From: tgpedersen
Message: 33418
Date: 2004-07-07
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "P&G" <petegray@...> wrote:and
> > Hebrew shows minimal lexical pairs, e.g.:
> > yo:m = day; ya:m = sea
> > (ayin)e:z = goat; (ayin)o:z = strength
> > ?el = to ?e:l = god
> > etc
> > So I think the starting point for this discussion is misguided.
> > Vowels are used lexically (and morphologically) in at least one
> > Semitic language.
>
> But that was not the starting point of the discussion. The question
> was whether there is at least one Semitic language where vowels are
> *not* used lexically. This is (almost) the case in Classical
> Arabic, and reportedly in Southern Peripheral Semitic languages.
>
> Certainly in the case of the verbs, the root of an Arabic verb is
> given by its consonantal "skeleton". Vowels are inserted and
> affixed purely as a function of the morphology.
> The claim is somewhat harder to make in the case of (pro)nouns and
> adjectives, where there are a number of vocalic patterns (for the
> singular and the "broken" plural) to which the forms may belong,
> which are not always predictable based on the class (pronoun, nounpredictable
> or adjective, etc.) or function of the word.
>
> This is in principle completely parallel to the situation as
> reconstructed for PIE. The vocalism of verbs is largely
> based on the morphology (e-grade/zero-grade in the present, o-gradePeripheral note: such a language will have to shield itself from
> in the perfect sg., zero-grade in the middle, etc.), while the
> vocalism of (pro)nouns and adjectives is somewhat less predictable
> in general.