Re: GROUPLANG: Pronouns
|From:||Nik Taylor <fortytwo@...>|
|Date:||Thursday, October 15, 1998, 16:59|
Pablo Flores wrote:
> but at least it should
> have an inclusive/exclusive distinction for 1st and 2nd
> person plural.
I'll go for inclusive/exclusive in 1st person, but not 2nd person. I
don't know of any natlangs with that distinction in 2nd person.
If we want a really interesting (and complicated) system, how's about
singular/dual/paucal/plural (or singular/dual/trial/plural) for at least
1st and 2nd persons
Gender in 1st and 2nd person
Regular (or nearly regular) declinsion
More cases than nouns
Polite/Informal (perhaps more than two distinctions) in *all* persons,
or at least 1st and 2nd.
For example, 3rd person polite would express respect towards the
person referred to
Any other ideas?
> And of course, the proximate/obviative distinction in the
> third person; OR the three-step deixis marker I proposed
> in my previous post.
Either one would fly with me. Gender should be included, tho.
So, if we have proximate/obviate in the third person (4 persons, if you
will), 4 numbers, 2 levels of politeness, and inclusive/exclusive in 1st
person, 10 cases (is that the consensus?), and, say, 4 genders, then
we'd have 1560 pronouns - of course, these would be formed regularly, so
no need to memorize hundreds of pronouns.
"It's bad manners to talk about ropes in the house of a man whose father
was hanged." - Irish proverb