Print

Print


----- "J. 'Mach' Wust" <[log in to unmask]> wrote: 

> I know one example of such a shift within one language (without borrowings 
> or pidgins/creoles). It is a (somewhat outdated) Bernese word for 
> grandfather: /trætti/, from /t@r/ 'definit masculin NOM/ACC article' + 
> /ætti/ 'grandfather'. I guess this is to be explained as child language. A 
> child would hear more often /t@r ætti/ than /ætti/, so the child would learn 
> /trætti/ as one word even though that's not grammatical. 

Not involving nouns and articles, of course, but it reminds me of how young children acquiring English analyze "look at" (/lUk@t/). After hearing, "look at the puppy", "look at the bird", "look at the elephant", "look at Mummy", etc., they analyze "lookit", whole hog, as akin to "regarder" or "mirar". So they point at something and scream "Lookit!" (embarrassed parent dives behind an end-cap at the supermarket). As they grow into English and hooliganism, they analyze it correctly to form, "What are *you* looking at?!" and "I was looking at the television, you sod!" If forms like "Üse Trætti" survive childhood, for quaint reasons of nostalgia or other, then maybe something else is going on. 

Kou