Zompist Bboard Again

s → h → ᴸ certainly works. If there's a problem with compensatorily-lengthening a short vowel but not a long one, then I don't know what it is. When you say the result is a floating tone, though---do you mean it doesn't end up linked to the final vowel? I'd have thought Vːᴴᴸ would give you a fallin...

I've just decided that kaɲi starts out as a word for strong smells and flavours, especially in relation to food. Pungent ? One way it's extended is as a sort of mana concept, in the video game sense of mana , a least---in relation to ancestral powers and the ability to harness them, but also powerfu...

It looks like your passive doesn't really result in an intransitive verb, and the original object doesn't end up as subject. Is that right? Then this is maybe more an impersonal construction than a passive in the usual sense. I'm not sure what to make of the use of the dummy subject in the reciproca...

"undocumented" gets used in more or less that way.

Akiatu has a fairly consequential pride concept, kaɲi, which currently has glosses pride, honour, strength, power. Nothing so far for love, words in that semantic neighbourhood are waiting for a fair bit of work on Akiatu society/culture.

I don't think I've heard that, though I seem to have gotten used to streamers on Twitch using "dude" as a sentence-final particle.

Akangka wrote: ↑Thu May 30, 2019 2:24 am Is there any tips in designing preposition sets?

This is something I puzzle about, too.

One thing: I'm pretty sure adpositions never agree with a subject. (They can agree, but only ever with a complement.) So it looks like you've actually got verbs, not verblike prepositions, fwiw.

Akangka wrote: ↑Tue May 28, 2019 9:57 pm Although English does have a relational noun. (On the top of ... In front of ... etc).

"sake" is another good relational noun in English ("for Pete's sake").

Ser wrote: ↑Mon May 27, 2019 11:50 am

akam chinjir wrote: ↑Mon May 27, 2019 3:10 am(The Mandarin example looks strange to me, though.)

I asked a native speaker and I was told it's good.

I thought I'd checked with a native speaker myself, but managed to misread. Sorry, Znex!

But the question was about languages in which you can't relativise obliques. If you can relativise obliques in Basque and Mandarin, then WALS is wrong about Basque, but it doesn't really help Akangka. (The Mandarin example looks strange to me, though.)

That's not relativising an oblique, though.

Akangka wrote: ↑Thu May 23, 2019 9:05 am How do a language with neither oblique relativization nor applicative voice relativize on the non-subject?

One possibility would be not to relativise in those cases. "I read a book for that child. That child..."

WALS (Polar questions) gives Mixtec (Chalcatongo) as its one example of a language in which polar questions aren't distinguished, that's probably the one I was thinking of, but it looks like it's got clause-initial question words, so not the one missals has read about.

Akangka wrote: ↑Thu May 23, 2019 12:52 am Uh, isn't most such language have particle to distinguish between interrogative usage and indefinite usage such as:
apapun, 何も, etc

Sure, but I was talking about languages where it's just the question word---it's not as common, but it definitely happens.

There's at least one language in which polar questions aren't marked at all (not even by intonation). It's common for content question words ("who?") to do double duty as indefinite pronouns ("someone"). Usually the question word usage is basic, though I have a vague memory that ...

Tone I don't think I did too bad a job making up a tone system, but now that I've let myself consult some things I want to tidy things up a bit. That's what this post is for. Er, it's long and pedantic. 1. Basics Okay, Bááru has three surface tones, high, mid, and low; but the mid tone is a default...

I just realized that isn't the best example because "us" here is an indirect object rather than a direct object. I'm used to that being called an applied object, fwiw. Though you don't seem to be treating applied objects as direct objects? An applied object appears to be something differe...

Travis B. wrote: ↑Mon May 13, 2019 11:02 am I just realized that isn't the best example because "us" here is an indirect object rather than a direct object.

I'm used to that being called an applied object, fwiw. Though you don't seem to be treating applied objects as direct objects?

Causatives of reflexives are definitely attested. Checking some likely places, I found Bantu, Quechua, and Turkish examples. Baker, The Mirror Principle and Morphosyntactic Explanation has some examples in section 4.1 (starting p.391).

Yeah, like that.