Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: "discontinuous affixes"

From:Tom Wier <artabanos@...>
Date:Monday, May 10, 1999, 22:43
Nik Taylor wrote:

> Tom Wier wrote: > > Wouldn't that make it an infix for a prefix? > > No, an infix goes inside the *root*, for instance, in Oaxaca Chontal (a > language in Mexico), the root kwepo' means "lizard", and the plural > infix -l- is added to make kwelpo' (lizards); the rule is, IIRC, that it > goes after the first vowel.
Well, why should we restrict the meaning to a root? I mean, what's happening is this: you have a prefix like "nala-" in your example, which has one meaning, is one morpheme, and than you insert another prefix inside that to alter the word further, with the two constituent elements of the original prefix remaining otherwise intact... what makes that any less of an infix than one that goes on a root? ======================================================= Tom Wier <artabanos@...> ICQ#: 4315704 AIM: Deuterotom Website: <http://www.angelfire.com/tx/eclectorium/> "Cogito ergo sum, sed credo ergo ero." Enlighten the people generally, and tyranny and oppressions of body and mind will vanish like evil spirits at the dawn of day. - Thomas Jefferson ========================================================