this post was submitted on 02 Feb 2025
18 points (100.0% liked)
Linguistics
611 readers
22 users here now
Welcome to the community about the science of human Language!
Everyone is welcome here: from laymen to professionals, Historical linguists to discourse analysts, structuralists to generativists.
Rules:
- Stay on-topic. Specially for more divisive subjects.
- Post sources whenever reasonable to do so.
- Avoid crack theories and pseudoscientific claims.
- Have fun!
Related communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I see a single mistake: it is unclear what the fuck I am looking at.
But maybe it's a me issue.
Think for a moment in English.
Note what's happening here: the basic meaning of the word is dictated by the consonants, that stay the same across multiple words. Then you change the vowel to convey further meaning: present vs. past vs. participle vs. noun.
In English this is a bit of an exception, but your typical Semitic language (as Arabic and Hebrew) does this all the time, typically following certain patterns. For example, extending OP's example:
You do see some affixes here and there, like that -tu in katabtu. But the workhorse of the morphology are those vowel changes.
And since this system was already present in Proto-Semitic, you can even find cognates across Semitic words, and they'll conjugate? decline? in similar-ish ways.
Words in semitic languages, unlike indo-european languages are conjugated with a system of roots and templates.
Roots are three (or even four) letter words, that are not meant to be used by themselves since they are equivalent to the infinitive in IE languages. So K-T-B would be "to write" and nothing else. No tense, no gender, etc etc.
Templates fill these in, by applying the root to a template. They specify the tense, gender, x-person etc.
So K-T-B (to write) + _A_A_TU (I did this thing in the past) = KATABTU
tl;dr: roots are verbs and templates are context for them
Thank you! Cool stuff!
I guess the image need a bit more clarity...
i swear i could remember writing an explanation for roots/templates in the image... i'll put it in the post body, thank you :)