"Thomas R. Wier" <[log in to unmask]> writes:
> > Two: agent and patient.
> You mean you have no ditransitive verbs in your language at all?
> That seems rather rare in my experience.  There are plenty of languages
> that seek to *create* more ditransitives (applicatives, e.g.).

I thought about three arguments, but decided against it because the
marking at the predicate would become very complicated.  Any argument
other than agent and patient will be either oblique, or realised by

> > Do you have a good name for it?  'Stripped stem that cannot be used in
> > isolation' in one word.
> What you're describing sounds something like the distinction between
> "stem" and "root" in certain areal studies.

Unfortumately, S7 has roots, too.  Stripped stems are not the roots.
Roots consist of two consonants:

   C1 - C2 -

Stems add one vowel:

   C1 - C2 V

A stripped stem is a stem without the first consonant:

   C2 V

I updated my grammar to use 'core', but maybe that's another
linguistic term that already means something different.

Next problem: using clitics, I get the terms 'enclitic' and
'proclitic' for free.  Now I need this for 'core', too.  Moreover,
'core' does not imply that the thingy is attached to some other thing,
so the term is not so nice in general.

Maybe 'attachable' or 'incorporable' would be appropriate.  I don't

Maybe 'corps'?  'Procorps' and 'encorps'? ;-)

** Henrik