cws
Greetings Guest
home > library > journal > view_article
« Back to Articles » Journal
On Proto-Ov diachrony
2▲ 2 ▼ 0
This article sums up the evolution of Ov and Shkenzi from Proto-Ov.
This public article was written by [Deactivated User], and last updated on 16 Apr 2019, 11:21.

[comments]
9. Genders
18. Ov anthem
19. Phonology
20. Sentences
23. Tones
28. WIP
Menu 1. BHO 2. Nominal morphology 3. Verbal morphology 4. SHN 5. Nominal morphology 6. Vowel harmony

[top]Nominal morphology


Semantic shifts
DATDative (case)
indirect object; recipient, beneficiary, location
BENBenefactive (case)
recipient of benefit

ALLAllative (case)
'to, onto'
INEInessive (case)
'inside'

ABLAblative (case)
away from
ECTSEctessive (case)
outside of


Morphological recycling

FOCFocus (syntactic)
shows new or contrastive information
→ ∅ (but retained as "kgi" (adp.), "it")
COPCopula
used to link the subject of a sentence with a predicate
→ ∅ (the U-ish suffix probably motivated the use of "u", "stand", as the copula)
PAUPaucal (number)
a few, some
→ ∅ (but retained as "zëvit" (adp.), "some")
COLCollective (number)
'group or mass entity'
→ ∅ (but retained as "-ran" (aff.), a widespread collective marker used for derivations in Ov)
ABSAbsolutive (case)
TRANS object, INTR argument
→ retained only for animate objects (the i- prefix got infixed and influenced the vowels, giving rise to the vocalic shift)

Most endings are reflected in the fricative paradigm in Ov. There is no sign of such paradigms in Proto-Ov.

The possessive forms evolved regularly to become the Ov direct possession paradigm in the plosive harmony, except for the 3PNThird person plural non-human (person)
neither speaker nor addressee, they/them
possessive form, which was lost.

[top]Verbal morphology


Levelling and semantic shifts

The present paradigm was levelled through vocalic harmonization.

The loss of the final syllable in 2PSecond person plural (person)
addressee (plural)
and 3PThird person plural (person)
neither speaker nor addressee, they/them
was aligned on 1PFirst person plural (person)
we (inclusive or exclusive)
.

The perfect marker was reanalyzed as a passive marker (Proto-Ov had no passive voice whatsoever).

The SBJVSubjunctive mood (mood)
desired or possible events
.PASPast
action occurred before moment of speech
and SBJVSubjunctive mood (mood)
desired or possible events
.FUTFuture (tense)
action occurring after the moment of speech
merged into the modern SBJVSubjunctive mood (mood)
desired or possible events
.NPRSNon-present (tense)
time other than now
.

Morphological recycling

The conditional (CONDConditional (mood)
would
) disappeared but was recycled as the auxiliary "so", "to be able to" from the 1First person (person)
speaker, signer, etc; I
, 2Second person (person)
addressee (you)
, 3Third person (person)
neither speaker nor addressee
and 1PFirst person plural (person)
we (inclusive or exclusive)
endings. Similarly, the assertive (ASRTAssertive (mood)
assertive
) was possibly recycled into the auxiliary "ióc", "to want".

The -n from the potential endings (POTPotential (mood)
likely events, ability
) was recycled into the modern future tense paradigm, with some vowel harmonization going on.

The consequential (CNSQConsequential (mood)
'then, and therefore'
) is no longer part of the Ov verbal system, but it is retained as a marginal semi-literary affix to replace an "if something" introducing structure by a "then something" concluding structure.

The crastinal (CRASCrastinal (tense)
'tomorrow'
) disappeared, leaving no trace.

Other diachronic events

The unavoidable common irregular verbs were artificially regularized in the 15th century during the Speech Revolt.

The passive forms in independent moods are an innovation from writers of the 14th century. Remark: SBJVSubjunctive mood (mood)
desired or possible events
.PSTPast (tense)
action occurred before moment of speech
SBJVSubjunctive mood (mood)
desired or possible events
.NPRSNon-present (tense)
time other than now
and SBJVSubjunctive mood (mood)
desired or possible events
.FUTFuture (tense)
action occurring after the moment of speech
SBJVSubjunctive mood (mood)
desired or possible events
.PREPresent.PASSPassive voice (valency)
be verb-ed
.



[top]Nominal morphology


Semantic shifts

PAUPaucal (number)
a few, some
→ ∅
TOTTotal
all/every
→ ∅
ALLAllative (case)
'to, onto'
→ ∅
ABLAblative (case)
away from
→ ∅

[top]Vowel harmony


Whereas Ov used consonantal paradigms to harmonize the endings, Shkenzi gave rise to a proper and straightforward vowel harmony:

  • front harmony = (-)i(-)
  • ;
  • back harmony = (-)o(-) or (-)ů(-)


  • For historical reasons, the schwa is of the back harmony. Middle Ov's ejectives block harmonization, establishing a fixed paradigm.

    Comments
    privacy | FAQs | rules | statistics | graphs | donate | api (indev)
    Viewing CWS in: English | Time now is 31-Jan-23 07:22 | Δt: 512.0499ms