in łaá siri “hug” is derived as “anti-hurt” so “I am hugging you” is “I am anti-hurting you” and I think that is special
here’s something serendipitous:
we’ve been analyzing gurung more and more and noticing that it does have some lexical tone, like in the minimal pairs <tába> (“to descend”) and <taba> (“to happen”). Verbal morphology, however, is heavily suffixing (like nominal morphology in łaá siri), and tone seems to do tricky things when roots are suffixed. In my opinion, it behaves kind of like pitch-accent, in that becomes restricted to one (or maybe two) syllables and tends to move towards the end of a complex morphological form.
Not a lot of work has been done with the language, but we theorize that only one syllable can carry a tone, and it’s usually the last. So for instance, <tába> (“to descend”) becomes:
(it’s also unclear if prosodic rules govern phrases, since many phrases end in rising or high tone)
BUT GUESS WHO’S CONLANG DOES EXACTLY THIS!!!!
when it comes to idiosyncratic translations, I gotta give it to bing
I think one of the most significant moments you can have as a language learner is when you know the meaning of a word, but you can’t explain it in your native language. Because, as frustrating as it may be, it does confirm that that particular language is carving out its own autonomous little nook of your brain.
Indeed. I know exactly how that feels, and it’s unbelievably frustrating, especially since most people don’t actually believe you when you try to explain that feeling.
This is a game of hangman where all of the words are reconstructed Proto-Indo-European words. I can’t claim it’s easy (in fact, it’s really quite hard), but it’s definitely an interesting way of learning more about PIE.
After a few rounds, you may get a better sense of which sounds are more versus less common in PIE, and after a few more, you may start noticing repeats, as it’s only drawing on a list of 18 words. Of course, you could also cheat and look up a list of Proto-Indo-European words to help.