On Wed, 12 Apr 2006 17:40:43 -0700, Jeff Jones <jsjonesmiami@...> wrote:
>13. mofkanhak
> I saw you there.
_mo-_: 2(sg/pl) transitive object?
This does not mesh with your earlier implicit rules, whereby _-tz(i)_
denoted a 1pl object (i.e. a *suffix*, not a prefix).
_-ha_: distal locative suffix ("there")
>14. akkanfa tuperu
> The dogs see.
_-fa_: 3pl transitive subject
>15. kanfa mamatz
> Our mother is seen.
Okay, now _-fa_ looks like a passive suffix. If so, then sentence #14
should be "The dogs are seen", not "The dogs see".
_-tz(i)_: 1pl possessive suffix (when added to a noun)
>16. fetxa mamak pakanhakwe peru
> My mother wanted to see dogs there.
_-k(o)_: 1sg possessive suffix
>17. koftlasli
> He gave me them.
_ko-_: 1sg indirect object?
_tla_: give
_-sli_: 3pl transitive object?
>18. kenfotla patta Hwan
> Juan wanted to give us potatoes.
Err... you're confusing your own grammar rules. It should be:
Tzifotla Hwan patta.
>19. pitlaxili peru
> They'll give them to a dog.
Alright, so indefinite number is unmarked.
_-xili_: This seems to be glossed as "them", but note the different suffix
_-sli_ above, with the *same* verb.
>20. etxak patlam peru Hwan
> I want you to give Juan a dog.
This sentence is ambiguous, since _peru Hwan_ could also mean "Juan's dog".
I suggest you revise it.
>I hope I haven't made any mistakes this time. There's at least one
>morpheme with two forms.
Shouldn't you know your own language best? :)
- Rob