Vadi: Difference between revisions

The issue of gender marking in Vadi is a topic of heated debate between the schools.  The Traditionalists believe that Vadi lacks gender as there is no apparent gender-marking morphology.  The Šibbūru argue that the mutation system (a feature the Traditionalists deny existing) does indeed indicate gender.   

At least in the case of body parts, there does appear to be some sort of gender marking on special [[Vadi#Number| singulative ]] forms, which also demonstrate an interesting split on the [[Vadi#Number| number system]].  The Šibbūru believes these divergent forms suggest that Vadi at one time had a more extensive noun class system, whereas the Traditionalists believe these differentiated forms are simply fossil remnants of a long defunct gender marking.

Unfortunately, these body parts are the only ones attested from the Scriptum.  The last two body parts listed were extracted from letters that became especially laced with various vulgar ad hominems between the two litigants.  Note also that the two last terms have both the presumptive animate and inanimate forms.  The inanimate forms appear to be used as proxy pronouns for the addressee (implying impotence), while the animate forms appear to be proxy pronouns for the addresser, especially in passages threatening physical violence.

====Number====