Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]
91
Phonetics and Phonology / Re: Is this words Sandhi?
« Last post by panini on May 18, 2018, 09:24:15 AM »
I, however, partially disagree: contractions can be a sub-type of sandhi. The matter at issue would appear to be the extent to which the phonological operations have to be "general" as opposed to having contextual restrictions. I would actually claim that the English examples are directly inflectional, in the sense that you can select between "I am" or "I'm", "will not" or "won't", and "won't" is not synchronically derived from /will+not/. French, however, would be sandhi, i.e. actual vowel deletion.
92
Language-specific analysis / Why do Finnish language use native tongue?
« Last post by giselberga on May 18, 2018, 09:06:10 AM »
Finnish language use native tongue like icelandic language
Why do Finnish language use native tongue?

Example
1) equator
Päiväntasaaja

2) system
Järjestelmä

3) January
tammikuu

4) false
väärä
93
Morphosyntax / Re: Plural Subject + Singular Agreement (Implied Clausal Subject)
« Last post by nico on May 18, 2018, 08:59:37 AM »
They do, but I won't bother you any longer with this issue.
94
Language-specific analysis / Re: Why are some words in many language similar?
« Last post by Daniel on May 18, 2018, 08:56:43 AM »
1. Those are completely different sets of words, some of which look more similar than others, some of which have languages related to each other (and others don't), and some are explained by other reasons.

2. Randomly picking words that "look similar" is not a good scientific approach. If you want to show any meaningful relationship, then you need a lot of systematic data showing patterns.

As for these specific sets of words, here are the answers:
Quote
아빠(korean) - father - بابا/اب(Arabic) - faðir(icelandic)- papa
엄마(korean) - mother(English) - ام/ماما(Arabic) - mama - móðir(icelandic)
These are similar because these are the first words babies say. The "m" and "b/p" sounds are the first that babies produce, and they first say "mama" then "baba/papa". This is found in dozens or hundreds of languages around the world. These words are more like onomatopoeia than "mother" and "father", which are better for comparing language relationships.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mama_and_papa
https://www.quora.com/Why-do-papa-and-mama-sound-similar-in-different-languages-while-son-and-daughter-dont/answer/Daniel-Ross-71
Quote
아니오(Korean) - no(English) - non(French) - нет(Russian), nej(Danish)
English, French, Russian and Danish have a shared ancestor (Proto-Indo-European), and this word goes back to an older negation word in that language. Korean is a coincidence.
Quote
Shi(Chinese)/Si(Spanish), da(russian etc), yes(english)/já(icelandic)
These words do not look similar. The only similarity is that they have a consonant-vowel (CV) pattern, which is easily explained because they are frequent words, and therefore likely to develop short forms over time. There is nothing more to explain here.

I'd suggest reading an introductory textbook about historical linguistics and linguistic reconstruction. I've written something about that here:
https://www.quora.com/How-can-we-learn-the-pronunciation-and-sound-changes-of-different-languages/answer/Daniel-Ross-71
95
Morphosyntax / Re: Plural Subject + Singular Agreement (Implied Clausal Subject)
« Last post by Daniel on May 18, 2018, 08:51:16 AM »
Quote
You can prove a construction by showing that it only works with some restrictions (see Goldberg).
Well, in the general sense, I don't think there are restrictions on this use of singular agreement for plural-structured concepts. But perhaps in this particular case there are exceptions to that. I didn't mean that you shouldn't enumerate them here. I just meant that in general it's fine if we agree to disagree, because the different proposals we're making don't seem to make any different empirical predictions.
96
Phonetics and Phonology / Re: Is this words Sandhi?
« Last post by Daniel on May 18, 2018, 08:49:34 AM »
No.

"Sandhi... is a cover term for a wide variety of sound changes that occur at morpheme or word boundaries."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandhi

Those are just contractions. More technically, they're part of a (diachronic) cliticization process where originally independent words become attached to others as dependent morphemes, like affixes, but still somewhere between morphology and syntax.

A few of those have some kinds of sound changes ("won't" for example) that you could call "sandhi" but mostly that would be missing the overall point.
97
Phonetics and Phonology / Is this words Sandhi?
« Last post by giselberga on May 18, 2018, 08:33:09 AM »
Is this words Sandhi?

Example
1.France
Je + amie = j’aime
L’amore
L’Italie

2.English
I + am = i’m
You + are = you’re
Will + not = won’t
98
Language-specific analysis / Why are some words in many language similar?
« Last post by giselberga on May 18, 2018, 08:30:47 AM »
I discover some word in many language  is similar
Why are this words in many language similar?

아빠(korean) - father - بابا/اب(Arabic) - faðir(icelandic)- papa
엄마(korean) - mother(English) - ام/ماما(Arabic) - mama - móðir(icelandic)
아니오(Korean) - no(English) - non(French) - нет(Russian), nej(Danish)
예(korean) - yes(english) - já(icelandic) - ja(Danish etc)
99
Morphosyntax / Re: Plural Subject + Singular Agreement (Implied Clausal Subject)
« Last post by nico on May 18, 2018, 07:59:14 AM »
As you prefer. You can prove a construction by showing that it only works with some restrictions (see Goldberg). To me linguistics is not about "proving" things, but about accounting for some phenomena, whereby there might be equally plausible accounts which completely differ from one another.
100
Morphosyntax / Re: Plural Subject + Singular Agreement (Implied Clausal Subject)
« Last post by Daniel on May 18, 2018, 07:44:46 AM »
Sure. But how can you "prove" a construction? Regardless, having a specific construction wouldn't mean that in the general case this isn't just a 'citation'/mentioning form.

Still, I don't think either of us has a direct counterargument to the other's analysis, or any way to (potentially) falsify either one. So we can just leave both as plausible explanations.
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]