resources

[chris_notts]

I'm reposting these links at the request of THC, from my post here:

http://zbb.spinnwebe.com/viewtopic.php? ... 39#p918539

An interesting text about inverse constructions:

http://pages.uoregon.edu/delancey/papers/inverse.html

DeLancey talks about the (in his view) deictic nature of inverse constructions, and how in a number of Tibetan languages the source of an inverse marker has been a verb like "come", expressing motion towards the deictic centre.

Similar topics seem to be discussed in this book by Givón:

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=qoY0 ... rb&f=false

[TomHChappell]

Similar topics seem to be discussed in this book by Givón:

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=qoY0 ... rb&f=false

That didn't work. I made a tinyurl instead;
http://tinyurl.com/3hvbj6w

[chris_notts]

I promised in another thread that I'd post some information on agreement in the Ndu language Manambu. It's here as part of a blog post, now that I've got my blog working:

http://chrisdb.dyndns-at-home.com/blog/ ... -agreement

The formatting of the side bar is slightly stuffed up for some reason I'll investigate later, but it doesn't stop the content being readable.

[Ouagadougou]

Interesting and free Google book: http://tinyurl.com/3gz6wwc

[Ser]

Interesting and free Google book: http://tinyurl.com/3gz6wwc

Thanks but you should also mention what it is about... In this case, discussions about some phonological and grammatical structures in sub-saharan African languages.

[TomHChappell]

I promised in another thread that I'd post some information on agreement in the Ndu language Manambu. It's here as part of a blog post, now that I've got my blog working:
http://chrisdb.dyndns-at-home.com/blog/ ... -agreement
The formatting of the side bar is slightly stuffed up for some reason I'll investigate later, but it doesn't stop the content being readable.

Fascinating. Thanks!

[dhok]

Course in Saterlandic Frisian.

[Matt]

I promised in another thread that I'd post some information on agreement in the Ndu language Manambu. It's here as part of a blog post, now that I've got my blog working:
http://chrisdb.dyndns-at-home.com/blog/ ... -agreement
The formatting of the side bar is slightly stuffed up for some reason I'll investigate later, but it doesn't stop the content being readable.

Fascinating. Thanks!

If anyone's interested, there's a .zip file available from my Dropbox with three reference grammar .pdfs in it. One of them is Aikhenvald's grammar of Manambu.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/26416064/3ReferenceGrammars.zip

[Acid Badger]

Does anyone have resources on non-Georgian Kartvelian verbs?

[roninbodhisattva]

Book:

The indigenous languages of the Caucasus, vol. 1: The Kartvelian languages. Ed. by Alice C. Harris. Delmar, NY: Caravan Books, 1991

Online:

Aorist and pseudo-aorist for Svan atelic verbs
The South Caucasian languages (this is an overview, though you should be able to extract something from it)

Note from the second article: "...since the verbal system of all Kartvelian languages is largely the same, Georgian with its more transparent morphology
can be taken as representative."

[Acid Badger]

Thank you very much!

[Jipí]

Schachter, Paul and Fe T. Otanes. 1972. Tagalog Reference Grammar. Berkeley: U of California P, 1983. Google Books. Google, 2011. Web. 6 Nov. 2011.

[Pogostick Man]

- If you're partial to Nostratic, Aharon Dolgopolsky's Nostratic Dictionary, brought to you by Cambridge University's DSpace service, includes both reconstructions of roots and phonemic correspondences with the protolanguages to which he believes Nostratic is related.
- Historical outlines of English sounds and Middle English grammar, for courses in Chaucer, Middle English, and the history of the English language, by Samuel Moore, is a public-domain (published 1919) book detailing English diachronics and development through Middle English. It has a bit on Middle English dialectology that is highly illuminating if you want to figure out what different ME dialects sounded like, to the point of indicating a bunch of the differing analogical developments.

[dhok]

Anybody have anything on Fala?

[chris_notts]

From this page you can download a grammar of Oksapmin, a Papuan language with evidentials and a related interesting system for marking point-of-view on verbs.

http://dtl.unimelb.edu.au/R/YGP9BFEST7K ... ndle=GUEST

[Turtlehead]

From this page you can download a grammar of Oksapmin, a Papuan language with evidentials and a related interesting system for marking point-of-view on verbs.

http://dtl.unimelb.edu.au/R/YGP9BFEST7K ... ndle=GUEST

That looks interesting. Would that phenomenon make it harder than Navajo to learn?

[chris_notts]

From this page you can download a grammar of Oksapmin, a Papuan language with evidentials and a related interesting system for marking point-of-view on verbs.

http://dtl.unimelb.edu.au/R/YGP9BFEST7K ... ndle=GUEST

That looks interesting. Would that phenomenon make it harder than Navajo to learn?

I don't know. It has an agreement prefix m- that looks a bit similar to Navajo's yi/bi (IIRC) alternation. Then it has this slightly unusual evidential system that marks whether the 1st person was directly involved or not as well as more usual distinctions. I haven't read the grammar in detail yet, but Foley ("The Papuan Languages of New Guinea") claims that in Oksapmin switches in the use of this system to mark change in viewpoint is quite important in stories / narratives.

[Shrdlu]

Marika Butskhrikidze
The Consonant Phonotactics
of Georgian

--Link--

[dhok]

What's the standard grammar of Greenlandic?

[Jetboy]

I've been tutoring some of the younger guys at my school in Latin, and one thing that I consistently wish for is a list of common verbs that have unpredictable 3rd or 4th principle parts (so not 1st's in -āvī -ātus, 2nd's in -uī -itus, or 4th's in -īvī -ītus). I've tried Google, but had no luck.

[finlay]

I've been tutoring some of the younger guys at my school in Latin, and one thing that I consistently wish for is a list of common verbs that have unpredictable 3rd or 4th principle parts (so not 1st's in -āvī -ātus, 2nd's in -uī -itus, or 4th's in -īvī -ītus). I've tried Google, but had no luck.

Wikipedia has an appendix of Latin verbs – it seems to contain at least all the common verbs (I suspect the list is not complete, however). It doesn't separate off the unpredictable ones (which I would call irregular, frankly), but with a list like this you could easily sift through it.

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix: ... 8A_to_K%29
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix: ... 8L_to_Z%29

[Jetboy]

Well, it's not exactly as if you can cross of the entire third conjugation as irregular. This looks like it should be quite useful though, thanks!

[finlay]

Well, it's not exactly as if you can cross of the entire third conjugation as irregular. This looks like it should be quite useful though, thanks!

Why not? We have plenty of irregular verbs in English which are only irregular on the same grounds – irregular past tense. Conversely, several of the Latin "irregular" verbs aren't very much more irregular than many other verbs (dare, ire...). It just seems like a bit of a conspiracy to say that Latin only has 10 irregular verbs – it's like it's trying to fit the stereotype of Latin as a rigid, logical language that could only have been spoken by the Romans, who are so regimented in their view of the world~~~

[Jetboy]

Eh, I'd call the only really irregular verbs (pos)sum, ferō, volō, eō, fiō, to some extent their compounds, and maybe one other that escapes me currently, because these are verbs where oftentimes you have to learn their forms one by one (knowing that the 1st plural is sumus doesn't let you figure out that the 2nd plural is estis). Sure, there are verbs that have unusual principle parts, but given those parts, you can construct all of the verb's forms correctly, unlike the ones above.
As for the third conjugation, the thing about it is, unlike the others, there's no pattern for thirds to deviate from that would make them irregular, unless we're saying that regular is -vī -tus for all declensions, in which case most of the second is irregular too. So dō and stō are irregular in principle parts because they deviate from the -āvī -ātus model, but discō, faciō, dīcō, fundō, are somewhat unpredictable, but, since none of the patterns which they demonstrate is really dominant over the others, it's hard to say that any of them are counter to a general rule.
Though, yeah, obviously Latin isn't "extreme loglang" or anything. Heck, you only need to look at the multifaceted nature of the ablative to tell you that.

[finlay]

Also, is it just me that hates that the 'citation form' of Latin verbs seems to be the first person singular? To me it's clearer if you use the infinitive. (It gets very annoying with some of the irregular verbs – I remember trying to look up an unrecognised verb participle, or something, and later realising that rather than being under esse it was under sum, at the other end of the dictionary. Or if your dictionary uses the infinitive in its English→Latin section and the 1st person in the Latin→English section...)