this post was submitted on 02 Feb 2025
25 points (93.1% liked)
Linguistics
683 readers
1 users here now
Welcome to the community about the science of human Language!
Everyone is welcome here: from laypeople to professionals, Historical linguists to discourse analysts, structuralists to generativists.
Rules:
- Instance rules apply.
- Be reasonable, constructive, and conductive to discussion.
- Stay on-topic, specially for more divisive subjects. And avoid unnecessary mentioning topics and individuals prone to derail the discussion.
- Post sources when reasonable to do so. And when sharing links to paywalled content, provide either a short summary of the content or a freely accessible archive link.
- Avoid crack theories and pseudoscientific claims.
- Have fun!
Related communities:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Think for a moment in English.
Note what's happening here: the basic meaning of the word is dictated by the consonants, that stay the same across multiple words. Then you change the vowel to convey further meaning: present vs. past vs. participle vs. noun.
In English this is a bit of an exception, but your typical Semitic language (as Arabic and Hebrew) does this all the time, typically following certain patterns. For example, extending OP's example:
You do see some affixes here and there, like that -tu in katabtu. But the workhorse of the morphology are those vowel changes.
And since this system was already present in Proto-Semitic, you can even find cognates across Semitic words, and they'll conjugate? decline? in similar-ish ways.