Talk:Linguistics/Typology

It is so great to see others contributing content here! Come back and add more.

Eventually we will probably want to tone down statements like "polysynthetic languages are definitely very cool", but for now I want to see that kind of enthusiasm here. We can worry about serious scholarly tone when the book has a couple of hundred pages. ACW 22:32, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Discourse? Pragmatics? Sociolinguistics?  Psycholinguistics?
If the aim here is a survey style text book then I think it needs to cover some more material. I think that Discourse, Sociolinguistics and Psycholinguistics need their own sections and that Pragmatics could be dealt with under semantics. Psycholinguistics might also cover first and second lanuage acquisition and speech and language pathology. I haven't edited the book to add these section headings because I can't commit right now to contributing so it would be ill mannered.

3 small questions
1. is latin really the ultimate inflected language? aren't there lots of langs with more elaborated inflections?

2.question of audience: names some major languages in case you cant think of any but then says "every argument ... is inflected on the verb," a mildly technical use of "argument"

3. lutinative languages can have both lots of agreements and inflections, or have rigid word order, such as German.

but german also has inflections.


 * perhaps they meant that german had both agreements & inflections and rigid word order? --Schneedesu (discuss • contribs) 18:00, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Syntatctic topology
It makes no sense.

Japanese example
From the little I know about Japanese from studying it a little while, isn't the example here a little grammatically odd? It seems like it would make more sense to use the wa-particle with watashi: watashi-wa hon-o yomimasu. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong! Schneedesu (discuss • contribs) 17:58, 19 August 2021 (UTC)