Nik Taylor wrote:
>Carlos Thompson wrote:
>> Most irregularities are either sound changes (like {e} -> {ie})
>
>Some consider those to be a regular subclass of verbs, and indeed, if
>you look at BOTH infinitive AND third person singular present
>indicative, most of those are predictable.
>
>> while a phonetic change are those you can predict in present
>> language).
>
>Then they aren't irregular verbs at all, if predictable, like
>-Vcer/-Vcir changing c to zc before o or a.
I wouldn't count them as irregular either but they are so written in a
table of irregular verbs.
>> Of those, probably _andar_ is the most tricky and the one most
>> people treat as regular, not because is not a children verb, but
>> because the full paradigm is rare among children is my guess.
>
>Why would children not use _anduve_, etc. much?
Dunno. Probably because _caminar_ is more used for _to walk_ while _andar_
has become the supletory form of _ir_ for the imperative in vos dialects.
The other meaning of _andar_ as auxiliary fits better for the imperfect in
past tense.
>> Most of those changes
>> are phonetic, like _poner_ -> _pongo_.
>
>-go verbs aren't predictable, are they? You said that "phonetic
>change" is predictable.
Yes. I should've say "sound change".
>> Actually, the English counterparts are irregular as well.
>
>Well, "walk" isn't irregular, but yeah, the point's mostly valid.
-- Carlos Th