Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Infixing in interlinears

From:Mark P. Line <mark@...>
Date:Wednesday, August 18, 2004, 0:14
Roger Mills said:
> Mark P. Line wrote: > > >> >> >> > One of the more useful sites mentioned recently.
Yep. Google turns up a number of related articles as well (by Lehmann, among others).
>> So assuming your example root 'fish' means "cumquat" in English, and >> assuming that the -il- infix is left-peripheral, your example in Leipzig >> glossing would be: >> >> f<il>ish >> <DIM>cumquat >> 'little cumquat' >> >> If you needed to treat -il- as right-peripheral instead, you'd gloss it >> as >> >> cumquat<DIM> >> > But if it were R-peripheral, wouldn't that imply that the infix form was > **-li-? Given that both the infix vowel and the stem vowel happen to be > the same in this case, it's open to debate. Any other ex. -- perhaps "dash > ~?dilash or ?dalish" '(little) mango"-- would show which it is.
I thought these new-fangled math-head terms left-peripheral and right-peripheral had to do with constituent order (which is rather fuzzy in the case of infixes). (Rule of thumb: if the term is not used in either the SIL glossary or in Payne, it's probably an artifact of somebody's formalism.) I would expect the form of the infix to co-evolve with the way in which it patterns phonotactically with the root or stem. If it occurs between the initial C and the following vowel in a predominantly CV language, I'd expect the infix to be VC, for example.
> I have an on-going argument (in my head, that is) with some of my > Indonesianist colleagues over this. In a certain group of languages, > there's a nominalizing infix that works as follows: > herun (vb.) > henerun (n.) 'exchange' > pali (Vb) > panali (n) 'anchor(age) > hukum (vb.) > hunukum (n) 'judge(ment)' etc. > > Wedded I guess to the Gospel truth that in synchronic analysis you > _mustn't_ > peek at the history, many persist in claiming the infix to be -nV- (at > least > they get the V-harmonizing part right), whereas the slightest knowledge of > AN history would show that the infix is -Vn- and is the local form of the > Object Focus *-in- seen in Philippine langs. </rant>
Hehe. Why include historical data when it's so much easier to limit yourself to a bit of introspective mysticism? Sometimes we can be happy if they even use synchronic data from actual native speakers. Clearly, a more broadly-based model of AN languages will be simpler if these infixes are treated as -Vn- plus the new V-harmonization pattern. -- Mark