138,977
edits
Suwáá/Unknown: Difference between revisions
m
→Nouns
m (→Nouns) |
|||
| Line 376: | Line 376: | ||
{{PAGENAME}} nouns decline in definiteness, three numbers (singular, dual and plural), and three cases (nominative, accusative, genitive). Unusually for a modern Semitic language, case plays a very important and productive role. There is no counterpart to the construct state or possessed forms of other Semitic languages; however, the possessor always follows the head. This state of affairs presumably came about because absolute and construct forms merged very early in the language's history, thus allowing the speakers to analyze them as free case-declined forms instead of bound, "construct-locked" forms. | {{PAGENAME}} nouns decline in definiteness, three numbers (singular, dual and plural), and three cases (nominative, accusative, genitive). Unusually for a modern Semitic language, case plays a very important and productive role. There is no counterpart to the construct state or possessed forms of other Semitic languages; however, the possessor always follows the head. This state of affairs presumably came about because absolute and construct forms merged very early in the language's history, thus allowing the speakers to analyze them as free case-declined forms instead of bound, "construct-locked" forms. | ||
===Morphological notes=== | |||
The accusative is identical to the genitive for animate nouns, and identical to the nominative for inanimate nouns. | The accusative is identical to the genitive for animate nouns, and identical to the nominative for inanimate nouns. | ||
{{PAGENAME}} nouns are notable for generalizing the diptotic (two-case) system, with nominative singular ''-''Ø < {{recon|''-ъ''}} < PNSem {{recon|''-u''}} and genitive/accusative singular ''-o'' < PNSem {{recon|''-a''}}, though it is uncertain whether diptotes or triptotes dominated the original Proto-Semitic paradigm. Feminine singular nominative {{recon|''-atu''}} was changed to {{recon|''-ā''}} (modern ''-a''), presumably under Indo-European influence. | {{PAGENAME}} nouns are notable for generalizing the diptotic (two-case) system, with nominative singular ''-''Ø < {{recon|''-ъ''}} < PNSem {{recon|''-u''}} and genitive/accusative singular ''-o'' < PNSem {{recon|''-a''}}, though it is uncertain whether diptotes or triptotes dominated the original Proto-Semitic paradigm. Feminine singular nominative {{recon|''-atu''}} was changed to {{recon|''-ā''}} (modern ''-a''), presumably under Indo-European influence. The feminine plural genitive also has an unexpected form of ''-aci'' instead of the syncretic {{recon|''-ác''}} - probably a result of analogy to the masculine plural. | ||
The definiteness suffixes arose from cliticized demonstratives: e.g. ''vódov'' 'the child' (nom.) < {{recon|''voldъ-vy''}} < PNSem {{recon|''waldu ðū''}}; ''porosili'' 'the horses' (acc./gen.) < {{recon|''porosi-ъli''}} < PNSem {{recon|''parašī ʔulī''}}. | The definiteness suffixes arose from cliticized demonstratives: e.g. ''vódov'' 'the child' (nom.) < {{recon|''voldъ-vy''}} < PNSem {{recon|''waldu ðū''}}; ''porosili'' 'the horses' (acc./gen.) < {{recon|''porosi-ъli''}} < PNSem {{recon|''parašī ʔulī''}}. | ||
Nouns fall into one of several declension paradigms. Diachronically, the declension paradigm a noun belongs to is a function of the declension class it was analyzed as, as well as the noun's gender. | Nouns fall into one of several declension paradigms. Diachronically, the declension paradigm a noun belongs to is a function of the declension class it was analyzed as, as well as the noun's gender. | ||
===Masculine nouns of type ''júm''=== | ===Masculine nouns of type ''júm''=== | ||