Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Where does inflection change to agglutination?

From:Roberto Suarez Soto <ask4it@...>
Date:Friday, December 27, 2002, 18:15
On Dec/26/2002, Danny Wier wrote:

> Well you're on the right track. Remember that Proto-Indo-European became > inflected after various alternations of an originally agglutinative form.
I didn't know that. Curious :-)
> Semitic languages are more inflectional, particularly in all those verb > forms; they change vowel configurations. But even those has agglutinative
Have these changes any fixed rules? I guess so, just wondering aloud :-) Any examples?
> No language is completely inflecting, agglutinative or isolating, of course;
Well, yes, that's something that I've already understood. Anyway, it's hard to make a conlang with enough elements of the three kinds to be realistic :-m
> I still am confused as to how you *properly* define "inflecting language". I > just know agglutinative means the attachment of bound morphemes and > isolating means the use of co-words with independent meaning (like Chinese).
I think that I was confusing agglutinative and isolating. By "agglutinative" I understood what "isolating" really is O:-) Now it all makes a bit more sense :-) -- Roberto Suarez Soto


Christophe Grandsire <christophe.grandsire@...>
Danny Wier <dawier@...>Here it is... Indo-European phonetic correspondences, by branch (both vowels and consonants)