Vadi: Difference between revisions

Line 942:

According to the Traditionalists, Vadi verbs for the most part contain no grammatical inflection. They do not mark for person, number, tense, or aspect. Instead, particles marking tense appear after the verb, the future marker ''nai'', and the past marker ''hai''.

Again, the ''Šibbūru'' School argues that a surface reading of the ''Širkattarnaft'' conceals the morphophonotactic processes that indicate these particles, when they appear after the verb root, are actually bound morphemes. While they agree that verbs most likely do not take tense or aspect markers, ~~tense affixes are present in Vadi, marked on the pronoun rather than the verb. These affixes trigger mutation on the pronoun. However, the verb does~~ express other affixes, particularly emphatic, deictic, and mirative markers. These markers also trigger mutations on the verb. The Traditionalists, however, disagree with these assessments as well.

Again, the ''Šibbūru'' School argues that a surface reading of the ''Širkattarnaft'' conceals the morphophonotactic processes that indicate these particles, when they appear after the verb root, are actually bound morphemes. While they agree that verbs most likely do not take tense or aspect markers, they do express other affixes, particularly emphatic, deictic, and mirative markers. These markers also trigger mutations on the verb. The Traditionalists, however, disagree with these assessments as well.

The differences between the Traditionalist and the ''Šibbūru'' schools are best exemplified by the opposing viewpoints of Schumann and Iyyaħmi. These differences between the two Vadists can be seen in the underlined portions of text in the table below:

@@ Line 942: / Line 942: @@
 According to the Traditionalists, Vadi verbs for the most part contain no grammatical inflection.  They do not mark for person, number, tense, or aspect. Instead, particles marking tense appear after the verb, the future marker ''nai'', and the past marker ''hai''.
-Again, the ''Šibbūru'' School argues that a surface reading of the ''Širkattarnaft'' conceals the morphophonotactic processes that indicate these particles, when they appear after the verb root, are actually bound morphemes.  While they agree that verbs most likely do not take tense or aspect markers, tense affixes are present in Vadi, marked on the pronoun rather than the verb.  These affixes trigger mutation on the pronoun.  However, the verb does express other affixes, particularly emphatic, deictic, and mirative markers.  These markers also trigger mutations on the verb.  The Traditionalists, however, disagree with these assessments as well.
+Again, the ''Šibbūru'' School argues that a surface reading of the ''Širkattarnaft'' conceals the morphophonotactic processes that indicate these particles, when they appear after the verb root, are actually bound morphemes.  While they agree that verbs most likely do not take tense or aspect markers, they do express other affixes, particularly emphatic, deictic, and mirative markers.  These markers also trigger mutations on the verb.  The Traditionalists, however, disagree with these assessments as well.
 The differences between the Traditionalist and the ''Šibbūru'' schools are best exemplified by the opposing viewpoints of Schumann and Iyyaħmi. These differences between the two Vadists can be seen in the underlined portions of text in the table below: