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
I appreciate that they're using consonants for the roots.
Isn't it the same in most european languages? What's mostly preserved of the roots is the consonants. Easily visible in the roots KRTS and STRK.
German examples:
Proto-Indo-European had a similar-ish system, that was used far more extensively than in modern IE languages. What you see in German and English are leftovers of that system.
As he said, but i'd like to add: semitic languages are much more preserved than IE languages. for example, i myself can understand ~40% of maltese and basic hebrew, despite never trying to learn either of those languages. Ablauts are an old system so german/english etc have split far off and the words, while having a lot of resemblance might not be almost identical like Shams and Shemesh (sun in arabic and hebrew) But roots are still alive any well in semitic languages.