Talk:Proto-Tigol: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
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) | ||
:Yeah, my excuse has been that Themsaran | :Yeah, my excuse has been that Themsaran almost never was a language that you heard spoken, it's rather a specific high register lect/fossilized stage of Talsmic languages. (Or some distinctions could stay afloat a little longer by analogy, or perhaps I should make things more clearly analogical.) Do you disbelieve it plausibly could represent that? [[User:Ílchőfti Lēmáthīd|Ílchőfti Lēmáthīd]] ([[User talk:Ílchőfti Lēmáthīd|talk]]) 03:17, 16 November 2013 (CET) |
Revision as of 02:22, 16 November 2013
Out of curiosity, how does the average themsaran child remember all the posessive suffixes? Some of them like the fourth person male/v/female seem like they'd probably collapse into one category. probably would I've noticed that in languages that have them they tend to be highly regular (exculding inuktitut), like, for example, Navajo. The posessive prefixes in navajo are the same at the core as the subject prefixes in the verbs, yet allthough the verb prefixes require a whole textbook to describe their behavior noun prefixes can be gone over in a mere two paragraphs. I'd assume that all nouns have to have their posessor indicated or something. Greatbuddha (talk) 03:05, 16 November 2013 (CET)
- Yeah, my excuse has been that Themsaran almost never was a language that you heard spoken, it's rather a specific high register lect/fossilized stage of Talsmic languages. (Or some distinctions could stay afloat a little longer by analogy, or perhaps I should make things more clearly analogical.) Do you disbelieve it plausibly could represent that? Ílchőfti Lēmáthīd (talk) 03:17, 16 November 2013 (CET)