Print

Print


At 07:38 23/03/99 +0000, you wrote:
>At 9:04 pm -0300 22/3/99, FFlores wrote:
>>Boudewijn Rempt <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>......
>>> agreement systems. Does anyone know of a conlang that has object agreement
>>> incorporated into the verb?
>>>
>>
>>It depends on what you mean by incorporated.
>
>Presumably as an affix (either prefix, infix or suffix).
>
>I can't think off hand of any conlang that does this, but I'd be very
>surprised if there were none.
>
>>
>>As for natlangs, Basque does something like that too --
>>but I don't know to what extent.
>
>The Bantu languages regularly do this - it comes after the subject and
>tense-sign prefixes and before the word stem.  However, the object affix is
>not required if the object is a noun but is used if it desired to emphasize
>the noun.  For example, in Swahili
>
>Nilikisoma = I read /rEd/ it (i.e. the book) <-- ni [I] + li[past] + ki [it]
>
>Umeleta kitabu?  Have you brought a book?
>Umekileta kitabu?  Have you brought _the_ book [I wanted]?
>

        That makes me think of a language where noun-verb agreement would be used
only to mark definiteness ("the"). I like this idea. Do any of you already
did it ?

>Ray.
>
>
                                                        Christophe Grandsire
                                                |Sela Jemufan Atlinan C.G.

"Reality is just another point of view."

homepage : http://www.bde.espci.fr/homepage/Christophe.Grandsire/index.html