Print

Print


On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 00:13:03 -0700, Logan Kearsley 
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>On 28 February 2012 23:58, Eric Christopherson 
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> On Feb 27, 2012, at 2:49 PM, Logan Kearsley wrote:
>>
>>> A bit of background- Celimine has always had demonstratives 
that
>>> conflate space+time (so you can say "here and now" or "then 
or there",
>>> but not "now but there").
>> [...]
>>> Now, I've recently started reading a grammar of Halkomelem 
Salish.
>>> That same article begins with an analysis of Halkomelem, 
which I
>>> totally skimmed over on the way to the much more 
interesting (at the
>>> time) bits on Blackfoot. And I feel really silly that I did not 
notice
>>> earlier that Halkomelem verb phrases work *eerily* similar to 
the way
>>> I came up with for Celimine, though sufficiently different that 
I can
>>> be reasonably sure I didn't just accidentally subconsciously 
copy it.
>> [...]
>>
>> Cool. I had a similar idea, but the "here/now" thing would be 
used also for first person (undecided whether it would apply to 1st-
p subject, agent, patient, possessor, or more than one). But I 
haven't worked out all the implications of it yet.
>
>I cannot imagine what any of the implications would be. What 
does it
>even mean for that to apply specifically to the 1st person?

1st person here/now sounds like a variation on Tibetan 
evidentiality, but that addresses "here" and allows both "now" 
and "then."

http://web.linguist.umass.edu/~tibetan/Garrett.pdf

>
>> What grammar of Halkomelem are you reading?
>
>Gerdts, 1988. _Object and Absolutive in Halkomelem Salish_. It's 
a
>PhD. thesis. Very annoyingly sparse in some areas, since it's not
>concerned with actually teaching the language, but deeply 
engrossing
>in others. I'm making lots of notes of interesting bits to steal.
>After being told how incredibly alien Salishan languages are 
supposed
>to be, I'm getting kind of weirded out by how much sense 
Halkomelem
>seems to make. It alternates between "that's just *weird*" 
and "it's
>odd how *normal* that seems". Way easier to understand than 
Blackfoot,
>if you can get past the utterly unpronounceable phonology (and
>correspondingly wacked transcription system), at least in my 
opinion.
>YMMV.
>
>-l.