Re: THEORY: questions

FFlores wrote:

> Hi, all! I'm writing a new and improved (I hope) grammar
> of Drasel=E9q, and running into trouble when it comes to
> rigorous linguistic terminology. So maybe you can help
> me. Here are my questions:
>=20
> 1. What's the difference between 'root' and 'stem'?
At least in Indo-European words, the "root" is a word stripped of all
derivation and inflection, and the "stem" is the word just stripped of
all inflection.  Stems tend to be visible in the language, while roots
often live in the murky depths of a proto-language.
=20
> 2. How would you define 'determiner', 'demonstrative',
> 'deictic pronoun' and 'qualifier'? How are they different?
Since "deictic" means "pointing out," and so does "demonstrative", I
think they are synonyms.

"Determiner" is a transformational-grammar syntax thing, and I think
it includes articles and demonstratives and some other similar
miscellaneous items (like English possessives).

I'm not sure about "qualifier."
=20
> 3. I have a class of words that are mostly adverbs in my mind, but
> don't behave like those. They come at the end of sentences and
> I thought 'I think those are discourse markers as we were talking
> about in Conlang months ago!' but I'm not sure. What do you think
> of this? Look at _tadh_:
>=20
>         Tegem  tadh farfpainet.
>         run.1s TADH NEG.reach.1s
>         'I run, but I can't reach (it).'
> *or*    'I run, however I can't reach (it).'
> *or*    'Not mattering that I run, I can't reach (it).'
>=20
> Is it a conjunction, or an adverb? And what do I do with this?:
>=20
>         Tegem, farfpainet tadh.
>         'I run -- I can't reach (it), though.'
>=20
> I think *this* _tadh_ is a discourse marker, since it can't be a
> conjunction, and it doesn't behave like an adverb (which always goes
> before the verb -- God forbid it shifts to final position, since it
> would destroy my grammatical structures!).
I think that a cagey linguist could get away with being vague and
calling these "particles." :)

Ed