Re: Suprafixes (was Re: TECH: Testing again, no new on-topic content (...))

On Sat, 15 Nov 2003 16:52:12 +0100, Jörg Rhiemeier <joerg_rhiemeier@...>
wrote:

> Hallo!
>
> On Sat, 15 Nov 2003 10:22:49 +0100,
> Andreas Johansson <andjo@...> wrote:
>
>> Quoting Paul Bennett <paul-bennett@...>:
>>
>> > I have been reading the descriptions of Mattole and Burushaski, as
>> well as
>> > some half-remembered stuff on Eskimo-Aleut languages, and I've been
>> cooking
>> > up one hell of a non-English, non-PIE, quite alien (to me) language.
>> >
>> > The first notable point is that it has 26 different Person/Gender
>> > inflections for verbs, some of which depend on the gender of both the
>> > speaker and the listener. It has 53 consonants and 15 vowels. Roots
>> are all
>> > CV monosyllabic. It is agglutinative, and does so via suffixes and
>> > suprafixes, and has ablaut as a result, as well as vowel harmony.
>
> Whoa!  Sounds very complicated, almost like Danny Wier's Tech!
> Hope you manage, and not get stuck in build-and-tear cycles like Danny.
> (BTW, I haven't heard of Danny for months.)
Not deliberately like Tech, but I suppose there are similarities now I
think about it. I'm pretty well just going to fire and forget when it comes
to this language, and go with first instincts all the way. Do I care if
this makes a higgledy-piggledy mess of a language? No, I do not. Real
languages are messy.

At least, I don't care yet. I may have a nervous breakdown somewhere along
the way. ;-)

>> Suprafixes? And that would be?
>
> AFAIK, a "suprafix" is a derivation or inflection which involves
> changes to suprasegmentals, e.g. an accent shift.
Yes. It's an affix that works by modifying existing sounds rather than
adding new sounds.

The first example I thought of was the marker for reflexive possession
(i.e. marking the object of a verb as being possessed by the subject of the
same verb), which manifests as a lengthening of the vowel of the possessed
root. Except "lengthening" is a semi-native term, and not exactly what
happens.

Here's a quick example, rather hastily converted to ASCII, but I'll try to
avoid typos.

Period after a letter means a dot below that letter.
Apostrophe after a letter means an acute above that letter.

z.d.a'dlha fpumo /z`d`AK\V fpUmo/ "he hit my arm"
z.d.a'dlha fpu'  /z`d`AK\V fpu/   "he hit his own arm" z.d.a' fpux.e'
/z`d`A fpUXE/    "I hit his arm"
z.d.a' fpu'      /z`d`A fpu/      "I hit my own arm"

Note the /U/ -> /u/ for reflexive possession, compared to the suffixes for
regular possession.





Paul