Re: Lingua Eurana tradition

li [Paul Bartlett] mi tulis la ...

> On Sat, 31 May 2008, Klaus Dieckmann wrote:
> 
> > "Paul Bartlett" wrote:
> >
> >>> This is another way of using an article. Why using the old paths?
> >> 
> >> However, why not consider what has been historically effective?  I
> >> myself would find it far easier to have a definite article but not an
> >> indefinite, rather than the other way around.
> >
> > Latin has no article, Russian has no article, Turkish has no article.
So 
> > what?
> 
> The "so what" is that to the best of my knowledge, if a language has an
> article at all, it is more likely to be definite rather than
> indefinite.  I do not claim all knowledge.  Are there natural languages
> which have only an indefinite article but no definite article?

I can't think of any.  A good example of the definite is Arabic
though I tend to think it's more of a prefix, considering the
agreement of adjectives for definiteness.

I tend to say there should be either no articles, or both.  The
use of one or the other leaves the unmarked somewhat ambiguous.

-------------------------------------------------
deinx nxtxr

LI SASXSEK LATIS. (http://www.nutter.net/sasxsek)