Re: THEORY: 'true' nature of nouns vs. 'illusionary' nature

Hi!

Danny Wier <dawiertx@...> writes:
>...
> http://www.cbc.ca/nunavutvotes2004/features/index.html
Ah, interesting, much longer and clearer in quality than the piece of
Kalaallisut!  Thanks! :-)

> >     http://www.theiling.de/sprache02.mp3
>
> Listening to it now. Is Greenlandic influenced by Danish/Norse in its
> intonation accents?
I doubt it, but cannot say for sure.

>...
> Looking at the first Google match after entering "kalaallisut",
> http://www.oqaasileriffik.gl/, I see words like
> _atortussanngortinneqartassapput_, _titartarneqarsinnaanngimmata_, _
> kusanarsaagaasanngillat_ and _nalunaarusiortussaatitaapput_.
>...
:-) That's a page I found in the same way, yes. :-)

> I'm visualizing what a complicated and precisely-marked verb might look
> like. A hypothetical example might be _mstkjefftl'ihac'xwong_ and it might
> mean "I hope I never say that he should get into the habit of giving
> anything to them ever again". A noun (again factitious) like
> _shqittghlormta'ilh_ might mean "belonging to that so-called father of
> theirs who thinks he's so great". Of course it won't always be that extreme
> in practice. Words won't be quite so long because many consonant clusters
> can legally exist.
Ok, so the phonology is not influenced by Inuit-Aleut.  You said the
verb was influenced by the Geogian screeve system, right?

I'm excitedly looking forward to seeing grammar descriptions! :-)

**Henrik

Reply