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

160613Re: How do non-English speaking linguists do interlinears?

Expand Messages
  • Benct Philip Jonsson
    May 10, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Sai Emrys skrev:
      > English-derived formalisms (like FEM and SG, possibly even 'the' since
      > 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.)
      >

      IMLE from works written in Scandinavian languages
      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...

      /BP 8^)>
      --
      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)
    • Show all 14 messages in this topic