160613Re: How do non-English speaking linguists do interlinears?
- May 10, 2009Sai Emrys skrev:
> English-derived formalisms (like FEM and SG, possibly even 'the' sinceIMLE from works written in Scandinavian languages
> Japanese doesn't really have it [the closest I can think of is 'that'
> and 'this'])?
> Or is English the official metalanguage of all linguists worldwide?
> (Somehow I doubt it.)
and German the general usage is to use
Scandinavian/German translations of the
formalisms, even if the difference often is
minimal due to it all being Latin in the first
place; e.g. you will see ACK and KNJV rather than
ACC and SBJV. To me as an (albeit rather
anti-unnecessary-loans) Swedish speaker using
English formalisms wouldn't feel right in a text
written in Swedish. This said some formalisms
are actually used as 'loan acronyms', notably NP
even though the expansion _nominalfras_ is always
used. IIRC I've seen MF some time and found it odd.
I'm afraid I haven't seen (or at least not taken
note of and remembered) what Icelandic authors do,
but I can'n imagine them using e.g. MASC, FEM, NTR
rather than KK KVK HK -- i.e. I'd expect them to
use the standard Icelandic dictionary
abbreviations put into upper case!
What do Russian authors do? I can't imagine them
using English either...
Benct Philip Jonsson -- melroch atte melroch dotte se
"C'est en vain que nos Josués littéraires crient
à la langue de s'arrêter; les langues ni le soleil
ne s'arrêtent plus. Le jour où elles se *fixent*,
c'est qu'elles meurent." (Victor Hugo)
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>