Re: about semitic morphology
|From:||Steg Belsky <draqonfayir@...>|
|Date:||Sunday, June 16, 2002, 6:21|
On Sat, 15 Jun 2002 19:28:25 +0100 Tim May <butsuri@...>
> Balazs Sudar writes:
> > Hi all!
> > I have a question about the triconsonantal system. Do this
> languages have an unchanging
> > form for nouns, or are all different, only the three consonants
> of an idea must be
> > unchanged in different words?
> > An example:
> > the root for writing is: M G D for living D R B
> > the noun "writing" is "megid"
> > That means:
> > should the noun for "loving" be "derib"???? Or there is no rule
> that all same function words
> > must have the same form?
Also, different verbs can come from different paradigms (|binyanim| in
Hebrew), which have different patterns. For instance, in Hebrew, the
paradigm |pa`al|'s noun pattern is |C@Ci:Ca:|, while the noun pattern of
the paradigm |pi`eil| is |CiC²u:C|. There are also irregular ones (or
minor sub-patterns), like the noun form of the |pi`eil| verb BQSh isn't
*/biqqu:S/, but instead it's /baqqa:Sa:/.
> There are many people here who know more about semitac languages
> I do, but yes, if they're both regular, the forms will be the same.
> You might find this page about the Arabic verb interesting.
> Note, though, that it's my impression that most Semitic languages
> have many irregular conjugations of roots.