My pronunciation might not make that <e> very laudable, but I'd definitely prefer using it in the spelling.*Ceresz wrote:I say avokadorna, but I've heard avokadosarna.Skomakar'n wrote:I have never heard this. Now that I think of it, I don't think I've really heard this in plural at all, though. It can easily be collective, like fisk, I guess.Ulrike Meinhof wrote:de avokadosarna.
My personal intuition would tell me avokadoerna, though.
Wiktionary lists avokadorna and avokadoerna (I can't imagine someone pronouncing the latter though...).
some questions about Swedish declension
- Skomakar'n
- Smeric
- Posts: 1273
- Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 8:05 pm
Re: some questions about Swedish declension
Online dictionary for my conlang Vanga: http://royalrailway.com/tungumaalMiin/Vanga/
#undef FEMALE
I'd love for you to try my game out! Here's the forum thread about it:
http://zbb.spinnwebe.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=36688
Of an Ernst'ian one.
#undef FEMALE
I'd love for you to try my game out! Here's the forum thread about it:
http://zbb.spinnwebe.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=36688
Of an Ernst'ian one.
Re: some questions about Swedish declension
Really? Well, I guess it's more logical than my use of <sade> even though I always say [sɑː] or spelling "nummer+tio" words as, for instance, <sjutio> and always pronouncing it [ɧɵtɪ].
- Skomakar'n
- Smeric
- Posts: 1273
- Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 8:05 pm
Re: some questions about Swedish declension
Those I always spell <sade> and <sjuttio> even though my pronunciation is along the lines of [ˈsʲɑː] and [ˈʃœtʰiːʏ]. I guess <sjuttio> still makes sense here, though. I consider writing and speech very different things, though.*Ceresz wrote:Really? Well, I guess it's more logical than my use of <sade> even though I always say [sɑː] or spelling "nummer+tio" words as, for instance, <sjutio> and always pronouncing it [ɧɵtɪ].
Online dictionary for my conlang Vanga: http://royalrailway.com/tungumaalMiin/Vanga/
#undef FEMALE
I'd love for you to try my game out! Here's the forum thread about it:
http://zbb.spinnwebe.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=36688
Of an Ernst'ian one.
#undef FEMALE
I'd love for you to try my game out! Here's the forum thread about it:
http://zbb.spinnwebe.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=36688
Of an Ernst'ian one.
Re: some questions about Swedish declension
That's because one has a root ending in -e, suffixing -n, while the other ends in a consonant and suffixes -en.*Ceresz wrote:It's pretty standard.
To use a classic example, anden and anden have different accents.
[img]http://hem.bredband.net/tximist/butiaowu3.png[/img]
Re: some questions about Swedish declension
Well then, I don't see what's so strange about doing the same thing with 'böner' and 'bönor' if you pronounce them both as 'böner' since it's the same here.Tximist wrote:That's because one has a root ending in -e, suffixing -n, while the other ends in a consonant and suffixes -en.*Ceresz wrote:It's pretty standard.
To use a classic example, anden and anden have different accents.
Böna - Bean
Bön - Prayer
Re: some questions about Swedish declension
As a general rule, Scandinavian words get the grave pitch accent if the word was polysyllabic in Old Norse, and the acute accent if it was monosyllabic. The plural forms of böna and bön in ON were:*Ceresz wrote:Well then, I don't see what's so strange about doing the same thing with 'böner' and 'bönor' if you pronounce them both as 'böner' since it's the same here.Tximist wrote:That's because one has a root ending in -e, suffixing -n, while the other ends in a consonant and suffixes -en.*Ceresz wrote:It's pretty standard.
To use a classic example, anden and anden have different accents.
Böna - Bean
Bön - Prayer
"beans": baunur
"prayers": bœnir
In other words both were bisyllabic. Compare with the plural of bonde:
"farmers": bœndr
Those final /r/'s were never syllabic in Old Norse, so bœndr was monosyllabic. That's why normally bönder gets the acute accent while böner and bönor both get the grave accent.
Now, at this point you may wonder why this shouldn't be the case with the definite forms anden and anden as well. In Old Norse they had the following forms:
"duck": ǫnd, "the duck": ǫndin
"spirit": andi, "the spirit": andinn
...where both of the definite forms are clearly bisyllabic. However, as it turns out, the definite article is exempt from the rule about mono- and poly-syllabic words. Instead, definite nouns preserve the pitch accent of their indefinite forms, so "the duck" gets the acute accent because its indefinite form is monosyllabic, while "the spirit" gets the grave accent because its definite form is bisyllabic.
Re: some questions about Swedish declension
Well, yes, but if you want to it can still work.
Even though it probably would sound pretty weird.
I'm not saying I do that though, since I distinguish between -or and -er in speech.
I'm just gonna shut up now, before I say more stupid stuff .
Even though it probably would sound pretty weird.
I'm not saying I do that though, since I distinguish between -or and -er in speech.
I'm just gonna shut up now, before I say more stupid stuff .
Re: some questions about Swedish declension
You could distinguish between them using tone, it's just that no one does.
I've been taught that it's the other way around - first they are pronounced the same, then "och" replaces "att" because you can't tell them apart. You do make an interesting argument. But saying that the infinite marker has been replaced by "och" would also be a little odd. I some contexts (such as "gå att handla", "go shopping") "och" would now be the standard in writing, and if you pronounced it /ok/ it would sound overly explicit but acceptable. But in most contexts (like "han tycker om att handla", "he likes shopping") even tho the normal pronunciation would be /o/, writing <och> or saying /ok/ would raise eyebrows.Miekko wrote:probably from what orthographically is written <och> - it's replaced att in many contexts.
Do you pronounce the subjunction "att" that way as well - is "hur visste du att ..." pronounced with [ɔ] ? If so, k, then you're right, otherwise, I bet it's a grammatical change more than a sound change.
That sounds more formal to me. I might say that in situations where "avokadosarna" would sound too silly.Skomakar'n wrote:My personal intuition would tell me avokadoerna, though.
Re: some questions about Swedish declension
Thanks for answering everybody.
To recap:
1) The -n neuter plural marker is probably a reanalysis of the plural definite article as a plural marker.
2) Many Greek and Latin plurals are reanalyzed as singulars in the colloquial language, other Greek and Latin nouns have native plural marking, and for those speakers who do have Greek and Latin plurals in the neuter gender their definite form ends in -n.
3) there is a lot of insecurity about plurals in -s. In some cases some people use a double plural in -sar. Some people avoid the -s plural all together. In the case of fans the definite plural is fansen, but that is a "special case".
4) -er and -or are in most dialects pronounced the same, but different from -ar
5) den stora is the usual way of using an adjective independently.
Is that all correct?
To recap:
1) The -n neuter plural marker is probably a reanalysis of the plural definite article as a plural marker.
2) Many Greek and Latin plurals are reanalyzed as singulars in the colloquial language, other Greek and Latin nouns have native plural marking, and for those speakers who do have Greek and Latin plurals in the neuter gender their definite form ends in -n.
3) there is a lot of insecurity about plurals in -s. In some cases some people use a double plural in -sar. Some people avoid the -s plural all together. In the case of fans the definite plural is fansen, but that is a "special case".
4) -er and -or are in most dialects pronounced the same, but different from -ar
5) den stora is the usual way of using an adjective independently.
Is that all correct?
Re: some questions about Swedish declension
Yep, pretty much, although I'm not sure I'd say 'fansen' is a special case, as there are more -sen forms out there. Most words that come to mind seem to be unassimilated ones though, e.g. kidsen, bratsen.
Also I double checked your question no. 1, so I can confirm the -n being the original definite form. Historically this is a limited phenomenon and doesn't occur in most traditional dialects.
Also I double checked your question no. 1, so I can confirm the -n being the original definite form. Historically this is a limited phenomenon and doesn't occur in most traditional dialects.
CERVENIAN
JELSH
JELSH
Miekko wrote:protip: no one wants to learn your conlangs. if they claim different, it's just to be friendly. this is true for all conlangers.
Re: some questions about Swedish declension
Oh yeah, there's that too.Aszev wrote:Yep, pretty much, although I'm not sure I'd say 'fansen' is a special case, as there are more -sen forms out there. Most words that come to mind seem to be unassimilated ones though, e.g. kidsen, bratsen.
I would say avokadona btw (avokadon = avocado-PL).
Re: some questions about Swedish declension
Cf. Norwegian, which spells these two words differently: å and at. (Half the time they spell og "and" as <å> as well, but that's incorrect .)Miekko wrote:Do you pronounce the subjunction "att" that way as well - is "hur visste du att ..." pronounced with [ɔ] ? If so, k, then you're right, otherwise, I bet it's a grammatical change more than a sound change.
Laudable?Skomakar'n wrote:My pronunciation might not make that <e> very laudable, but I'd definitely prefer using it in the spelling.
[i]Linguistics will become a science when linguists begin standing on one another's shoulders instead of on one another's toes.[/i]
—Stephen R. Anderson
[i]Málin eru höfuðeinkenni þjóðanna.[/i]
—Séra Tómas Sæmundsson
—Stephen R. Anderson
[i]Málin eru höfuðeinkenni þjóðanna.[/i]
—Séra Tómas Sæmundsson
Re: some questions about Swedish declension
Hehe. He means audible. English ain't easy...Echobeats wrote:Laudable?Skomakar'n wrote:My pronunciation might not make that <e> very laudable, but I'd definitely prefer using it in the spelling.
[img]http://hem.bredband.net/tximist/butiaowu3.png[/img]
Re: some questions about Swedish declension
I worked that out – I was just being pernickety I guess.Tximist wrote:Hehe. He means audible. English ain't easy...Echobeats wrote:Laudable?Skomakar'n wrote:My pronunciation might not make that <e> very laudable, but I'd definitely prefer using it in the spelling.
[i]Linguistics will become a science when linguists begin standing on one another's shoulders instead of on one another's toes.[/i]
—Stephen R. Anderson
[i]Málin eru höfuðeinkenni þjóðanna.[/i]
—Séra Tómas Sæmundsson
—Stephen R. Anderson
[i]Málin eru höfuðeinkenni þjóðanna.[/i]
—Séra Tómas Sæmundsson
- Peacekeeper
- Sanci
- Posts: 46
- Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 1:28 pm
- Location: Back in Europe
Re: some questions about Swedish declension
In more formal context I would probably use that form too, but I usually default to "avocadosarna".Qwynegold wrote:I would say avokadona btw (avokadon = avocado-PL).
Regarding the Greek and Latin plurals, I do use many of them as real plurals (sg. faktum / pl. fakta; sg. visum / pl. visa). Medium and media I use differently for some reason, with the plural depending on which meaning of the word is used. I use sg. medium / pl. medium for a psychic person; sg. medium / pl. media when discussing physics; and media as a mass noun when referring to mass media.
[size=200]L・ロビン・ニルソン[/size]
[url]http://www.politicalcompass.org[/url]
[b]Economic Left/Right: 9.50
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.21[/b]
[url]http://www.politicalcompass.org[/url]
[b]Economic Left/Right: 9.50
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.21[/b]
- Miekko
- Avisaru
- Posts: 364
- Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2003 9:43 am
- Location: the turing machine doesn't stop here any more
- Contact:
Re: some questions about Swedish declension
I would never use any other form than avokadona when speaking anything but dialect (in which they may turn up as avokadonen)Peacekeeper wrote:In more formal context I would probably use that form too, but I usually default to "avocadosarna".Qwynegold wrote:I would say avokadona btw (avokadon = avocado-PL).
Regarding the Greek and Latin plurals, I do use many of them as real plurals (sg. faktum / pl. fakta; sg. visum / pl. visa). Medium and media I use differently for some reason, with the plural depending on which meaning of the word is used. I use sg. medium / pl. medium for a psychic person; sg. medium / pl. media when discussing physics; and media as a mass noun when referring to mass media.
otoh, I do use forms like "melondren" (less often "melonan"), citrondren(/citronan), metodren (metodan), etc.
< Cev> My people we use cars. I come from a very proud car culture-- every part of the car is used, nothing goes to waste. When my people first saw the car, generations ago, we called it šuŋka wakaŋ-- meaning "automated mobile".
Re: some questions about Swedish declension
For anyone who was curious whether or not I got the job, today I found a letter of the University of Stockholm in my letterbox that said I won't be offered the job.
- Skomakar'n
- Smeric
- Posts: 1273
- Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 8:05 pm
Re: some questions about Swedish declension
Oops. Thanks.Echobeats wrote:I worked that out – I was just being pernickety I guess.Tximist wrote:Hehe. He means audible. English ain't easy...Echobeats wrote:Laudable?Skomakar'n wrote:My pronunciation might not make that <e> very laudable, but I'd definitely prefer using it in the spelling.
Online dictionary for my conlang Vanga: http://royalrailway.com/tungumaalMiin/Vanga/
#undef FEMALE
I'd love for you to try my game out! Here's the forum thread about it:
http://zbb.spinnwebe.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=36688
Of an Ernst'ian one.
#undef FEMALE
I'd love for you to try my game out! Here's the forum thread about it:
http://zbb.spinnwebe.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=36688
Of an Ernst'ian one.