Difference between revisions of "Middle Olgish language"

Line 64: Line 64:
==Morphology==
==Morphology==


fairly consistent with LMO
Affix attachment
===Verbal morphology===
{| class="wikitable"
{| class="wikitable"
|+ Middle Olgish Verbal Morphology
|+ Middle Olgish Verbal Morphology
Line 88: Line 93:
|}
|}


Middle Olgish mostly preserves the paradigms of its [[Liturgical Middle Olgish|Liturgical]] counterpart, albeit with greater degrees of syncretism, in particular in the subjunctive. The bare imperative of [[Old Olgish|Old]] and [[Liturgical Middle Olgish|Liturgical Olgish]] is merged with the old optative, extending its ''-m'' suffix to all forms in the paradigm; while these new endings become the norm in informal spoken language and are used even more widely in [[New Olgish]], the older bare forms are preferred in more formal contexts, particularly prayers adapted directly from [[Saint Fádin|Fádin’s]] [[Lonsorigi]].
Middle Olgish mostly preserves the paradigms of its [[Liturgical Middle Olgish|Liturgical]] counterpart, albeit with greater degrees of syncretism, in particular in the subjunctive. The bare imperative of [[Old Olgish|Old]] and [[Liturgical Middle Olgish|Liturgical Olgish]] is merged with the old optative, extending its ''-m'' suffix to all forms in the paradigm; while these new endings become the norm in informal spoken language and are used even more widely in [[New Olgish]], the older bare forms are preferred in more formal contexts, particularly prayers adapted directly from [[Saint Fádin|Fádin’s]] [[Lonsorigi]]. Person/number coding is subject to considerable underspecification; traditionally, the ''-e'' ending is glossed to express singularity and the ''-a'' ending plurality, while the ''-o'' ending is thought to represent the second person in particular.
 
 
 
Affix attachment
Underspecification of endings


Verbs
===Adjectival morphology===
Adjectives
Adjectives
 
===Nominal morphology===
Plural forms?
Plural forms?