Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Suppletive plurals (was: Greenberg)

From:Marcus Smith <smithma@...>
Date:Thursday, September 14, 2000, 15:18
John Cowan wrote:

>Lojban grammaticizes number (of course it has words for numbers, and can >use them to do the work that grammatical number does in other languages) >only in the personal pronouns, and then only by suppletion. Does >suppletion count as an "allomorph of plural" when it is the only form?
I think Lojban falls within the spirit of this universal, since the singular and plural forms are not identical.
>The personal pronouns (which are caseless, but glossed here as nominatives)
> > mi I > do you (sg. or pl.) but not other(s) > mi'o we: you and I but not other(s) > mi'a we: I and other(s) but not you > ma'a we: I and you and other(s) > do'o you and other(s) > >While these have obvious similarities, they are not analyzable into
morphemes. do'o surprised me. Based on the pattern, I was expecting do'a since the other two with "others" included end that way. =============================== Marcus Smith AIM: Anaakoot "When you lose a language, it's like dropping a bomb on a museum." -- Kenneth Hale ===============================