138,759
edits
Talk:Proto-Tigol: Difference between revisions
m
IlL moved page Talk:Thensarian to Talk:Proto-Tigol without leaving a redirect
No edit summary |
m (IlL moved page Talk:Thensarian to Talk:Proto-Tigol without leaving a redirect) |
||
| (11 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| 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) | |||
Byhighly regular I mean that the suffixes do not change their forms much when they are added to a noun. | |||
[[User:Greatbuddha|Greatbuddha]] ([[User talk:Greatbuddha|talk]]) 18:19, 16 November 2013 (CET) | |||
:You misread my reply, my question is about your comment "I'd assume that all nouns have to have their posessor indicated or something." Do you mean L1 learners of Themsaran (as it stands now) would eventually interpret possession to be obligatory on all nouns? What would cause this to happen? [[User:Ílchőfti Lēmáthīd|Ílchőfti Lēmáthīd]] ([[User talk:Ílchőfti Lēmáthīd|talk]]) 18:52, 16 November 2013 (CET) | |||