[YG Conlang Archives] > [westasianconlangs group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
--- In westasianconlangs@yahoogroups.com, "Isaac Penzev" <isaacp@...> wrote: > Bad idea. > 1) why to retain Greek ending -os? 2 reasons: the Central Cappadocian Greek does it (agglutinating the case and plural markers directly to the -os ending; and Armenian does it in words of Greek origin which have the -os ending [the genitive of ovkianos "ocean" would be ovkianosi]). Now, some other dialects of Cappadocian Greek are not as fully agglutinating, and they do drop the -os (in other words, they actually decline the word, even if the endings are the same for all nouns). As Armenian keeps the -os in the oblique tenses (at least in words of Greek origin that keep the -os endings at all), I saw that as a reason to follow the Central Cappadocian Greek model. Suggestions? I understand what you're saying, because at first I was going to get rid of the -os ending (maybe even in the nominative) but when I saw that Cappadocian and Armenian retained it, agglutinating case and number endings, I thought I'd keep it too. I think in some Armenian words with origin in Greek masculine nouns in -os, they drop the -os entirely (kiwr from kyrios), but other Armenian words keep the -os: ovkianos, lambiurint'os (from laburinthos), etc. What to do? I think I could go either way. > 2) in Armenian, case endings follow the plural suffix: banvor 'worker' - > banvori 'worker (G.)' - banvorner 'workers' - banvorneri 'workers (G.)' You're absolutely right, my bad. I'd have to check my notes, but I believe the Cappadocian Greek adds the plural to the case suffix. A revised version of my original scheme (using Armenian ovkianos) would then be: Direct: ovkianos ovkianosner Oblique ovkianosyu ovkianosneryu Thanks for the input, Eamon