5-1219msg2.txt

运用贝叶斯网编的一个识别垃圾邮件的程序

Subject: language evolution context

hello to all linguist - s ! i be " lurk " to ( proper use ? ) your conversation since now a good year , but , not be a linguist myself , i usually do not talk a lot . first , as a teacher of french language in taiwan , i must tell how much i feel listen to this list really bring me a lot . specially as i hold a non-prescriptive view of my own language ( contrary , i think , to the majority of teacher ( ? ) , and certainly to our embattle french ministre de la culture , mr toubon , that a lot of people in france now usually call mr . " allgood " : ) . i be prompt to write by the problem of the evolution of language . . . so it be not so far from my allusion to mr . toubon with with i open my message . . . it seem to me obvious that , ( apart from phonological evolution ) a language may evolve , at the morpho-systactic level , from acculturation , that be , influence of another , ( " dominant " or not ) language , in historical time , close geographically , but also through commercial contact ( the modern time be another story - what do mean " close " when i can talk with you from taiwan ? ) . but i think the matter be quite more complicate that all that have be mentionn so far . . . first the chinese case seem to me very complicate and specific : a - there be a chinese " isolat " for about 4000 year ( quite no interaction with other culture , except the bouddhist indian one , where it give rise to a quite specific " sub-language " , mainly phonetic transcription of samskrit word into adapted-on - purpose chinese character , but which have little to do with generic chinese , b - there be a feed-back from the ideograph , so that chinese language do n't evolve independantly from its write since a long time , c - because the phonologic evolution of the speak language be not directly reflect onto the write system , which built upon its own logic , it be possible that its law of evolution could be very different from language use alphabetic or syllabic system of notation ( ? ) . more : my french be certainly influence by the english i use on internet , and the chinese i use in day-to - day life ( to the point that i sometime realise that , while talk to my sister in france by phone , i find myself unthinkingly tell her : " j ' habite dan une petite hsiang derriere l ' ecole . " ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ( i live in a little hsiang just behind the school - - " hsiang " be the chinese for a little alley connect to a main street ) . and have to apologize and reexplain . . . but i mainly switch between the language , and there be little chance i create my own pidgin or creole . . . so do many taiwanese ( min-nan ) speak people in the south of the island . . . so do it not mean that the evolution should depend on the education level of people - so that it would be differential inside a society accord to , say , the social class ? there be probably as well a " critical mass effect " ( if france be turn into some chinese-dominant state . . . ) . is not our idea of " homogeneity " in evolution vitiate by the pretention of modern nation-state to generate a " super-culture " - through linguistic homogeneisation ? ) - i be also aware of phenomenon of resistance to acculturative evolution ( conscious or not ) as for the quebecquoi tell , not " un hot-dog " as the french do , but " un chien chaud " ( toubon be in my opinion but a marginal impedement on the natural evolution , whatever direction it take ) . . . - another exemple of the complexity of those issue would be the " rigidification " of a language face a threat . it be give to me as an explanation when i be a student of kurdish , when i learn that this language have in common with old persian an " ergative " ( ? ) construction for transitive verb in past tense , which be present to me as a " quite - passive " construction . to allow for comparison by more knowledgeable people , i will explain a little : there , the infix represent the agent be append at the end of the verb , while the infix represent the subject be append after the object , as : mindal-eke sew - ek - y xuward - 0 ( - eke and ek ( [ ^ e ] k ) be suffix express definiteness ( eke = the ) ( child-the apple-one - he eat ) and indefiniteness respectively ( ek = a ) ) here , - y represent the child , - 0 a null infix ( there be only one apple ) , so " the child eat the apple " would be : mindal-eke sew - ek - y xiward-n < - - - - " - n " : there be several apple ( child-the apples-the - he ate-them ) so i be tell at this time that this construct , which be use in old persian ( and be still use in the variety of persian speak in afghanistan , be an archaic construction , characteristic of the periphery of the indo-iranian domain , that be , in kurdistan ( south-kurmandjus , or sorani-speak part ) , and also among the baluch , and represent a rigidification of the language due to a threat from other language , ( so that language at a domain periphery would sometime evolve more slowly ) and that it have disappear from standard modern persian . . . i would want to know if all that be still consider true , though . what do you think of it ? i guess there be as well different levels of evolution take place simultaneously , that can be contradictory ( phonology , vocabulary , syntax . . . ) . anyway , i see several reason why it should be difficult to infer any " linear " evolution of language ( whatever fascination i feel when i read post speak of modelisation of 10 or 20 0 year back . . . ) on anything else that a case-by - case basis ( or do the fact that population density have obviously undergo a dramatic change since then , change the dynamics of contact . . . ? ? ? ? ) . to resume my question : how can we ascertain that this language have have this reaction without have to resort to extra-linguistic implicit hypothesis as : homogeneity through class , identity of evolution whatever the number of speaker would be ( lng-switch v creolisation . . . ) , existence ( or not ) , type , and evolution of a script system ( * * ) etc . . . ? as i tell , i be no linguist , ( neither " linguistician " nor philologist : ) , so i hope i do not waste your time , thus get all your community angry at me ( ack ! - terrible perspective ) . but i will be very interest to read more about all this . friendly to all , gerard gautier ( * * ) once more , kurdish would be a good case in point , as it use up to three different script system accord to the place ( latin , arabo-persian , cyrillic for the north-kurmandjus , and latin and arabo-persian for soranus ) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ wen-tzao school | \ | / / gerard gautier of foreign language | / \ \ | . . \ | \ | | _ _ > | _ / \ _ > o _ _ _ > kaohsiung - taiwan _ / _ / . . _ / ( _ s . . _ / gauier @ cc . nsysu . edu . tw ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~