[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 57 KB, 640x640, 1649171217100.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
22436566 No.22436566 [Reply] [Original]

Some unsolved questions in linguistics. What do you think /lit/?

1. Is there a universal definition of word?

2. Is there a universal definition of syllable?

3. Is there a universal definition of sentence?

3. Are there any universal grammatical categories?

4. Is syntactic structure constructed of part-whole relations of syntactic constituents or is it built of an asymmetrical dependency relation between words?

5. Can the elements contained in words (morphemes) and the elements contained in sentences (words or syntactic constituents) be shown to follow the same principles of combination?

6. How are domains for phonological processes related to syntactic structure? Do prosodic domains deviate from syntactic constituent structure?

7. Is it possible to formally delineate languages from each other? That is to say, is it possible to use linguistic (rather than social) criteria to draw a clear boundary between two closely related languages with a dialect continuum between their respective standard forms (e.g. Occitan and Catalan)?

8. How does grammaticalization function?

9. What constitutes grammatical language, as viewed by native speakers of that particular language, i.e. the problem of gradient well-formedness?

>> No.22436572

>>22436566
I'm already yawning. Think about something worthwhile.

>> No.22436595
File: 159 KB, 686x526, 385.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
22436595

>>22436566
I think you should shut the FUCK up and go get some BITCHES you garrulous nigger.

>> No.22436607

>>22436566
1. Yes, or there ought to be

2. In an ideal world, yes. However that caused the Tower of Babel and that would be something we should avoid.

3. Sentences should be defined purely by context

4. Ending sentences in prepositions shouldn’t be a crime

5. Not sure what you mean. Be more specific and give examples

6. They should

7. They ought to at least follow the structure of moderate-level pronounceability. No area where letters are dropped off like in French or Portuguese pronunciation

8. Languages are mostly defined geographically not socially or linguistically. Usually by approximation towards different cultures. Hence, it’s anthropological.

9. It’s wholly dependent on the content of the sentence

10. This is purely a socio-cultural question wholly dependent on cultural myths.

>> No.22436621

>>22436566
Studied linguist here.
1. Fuck
2. You
3. And
4. Educate
5. Yourself
6. On
7. this
8. Kinda
9. Shit

Glad I could help.

>> No.22437878

>>22436566
>universal
Who cares, the English definition is the only one that matters.

>> No.22437962
File: 1.50 MB, 328x248, 1689903582895212.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
22437962

>>22436572
>>22436595
agreed

>> No.22437966

>>22436621
>Studied linguist here.
We can tell