Re: Is this realistic? (Papiamentu, Kele)

----- Original Message -----
From: David J. Peterson
To: CONLANG@LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU
Sent: Friday, July 04, 2003 5:18 AM
Subject: Re: Is this realistic? (Papiamentu, Kele)


>Hey Rob,
>
><<Perhaps this is becaause both 'ta' and 'a' are derived from verbs and
>'lo' is derived from 'logo'/'luego'?>>
>
>Now you've piqued my curiosity.  None of my books list a possible etymology
for "lo", and as a native Spanish speaker, I can't think of where it came
from.  >Your theory is a possibility, though how long ago did the o
[+streess] > /wo/ > [we] change happen?  Could it be from Dutch?  I know
nothing about Dutch.  >Anyway, it also says that you can only switch the
order of the tense and the pronoun with the 1st, 2nd and 3rd singular
pronouns.  So, you could say /lo mi papia/, >but (presumably) not *lo papa
papia.  They say the same thing happens with /bai/ in Tok Pisin.

Hmm...I assumed it was a backformation from 'los'.  Or possibly something in
opposition to 'la'.  But I'm probably wrong.