>><<Syntax is a nightmare. >>
Don't all languages have synatx? Wouldn't a simple language (like English) with only syntax, and almost no inflection, be much simpler than a language with ghastly inflectional complexity along with the usual syntax problems?<<
The matter with English is that a fundamental aspect of English syntax is the tying of verbs with prepositions and particles, to the point that they are very much part of the verb itself semantically. And the meanings of such combinations are by no means predictable either, but rather have to be learned for each such combination individually, especially in everyday spoken English. While one does to some degree see similar things with other languages, such as verbs' meanings being changed by their objects' case in Finnish, they generally do not take on the degree of complexity that is found with such forms in everyday spoken English.
Don't all languages have synatx? Wouldn't a simple language (like English) with only syntax, and almost no inflection, be much simpler than a language with ghastly inflectional complexity along with the usual syntax problems?<<
The matter with English is that a fundamental aspect of English syntax is the tying of verbs with prepositions and particles, to the point that they are very much part of the verb itself semantically. And the meanings of such combinations are by no means predictable either, but rather have to be learned for each such combination individually, especially in everyday spoken English. While one does to some degree see similar things with other languages, such as verbs' meanings being changed by their objects' case in Finnish, they generally do not take on the degree of complexity that is found with such forms in everyday spoken English.