Re: Language Sketch: Yargish Orkish

Roger Mills wrote:
>Andreas Johansson wrote:
>(snip interesting description.   I like.)
>
> >> > PRONOUNS
> >> >
> >> > Yargish pronouns don't have any gender distinctions, nor any
> >> > formal/informal distinctions, which makes for a neat pronoun
> >> > table with forms for three persons, two numbers and four cases
> >> > (again, the locative is only used with postpositions).
> >> >
> >> > -     1st.sg 1st.pl 2nd.sg 2nd.pl 3rd.sg 3rd.pl
> >> > - abs ang    nazur  zdi    naja   ach     nava
> >> > - erg nga    zura   zda    ja     acha    va
> >> > - dat ngu    zuru   zdu    ju     achu    vu
> >> > - loc ngiz   zuriz  zdiz   jayz   achiz   naviz
> >>
> >>[T.Wier] Can you talk a little more about the suppletion here?
> >
> >As soon as somebody reminds me what "suppletion" means!
>
>
>Substitution of phonologically unrelated forms in a paradigm (usually old
>synonyms) .  E.g. English go - went; also for 'go', Span. forms < *vadere
>in
>the pres., vs < *ire in the impf. and fut., and *fu- (!) in the
>preterit...and  Ital. < *vadere in the pres. sing. but <*andare everywhere
>else.  Or for that matter, Lat. 'to be', pres. and impf. < IE *es- vs.
>perf.
>< *bhu-
>
>Since na- is your plural marker, one might have expected some combination
>of
>na and ang in the lst pl, na/zdi for 2nd pl. etc.  The roots -zur, -ja
>and -va are suppletive (apparently).
Thanks. Yes, they're suppletive. As for Thomas Wier's question, well it's
nothing remarkable for a language to have unrelated forms for I~we,
thou~you, he/she/it~they, is it?

                                               Andreas

_________________________________________________________________
Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com

Reply