[YG Conlang Archives] > [westasianconlangs group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
On 29 May 2008, at 02:13 , Isaac Penzev wrote:
Well, there are some other patterns, but CaCi:C is the most popular, IMHO.The next by popularity would be CaCa:C.
Well, sounds good to me. Is there any evident logic to why one variant or another gets used? Otherwise I guess it's just whether I like dashiru or dasharu better (which is good enough for me if it comes to that. :)
But the work *only* withdescriptive/qualitative adjectives. Relative adjectives (usu. corresponding to nouns in attributive position in English) seem to be universally formed by means of -yy- suffix in the whole Afro-Asiatic family. They are called"nisbah" adjectives. E.g. {3arabu} "an Arab" > {3arabiyyu} "Arabic".
Yes, I've encountered mention of these in my reading, and I gather there were similar things in Egyptian. I probably need to get to grips with them.
On 29 May 2008, at 02:13 , Isaac Penzev wrote:
On Wednesday, May 28, 2008 6:06 PM, Carl Edlund Anderson wrote:Well, mostly because I've never really gotten along with the dual case.Dual *number*, FYI.
<I slap myself upside the head and go make more coffee!>
Don't worry about it. Modern Hebrew has almost lost it,keeping it alive only in natural pairs, e.g. {3ayin} "an eye" > {3einayim}"a pair of eyes".
Well, since my morphology is still quite simple, I won't rule it out. I don't know how much I'll use it, but I'll keep the dual in mind.
On Wednesday, May 28, 2008 6:06 PM, Carl Edlund Anderson wrote:Actually I now find myself uncertain about how to form feminine nouns. I have been slapping a feminine marker -t on the root and then tacking case ending markers after that: f.nom.sg. dashratu, f.nom.pl. dashratuwa .... but it seems to me that Real Egyptian actually formed feminine plurals by first adding the -w- marker for the plural and _then_ the -t feminine marker, which would give me a f.nom.pl. like .. dashrawatu, instead. Not sure how to go here. Maybe I need to check some comparative ideas from Arabic or (if I can find any examples) other Afro-asiatic languages.
On 29 May 2008, at 02:13 , Isaac Penzev wrote:
Yep, {daSrawatu} would be closer to the original AEgyptian form.
On 29 May 2008, at 08:01 , Pavel A. da Mek wrote:
"dashrawatu" is more real, but I suppose that after -VC- the feminine markerneed not be vocalised, thus maybe sg. "dashratu", du. "dashratju", pl. "dashrawtu" (m. sg. "dashru", du. "dashrawju", pl. "dashrawu").Also the weak consonat "w" could disappear with lenghtening in daughter languages, giving sg. "dashratu", pl. "dashra:tu" (m. sg. "dashru", pl. "dashru:"). This would be similar to what we see for example in Babylonian: sg. m. Sarrum dannum "mighty king", f. Sarratum dannatum "mighty queen", pl. m. Sarru:m dannu:tum "mighty kings", f. Sarra:tum danna:tum "mightyqueens".
Mmm, yes, I like it, though I need to think about f.pl. dashrawatu vs. dashrawtu. I think I, at least, have an easier time saying the former, though I suppose the /aw/ clusters might tend to become diphthongs if so allowed.
Cheers, Carl -- Carl Edlund Anderson http://www.carlaz.com/