Re: R: New Idea? Was(YAC: a couple of questions)

On Fri, 29 Dec 2000, SMITH,MARCUS ANTHONY wrote:

> On Fri, 29 Dec 2000, Mangiat wrote:
>
> > But if, in a language as Chinese, i.e., where there is no sing-pl
> > distinction, the numeral 'one' begins to be suffixed to nouns to mark their
> > sing. form we'd have a marked sing. versus an unmarked plur. Here's an
> > exemple with a Chinese-like made up numeral (don't remember the word for
> > 'one'):
> >
> > yün = one
> > ren = man
> >
> > renyün = man    versus    ren = men
> >
> > What do you think?
>
> It seems possible. The question I have though, is why should 'one' be
> suffixed to singulars in the first place? I could see using it as an
> indefinite article, in which case it wouldn't be applied to definite
> singulars. If it just started being used to distinguish singular from
> plural to avoid ambiguity, I'm not sure why the singular would get a
> special suffix as opposed to the plural.
I don't know if this helps, but in Korean "one" does get attached t
owords as a sort-of indefinite article, to emphasize that there's "just
one."  But to emphasize that is more than one of something:

mal = horse or word, depending (theyr'e spelled the same, and no doubt from
  whichever Chinese toned "ma")
han mal = one horse
du mal = two horses
mal duge = horses
  where, as far as I can tell, "duge" is derived from "two of," but becomes
  attached as a suffix instead of going in front like an ordinary happy
  little adjective in Korean.  But it is used to emphasize that there's
  more than one horse under discussion, and is entirely optional.

YHL