Print

Print


E f+AOk-sto Andreas Johansson <[log in to unmask]>:
> Is there a term for languages where you have essentially one-to-one
> correspondence between morphemes and grammatical categories, but forgoes
> agglutinating accretion of suffixes in favour of mutations and infixes?

I think that'd just be a fusional polysynthetic language.
Doesnt the idea of mutations undermine the idea of one-to-one mapping?  If
something has mutated, then it expresses both its original meaning and and
the mutation's meaning, doesnt it?




        *Muke!
--
http://frath.net/                  E jer savne zarj+AOk- mas ne
http://kohath.livejournal.com/     Se imn+AOk- koone'f metha
http://kohath.deviantart.com/      Brissve m+AOk- kol+AOk- ad+AOI-.