Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Probability of Article Replacement?

From:Nik Taylor <yonjuuni@...>
Date:Monday, March 3, 2003, 17:55
Rachel Klippenstein wrote:
> Interestingly, although the plural 1.5 person pronoun > is essentially inclusive "we", Old Starrish has no > word for exclusive "we", since the 1st person plural > could be inclusive or exclusive "we" (although it may > in later history have developed into exclusive "we").
Interesting. In my Uatakassi, the first person dual acquired a specifically inclusive meaning. For a dual exclusive, you had to use instead the first person paucal, which could also be inclusive. Likewise, the plural could be either way. In later stages, the paucal developed into a plural exclusive, while the plural itself acquired an inclusive meaning by way of contrast with paucal. The dual, meanwhile, remained as a dual-inclusive. Thus, while for inclusive there was a dual-plural contrast, the exclusive had no such contrast. -- "There's no such thing as 'cool'. Everyone's just a big dork or nerd, you just have to find people who are dorky the same way you are." - overheard ICQ: 18656696 AIM Screen-Name: NikTaylor42