5,467
edits
Vadi: Difference between revisions
m
→Footnotes
m (→Morphology) |
m (→Footnotes) |
||
| Line 988: | Line 988: | ||
3) Schumann argues that gemination outside of Minhast loanwords does not occur in Vadi, as the authors' ''Širkattarnaft'' does not show any gemination. This argument, as Tashunka notes, is problematic in that most Minhast writings, both past and present, rarely indicate gemination. Evidence of gemination in Vadi surfaces in the orthography between morpheme boundaries where the vowel of the syllable preceding the geminate consonant is lengthened, and the following syllable or an inserted "dummy syllable" starts with a voiced consonant to indicate fortition. Schumann argues this is partial reduplication used for derivation, but Iyyaħmi concurs with Tashunka's analysis. | 3) Schumann argues that gemination outside of Minhast loanwords does not occur in Vadi, as the authors' ''Širkattarnaft'' does not show any gemination. This argument, as Tashunka notes, is problematic in that most Minhast writings, both past and present, rarely indicate gemination. Evidence of gemination in Vadi surfaces in the orthography between morpheme boundaries where the vowel of the syllable preceding the geminate consonant is lengthened, and the following syllable or an inserted "dummy syllable" starts with a voiced consonant to indicate fortition. Schumann argues this is partial reduplication used for derivation, but Iyyaħmi concurs with Tashunka's analysis. | ||
4) This particular gloss is an excellent example of how the divergence between | 4) This particular gloss is an excellent example of how the divergence between the Traditionalist and ''Sibbūru'' orthographic systems can lead to different conclusions of underlying grammatical structures. | ||
In the original ''Širkattarnaft'' of this sample, Iyyaħmi has indicated, per his system employing tildes, the mutations that occurred between the standalone characters and the word in which they trigger sandhi changes. In this case, the word '' | In the original ''Širkattarnaft'' of this sample, Iyyaħmi has indicated, per his system employing tildes, the mutations that occurred between the standalone characters and the word in which they trigger sandhi changes. In this case, the word ''<diy>ney'' triggers ''kusarʌ'' to undergo voicing of the initial consonant as indicated by the tilde in ''gu~'' joined to ''kusarʌ''. Syncope also cooccurs with the elision of the /i/ of ''kilay''. Iyyaħmi's gloss yields the actual phonemic realization /gzarʌ/. | ||
In contrast, Schumann has glossed the original ''Širkattarnaft'' grapheme <gu> as a word, which has led his final morphemic gloss of <gu> as a | In contrast, Schumann has glossed the original ''Širkattarnaft'' grapheme <gu> as a bona fide word, which has led his final morphemic gloss of <gu> as ''gu'', a particle with as-of-yet unknown meaning. Iyyaħmi's representation however conveys the sandhi process ''kusarʌ'' undergoes. As a result, Iyyaħmi's transcription yields two fewer words than Schumann's, the very two that Schumann has glossed as independent words. Iyyaħmi's gloss ultimately shows there are no unknown, independent words in the ligigant's text and avoids Schumann's erroneous conclusion of the <gu> grapheme as a separate morpheme. | ||
As expected, the first line of Tashunka's gloss indicates none of the underlying mutations, only the pronunciation of the final textual realization. Mutations and other sandhi changes can be gleaned only via his morphemic breakdowns, which again closely follow Iyyaħmi's analysis. | As expected, the first line of Tashunka's gloss indicates none of the underlying mutations, only the pronunciation of the final textual realization. Mutations and other sandhi changes can be gleaned only via his morphemic breakdowns, which again closely follow Iyyaħmi's analysis. | ||
| Line 1,001: | Line 1,001: | ||
|phrase = Ikúni behet mek, yawikâ ha <yu> ~ <bif>ita mek hen | |phrase = Ikúni behet mek, yawikâ ha <yu> ~ <bif>ita mek hen | ||
| IPA = /i'ku:ni bɛhɛt mɛk jo'ka: ha'jita mɛkjɛn/ | | IPA = /i'ku:ni bɛhɛt mɛk jo'ka: ha'jita mɛkjɛn/ | ||
| morphemes = Ikúni behet mek, | | morphemes = Ikúni behet mek, yawikâ ha=yita mek hen | ||
| gloss = lord VOC.DEFR please here SGV paper please EMPH | | gloss = lord VOC.DEFR please here SGV paper please EMPH | ||
| translation = My lord, I beseech thee, behold the (legal) documents (in my hand). | | translation = My lord, I beseech thee, behold the (legal) documents (in my hand). | ||