Verse:Mwail/Tucootka/Lexicon: Difference between revisions

Line 580:

The accusative is identical to the genitive for animate nouns, and identical to the nominative for inanimate nouns.

{{PAGENAME}} nouns are notable for ~~inheriting the oldest version of the Proto-Semitic case system,~~ the diptotic (two-case) system, with nominative singular ''-''Ø < {{recon|''-ъ''}} < PSem {{recon|''-u''}} and genitive/accusative singular ''-o'' < PSem {{recon|''-a''}}. Feminine singular nominative {{recon|''-atu''}} was changed to {{recon|''-ā''}} > ''-a'' under Indo-European influence. The instrumental/locative is older than the definite affixes and wasformed by suffixing inflected forms of the preposition {{recon|''bi''}} 'with/by, in'. This means that overall, the fusional nature of the Semitic nominal declension is well-preserved.

{{PAGENAME}} nouns are notable for generalizing the diptotic (two-case) system, with nominative singular ''-''Ø < {{recon|''-ъ''}} < PSem {{recon|''-u''}} and genitive/accusative singular ''-o'' < PSem {{recon|''-a''}}. Feminine singular nominative {{recon|''-atu''}} was changed to {{recon|''-ā''}} > ''-a'' under Indo-European influence. The instrumental/locative is older than the definite affixes and wasformed by suffixing inflected forms of the preposition {{recon|''bi''}} 'with/by, in'. This means that overall, the fusional nature of the Semitic nominal declension is well-preserved.

The definiteness suffixes arose from cliticized demonstratives: e.g. ''vodov'' 'the child' (dir.) < {{recon|''voldъ-vъ''}} < {{recon|''waldu ðū''}}; ''porosili'' 'of the horses' < {{recon|''porosi-ъli''}} < {{recon|''parašī ʔulī''}}.

@@ Line 580: / Line 580: @@
 The accusative is identical to the genitive for animate nouns, and identical to the nominative for inanimate nouns.
-{{PAGENAME}} nouns are notable for inheriting the oldest version of the Proto-Semitic case system, the diptotic (two-case) system, with nominative singular ''-''Ø < {{recon|''-ъ''}} < PSem {{recon|''-u''}} and genitive/accusative singular ''-o'' < PSem {{recon|''-a''}}. Feminine singular nominative {{recon|''-atu''}} was changed to {{recon|''-ā''}} > ''-a'' under Indo-European influence. The instrumental/locative is older than the definite affixes and wasformed by suffixing inflected forms of the preposition {{recon|''bi''}} 'with/by, in'. This means that overall, the fusional nature of the Semitic nominal declension is well-preserved.
+{{PAGENAME}} nouns are notable for generalizing the diptotic (two-case) system, with nominative singular ''-''Ø < {{recon|''-ъ''}} < PSem {{recon|''-u''}} and genitive/accusative singular ''-o'' < PSem {{recon|''-a''}}. Feminine singular nominative {{recon|''-atu''}} was changed to {{recon|''-ā''}} > ''-a'' under Indo-European influence. The instrumental/locative is older than the definite affixes and wasformed by suffixing inflected forms of the preposition {{recon|''bi''}} 'with/by, in'. This means that overall, the fusional nature of the Semitic nominal declension is well-preserved.
 The definiteness suffixes arose from cliticized demonstratives: e.g. ''vodov'' 'the child' (dir.) < {{recon|''voldъ-vъ''}} < {{recon|''waldu&nbsp;ðū''}}; ''porosili'' 'of the horses' < {{recon|''porosi-ъli''}} < {{recon|''parašī&nbsp;ʔulī''}}.