zompist bboard

Trebor wrote: - Voiceless stops cannot occur word-finally: e.g., arag 'he saw' ~ arkay/arkey 'I saw'.

- The language does not have independent articles or demonstratives, but attaches these determiners to the end of the noun. Further, two kinds of definite article exist: the first "used to mark new information or something just being introduced in a conversation" (-ka for masculine nouns, -ta for feminine nouns), the second used after "something has been introduced or if it is generally known" (-kii for masculine nouns, -tii for feminine nouns) (p. 31).

In modern NWC, nearly the reverse has occurred: the high central unrounded vowel*ï has become a syllabic liquid [l] (which is retroflex [L] after retroflex initials). See Coblin (1994: 108).

Nortaneous wrote:It's not strange for voiced plosives to be restricted from word-final position; it is strange for voiceless plosives to be restricted from word-final position if they can occur word-initially.

Yng wrote:Not that strange, is it?

Not that weird at all - the only odd thing is that they call the first definite article, which is pretty much the textbook definition of indefinite, definite.

Note that there is a distinction between definite (with an article) and indefinite (without an article) equivalent to the English articles the versus a. Remember that there are two kinds of definite information: new (just being introduced in a conversation) which is marked by -a; and given (known by the speakers or already discussed) which is marked by -ii.

Trebor wrote:

Yng wrote:Note that there is a distinction between definite (with an article) and indefinite (without an article) equivalent to the English articles the versus a. Remember that there are two kinds of definite information: new (just being introduced in a conversation) which is marked by -a; and given (known by the speakers or already discussed) which is marked by -ii.

(pp. 39-40)

I'm still puzzled about this matter: your point is important. Maybe a linguist has done some work to figure out exactly what roles unmarked nouns versus -ka/-ta nouns play in Somali discourse.

clawgrip wrote:One thing I've always found a bit weird about Old Japanese is that there is a verb that seems to lack any stem...it's just the verb endings alone.

Compare the conjugations of the following verbs, all of the shimo-nidan class:

Code: Select all

受く:     uk-e     uk-e     uk-u     uk-uru     uk-ure     uk-eyo
混ず:    maz-e    maz-e    maz-u    maz-uru    maz-ure    maz-eyo
答ふ:  kotah-e  kotah-e  kotah-u  kotah-uru  kotah-ure  kotah-eyo
得:          e        e        u        uru        ure        eyo

the verb u "get; attain" seems to have no actual verb stem. I can't determine what could have caused this, for example any sound change that could have eliminated the original stem. It's just an anomaly.

Nortaneous wrote:^ where's the -nd- come from?

Theta wrote:

Nortaneous wrote:^ where's the -nd- come from?

Just epenthesis, also depending on the dialect the first person marker inserts a nasal before the nearest following consonant if it's any of /b d dZ g z Z/.

Theta wrote:

clawgrip wrote:the verb u "get; attain" seems to have no actual verb stem. I can't determine what could have caused this, for example any sound change that could have eliminated the original stem. It's just an anomaly.

Almost the same thing occurs in Ket, with the verb meaning 'to eat'. The typical root is -a, but this is elided for a significant number of speakers:
ku-b-il
2.S-INAN.O-PST
"you ate it"
as well as in Ojibwe, with the verb izhi 'to say'. the verb itself is actually just a hanging 'initial', that would normally modify a root but none is actually present here. A couple different forms of the verb elide even this:
nindig 'he says to me' is analyzable as ni-ig '1-INV' with no phonological material present as the root at all.

Chengjiang wrote:

Theta wrote:

Nortaneous wrote:^ where's the -nd- come from?

Just epenthesis, also depending on the dialect the first person marker inserts a nasal before the nearest following consonant if it's any of /b d dZ g z Z/.

Ah, so it's epenthetic insertion of /d/, followed by insertion of a nasal before that /d/ by the first person marker?

Theta wrote:Hwhwhatting: is there really a separable semelfactive in Russian? neat

Nortaneous wrote:Consonant clusters in a rGyalrongic language.

KathAveara wrote:Are those all (apart from bird and the last one) monosyllables?

Japhug has an intriguing five-way contrast between /velar stop+j/ as in kjo ‘to cause to glide’, palatal stops co ‘valley’, /dental affricates+j/ ɯ-mtsjoʁ ‘beak’, alveolo-palatal affricates as in tɕoʁtsi ‘table’ and /uvular stop+j/ as in qjoʁ ‘to vomit’. Palatal stops can be followed by -ɣ-, -r- or -l- as in ɲcʰɣaʁ ‘birch bark’.

Nortaneous wrote:Consonant clusters in a rGyalrongic language.

nvse 'morning', nvtsæ 'meal', ʁmno 'awl', χsmɑr 'wheat', ʁvdʑvər 'sprout', çɲɕə 'sweat', χscər 'danger', jmbjəmpɑ 'bird', ʁvrdʑɣə 'geminate', ʁjnzdəjnzdə 'cause to buy each other things (for their own benefit)'

Also: diachronics of sonority hierarchy change.