Tergetian vernaculars: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
mNo edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
In [[Eevo]], "'''Tergetian languages'''" (''Terjedib'' or ''łynøñ Terjed'') refers to naturally evolved vernacular descendants of Classical | In [[Eevo]], "'''Tergetian languages'''" (''Terjedib'' or ''łynøñ Terjed'') refers to naturally evolved vernacular descendants of Classical Tseer. This is misleading, as | ||
== Common features == | == Common features == |
Revision as of 19:52, 22 April 2023
In Eevo, "Tergetian languages" (Terjedib or łynøñ Terjed) refers to naturally evolved vernacular descendants of Classical Tseer. This is misleading, as
Common features
- AuxVOS, with V a verbal noun (from topic final word order in CWdm)
- Verbal nouns treated ergatively like in Irish ("my love to/by-him" means "his love for me") [a Standard Average Talman feature, opposite of SAE or Hebrew/JBA]
- Large but closed class of auxiliaries, e.g. for tense marking, or things like "marbeh lisloach" 'forgives often' (shared to some extent by Anbirese)
- As in Modern Tseer, marks pluractionality by pluralizing the verbal noun
- always using im- or iN- for plurals (this got into Modern Windermere)
- construct state marked by a reflex of the CWdm 3sg.m possessive pronoun in
- Verb tenses work a lot like like in Jewish Babylonian Aramaic or An Yidis
- "in VN" or "on VN" for imperfective aspect unmarked for tense
- "after VN" for perfective aspect
- an auxiliary can be used to mark tense, which is relative to conjunctions like "before": "before (future aux)", "after (past aux)"