Re: Functions of Classifiers (in a conlang)

On 5/14/06, Chris Bates <chris.maths_student@...> wrote:
> Now, there is an issue with combining these two ideas: with the word
> order rules I was considering, and I think probably with any possible
> word ordering, it's too easy to find examples of sentences where the
> classifier is ambiguous in whether it is acting as a pronoun or as a
> nominalizer for a following verb. Eg:
>
> MAN.CLS man come and MAN.CLS angry shout
>
> Is this:
>
> The/a man came and he shouted angrily
>
> or...
>
> The/a man came and the angry (man) shouted?
>
The ambiguity between the two isn't especially odious, so long as
you're going for a naturalistic lang.  This is relatively minor
compared to some other sorts of ambiguity we find in natlangs.

Of course, if one of your design goals is the minimalization of
ambiguity, then here are the beginnings of two possible solutions:

- Make the classifier precede its NP (as above) and use a verb-initial
constituent order.

- Make the classifier follow its NP and use a verb-final constituent order.

[snip]

> The second solution is easier, but has the downside of perhaps making
> pronouns longer...
If you wish to try this -- using special forms of the classifiers as
pronouns -- but are concerned about making these derived pronouns too
long, consider non-concatenative morphology.  For example, the
historical pronominalizing suffix could have been -/i/, but now the
pronominalization of classifiers is realized by vowel umlaut, or
consonant mutation, etc.

-- Pat

Reply