* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
LINGUIST List logo Eastern Michigan University Wayne State University *
* People & Organizations * Jobs * Calls & Conferences * Publications * Language Resources * Text & Computer Tools * Teaching & Learning * Mailing Lists * Search *
* *

LINGUIST List 23.1116

Tue Mar 06 2012

Qs: Suppletion Cross-linguistically

Editor for this issue: Zac Smith <zaclinguistlist.org>

New! Multi-tree Visit LL's Multitree project for over 1000 trees dynamically generated from scholarly hypotheses about language relationships:

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.cfm.
Date: 04-Mar-2012
From: Piers Kelly <Piers.Kellyanu.edu.au>
Subject: Suppletion Cross-linguistically
E-mail this message to a friend

Hi Linguists,
I'm working on a Philippine auxiliary language that has bucketloads of
suppleted forms. In other words, I'm dealing with words where the
morphology is not explicit, as in English 'go' -> 'went' and Russian.

I would like to know if you can tell me of other languages that have a high
degree of this kind of implicit morphology. And is there a way of
quantifying suppletion in a language?

Many thanks,

Linguistic Field(s): Typology

Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Page Updated: 06-Mar-2012

Supported in part by the National Science Foundation       About LINGUIST    |   Contact Us       ILIT Logo
While the LINGUIST List makes every effort to ensure the linguistic relevance of sites listed on its pages, it cannot vouch for their contents.