Indo-European Syntax (with Danny Bate)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 4 июн 2024
- Danny Bate ( dannybate.com ) talks about his doctoral work on Indo-European syntax and his new podcast "A Language I Love Is..." ( open.spotify.com/show/5n30BD1... ) with Jackson Crawford and his Patreon supporters in this live conversation recorded May 16, 2024.
Jackson Crawford, Ph.D.: Sharing real expertise in Norse language and myth with people hungry to learn, free of both ivory tower elitism and the agendas of self-appointed gurus. Visit jacksonwcrawford.com/ (includes bio and linked list of all videos).
Jackson Crawford’s Patreon page: / norsebysw
Jackson Crawford's Ko-fi page: ko-fi.com/jacksoncrawford
Visit Grimfrost at glnk.io/6q1z/jacksoncrawford
Latest FAQs: vimeo.com/375149287 (updated Nov. 2019).
Jackson Crawford’s translation of Hávamál, with complete Old Norse text: www.hackettpublishing.com/the... or www.amazon.com/Wanderers-Hava...
Jackson Crawford’s translation of The Poetic Edda: www.hackettpublishing.com/the... or www.amazon.com/Poetic-Edda-St...
Audiobook: www.audible.com/pd/The-Poetic...
Music © I See Hawks in L.A., courtesy of the artist. Visit www.iseehawks.com/
Logos and channel artwork by Justin Baird. See more of his work at: justinbairddesign.com
my family too has an age old tradition of being non-linguists lol
Mine too!
i feel he reads too much harry potter
what a bright and cheerful person Danny is!
The meeting of syntax and cognitive science is interesting.
For me at least (I'm from the south of England) I would say that including the object in a question isn't necessarily a marker of formality but do-support is. Compare 'You want some cake?' and 'Do you want some cake?'
I am from Michigan in the US and I hadn't realized before you pointing it out that do-support is a fairly big part of how me and nearly everyone I know manifest a more formal register.
Having a slower cadence with clearer enunciation, forgoing weak forms/schwa, and specific altered intonation put together without do-support can either feel slightly off or possibly even quite condescending rather than polite in the wrong context.
Considering how that specifically has to do with sounds of speech lost in writing, as far as I can tell reflecting on my own experiences sending work emails and writing formal letters on top of corresponding with people who have very different vocabularies (be it due to socio-economic, geographic, or other factors) do-support appears then to be the biggest signifier to me for if someone is attempting to be polite/formal or not. Fascinating stuff!
This was a very good discussion. The apparent connection between Old Irish syntax and Sanskrit syntax is noteworthy, because the two languages are geographically peripheral in Indo-European terms, and connections between peripheral languages can be persuasive. As an anecdotal tangent, an Iranian once observed to me that my CD of Irish children's songs sounded kind of Persian.
Thanks for guilting me into working on more episodes of the Theory Neutral Podcast! ("The Podcast About Stuff Languages Do")
whoo, always exciting to see an Indo-european video. Proto-indo-european is icing on the cake.
What a combo!
"Tell me who do you love, man. Tell me what, man. Tell me what's it you love, man."
Verb dropping comes before subject dropping:
"Would you like cake?"
"You like cake?"
"Cake?"
🎂?
"You like cake?" sounds more like "Do you like cake?" to me
😂
@@BodyPressCorviknight Absolutely. I would not use "like" on its own that way. Actually I probably wouldn't ask the original question in that exact way either.
For me, the sequence of shorter questions would probably be
"Do you want some cake?"
"You want some cake?"
"Want some cake?"
"Cake?"
@@PaulWiele
for me it would be
"Do you want some cake?"
"You want some cake?"
"You want cake?"
"Want cake?"
Good video!
Subject dropping in questions is something which used to happen in the Uk. I remember it in the 50s and 60s. "Got a light?"
It doesn't still happen? It still does here in the US.
_(...if this is covered in the video, my mistake - just hit "Play" about ten seconds ago.)_
@Kveldred it definitely still exists in the UK. I'm flying by the seat of my pants here, but I would say it goes with a temporary ongoing condition, or especially with iminent future plans. Like "studying linguistics?" Or "going to the party" or "got a light?" Are legitimate questions. But "have a brother?" Or "went to the party?" Aren't.
I like the notion of art of a language is the "bedrock" what changes when limited? Words communicate. I am so much happier having heard this, thank you.
What a delightful, deep discussion! Thank you, Danny and Jackson.
‘Free’ word order isn’t random or anarchic in this languages, it’s just not used to indicate syntactic roles (as it tends to be in English). Some word orders are less marked, others are used for emphasis, contrast, etc. And it’s often the order of syntactic phrases, rather than individual words.
Loved this! It would be cool to have the guy from Learn Hittite on to talk about PIE's similarities and differences with Uralic and North Caucasian, given Danny's "Uralic-y" comment.
Great talk. I wonder if Danny wouldn't be interested in David Lightfoot's Born to Parse - there are some great insights in there about what we should expect for historical syntactic change with regards to language acquisition.
as a native English speaker from New Jersey, "like that phone" is a valid command, and "talking to Danny" is a valid statement if you're talking about yourself ("I'm" omitted) in response to a question like "what are you doing?".
Utah here, that would be a valid set of statements here too.
@@redacted_redacted_redacted Originally from the East Coast of Canada and that response would be entirely valid for any person, not just yourself, so long as the question indicates the subject. "What (is/are/am) (you/they/her/him/I/it) doing?" "Going to lunch".
Big mike energy!😊
I'm here to confirm that stuff like the topic system of Old English is what I come here for.
The subject dropping you mention is a good catch! But it’s limited to 2nd person singular and plural only, so 1st and 3rd person singular and plural questions will always need the subject
Subject dropping in questions in English seems to be an emergent form of the colloquial shift of the subject to the end of the phrase: “drank a cup of tea, did you?” Has slowly become “drank a cup of tea?” By ditching the “, did you?”
1:00:00 There is a paper from last year by Katalin Kiss on how the non-finiteness of subordination correlates with basic word order, with evidence from Uralic.
1:30:00 Thank you for the George Walkden recommendation on comparative generative syntax!
@11:40 Arrested Development reference - nice.
Have a phone can not become the standard question because the "have a" phrase is already occupied by offering stuff. Like, "have a beer". So "have a phone" sounds like you are offering to give a phone to that person.
it would be "got a" in that case. "got a phone?"
@@Plusrien-vz8du and it could even be argued that "have a phone?" could hypothetically be acceptable, due to intonation. Like in spanish where the basic question is just the statement with a questioning inflection.
I haven't watched the video yet but why not? Difference in intonation is all it would take
@@WGGplantOh yeah you beat me to it by 3 mins
V1 is still used in German jokes. «Geht ein Hund», and so forth -- it might very well be part of the narrative structure of Germanic languages, as mentioned in the OE. example, for instance. No topic, hence V1, topic and comment, hence V2 afterwards.
“She said what?!”
Well, you do subject dropping in the case of first-person for statements too, e.g. "Gonna head up to the canyon." "Have a notice here that tells me…" "Just ate a hotdog."
Yoda Syntax!!!! Always there forms exist that technically grammatically wrong are but still fully comprehensible remain. There will always be people who think it's "cool" to play with the language and use these forms. And then some of these forms will catch on and become the new standard, particularly if they're shorter and easier. Strong case languages like Latin, give more freedom to play with word order, and create funky poetic sentences that are non standard but totally understandable. Plus I'd guess that redundancy is a classic version of this. If for example a question is marked both by a question word and a rising intonation, then the question word can be dropped and it's still compressible. Same if Subject / Object is clear from the word order, you say F*** it and leave out those horrible case endings, but if it's not you can't. Like evolution, the mistake that works can become the new standard. Wrong but comprehensible can become the new right.
"pretty Sanskrit-y" 😅
Got milk?
We need volsungs pt 2 ❤
The Saga
If you want to look at a good example of a contemporary Indo-European topic-comment language, then you should consider Czech.
Well, when we speak in commands we drop the subject.
In your examples, Jackson, it sounds like the subject is “you”.
In my own idiolect, I often tend to drop “I” because of the influence of Spanish, a language I learned in my twenties (22, 23, 24).
"I came from a long line of non-linguists." 🎩
bro so giddy lol, utterly chalant maxxed
1:00:17 "pretty Sanskrit-y, pretty Latin-y, and pretty Uralic-y"--I wonder if "pretty Baltic-y" might also be included in this characterization of PIE?
In terms of syntax the Baltic languages are quite like other modern languages of Europe, not really like Latin or Sanskrit.
Question about subject dropping in English - is that specific the western US English? I find I am constantly correcting subject dropping out of my writing but wasn't aware it was a larger trend. To my mind it feels very "cowboy" to me, and I was young in Arizona so it feels like it fits in there.
No it's common everywhere, Ive heard it from English people before.
Hittite grammar needs to be compared to the "classical" Hatti language.
59:00
Boi ri awrae
Asid raja (nalo nama)
(Es) war (einmal) ein König
Did they get into the ergative with Prof Blevins?
What was the name of the law that Danny Bates mentioned in 42:00? Vacanagle's Law?
Wackernagel's law -- you can read it on the Wikipedia page about clitics (under "Word order").
All your examples of subjectless questions drop the second-person pronoun. DOES the idea hold for the rest?