Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Terkunan: rules for deriving nouns, verbs, adjectives

From:Dirk Elzinga <dirk.elzinga@...>
Date:Tuesday, October 30, 2007, 18:33
On 10/30/07, Jörg Rhiemeier <joerg_rhiemeier@...> wrote:
> > The GMP *should not* distinguish between morphological endings and > normal stem ends (where they are word-final), because real sound > changes *do not make such distinctions*. You are trying to simulate > something that *just doesn't happen* in natlangs. If a final -m > goes away, for instance, it does so no matter what kind of morpheme > it is part of.
It is not true that sound changes do not take morphological boundaries into account. Consider the following examples from a non-standard variety of English: [sæn] 'sand' [ol] 'old' [tol] 'told' [wɪn] 'wind' [bɛs] 'best' [wɑs] 'wasp' [fæk] 'fact' [pæst] 'past' [prɑdʌk] 'product' [lɛf] 'left' [fæwn] 'found' These examples show simplification of a final consonant cluster consisting of a nasal, fricative or stop followed by a stop by deleting the final stop. Now consider the following examples from the same variety of English: [kʰænd] 'canned' [rold] 'rolled' [fɪld] 'filled' [sɪnd] 'sinned' [ɡɛst] 'guessed' [slæpt] 'slapped' [rɛkt] 'wrecked' [pʰæst] 'passed' [dʌkt] 'ducked' Here the final clusters have *not* been simplified. The difference between the two sets of examples is the presence of a morpheme boundary between the consonants of the cluster in the second set; there is no such morpheme boundary in the clusters of the first set of examples (with the possible exception of 'told', which the past tense/past participle of 'tell'.) So it seems that morphological information is crucial to understanding this change, and your statement that "sound changes don't care the least of the morphological structure of the word" is not true, or is at best overstated. Dirk


And Rosta <and.rosta@...>THEORY/YAEPT: Re: Terkunan: rules for deriving nouns, verbs, adjectives
Eugene Oh <un.doing@...>