Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

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

From:Eugene Oh <un.doing@...>
Date:Friday, November 2, 2007, 16:58
2007/10/31, Dirk Elzinga <dirk.elzinga@...>:
> 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: >
[snip examples]
> > 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 >
It might have been that this variety retained the schwa in the past-tense ending long enough for the cluster simplification not to have affected it. Also I observe that the second set of words involves historical geminates which could have resulted in a different simplification: that of [rolld] > [rold] vs. [told] > [tol], for example. It isn't a perfect example. Eugene


Dirk Elzinga <dirk.elzinga@...>