[YG Conlang Archives] > [saweli group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >


[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: quote of the day - elaborated



I just see that in your wordlist there is still a remainder of Latejami:
Dasu kava tejami kumeno = How many languages are there?

I wondered how you would say "Latejami" in Saweli, so "the language".
Something with "saxis"...


--- In saweli@yahoogroups.com, MorphemeAddict@... wrote:
>
> In a message dated 6/6/2007 8:48:15 AM Central Daylight Time, 
> sts@... writes:
> 
> 
> > Questions: "b" means that there are two arguments. I wonder what
happens 
> > if you use open nouns: needs the suffix to indicate the quantity of 
> > arguments as well?
> > Can you please give other examples instead of "b" (other verb
suffixes)?


>         -s  -d
> 1 arg   p   f
> 2 arg   b   v
> 3 arg   -   m
> 
> There are no classifiers with three arguments that are static, i.e.,
A/P/F-s, 
> so there is no ending for them. 

I was thinking about "to protect somone from something". This would be
A/P/F-s. But if you derive it from "safe", which actually is
"protected by someone from something"...

It feels like there is missing something. A/P/F-s should be possible.


--- In saweli@yahoogroups.com, MorphemeAddict@... wrote:
>
> In a message dated 6/6/2007 8:48:15 AM Central Daylight Time, 
> sts@... writes:
> 
> 
> > The u-y-w thing is interesting. How does it work? Maybe I got
something 
> > wrong with the "become obvious"... :-/
> > Could you please formulate some examples with and without u/y/w?
> > 
> 
> The endings for change of argument structure are composed of the
following 
> elements.
> 
> s/d              +/- F               P|AP|A/P
> 
> x=>s                 w=>+F      a=>P
> z=>d                 y=>-F        e=>AP
> v|0=no chng 0=no chng.  o=>A/P
>                                             u=no chng.

Ah! Now I see, theres both "0" and "o".


> "v" is used when only the vowel         
> changes, to provide a consonant.        
> 
> These form suffixes of the form CV or CSV, where S is w or y.
> 
> They are relative to the argument structure of the classifier, so
the change 
> in meaning they produce depends on the classifier of the word they
are added 
> to.  This is a major change from Latejami, in which the
corresponding suffixes 
> are all absolute and do not depend on the classifier for any of
their meaning.


It's worth experimenting on this.

--- In saweli@yahoogroups.com, MorphemeAddict@... wrote:
>
> In a message dated 6/6/2007 9:11:20 AM Central Daylight Time, 
> sts@... writes:
> 
> 
> > Stevo, so if I understand it right, this is the word-level grammar:
> > 
> > word = cl + mod + (n + suffix) + ending + secondary ending
> > 
> 
> Exactly right.
> 
> > (mod = semantic modifier)
> > (suffix = structural modifier)
> > (tag = pos-tag)
> > (quantor = secondary ending)
> > 
> 
> "Quantor"?  What's that?  

Oops. It's "quantifier" in English, "Quantor" in German. I quote from
Wiki:
"More specifically, in language and logic, quantification is a
construct that specifies the quantity of individuals of the domain of
discourse that apply to (or satisfy) an open formula."

That's the best word I could come up with.

> > Why does the classifier precede the modifier? My personal preference 
> > might have been to invert the order in this case, but I haven't
thought 
> > of it too much.
> > 
> 
> The classifiers are ordered according to the outline in Appendix C of 
> "Lexical Semantics".  They must come first to preserve the order.

OK.


> >  just thought, since both the modifier and the suffix modify the 
> > classifier, the classifier should be right between them. Like
> > 
> > mod + cl + suffix + ending + secondary ending
> > 
> 
> Since the language is right-branching, all modifying words modify to
the 
> left.  I have taken this principle to its logical conclusion.  Thus
modifier 
> morphemes modify to their left, and each new modifying morpheme to
the right 
> modifies everything in its scope to the left.
> > 
> > I suggest not to say "primary" and "secondary" "ending". It's like 
> > saying "preposition", only because it stands _before_ a noun.
> > 
> > classifier: classifier, concept
> > modifier: modifier, semantic modifier, conceptual modifier
> > suffix: structural modifier
> > primary ending: pos-tag, tag, pos, part-of-speech
> > secondary ending: quantor
> > 
> I have used POS sometimes already, but what is "quantor"?

Quantifier, see above.



--- In saweli@yahoogroups.com, MorphemeAddict@... wrote:
>
> What I've been calling (primary/POS) endings and secondary endings are 
> actually obligatory vs. optional endings.  And they're all just
endings.  The 
> optional endings always follow the obligatory ones.


Yes. And you could also say "primary suffix" and "secondary suffix"
instead of "modifier" and "suffix" respectively. But "conceptual
modifier" and "structural modifier" might give more information about
what these components are about.


Thank you very much for your explanations.

Bye,
Stefo