out of question.

Consider: Why in English we say ‘I am 6 years old.’ (How can a 6years’

person be old?) In Hindi,we say ‘I am of 6 years.’, but in French and also

Glosa we say ‘I have 6 years.’ If such small things are so different. I dont

think there can be a universal grammar.

Nikhil Sinha

nikhilsinha_in@…

www.geocities.com/nikhilsinha_in

——-Original Message——-

From: L Rossell

Date: Friday, August 19, 2005 5:35:05 PM

To: glosalist@yahoogroups.com

Subject: Re: [glosalist] Glosa grammar and universal grammar (it was: Glosa

on web)

On Fri, Aug 19, 2005 at 07:52:41PM +1000, Robin Fairbridge Gaskell wrote:

The other problem with learning the language is the absence of a

‘rule-book’ . If Syntax is the thing, then I believe that GOOD SYNTAX can,

and must, be taught. However, Ron Clark did not perceive this as a

stumbling block to people’s learning of the language.

Right! (I applause, really :)

I suspect that lurking, waiting to be discovered, there is a

Grammar of Syntax. Maybe, when Linguists discover it there will be a

breakthrough in the ‘Universal Grammar.’ However, it will need to be

written up in much more understandable language than that used by Chomsky.

Mmm that thing about ‘Universal Grammar’ is only an attracting title, or

something “in the mind of some people”? I mean… Are there people

believing in a future find of a “universal grammar”?

I thought it was merely a title from Chomsky.

If mankind ever does find out just how syntax really works, then a

break-through in International Auxiliary Language should occur. If not,

ultimately the well-organized army of Esperantists will have their way.

Ne tiom bone organizitaj, tutcerte ;) Kaj pri la vortaro, mi opinias ke

tiusence Glosa ja pli bonas ol esperanto.

Simple Esperanto facilegas al

euxroplingvanoj, kaj pro ia simpleco kompare al aliaj euxropaj lingvoj, gxi

pli al ne-euxroplingvanoj kompare al la lerno de normale-akceptita euxropa

lingvo.

I think the human cortex is so flexible, that it can deal with many grammars

different at all. Simply, the nervous system would adapt itself to the

language,

having a neural network which deals with a concret language. The mother

language, of course, most defines that neural network about languages.

Isn’t that a simple point of view? Why should there be a “universal grammar”

if

we have such a flexible brain? :)

Maybe I don’t understand, what a “universal grammar” would be :)

Bye!

–

In its laws, society makes its mightiest collective effort to impose

predictability upon human behavior.

• S. I. Hayakawa, “Language in thought and action”