Re: PLUG: SpecGram Current Issue

Eric wrote:
<<
but now that I've reread it, I *think* what David was saying was that
perhaps the elative dual forms elicited did not in fact bear any
relation, even a paradigmatic one, to the other forms.
 >>

Right.  The question is posed at that point in order to cover his
bases.  Thus far it appeared that the forms were suppletive, but
he couldn't rule out the possibility that he misanalyzed the data,
at that point.  If it did turn out to be the case that the forms weren't
related phonologically or paradigmatically, then they would be
separate lexemes, and the suppletive analysis would have been
a misanalysis.  He then goes on to list other data that show that
elative dual forms do exist and are used quite frequently, so the
first analysis, though bizarre, appears to be the correct one.  (I
suppose, however, a language with 14 cases and three numbers
with forms for all but one combination would be even more
bizarre--especially if that combination were the elative dual.)

-David
*******************************************************************
"A male love inevivi i'ala'i oku i ue pokulu'ume o heki a."
"No eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn."

-Jim Morrison

http://dedalvs.free.fr/