Applying Leipzig glossing rules

[Fejes László]

Oh, sorry, I forgot that CONNEG should be added at least in those cases when
the connegative form differs from the positive one:

come-IMP.PL  and come-CONNEG.IMP.3SG
(theres is no common form for plurals anywhere else in the paraigm, so
CONNEG is not necessery---but useful---here)
or
come-IMP.3, come-CONNEG.IMP.1PL and come-CONNEG.IMP.2PL
(theres is no common form for singuler and plural third persons anywhere
else in the paraigm, so CONNEG is not necessery---but useful---here)
or
come-CONNEG.IMP.1PL, come-CONNEG.IMP.2PL, come-CONNEG.IMP.3PL and
come-CONNEG.IMP.3SG

In the case of älä tule-x one of CONNEG and IMP can be abandoned: in
practice, it is not important which is abandoned but using both of them
suggests that the CONNEG.IMP.2SG differs from the IMP.2SG or CONNEG.IND.2SG
form.

L.


2009/10/13 Fejes László <fejes.laszlo at gmail.com>

>
> I think the following glossing would be the proper one:
>
>
> älä        tule-x
> NEG.IMP.2SG come-IMP.2SG
> äl-kää     tul-ko
> NEG-IMP.2PL come-IMP.PL
> äl-kää-mme tul-ko
> NEG-IMP-1PL come-IMP.PL
>
> because there is no forms like älä tulko, älkää tule etc. However, form
> älköön tulko and älkööt tulko shows that tuleko is not always plural, so, it
> can be glossed as
>
> come-IMP.PL  and come-IMP.3SG
> or
> come-IMP.3, come-IMP.1PL and come-IMP.2PL
> or
> come-IMP.1PL, come-IMP.2PL, come-IMP.3PL and come-IMP.3SG
>
> depending on the context (and the analysis).
>
> :)
>
> L.
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/ura-list/attachments/20091013/19896269/attachment.htm>