I take it from your question that you think plural
marker(s) are a good thing, and that not having them
means a limitation of some kind. ?

Are you assuming that 'undeveloped' languages don't
have such markers?  In looking at Chinese, which is a
good example where a language has rather non-english
plurality - "wo3" means "my", "we", and "our" - there
is indeed a different spin on describing plurality,
but this is generally left to context.

I don't know Zh well enough to state anything with
absolute authority, but its an interesting question as
to the kind of balance that different languages have
for relating concepts of self, possession, identity,
community, etc --each language concept being different
from other languages in proportion with differences in
concepts of plurality.


--- Rob Haden <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> What are the realistic ways by which plural markers
> develop?
> - Rob

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!