Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Morphosyntax / Re: Verbs
« Last post by theegrammariancat on July 20, 2017, 04:03:26 PM »
By the way which text book are you using? : D
2
Morphosyntax / Re: Verbs
« Last post by theegrammariancat on July 20, 2017, 12:55:55 AM »
What I do is that I check what is after the verb, in this way I can identify if the verb is transitive, intransitive, ditransitive, intensive, or complex.
I assume that when you are talking about more complex sentences you are talking about subordinate clauses, I think my advise still applies in this case.
3
Linguist's Lounge / Re: Introduction Thread
« Last post by theegrammariancat on July 20, 2017, 12:26:41 AM »
Hello! First I want to say that I am really glad to be here, there is a lot of great people in this forum. I hope to make friends and learn a lot from you.
My name is Ricardo, I have a B.A in Hispanic Language and Literature, and actually I work as an English Teacher. I'm from Mexico and I found this forum because I was looking for a linguistics forum. My primary interest in linguistics is grammar (syntax and morphology), also I'm interested in second language acquisition, teaching languages and foreign languages. Feel free to message me. I would appreciate if you share bibliography and authors. :)

 
4
Morphosyntax / Re: Is "non-" a neoclassical element?
« Last post by Natalia on July 16, 2017, 03:06:34 PM »
OK. Thank you for your helpful comments.
5
Morphosyntax / Re: Is "non-" a neoclassical element?
« Last post by Daniel on July 15, 2017, 08:32:04 PM »
No, that's not a neoclassical word. I can also say "non-iphone" or "non-android" or "non-microsoft" in reference to mobile phones.

But some neoclassical words do have "non-". Or at least neoclassical words can combine with "non-". It seems a little odd to me to say that any time "non-" is used it becomes non-neoclassical, but I guess you could say that. Personally I think it just is optional, so it's not a determining factor in itself.
6
Morphosyntax / Re: Is "non-" a neoclassical element?
« Last post by Natalia on July 15, 2017, 03:12:19 PM »
The thing is, I'm not sure whether to treat forms like "non-elite" as neoclassical compounds because I'm not sure if "non-" belongs to the neoclassical group.
7
Morphosyntax / Re: Is "non-" a neoclassical element?
« Last post by Daniel on July 15, 2017, 02:00:52 PM »
It depends on what you mean.

Yes, it is used in neoclassical derivations.

No, it is not restricted to neoclassical derivations. Actually, it's productive in Modern English.

Additionally there are other negative prefixes in neoclassical words, especially in- (and allomorphs im-, il-, etc.).

So does the inclusive or exclusive definition fit your purposes better?
8
Morphosyntax / Is "non-" a neoclassical element?
« Last post by Natalia on July 15, 2017, 12:06:08 PM »
Could you tell me please whether the form "non-" is to be regarded as a neoclassical form, like "astro-", "bio-", "geo", etc.?

Here is the passage from "Online Etymology Dictionary":
Quote
prefix meaning "not, lack of," or "sham," 14c., from Anglo-French noun-, from Old French non-, from Latin non "not, by no means, not at all, not a," from Old Latin noenum "not one" (*ne oinom, from PIE root *ne- "not" + PIE root *oi-no- "one, unique"). In some cases perhaps from Middle English non "not" (adj.), from Old English nan (see not).
9
Language-specific analysis / Re: Need Translation Help - Part 2: Hebrew
« Last post by TyrannusRex on July 14, 2017, 05:42:50 AM »
Okay, thank you!
In that case, I guess it is Biblical Hebrew that I'm looking for, if you run into anyone that might be able to help, please send them my way. :)
10
Language-specific analysis / Re: Need Translation Help - Part 2: Hebrew
« Last post by Daniel on July 14, 2017, 02:48:41 AM »
Hebrew has changed substantially. Not so much as a natural progression (as in the modern Arabic 'dialects' compared to Classical [Quranic] Arabic, which have indeed changed substantially as well), but as an abrupt shift with the revival of Modern/Israeli Hebrew. Modern Hebrew is a modernized form of Biblical Hebrew, with substantial changes in vocabulary as well as some changes in pronunciation and grammar. Some have gone as far as to say it's really a European language with Hebrew words, but that's an extreme claim in my opinion. It's just modernized Hebrew, and it also does have some of the features that naturally evolved in Hebrew (changing pronunciation, some grammar) but remember that Hebrew as a native/spoken language was dormant for some time, and instead only known/used as a liturgical/religious language for centuries. Of course many Hebrew speakers will know both Modern Hebrew and Biblical Hebrew, at least to some degree, for cultural reasons, certainly compared to say how many English speakers know Old English.

As for translators, I hope you find someone to talk to about these topics.

I don't know Hebrew (or Irish) myself, but for transliteration, there are some websites out there that will do it for you-- not perfectly, but at least the basic idea. There are also a lot of tools available for biblical research, which might help you in general (whether or not your project is primarily religious in nature). Search around a bit and see what's out there. I don't know much about Hebrew on Google Translate, but my guess is that like Greek it is probably the modern version-- Ancient Greek often translates into English somewhat intelligibly, but the translation into Greek is almost always Modern Greek. The same probably applies to Hebrew, so I hope at least knowing that is helpful even if it means Google Translate won't help you much.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10