Hantza/Verbs: Difference between revisions
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 68: | Line 68: | ||
|} | |} | ||
This eight syllable word also illustrates the [[Hantza#Morphophonological_processes|morphophonological processes]] of assimilation (''-ti-'' + ''-tu-'' = ''-tzu-'') and metathesis (''-kap-'' + ''-mò'' = ''-kampò''). | This eight-syllable word also illustrates the [[Hantza#Morphophonological_processes|morphophonological processes]] of assimilation (''-ti-'' + ''-tu-'' = ''-tzu-'') and metathesis (''-kap-'' + ''-mò'' = ''-kampò''). | ||
==Person marking== | ==Person marking== | ||
| Line 180: | Line 180: | ||
Evidentiality is marked on the verb by suffixation. | Evidentiality is marked on the verb by suffixation. | ||
The division of evidentials is similar to that of the South American languages Aymara and Quechua; there exists a three way distinction. The first version provided is used post-consonantally, the second post-vocalically | The division of evidentials is similar to that of the South American languages Aymara and Quechua; there exists a three way distinction. The first version provided is used post-consonantally, the second post-vocalically: | ||
*Witness: ''-am-'', ''-am-'' | *Witness: ''-am-'', ''-am-'' | ||
*Inferential: ''-ang-'', ''-ng-'' | *Inferential: ''-ang-'', ''-ng-'' | ||