Re: polysynthetic languages
| From: | vaksje <vaksje@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Sunday, September 21, 2003, 7:12 |
|---|
On Sat, Sep 20, 2003 at 06:36:19PM -0500, Eddy Ohlms wrote:
> Tim May wrote:
>
> > I don't think they did. Chris Bates said that about Peter Bleackley's
> > language Magzhelyagon[1], is that what you're thinking of?
>
> I see. Anyone have a polylang as their main conlang?
Sure, but it's been in embryonic stasis for ages up until a few weeks
ago. Unfortunately, I haven't yet decided on the grammatical morphemes,
so the best I can do is show the verb structure:
verb_root-(deriv)-(TAM)-subject+marker-(object+marker)-funct-enclitic(s)
deriv = derivation (causative, "fail to ~", etc.)
TAM = tense, aspect, mood (inchoactive, graduative, etc.)
funct = the VP's function (used to nominalize or adverbalize the
whole VP; takes case markers, including zero affix)
enclitics = discourse clitics (evidentiality, emphasis)
As you can see, noun incorporation is the default. I'm not even sure if
roots with a nominal function can stand alone, other than in responses.
--
vaksje.
Replies