Linguistic Miscellany Thread

[So Haleza Grise]

Are there languages where a complement clause always precedes its main clause? I'm thinking of examples like eating fish likes Rachel or that the weather is warm knows Jeff.

[zompist]

Are there languages where a complement clause always precedes its main clause? I'm thinking of examples like eating fish likes Rachel or that the weather is warm knows Jeff.

The first example, Japanese. For the second I assume you'd need an OVS language.

[jal]

This is still generally done with historical rulers ─ e.g. your example of king "Philip II" of Spain ─ but so much with current ones outside of popes ─ e.g. the current king of Spain is "Felipe VI".

This. In Dutch, modern rulers are called by their "foreign" name, e.g. "koning Charles", "koning Felipe", historic rulers by their "native" name, e.g. "koning Lodewijk XIV (de veertiende)", "koning Filips II (de tweede)" etc.


JAL

[Travis B.]

Are there languages where a complement clause always precedes its main clause? I'm thinking of examples like eating fish likes Rachel or that the weather is warm knows Jeff.

For the first I was thinking of Japanese also (I studied it in middle and high school, actually), but many other SOV languages probably follow similar patterns in this regard.

[Raphael]

Thank you, Travis and jal!

[hwhatting]

Are there languages where a complement clause always precedes its main clause? I'm thinking of examples like eating fish likes Rachel or that the weather is warm knows Jeff.

For the first I was thinking of Japanese also (I studied it in middle and high school, actually), but many other SOV languages probably follow similar patterns in this regard.

Well, I thought of Turkic languages, but they frequently embed the complement clause between the subject and the rest of the clause:
Rachel fishes eating likes
Jeff weather warm being knows
That's because the complement clauses tend to be in the O position. This doesn't seem to be what SHG is looking for, so, I guess zomp is right that one should rather look at O-first-languages.

[Raphael]

Just discovered this in the comments section of Bret Devereaux's blog, posted by someone going by the name "Hector":

Interestingly, Punjabi is a language that apparently seems to be in the process of becoming tonal (on the internet you can see heated debates between native speakers about whether it’s a tonal language or not), within the early modern period (after a script was developed), so you can sort of see how tones develop in real time.

Any comments?

[Travis B.]

Just discovered this in the comments section of Bret Devereaux's blog, posted by someone going by the name "Hector":

Interestingly, Punjabi is a language that apparently seems to be in the process of becoming tonal (on the internet you can see heated debates between native speakers about whether it’s a tonal language or not), within the early modern period (after a script was developed), so you can sort of see how tones develop in real time.

Any comments?

Wikipedia also says that Punjabi is a tonal language as a side effect of it having lost murmured consonants; while we all know how reliable Wikipedia's linguistics articles are, this view does not seem limited to Wikipedia.

[Raphael]

Thank you, Travis! Anyone else?

[Travis B.]

This is still generally done with historical rulers ─ e.g. your example of king "Philip II" of Spain ─ but so much with current ones outside of popes ─ e.g. the current king of Spain is "Felipe VI".

This. In Dutch, modern rulers are called by their "foreign" name, e.g. "koning Charles", "koning Felipe", historic rulers by their "native" name, e.g. "koning Lodewijk XIV (de veertiende)", "koning Filips II (de tweede)" etc.

One important note, though, is that historical French monarchs named "Louis" are typically pronounced /ˈluːiː/ in loose emulation of the French pronunciation, not /ˈluːɪs/ as is the typical English-language pronunciation of "Louis".

[zompist]

This is still generally done with historical rulers ─ e.g. your example of king "Philip II" of Spain ─ but so much with current ones outside of popes ─ e.g. the current king of Spain is "Felipe VI".

This. In Dutch, modern rulers are called by their "foreign" name, e.g. "koning Charles", "koning Felipe", historic rulers by their "native" name, e.g. "koning Lodewijk XIV (de veertiende)", "koning Filips II (de tweede)" etc.

One important note, though, is that historical French monarchs named "Louis" are typically pronounced /ˈluːiː/ in loose emulation of the French pronunciation, not /ˈluːɪs/ as is the typical English-language pronunciation of "Louis".

But even this is relatively modern. Dickens in A Tale of Two Cities refers to "King Lewis" in a chapter set in England, but "Louis" later on in the main, part of the book, set in France.

[Travis B.]

This. In Dutch, modern rulers are called by their "foreign" name, e.g. "koning Charles", "koning Felipe", historic rulers by their "native" name, e.g. "koning Lodewijk XIV (de veertiende)", "koning Filips II (de tweede)" etc.

One important note, though, is that historical French monarchs named "Louis" are typically pronounced /ˈluːiː/ in loose emulation of the French pronunciation, not /ˈluːɪs/ as is the typical English-language pronunciation of "Louis".

But even this is relatively modern. Dickens in A Tale of Two Cities refers to "King Lewis" in a chapter set in England, but "Louis" later on in the main, part of the book, set in France.

Speaking of "King /ˈluːɪs/" for a French monarch just feels really odd to me...

[anteallach]

Spanish names for our current royals still get used: Carlos III, Guillermo de Gales (with children Jorge de Gales, Carlota de Gales and Luis de Gales), etc. There are limits: at least on Spanish Wikipedia they haven't come up with Spanish translations of Archie and Lilibet for the children of Enrique, Duque de Sussex, and former Principe Andrés is now Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor.

Likewise the King of Sweden is Carlos_XVI_Gustavo_de_Suecia.

[salem]

One important note, though, is that historical French monarchs named "Louis" are typically pronounced /ˈluːiː/ in loose emulation of the French pronunciation, not /ˈluːɪs/ as is the typical English-language pronunciation of "Louis".

But even this is relatively modern. Dickens in A Tale of Two Cities refers to "King Lewis" in a chapter set in England, but "Louis" later on in the main, part of the book, set in France.

Speaking of "King /ˈluːɪs/" for a French monarch just feels really odd to me...

I guess that the St Louis after whom the city is named is not, like, terribly well known among the general public to have been named after a French monarch, but I've heard it pronounced both ways, /ˈlu.ɪs/ and /ˈlu.i/, by different people. Though I can't say I know which of the two is more prevalent among the Sanctiludovicians themselves. On the contrary, Louisville Kentucky is always nonsiɡmatic /ˈlu.ivɪl/ or /ˈluːɪvɪl/; if you were to ask my grandparents who lived there, they'd tell you the local pronunciation was something like [ˈɫʌːvɪ̈ɫ].

at least on Spanish Wikipedia they haven't come up with Spanish translations of Archie and Lilibet

I wonder what idiomatic equivalents could be... Archi and Chabela? Or Lilibela?.

[Travis B.]

But even this is relatively modern. Dickens in A Tale of Two Cities refers to "King Lewis" in a chapter set in England, but "Louis" later on in the main, part of the book, set in France.

Speaking of "King /ˈluːɪs/" for a French monarch just feels really odd to me...

I guess that the St Louis after whom the city is named is not, like, terribly well known among the general public to have been named after a French monarch, but I've heard it pronounced both ways, /ˈlu.ɪs/ and /ˈlu.i/, by different people. Though I can't say I know which of the two is more prevalent among the Sanctiludovicians themselves. On the contrary, Louisville Kentucky is always nonsiɡmatic /ˈlu.ivɪl/ or /ˈluːɪvɪl/; if you were to ask my grandparents who lived there, they'd tell you the local pronunciation was something like [ˈɫʌːvɪ̈ɫ].

The city of St. Louis is /ˈlu.ɪs/ to me, and as for the saint I'd probably pronounce it /ˈlu.ɪs/ in the context of being a saint and /ˈlu.i/ in the context of being a king. As for Louisville, Kentucky, that would be /ˈlu.iˌvɪl/ to me, even though /ˈlu.ɪˌvɪl/ is also cromulent; it is never */ˈlu.ɪsˌvɪl/.

[Starbeam]

Every Anglo "Louis" except Louisville pronounces the 's', including Louis Armstrong. I'm aware that's not common for him, but apparently that's how he personally said his name.

[Travis B.]

Every Anglo "Louis" except Louisville pronounces the 's', including Louis Armstrong. I'm aware that's not common for him, but apparently that's how he personally said his name.

I'm personally used to "/ˈlu.i/ Armstrong" myself.

[Raphael]

Every Anglo "Louis" except Louisville pronounces the 's', including Louis Armstrong. I'm aware that's not common for him, but apparently that's how he personally said his name.

Oh. I wasn't expecting that.

[Nortaneous]

Isn't Louisville /luwəvəl/ without secondary stress?

[Travis B.]

Isn't Louisville /luwəvəl/ without secondary stress?

If I pronounced that it would come out as [ˈʟ̞uːwəːvɯ(ː)] because final /əl/ without secondary stress comes out as [ɯ(ː)].