Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Reply to Gunnar

Expand Messages
  • Ven. Pandita
    Dear Gunnar Thank you for your kind comment. My linguistic knowledge is not much, but I would like to improve it. ... In the case of Burmese, we also have many
    Message 1 of 1 , Mar 2, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear Gunnar

      Thank you for your kind comment. My linguistic knowledge is not much,
      but I would like to improve it.

      You wrote:

      > --- "Ven. Pandita" <ashinpan@...> skrev:
      >
      >
      >>Burmese is what some call an "agglutinative" language whereas Pali is an inflectional language. Burmese entirely lacks inflections such as declensions and conjugations
      >>that Pali has.
      >>
      >>
      >Don't you mean an "isolative" language? "Agglutinative" languages, like Finnish (and I think Turkish), do have a lot of inflections (Finnish actually has about twice as many grammatical cases as Pali), but unlike inflectional languages the roots themselves are not changed - the affixes are just added.
      >
      In the case of Burmese, we also have many cases, which are added to
      roots without any change to the roots themselves. If such a process is
      to be called an "inflection", let it be. When I said "Burmese entirely
      lacks inflections", I mean that such "inflections" cannot be made into
      paradigms like those in Pali and Sanskrit because, theoretically, any
      given root can accept any affix. Moreover, even with all words each
      having a root with a proper affix in a given sentence, word order is
      still important --- we can't make arbitrary changes to it.

      Please correct me if I am wrong.

      with metta

      Ven. Pandita


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.