Re: Phaleran Update: Language game; Alienable and inalienable possession

Welcome back, Tom!

Tom Wier wrote:
>The Language Game
>
>Much like the English construction "X schX", this game is used to
>denigrate the subject in question.  Superficially, one would say
>that one simply reverses the first two syllables in a reduplicative
>fashion:
>
>(1) Lexeme:                      Derived form:
>    k'orwu  'treasonous act'     k'orwu-wuk'or
>    xâfen   'old man'            xâfen-fenxa
>    ahra    'governor'           ahra-hrâ
(snips)
Not unlike "vesre" in Spanish, which reverses the syllable order ("al
_revés").  There's an amusing old review by Borges of a book (by a Spaniard)
bemoaning the state of Spanish in Argentina (i.e. Buenos Aires);  as Borges
pointed out, vesre was mainly the province of "alumnos del cuarto grado" and
tango lyricists.  It may once have been a feature of lunfardo, the porteño
slang more or less comparable to thieves' argot.  Examples:  gotán 'tango',
feca con chele, llotivenco 'tenement' < conventillo.

I never encountered this sort of word-play in Indonesia, but it should be
possible in a language like that, with relatively simple syl. structure (and
not unlike Spanish).  A little difficult in English, I think.

>Alienable and Inalienable Possession
I'm a great fan of alienable/inalienable. It wasn't used in Kash, though the
genitive case is largely restricted to possession by humans, optional for
other animates.  Those may, and most inanimates must, use a different
construction.

The distinction abounds in regional languages of Eastern Indonesia, and
Melanesia/Polynesia of course, with interesting variations as to how items
are categorized.

(snip)
>Ritual animals are inalienably possessed when alive, but
>alienably possessed when dead (i.e., after sacrifice):
Very nice.