14.3544, Qs: Unwritten Langs; English Prefix Assimilation

[LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List:  Vol-14-3544. Sun Dec 21 2003. ISSN: 1068-4875.

Subject: 14.3544, Qs: Unwritten Langs; English Prefix Assimilation

Moderators: Anthony Aristar, Wayne State U.<aristar at linguistlist.org>
            Helen Dry, Eastern Michigan U. <hdry at linguistlist.org>

Reviews (reviews at linguistlist.org):
	Sheila Collberg, U. of Arizona
	Terence Langendoen, U. of Arizona

Home Page:  http://linguistlist.org/

The LINGUIST List is funded by Eastern Michigan University, Wayne
State University, and donations from subscribers and publishers.

Editor for this issue: Naomi Fox <fox at linguistlist.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)
Date:  Sat, 20 Dec 2003 11:28:35 -0500 (EST)
From:  Carol da Silva <cdeshano at yahoo.com>
Subject:  non-written languages

2)
Date:  Fri, 19 Dec 2003 16:01:00 -0500 (EST)
From:  John Levis <jlevis at iastate.edu>
Subject:  Assimilation in irregular, illegible

-------------------------------- Message 1 -------------------------------

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

I am looking for a list of living languages that do not have writing
systems. Any suggestions?


-------------------------------- Message 2 -------------------------------

Date:  Fri, 19 Dec 2003 16:01:00 -0500 (EST)
From:  John Levis <jlevis at iastate.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

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-14-3544