Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Tripartite (was Re: Trigger language?)

From:daniel andreasson <danielandreasson@...>
Date:Friday, January 17, 2003, 18:12
Josh Roth wrote:

> I think it is the case that most languages that are > tripartite are only partially so. I see a reference > though to "a group of Australian Aboriginal languages > spoken in south-east Queensland which make three-way > distinctions for A, S, and P across all NPs." There's > also a partially tri. Iranian language, Yazgulyam, and > others among Australian and Papuan langs.
Yes! Now that you mention it, I remember reading about Yimas in an article by Kibrik. Let's see if I can dig it up. ::digging:: Here we go. Kibrik, Alexandr E. "Beyond subject and object: Toward a comprehensive relational typology", Linguistic Typology 1 (1997), 279-346. It's a very interesting, but rather complicated discussion on the topic of different language types. I really recommend it though. ISTR that I've mentioned it on this list before. (Some people on this list would have easy access to it, since I hear he's a prof at their uni, lucky bastards. ;) Daniel Andreasson --