SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The amateur linguist in me who, for example, finds it fascinating that Hindi and Farsi are far more closely related to European languages such as English or Greek than they are to other languages in that part of the world such as Arabic or Tamil, has come across an Ars Technica article that appears to demonstrate that there is a "language universal" that binds all language families:
Language takes an astonishing variety of forms across the world—to such a huge extent that a long-standing debate rages around the question of whether all languages have even a single property in common. Well, there's a new candidate for the elusive title of "language universal" according to a paper in this week's issue of PNAS[*]. All languages, the authors say, self-organise in such a way that related concepts stay as close together as possible within a sentence, making it easier to piece together the overall meaning.
Language universals are a big deal because they shed light on heavy questions about human cognition. The most famous proponent of the idea of language universals is Noam Chomsky, who suggested a "universal grammar" that underlies all languages. Finding a property that occurs in every single language would suggest that some element of language is genetically predetermined and perhaps that there is specific brain architecture dedicated to language.
The idea that all the major language families is nothing new, and linguists have documented similar words that seem to be present in different language families all over the globe (e.g., milk). This article may be more evidence of these links, or it may just demonstrate something in the language center of the brain that guarantees that all languages are going to have similar characteristics.
[*] Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 07 2015, @04:37PM
Actually that's true only for subordinate clauses; for main clauses, the verb is strictly on the second position (well, there are exceptions also to this; in some cases you also have it at the beginning, for example in questions). Note however that the "verb" here is not necessarily the complete predicate; it might be just the auxiliary verb, in which case the *actual* verb again goes to the end; also, some verbs are split in some situations, where one part again goes to the end while the other part remains at the second position. Also note that "the first position" does not necessarily mean the subject; it can be filled by another part of the sentence in which case the subject follows the verb.
tl;dr: While German has indeed the tendency to move verbs to the end, the actual rules are much more complicated.
Your sentence,
would be in German word order (or rather, in the best approximation you can get by only reordering words):
And then get you German, where all the verbs at the end of an extremely long sentence piled up are.
There are also grammatically correct sentences which have the verbs all piled up, but not really at the end of the sentence (I'll mark the verbs in bold for your convenience):
Derjenige, der denjenigen, der den Pfahl, der auf der Brücke, die auf dem Weg, der nach Regensburg führt, liegt, steht, umgeworfen hat, anzeigt, erhält zehn Euro Belohnung.