Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Another terminology question

From:Carl Banks <conlang@...>
Date:Friday, May 30, 2008, 3:26
JR wrote:
> First off, I've decided to use the term 'construct' after all for the Khafos > suffix I asked about last month. Its usage is different from what I'm > familiar with from Hebrew and the like, but I've found that the term is used > for forms of nouns in certain African languages that occur not only with > possessors, but with adjectives, relative clauses, etc. I guess that gives > me license. Thanks to those who helped!
Interesting. Bowtudgelean has a similar feature for things identified (not merely described) by a following adjective or adjectival phrase. I called it indicated state for the lack of something better (though the term could apply to some other definite states). Construct actually could be a good name for it; since the following adjective is more or less required. Except in one dialect I have them using a bare indicated state for weakly definite words (things where you want to communicate that there is a particular thing but not any sense of what its identity is).
> I have another question. Khafos uses the same marker (an infix, sometimes in > combination with a prefix too*; and the infix varies in the examples below > because it contains a copy of the previous vowel) to mark words as being > negative, or as being questioned, whether they're wh- words or anything > else. Ex: > > ha-ia-lo-m > leave1-X-leave2-2 > 'You're not leaving.' > > ha-ia-lo-m? (with rising intonation) > leave1-X-leave2-2 > 'Are you leaving?' > (This is not the equivalent of 'you're not leaving?" It's the unmarked way > to ask the question; 'halom?' would only be used as an echo question.) > > p-a-ia-lllo halo-n-sh > X-idiot1-X-idiot2 leave-Sub-3 > 'It's not the idiot who's leaving.' > > p-a-ia-lllo halo-n-sh? > X-idiot1-X-idiot2 leave-Sub-3 > 'Is the *idiot* leaving?' > > gy-iy halo-n-sh? > who-X leave-Sub-3 > 'Who's leaving?' > > Is there one term I can use that covers both the interrogative and > negate-ive properties of this marker?
Perhaps antipositive or impositive or something like that.
> * Logically there could be a separate term for this combination, as there is > for prefix + suffix (=circumfix), but I won't even ask.
Transfix. I just guesses that might be what it would be called, but lo and behold the One Arbiter of Truth itself has an entry for it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transfix Carl Banks

Reply

JR <fuscian@...>