Re: ANADEWISM? Plural only marked in animates

Dirk Elzinga skrev:
> On 5/4/05, Benct Philip Jonsson <bpj@...> wrote:
>
>>Does anyone know if there is an ANADEWISM for marking
>>plurality only in animates?
>
>
> Shoshoni does this (as does most of Northern Uto-Aztecan). While there
> is no prohibition against pluralizing inanimates, it isn't usual;
> which is to say, native speakers accept such formations, though
> reluctantly.
Thanks.  This is somewhat what I have in mind for Sohlob.
More exactly what is a plural marker for animates is also
(and in origin) a collective marker also used on inanimates.
Thus _bispreng_ 'mountain range' exists beside _bisper_ 'mountain'
but is lexicalized rather than productively formed, unlike
_æsfofdong_ 'sons' from _æsfofd_ 'son'.


--

/BP 8^)>
--
Benct Philip Jonsson -- melroch at melroch dot se

         Solitudinem faciunt pacem appellant!
                                             (Tacitus)