Page 214 of 248
Re: Linguistic Miscellany Thread
Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2023 12:43 am
by Man in Space
Nortaneous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 12:07 amAnd really, *atha ~ *at-? Does she at least recognize that a vision of the remit of comparativism broad enough for *atha ~ *at- is something that has to be argued for?
That specific example is also a kinship term, so it’s a particularly weak comparand.
Re: Linguistic Miscellany Thread
Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2023 3:22 pm
by zompist
This is pretty charming. It's a tall tale recorded in Missouri French Creole half a century ago, about a hunter in the 1600s, now turned into an animated movie. I didn't know there was a Missouri French Creole.
Re: Linguistic Miscellany Thread
Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2023 9:25 pm
by Travis B.
Is it my imagination, or is the affricate /dz/ less stable than /ts/, /tʃ/, or /dʒ/, and has a tendency to deaffricate as /z/?
Re: Linguistic Miscellany Thread
Posted: Sat Oct 14, 2023 6:53 am
by Rad Aghast
Zju wrote: ↑Sun Aug 28, 2022 1:00 pm
Ah, so it is a overall rarity then. I guess I'll have to find a source of ɬ if I want tl > t͡ɬ,
l devoices after consonants and in wordfinal position? That is quite natural and not uncommon.
Re: Linguistic Miscellany Thread
Posted: Sat Oct 14, 2023 11:18 am
by Kuchigakatai
bradrn wrote: ↑Wed Oct 11, 2023 6:17 pm
What is ‘Isidorianist’ even supposed to mean?
Isidore of Seville (Latin:
Īsidōrus Hispalēnsis, ca. 560 - 636 CE) is the author of a very long treatise of Latin etymologies, entitled the
Etymologiae or the
Origines, where he basically just makes connections between words based on their sound. Lots are trivial, or trivial but in the wrong direction (deriving a common basic word from a longer one of the same root with affixes), and lots are just plain wrong. If anything, it's very interesting when Isidore manages to get a non-trivial etymology right.
It's a sick burn because it's a pretty learned reference to call someone a bad etymologist.
Re: Linguistic Miscellany Thread
Posted: Sat Oct 14, 2023 6:24 pm
by foxcatdog
Rad Aghast wrote: ↑Sat Oct 14, 2023 6:53 am
Zju wrote: ↑Sun Aug 28, 2022 1:00 pm
Ah, so it is a overall rarity then. I guess I'll have to find a source of ɬ if I want tl > t͡ɬ,
l devoices after consonants and in wordfinal position? That is quite natural and not uncommon.
*s > *ɬ is also good
Re: Linguistic Miscellany Thread
Posted: Sat Oct 14, 2023 7:09 pm
by Nortaneous
For /tɬ/ without /ɬ/, PHOIBLE has Nahuatl, Wintu, and Squamish, and IPHON has Bawm. Wintu and Squamish look dubious, but Nahuatl is a known case. Reichle 1981 agrees that Bawm doesn't have /ɬ/, but analyzes <tl thl> as the only clusters in the language, which seems silly - why not unit /tɬ tɬʰ/?
Re: Linguistic Miscellany Thread
Posted: Sun Oct 15, 2023 10:49 am
by Rad Aghast
Nortaneous wrote: ↑Sat Oct 14, 2023 7:09 pm
For /tɬ/ without /ɬ/, PHOIBLE has Nahuatl, Wintu, and Squamish, and IPHON has Bawm. Wintu and Squamish look dubious, but Nahuatl is a known case. Reichle 1981 agrees that Bawm doesn't have /ɬ/, but analyzes <tl thl> as the only clusters in the language, which seems silly - why not unit /tɬ tɬʰ/?
In that period it was common for phonologists to adhere to a structuralist theory that saw the goal of an elegant phonological analysis to be having as few discrete units as possible, and then organizing them through combinatory rules.
Re: Linguistic Miscellany Thread
Posted: Sun Oct 15, 2023 10:59 am
by Rad Aghast
Moose-tache wrote: ↑Wed Oct 11, 2023 6:09 pm
2) "Isidorianist" is actually a pretty sick burn.
But he is using it wrong, since he is the one being an Isidorianist himself.
Re: Linguistic Miscellany Thread
Posted: Mon Oct 16, 2023 1:55 pm
by WeepingElf
Another matter entirely:
Recently, the discovery of
a new Anatolian language has been announced. Could it be that this is the Bronze Age ancestor of Lydian, which appears to be the most divergent Anatolian language? What do you think?
Re: Linguistic Miscellany Thread
Posted: Mon Oct 16, 2023 9:39 pm
by KathTheDragon
There's no point speculating until we know more about the text.
Re: Linguistic Miscellany Thread
Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2023 3:59 am
by WeepingElf
KathTheDragon wrote: ↑Mon Oct 16, 2023 9:39 pm
There's no point speculating until we know more about the text.
Indeed not.
Re: Linguistic Miscellany Thread
Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2023 6:56 am
by jal
WeepingElf wrote: ↑Mon Oct 16, 2023 1:55 pmRecently, the discovery of
a new Anatolian language has been announced. Could it be that this is the Bronze Age ancestor of Lydian, which appears to be the most divergent Anatolian language? What do you think?
Unlikely imho, as Kalasmaic was discovered quite a bit away from Lydia. My take would be that there's quite a number of Anatolic languages of which we have no evidence yet, and this is just one of many in that area.
JAL
Re: Linguistic Miscellany Thread
Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2023 10:09 am
by WeepingElf
The Wikipedia page says "Luwic?", but that may just be due to the general Luviomania - it is fashionable among scholars studying languages of Bronze Age Anatolia and the Aegean to consider everything in the area "Luwic" as long as that is even marginally possible. Even Etruscan, which is quite clearly not even IE, has been claimed to be a Luwic language! I wonder how long it will take for the "proof" that Greek also is a Luwic language
Re: Linguistic Miscellany Thread
Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2023 12:18 pm
by jal
WeepingElf wrote: ↑Tue Oct 17, 2023 10:09 amThe Wikipedia page says "Luwic?", but that may just be due to the general Luviomania
Tbf the article it references makes no such direct claims: "According to Rieken, while the new language is close to the area where Palaic was spoken, the text seems to share more features with Luwian." I've corrected the Wikipedia article saying "likely Luwic" to "possibly Luwic".
JAL
Re: Linguistic Miscellany Thread
Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2023 12:57 pm
by äreo
Do we have any examples of languages in which conjugation for person has been lost in all but one or a few very common verbs? I'm imagining a situation where the copula, for example, still distinguishes person such that the subject pronoun can be dropped, but all or nearly all other verbs require the pronoun or are at least ambiguous.
Re: Linguistic Miscellany Thread
Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2023 1:09 pm
by Linguoboy
äreo wrote: ↑Tue Oct 17, 2023 12:57 pmDo we have any examples of languages in which conjugation for person has been lost in all but one or a few very common verbs?
Sounds like Basque.
Re: Linguistic Miscellany Thread
Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2023 5:14 pm
by äreo
Linguoboy wrote: ↑Tue Oct 17, 2023 1:09 pm
äreo wrote: ↑Tue Oct 17, 2023 12:57 pmDo we have any examples of languages in which conjugation for person has been lost in all but one or a few very common verbs?
Sounds like Basque.
Sort of. From what I've been reading, Basque has lost finite forms in general for most verbs, but conjugation for person is still accomplished with auxiliaries.
But I just realized that English is actually the closest thing I'm aware of to what I have in mind. Our copula is the only verb that distinguishes first, second, and third person (only in the present and only in the singular, of course, and it's not pro-drop) and every other verb only marks 3S.
Re: Linguistic Miscellany Thread
Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2023 9:01 pm
by Nortaneous
äreo wrote: ↑Tue Oct 17, 2023 12:57 pm
Do we have any examples of languages in which conjugation for person has been lost in all but one or a few very common verbs? I'm imagining a situation where the copula, for example, still distinguishes person such that the subject pronoun can be dropped, but all or nearly all other verbs require the pronoun or are at least ambiguous.
Not quite the same thing, but in Wutung, there are:
1. Invariant (non-conjugated) simple verbs
2. Subject-inflecting simple verbs, all of which begin with /p l dʒ ʔ h/ except
o "have"
3. Double-inflecting simple verbs, which, like the subject-agreeing verbs, take initial mutation for subject agreement, but supplete for object agreement
4. Compound verbs, which are composed of multiple root elements at least one of which takes person-number-gender agreement (though some simple verbs don't occur in compound verbs and some compound verb elements don't occur as simple verbs).
For example, transcribing Marmion's orthography into IPA: (nasalization isn't contrastive following a nasal consonant)
Invariant simple verb:
moi 'like/want'
| >all |
| 1SG> | moi |
| 2SG> | moi |
| 3SG.M> | moi |
| 3SG.F> | moi |
| 1PL> | moi |
| 2PL> | moi |
| 3PL> | moi |
Subject-inflecting simple verb:
le 'do'
| >all |
| 1SG> | le |
| 2SG> | be |
| 3SG.M> | ʔle |
| 3SG.F> | tʃe |
| 1PL> | de |
| 2PL> | le |
| 3PL> | te |
Double-inflecting simple verb:
ʔa 'hit'
| >1/2SG | 3SG.M | 3SG.F | PL |
| 1SG> | pũ | ʔa | lã | dʒi |
| 2SG> | mu | ʔba | ma | tʃi |
| 3SG.M> | ʔu | ʔa | ʔla | si |
| 3SG.F> | ɲu | ʔwa | ɲa | tʃi |
| 1PL> | nu | ʔda | na | di |
| 2PL> | pũ | ʔa | lã | dʒi |
| 3PL> | ɲu | sa | ɲa | ti |
Compound verb containing a single subject-inflecting root:
huwɵle 'cry'
| >all |
| 1SG> | huwɵle |
| 2SG> | huwɵbe |
| 3SG.M> | huwɵʔle |
| 3SG.F> | huwɵtʃi |
| 1PL> | huwɵde |
| 2PL> | huwɵle |
| 3PL> | huwɵti |
Compound verb containing a single subject-inflecting root:
ʔãʔwɵ 'lie down'
| >all |
| 1SG> | ʔãʔwɵ |
| 2SG> | mɛʔwɵ |
| 3SG.M> | ɲiʔwɵ |
| 3SG.F> | ĩʔwɵ |
| 1PL> | nɛʔwɵ |
| 2PL> | ʔãʔwɵ |
| 3PL> | ĩʔwɵ |
Compound verb containing two subject-inflecting verb roots:
pungha 'leave'
| >all |
| 1SG> | pũha |
| 2SG> | muhma |
| 3SG.M> | muʔa |
| 3SG.F> | muhwã |
| 1PL> | nuhna |
| 2PL> | pũha |
| 3PL> | muhɲa |
Compound verb containing multiple double-inflecting verb roots:
qehulia 'throw away'
| >1SG | >2SG | >3SG.M | >3SG.F | >1PL | >2PL | >3PL |
| 1SG> | --- | ʔehuhma | ʔehulia | puhuli | --- | luɲaha | luɲahɲa |
| 2SG> | bihbuba | --- | bihbulia | fihbuli | deduhna | --- | bluɲahɲa |
| 3SG.M> | ʔeʔuha | ʔeʔuhma | ʔeʔulia | wiʔuli | lusahna | lusaha | lusahɲa |
| 3SG.F> | wihwuha | wuhwuhma | ʔwihwulia | sihwulia | hlutʃahna | hlutʃaha | hlutʃahɲa |
| 1PL> | --- | dehduhma | dihdulia | wihduli | --- | duɲaha | duɲahɲa |
| 2PL> | ʔehuha | --- | ʔehulia | pihuli | luɲahna | --- | luɲahɲa |
| 3PL> | sihndʒuha | sihndʒuhma | sihndʒulia | wihndʒuli | sutahna | sutaha | sutahɲa |
Re: Linguistic Miscellany Thread
Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2023 11:17 pm
by äreo
Nortaneous wrote: ↑Tue Oct 17, 2023 9:01 pm
äreo wrote: ↑Tue Oct 17, 2023 12:57 pm
Do we have any examples of languages in which conjugation for person has been lost in all but one or a few very common verbs? I'm imagining a situation where the copula, for example, still distinguishes person such that the subject pronoun can be dropped, but all or nearly all other verbs require the pronoun or are at least ambiguous.
Not quite the same thing, but in Wutung, there are:
1. Invariant (non-conjugated) simple verbs
2. Subject-inflecting simple verbs, all of which begin with /p l dʒ ʔ h/ except
o "have"
3. Double-inflecting simple verbs, which, like the subject-agreeing verbs, take initial mutation for subject agreement, but supplete for object agreement
4. Compound verbs, which are composed of multiple root elements at least one of which takes person-number-gender agreement (though some simple verbs don't occur in compound verbs and some compound verb elements don't occur as simple verbs).
For example, transcribing Marmion's orthography into IPA: (nasalization isn't contrastive following a nasal consonant)
Invariant simple verb:
moi 'like/want'
| >all |
| 1SG> | moi |
| 2SG> | moi |
| 3SG.M> | moi |
| 3SG.F> | moi |
| 1PL> | moi |
| 2PL> | moi |
| 3PL> | moi |
Subject-inflecting simple verb:
le 'do'
| >all |
| 1SG> | le |
| 2SG> | be |
| 3SG.M> | ʔle |
| 3SG.F> | tʃe |
| 1PL> | de |
| 2PL> | le |
| 3PL> | te |
Double-inflecting simple verb:
ʔa 'hit'
| >1/2SG | 3SG.M | 3SG.F | PL |
| 1SG> | pũ | ʔa | lã | dʒi |
| 2SG> | mu | ʔba | ma | tʃi |
| 3SG.M> | ʔu | ʔa | ʔla | si |
| 3SG.F> | ɲu | ʔwa | ɲa | tʃi |
| 1PL> | nu | ʔda | na | di |
| 2PL> | pũ | ʔa | lã | dʒi |
| 3PL> | ɲu | sa | ɲa | ti |
Compound verb containing a single subject-inflecting root:
huwɵle 'cry'
| >all |
| 1SG> | huwɵle |
| 2SG> | huwɵbe |
| 3SG.M> | huwɵʔle |
| 3SG.F> | huwɵtʃi |
| 1PL> | huwɵde |
| 2PL> | huwɵle |
| 3PL> | huwɵti |
Compound verb containing a single subject-inflecting root:
ʔãʔwɵ 'lie down'
| >all |
| 1SG> | ʔãʔwɵ |
| 2SG> | mɛʔwɵ |
| 3SG.M> | ɲiʔwɵ |
| 3SG.F> | ĩʔwɵ |
| 1PL> | nɛʔwɵ |
| 2PL> | ʔãʔwɵ |
| 3PL> | ĩʔwɵ |
Compound verb containing two subject-inflecting verb roots:
pungha 'leave'
| >all |
| 1SG> | pũha |
| 2SG> | muhma |
| 3SG.M> | muʔa |
| 3SG.F> | muhwã |
| 1PL> | nuhna |
| 2PL> | pũha |
| 3PL> | muhɲa |
Compound verb containing multiple double-inflecting verb roots:
qehulia 'throw away'
| >1SG | >2SG | >3SG.M | >3SG.F | >1PL | >2PL | >3PL |
| 1SG> | --- | ʔehuhma | ʔehulia | puhuli | --- | luɲaha | luɲahɲa |
| 2SG> | bihbuba | --- | bihbulia | fihbuli | deduhna | --- | bluɲahɲa |
| 3SG.M> | ʔeʔuha | ʔeʔuhma | ʔeʔulia | wiʔuli | lusahna | lusaha | lusahɲa |
| 3SG.F> | wihwuha | wuhwuhma | ʔwihwulia | sihwulia | hlutʃahna | hlutʃaha | hlutʃahɲa |
| 1PL> | --- | dehduhma | dihdulia | wihduli | --- | duɲaha | duɲahɲa |
| 2PL> | ʔehuha | --- | ʔehulia | pihuli | luɲahna | --- | luɲahɲa |
| 3PL> | sihndʒuha | sihndʒuhma | sihndʒulia | wihndʒuli | sutahna | sutaha | sutahɲa |
Wow. The suppletion for objects is especially wild.
La Wik says Wutung has about 900 speakers. I wonder if a 10x or 100x greater population would lose/simplify some of these patterns.