Re: Strong Plurals?
| From: | JS Bangs <jaspax@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Wednesday, June 4, 2003, 2:43 |
|---|
Joseph Fatula sikyal:
> (sg.) - (pl.)
> atsa - asto
> chemu - chenda
> daja - dazhda
> egash - egzhu
> elghi - elghbo
> kaigu - kaigu
> kaza - kazda
> kodu - kodra
> ngide - ngidra
> omeiyh - onggha
> qrat - qrada
> qule - qulga
> tachi - tashta
> temu - tendo
> tume - tungga
>
> How would one best describe this sort of plural formation without reference
> to the older form of the language? (In this scenario, the people who speak
> Tunggu (this language) do not know anything specific about the language of
> their ancestors.)
Suppletion is the normal linguistic term, if that's what you're looking
for. If you want something creative, I think that calling them strong
plurals (like the title of your message), is fabulous.
Jesse S. Bangs jaspax@u.washington.edu
http://students.washington.edu/jaspax/
http://students.washington.edu/jaspax/blog
Jesus asked them, "Who do you say that I am?"
And they answered, "You are the eschatological manifestation of the ground
of our being, the kerygma in which we find the ultimate meaning of our
interpersonal relationship."
And Jesus said, "What?"
Reply