0
Forbes Posted 21 years ago
Linguistics Studies

The Analysis of Analytical Languages

Ignoring polysynthetic and agglutinative languages (which I have no wish to do other than for the purpose of the question I pose) languages may be placed somewhere on the synthesis/ analysis continuum. Languages such as Sanskrit, Greek (Ancient) and Latin would come very near the synthetic end of the continuum and languages such as Chinese and Thai would come very near the analytic end of the continuum. English is rather nearer to the analytic end than the synthetic end. I believe that there is a theory that languages move from synthesis to analysis; this can clearly be seen in the way Latin changed into French, for example.

I have read many of the threads in this forum with interest. What has struck me is how quite often two well informed people cannot agree on how to analyse a language question and how many questions seem to be incapable of satisfactory resolution.

My question therefore is this: Is it the case that the more a language moves along the continuum to analysis, the more elusive it becomes and the more difficult to analyse?
  

Top answer

I really don't know anything about it. But off the top of my head, it would seem the more independent words a language has, the more complex it may be. Instead of having a more limited set of base words, the analytic language has a large sets of words which evolve in their own ways, independent of any base.

  • I really don't know anything about it.
  • But off the top of my head, it would seem the more independent words a language has, the more complex it may be.
  • Instead of having a more limited set of base words, the analytic language has a large sets of words which evolve in their own ways, independent of any base.
  • If satisfactory mutates, unsatisfactory mutates with it.
  • But if non-X is independent of X, the two words may, over time, no longer be (true) opposites.
Free · every Monday

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.

7 Answers
0
I really don't know anything about it. But off the top of my head, it would seem the more independent words a language has, the more complex it may be. Instead of having a more limited set of base words, the analytic language has a large sets of words which evolve in their own ways, independent of any base. If satisfactory mutates, unsatisfactory mutates with it. But if non
0
what do you mean by analytical language and kindly site some examples?
0
<My question therefore is this: Is it the case that the more a language moves along the continuum to analysis, the more elusive it becomes and the more difficult to analyse?>

I don't know, but would you imagine that all theorists agree on how to analyse a language javascript:void(0) that is related to Latin usage?
0
I would define an analytic language as one in which the functions of words in a sentence are defined either by other "grammatical" words (and not by the changes of endings in words) and/or by word order.

Languages are not necessarily either analytic or synthetic, but exist on a continuum.

One of the features of analytic languages is that meaning can sometimes only be established
0
I do not. Perhaps due to the bias I have as a native English speaker, I believe concepts that rely on the establishment of the relationships between people and objects, objects and other objects, and people and time are most easily understood universally through one or (as is often the case in German-English dialogue) more than one preposition, rather than through affixes. In the large, meanings
0
I am not sure your German example is a good one. The indirect object can be expressed in English without a preposition: Give the man a medal. Give me it etc.

More generally, I do not think it is the case at all that languages that use prepositions rather than case endings are more readily universally understood. It is, as you half suggest, a question of what you are used to. There
0
In Enlgish we mark case with prepositions and word order and even when the dative isn't marked with "to" or "for" we can always distnguish between the two objects because the dative comes first:

I'm buying some food for them -----> I'm buying them some food

Although I know there are some occasions when we rely completely on common sense, on the whole mark

Related Questions