Dryer (2011): "... than any claim about the human mind that any generative syntactician has made in the last 30 years, ..."

Komentatzen genuen hemen, aipatuz Dryer (2011), ze:

The distribution of SOV versus SVO in the world is quite striking in that although the two orders are about equally common, SOV is much more common in small language families, suggesting that there was a time a few thousand years ago when SOV was by far the most common word order in the world. [Dryer, 2011]

Nahizta, jakina, ezin dugun jakin ziurtasunez nolákoa izan den munduko sintaxien historia zehatza eta osoa, evidentziak apuntatzen du ki SOV ordena nola oso-oso zabaldua an garai zaharrak.

Eta, jarraian, Dryer tipologista famatuak dio (Dryer, 2011):

So, I would also say that the idea that there was a single original human language and that that language was SOV probably has a higher chance of being true than any claim about the human mind that any generative syntactician has made in the last 30 years, and (though this is probably more contentious) than any reconstructed forms for Proto-Indo-European being correct. There’s a lot of highly speculative work in linguistics.

Eta nahiz ezin dugun jakin zehazki nolákoak izan ziren lehenengo taupada linguistikoak gain gure planeta, Dryer-i sinesgarriagoa iruditzen zaio a hipotesia ezen hasiera linguistikoetan existitu zén SOV hizkuntza bakar bat zeinda ez azken hamarkadetako generatibisten lan guztiak, eta baita sinesgarriagoa zein diakronista askoren lanak. 

Dryer-ek amaitzen du esánez ze there’s a lot of highly speculative work in linguistics, eta bai, ados gaude, eta gehituko genuke ze, bestaldetik, kasu askotan ez zaiela kasurik egiten ki evidentzia argienak ere, hala nola adibidez ze sintaxi burulehena dá askoz potenteagoa zein sintaxi buruazkena (potenteagoa, jarraituagoa, flexibleagoa, diskursiboagoa, expresiboki moldagarriagoa eta... efektiboagoa). Total, desastre zientifiko bat. Eta, nork sufritu behar du hori? [1150] [>>>]