7,723
edits
Verse:Irta/Naeng: Difference between revisions
→Lexical differences
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
Oklahoman Naeng has a few divergences from Bjeheondian Naeng and has lexical influence from Cherokee, Maghrebi Azalic, and to an extent, English. | Oklahoman Naeng has a few divergences from Bjeheondian Naeng and has lexical influence from Cherokee, Maghrebi Azalic, and to an extent, English. | ||
Czech Naeng has a bit more SAE syntax as well as loanwords from Latin, but certain non-SAE features in contemporary vernacular Naeng but absent in literary Naeng are exaggerated; for instance, Czech Naeng strongly prefers verbs of motion rather than pronouns. The articles ''se'' and ''fi'' are also commonly mixed up especially for younger speakers of Czech Naeng, so the article system turns into a specific/nonspecific one. The most notable SAE-ism in Czech Naeng is the use of ''ruay'' for a perfective or telic aspect, for instance ''Fi rüech ruay patsrin fi muad'' "The bird ate the fruit". | Czech Naeng has a bit more SAE syntax as well as loanwords from Latin, but certain non-SAE features in contemporary vernacular Naeng but absent in literary Naeng are exaggerated; for instance, Czech Naeng strongly prefers verbs of motion rather than pronouns. The articles ''se'' and ''fi'' are also commonly mixed up especially for younger speakers of Czech Naeng, so the article system turns into a specific/nonspecific one. The most notable SAE-ism in Czech Naeng is the use of ''ruay'' for a perfective or telic aspect, for instance ''Fi rüech ruay patsrin fi muad'' "The bird ate the fruit". This is also used in impersonal sentences, such as ''Ruay patsrin fi muad.'' "The fruit has been/was eaten." | ||