LINGUIST List 14.3544

Sun Dec 21 2003

Qs: Unwritten Langs; English Prefix Assimilation

Editor for this issue: Naomi Fox <foxlinguistlist.org>

We'd like to remind readers that the responses to queries are usually best posted to the individual asking the question. That individual is then strongly encouraged to post a summary to the list. This policy was instituted to help control the huge volume of mail on LINGUIST; so we would appreciate your cooperating with it whenever it seems appropriate. In addition to posting a summary, we'd like to remind people that it is usually a good idea to personally thank those individuals who have taken the trouble to respond to the query. To post to LINGUIST, use our convenient web form at http://linguistlist.org/LL/posttolinguist.html.

Directory

  1. Carol da Silva, non-written languages
  2. John Levis, Assimilation in irregular, illegible

Message 1: non-written languages

 Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 11:28:35 -0500 (EST)
From: Carol da Silva <cdeshanoyahoo.com>
Subject: non-written languages

I am looking for a list of living languages that do not have writing
systems. Any suggestions?
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Message 2: Assimilation in irregular, illegible

 Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 16:01:00 -0500 (EST)
From: John Levis <jlevisiastate.edu>
Subject: Assimilation in irregular, illegible

I have always assumed that the prefix in irregular and illegible is an
assimilated form of ''in-'' meaning ''not''. What evidence exists for
this, and is there textual evidence that the prefix was ever spelled
''in-'' with the unassimilated form? Or did the assimilation happen
before the spelling was standardized?

Subject-Language: English; Code: ENG
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue