nurikdaka on October 19, 2010, 08:57:20 am
what????i didn't get it

Archonix on October 21, 2010, 05:46:56 am
The relationship breaks down quite quickly the more non-indo-european languages you used at the start of your argument. Hungarian for "mine" is "enyém", which produces a completely different facial expresison when emphasised.

I don't think Hungarian has a word directly equivalent to "mine".  Does "enyém" make sense as a one word sentence?  

To test the hypothesis for non indo european languages, you need a native speaker who can say what is idiomatic - who can tell us what a Hungarian kid would say when he found another kid eating his chips.  Would a Hungarian say "enyém" in that circumstance?.  

Ezen az enyém. These belong to me, so they might just say "enyém!" which would loosely translate as "mine!" or they might just shout out the possessive form of the noun - eg "my house" could be házam, which means "my house" from ház and the possessive suffix am. Possessive pronouns are rare in finno-ugric languages but some of the more fusional ones have created something like it out of existing elements.

In Finnish, another Finno-ugric language, "my house" would be mun/minun taloni - again a possessive suffix to the noun indicates ownership, but Finnish has evolved towards being a more fusional language and also includes the use of the genitive personal pronoun as a possessive pronoun. Unlike Hungarian it doesn't decline the pronoun

You've caught me on korean, though. Outside indo-european I'm not exactly confident on what is or is not the correct phrase but within that milieu and its immediate neighbour finno-ugric I have a fairly good base to work with, and I've already provided evidence that your theory isn't as watertight as you seem to believe.

Incidentally, when I pronounce "mine", I don't show my teeth at all. Most people around where I live don't show their teeth either, nor do we draw back our lips in any way, but make a fairly large round shape with the corners of the mouth turned slightly downward. Perhaps we're sad about the fact that we own things. ;)

The final bit of proof I offer is evolutionary: we are not dogs. We are apes. Apes do not use the same facial expressions as dogs to convey the same information. Apes often bare their teeth at each other to show affection, whereas if you bare your teeth at a dog it will interpret that as a threat every time. Apes will often not bear their teeth when making a threat, whereas a dog will do so every time. Our behaviour is not dog-like but ape-like and consequently any theory of body language must take this in to account. And apes, oddly enough, don't behave remotely the same way to dogs when they're protecting something they possess.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2010, 06:20:01 am by Archonix »