Re: CHAT: Nakiltipkaspimak

Tal skrev:

> Just looked through the archives; found the first post with
> my current email-address. Hmm... complaining I only had about
> 200 words, seems vocab's always been difficult, especially
> considering there's only about 500 now ;)
I have a few more than the 3 or 4 I had this summer but not
that many more. :) Sometimes there are days when I'm thinking
of skipping the phonology alltogether and just make up words
that sounds nice, not caring about phonology and phonotax.

> Heh, yeah, Akan sure did nasty things to my linguistic world-view
> and that is a very good thing. Too bad the linguistics insitute at
> my uni. is primarily a pragmatics/semantics/phonology-place.
The good thing is that Stockholm is a functionalistic uni with its
main interest in typology. The bad thing is that they don't really
make much of it.

> Reason I asked is târuven has evidentials too but I'm not quite
> sure how they work. Since all verbs have an implicit 1st person
> singular subject, a default, unmarked "hearsay"-evidential,
> translated as above, would seem rather weird... "I heard that I
> did x...", "It is said that I did X...". So far I've pretended
> that there aren't any evidentials to avoid the issue.
Well, that _would_ seem rather odd. Since you have an implicit
1sg subject on the verb, the unmarked evidential should be the
"personal experience". But what do I know. Uncommon to have the
1sg be the unmarked form of the verb instead of the 3sg, isn't it?
If you let the 3sg be the unmarked form, having the hearsay
particle as the unmarked evidential would make more sense.

Hamlet: 1sg or hearsay, that's the question... :)

> Mine solves that through internal sandhi, but it isn't visible
> in the orthography. If I ever get around to making that
> târuven2SAMPA-filter I can show the pronounciation in the
> interlinears... *appends to huge TODO-list*
Couldn't you include the pronunciation (written by hand) when
you give examples from târuven? I thought I'd gotten those
diphthongs into my head, but apparently not. It's _really_ hard
to remember what those accents do. :)

> And thank you for that, I always think of q as /N/ these days
> since that's how it is in târuven. Gets somewhat confusing at
> times.
Hehe, yeah. {x} is always /S/ for me nowadays. But in Pimak
it's /x/. I constantly mispronounce. I'm thinking of making
the /S/ pronunciation a dialect feature. And believe me or
not, but I just happen to speak that dialect! :)

> cavvayr (hmm I'm not sure whether {ay} is a diphthong or not...
See? Even _you_ are having problems with the diphthongs. :)

> y-     cavvayr            -ge       fal   -es
> "they" move.into.position causative water locative
> `"they" are putting something into the water-supply.'
>
> *grepping brain*) is intransitive, made transitive by the
> intransitive-to-transitive ("causative" for short) suffix -g(e)
> (The e prevents the g from devoicing), and all transitives (made
> with -ge or not) have an implicit 3rd person unknown number (aka.
> something, someone) object, so there.
Ah. Of course. Silly me. I should have thought of that.

Daniel