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:

  1. Stay on-topic. Specially for more divisive subjects.
  2. Post sources whenever reasonable to do so.
  3. Avoid crack theories and pseudoscientific claims.
  4. Have fun!

Related communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

If there's any mistake please correct me (especially in the hebrew parts, i am only native in arabic and know basic hebrew)

explanation for roots and templates (i forgot to completely explain them lol): 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

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

I see a single mistake: it is unclear what the fuck I am looking at.

But maybe it's a me issue.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 minutes ago* (last edited 6 minutes ago)

Think for a moment in English.

  • I sing /sɪŋ/
  • I sang /sæŋ/
  • I sung /sʌŋ/
  • a song /sɒŋ/

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:

Arabic English translation
كِتَاب / kitāb book
كُتُب / kutub books
كَتَبْتُ / katabtu I wrote
كَتَبَ / kataba he wrote
اُكْتُبْ / uktub write! (masculine)

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.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (1 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Thank you! Cool stuff!

I guess the image need a bit more clarity...

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 hours ago

i swear i could remember writing an explanation for roots/templates in the image... i'll put it in the post body, thank you :)