On Wed, 2 Apr 1997, Jan Havlis wrote:
Because of limited knowledge about language, they did not derive words regularly, not even logically, but they simply created a new word. Example: to fight - kapera, fighter (warrior) - kaperal, place for fighting (battlefield) - kaperi. But the morphological changes, they have used in this case, they have never used again. So there are no two similar ways to create derivates from one, e.g. verb or noun, root.This point is crucial. Is it possible in natlangs to have such kind of lexicology and morphology? My task is to 'explain', trustworthy, why it is so in terms of natlangs evolution.
This is so neat! having a conversation with a guy on the other side of the world!
Anyway, one possible way to explain the strange derivations is to perhaps put those derivations which are similar into a class, and have several classes of derivation morphologies. Also possible is to acknowledge that Arkian derived from a mother tongue whose derivational processes have been lost, hence the strange differences.
Just two simple ideas...I'm sure others have better ideas.
Copyright © 1997, Paul M. Hoffman,
Last updated: July 20, 1997