Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Proto-Jardic noun morphology

Expand Messages
  • Roger Mills
    ... Jarda can have SVO or OVS word orders by fronting the subject or the object, so maybe Proto-Jardic had basic SVO order and allowed V to be fronted. (It s a
    Message 1 of 15 , Feb 16, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      --- On Sat, 2/16/13, Herman Miller <hmiller@...> wrote:
      Jarda can have SVO or OVS word orders by fronting the subject or the object, so maybe Proto-Jardic had basic SVO order and allowed V to be fronted. (It's a little harder to see how a verb-final language could switch to SVO, but I don't need to go back that far for now.)

      ğjub-en ķitṛa-ja ģundi (VSO)
      catch-PERF bat-ERG moth-ABS
      "the bat caught a moth"

      ğjuben ģundi ķitṛaja (VOS)
      ķitṛaja ğjuben ģundi (SVO)
      ģundi ğjuben ķitraja (OVS)
      -=========================================

      Kash can also have all three orders in a sentence like this, though SVO is the "normal" or default order. Is SVO, the O is the new info; VOS suggests that S is the new info. and there wouold be an intonation break between VO and S, OVS (or also OSV) is how they "passivize" it. It could further be made into a cleft sentence (it was a moth that the bat caught) by adding "na ya" -- O na ya, [inton. break] VS/SV.

      Let me say generally-- I've been saving a lot of this thread, because it contains interesting ideas for developments from Proto-Kash, and probably also Proto-Gwr, which I'm still cogitating.

      (I see also that "ķitṛaja" on the web page contradicts the "ķitṛala" that I've got in my Jarda documentation. I don't know which one is more recent, but "ķitṛaja" sounds more like the correct form. Maybe it could be a dialectal variation.)
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.