Re: Inclusive or exclusive?

Yitzik wrote:

> If a language makes personal pronouns plural by adding a plural suffix to
> singular stems, like _gan_ 'thou' > _gan.tay_ 'you (pl)', and has
> inclusive/exclusive distinction in 1pl, would _nan.tay_ (< _nan_ 'I') mean
> 'we (incl)' or 'we (excl)'? Its counterpart would be smth like _tan_ (that
> is, similar to the sn stem).
>
Seems to me that nan.tay would simply be a generic plural (we, irrespective
of incl/excl.), but you could dictate that is's one or the other (say,
inclusive), but then you'd need another suffix (tan ?) for exclusive. Could
you devise anything from the 3d pers. pronoun form?

Another possibility would be to create a form based on nan+gan for incl.

Interestingly, in Indonesian languages that have lost the incl/excl
distinction, it's almost always the _incl._ form that survives as the
generic plural.

Reply