Talk:Proto-Tigol: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
[[User:Greatbuddha|Greatbuddha]] ([[User talk:Greatbuddha|talk]]) 03:05, 16 November 2013 (CET) | [[User:Greatbuddha|Greatbuddha]] ([[User talk:Greatbuddha|talk]]) 03:05, 16 November 2013 (CET) | ||
:"I'd assume that all nouns have to have their posessor indicated or something.": What do you mean/how would that come about? [[User:Ílchőfti Lēmáthīd|Ílchőfti Lēmáthīd]] ([[User talk:Ílchőfti Lēmáthīd|talk]]) 05:44, 16 November 2013 (CET) | :"I'd assume that all nouns have to have their posessor indicated or something.": What do you mean/how would that come about? [[User:Ílchőfti Lēmáthīd|Ílchőfti Lēmáthīd]] ([[User talk:Ílchőfti Lēmáthīd|talk]]) 05:44, 16 November 2013 (CET) | ||
:"in languages that have them they tend to be highly regular" - On the other hand languages w/ (possessor+possessive class) are a thing, so there is no reason why you couldn't have (possessor+number). [[User:Ílchőfti Lēmáthīd|Ílchőfti Lēmáthīd]] ([[User talk:Ílchőfti Lēmáthīd|talk]]) 06:51, 16 November 2013 (CET) | |||
Revision as of 05:51, 16 November 2013
Out of curiosity, how does the average themsaran child remember all the posessive suffixes? Some of them like the fourth person male/v/female seem like they'd probably collapse into one category. probably would I've noticed that in languages that have them they tend to be highly regular (exculding inuktitut), like, for example, Navajo. The posessive prefixes in navajo are the same at the core as the subject prefixes in the verbs, yet allthough the verb prefixes require a whole textbook to describe their behavior noun prefixes can be gone over in a mere two paragraphs. I'd assume that all nouns have to have their posessor indicated or something. Greatbuddha (talk) 03:05, 16 November 2013 (CET)
- "I'd assume that all nouns have to have their posessor indicated or something.": What do you mean/how would that come about? Ílchőfti Lēmáthīd (talk) 05:44, 16 November 2013 (CET)
- "in languages that have them they tend to be highly regular" - On the other hand languages w/ (possessor+possessive class) are a thing, so there is no reason why you couldn't have (possessor+number). Ílchőfti Lēmáthīd (talk) 06:51, 16 November 2013 (CET)