Re: Group Conlang: affix morphology

Pablo Flores wrote:
> I meant: what if you use a -CV(C) prefix and add it to a root like
> kjak-? kjak- + -tu = *kjaktu is not valid; if you used the regular
> change stop > fricative, you would need kjakhtu, thus changing the
> root. To avoid this we could insert an epenthetic vowel, perhaps
> the same as the root vowel: kjakatu.
My point was that you *wouldn't* have kjak- as a root, because that's an
impermissible syllable-structure, so that you'd never have that
problem.  The root could only be kjakh- to begin with, or perhaps
kjaka-, but in any case, kjak- couldn't be a root.  I think that roots
should have to be able to stand on their own.

--
"It's bad manners to talk about ropes in the house of a man whose father
was hanged." - Irish proverb
http://members.tripod.com/~Nik_Taylor/X-Files
ICQ: 18656696
AOL: NikTailor