5,466
edits
Vadi: Difference between revisions
m
→Phonotactics
m (→Mutations) |
m (→Phonotactics) |
||
| Line 190: | Line 190: | ||
For the Šibbūru school, the excellent condition of the texts from the Scriptum were a veritable gold mine. It led to a revolutionary reevaluation of Vadi phonology and phonotactics and revealed that Vadi phonotactics were anything but simple. If anything, the Scriptum revealed that just like the knowledge of Vadi phonology was incomplete, its phonotactics were also greatly underestimated. | For the Šibbūru school, the excellent condition of the texts from the Scriptum were a veritable gold mine. It led to a revolutionary reevaluation of Vadi phonology and phonotactics and revealed that Vadi phonotactics were anything but simple. If anything, the Scriptum revealed that just like the knowledge of Vadi phonology was incomplete, its phonotactics were also greatly underestimated. | ||
Iyyaħmi's work led to the discovery of consonantal mutations reminiscent of the Celtic languages, which initially sparked much controversy in the Vadist community. To support his theory, he grouped several of the [[Vadi# | Iyyaħmi's work led to the discovery of consonantal mutations reminiscent of the Celtic languages, which initially sparked much controversy in the Vadist community. To support his theory, he grouped several of the [[Vadi#Orthographic_Systems |spelling anomalies]] shared by ''both'' litigants into different categories, and via various statistical analyses, he was able to establish frequencies of these anomaly classes which demonstrated that the litigants' spellings were anything but random, but followed discernible patterns that were statistically significant. These patterns led Iyyaħmi to conclude that only underlying sandhi processes could account for these spelling patterns. Indeed, his statistical evidence was so compelling (Iyyaħmi's analyses were significant with a ''p''-value of less than .05) that more Vadists have joined the Šibbūru school, agreeing that mutations and other sandhi processes are indeed a significant feature of the language. | ||
Regardless, the Traditionalists have been vocal about their criticisms towards Iyyaħmi's statistical analyses.[[Vadi#Footnotes |<sup>2</sup>]] In particular, Schumann has argued, and continues to maintain, that the spelling anomalies in the texts simply indicate dialectal differences between the litigants.[[Vadi#Footnotes |<sup>3</sup>]] Iyyaħmi does agree that dialectal differences may account for some of the spelling anomalies. However, this argument alone is too simplistic and is insufficient to explain away the frequencies. | Regardless, the Traditionalists have been vocal about their criticisms towards Iyyaħmi's statistical analyses.[[Vadi#Footnotes |<sup>2</sup>]] In particular, Schumann has argued, and continues to maintain, that the spelling anomalies in the texts simply indicate dialectal differences between the litigants.[[Vadi#Footnotes |<sup>3</sup>]] Iyyaħmi does agree that dialectal differences may account for some of the spelling anomalies. However, this argument alone is too simplistic and is insufficient to explain away the frequencies. | ||