User:Chrysophylax/Golden Afroasiatic: Difference between revisions

m
Line 137: Line 137:


Chadic, Cushitic, and South Ethiopian languages and Amharic shows partial reduplication of final radical L->R e.g. Hausa ''kofa'' -> ''kofofi''
Chadic, Cushitic, and South Ethiopian languages and Amharic shows partial reduplication of final radical L->R e.g. Hausa ''kofa'' -> ''kofofi''
Spread broken pattern in all?most? of PAA (Cushitic, Chadic, Semitic, Berber, Egyptian). e.g. Eg. ''ik3'' for ''k3'' “soul” in situ usual '''k3w'''
Old collective use of such a pattern in CArab. OAss. Assyro-Bab. (''damqum'' “good” -> ''dumqum'' “lit. good things”) OAk. C₁vC₂C₂a(C₃) + -ū/-ī or -ūtu /ātu
===Cases===
North Cushitic shows similar system to Berber where subjects are prefixed with ū-, ā- (sg., pl.) and ō-, -ē (id.) for object, cf. Berber u- vs. a-, i-. (id.) In both, the feminine/collective ''t-''' precedes. Ancient Egyptian has nil and uses word order. Semitic is questionable but as Semitic seems to be a bit closer to Berber it's quite possible. Semitic seems to have suffixed -a and -u.
Lipiński suggests Afrasian languages have verbs which agree with agent in P, G and N but concord with non-active by pronominal suffixes.
Berber-Semitic broadly agree on using the affix ''/-a/-'' for construct and nomen rectum with ''/-u/-''
"new" genitive -i in Semitic is probably postposition -īy (ablative-ish in East Cushitic)
East Semitic has -uš which probably -iš which is a mostly postpositional particle, note however use as a prepos. in Paleosyrian. Mix of particle as both post and preposition is Afroasiatic-ish. Cf. Sem. wa- / -ma “and” with alt. w: m
Semitic -ah is orig. postposition directive in meaning, Ug. šmmh 'heavenward'
Predicate state -a projects to PAA as expected, cf. Egyptian old perfective, Classical Arabic perfect, Semitic stative