Re: THEORY: Question: Bound Morphemes

Kristian Jensen wrote:

> I have heard of languages, like the Polynesian languages, where
> authorities cannot agree what constitutes a word because boundaries
> tend to be fluid. I fear that this may be the case with Boreanesian.
Sounds likely. In that case, you are free to transcribe the words in
whatever way seems clearest and most aesthetically pleasing to you!

I don't think this is really that uncommon; there's no reason that
"word" should be a crisp rather than fuzzy category.  After all, in
English, we have phrasal accent as well; what is and isn't a "word" is
in some cases determined only by tradition.

(Cf. French Creole: when people without a written tradition in which
words are indicated by spaces adapted French words, they incorporated
articles and sometimes even 'de' into the words: the Creole word for
"water" is "dlo"!)

I would aim for clarity in this instance.  Whatever makes it, in your
opinion, easiest to understand, would be a good idea.

+ Ed Heil ---------------------- edheil@postmark.net +
|    "What matter that you understood no word!       |
|    Doubtless I spoke or sang what I had heard      |
|           In broken sentences."  --Yeats           |
+----------------------------------------------------+