User talk:Haqqalikitaaq/Archive 1

Polysynthesis
Your additions of examples from Eskimo-Aleut langauges to Polysynthetic language seem to be correct and quite nicely formatted. However sources for the examples are lacking - any information particularly direct examples must be explicitly sourced in order to be includable. I hope you'll provide a reference to the sources of your examples since they quite clearly make the article richer and it would be a shame to have to remove them.·Maunus· ƛ · 11:07, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
 * You keep adding unsourced material to the article. I will not request sources again but proceed to remove the unsourced examples unless you provide sources.·Maunus· ƛ · 11:54, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Inuinnaqtun, Siglitun and Uummarmiutun
In this edit I notice that several of the words, uuk&iblugu for example, have & in them. Is that correct? I've never seen it like that before. In this there is the same thing with the &. Also the English translation, through the ete if gus mother;s needle, does not seem to make sense. In these edits there is a lot of material added which if all from the same source may be a bit too much for fair use. Also in all three articles the material needs sourcing. Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 13:09, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Don't worry about not replying sooner. I think that if the & is supposed to stand for łit would probably be better to use it. It's used in other places such as the Lutselk'e, Northwest Territories article. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 12:32, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 20:15, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Inuit language
I noticed your comments there and would just like to point out that your proposed relationship between Inuit languages and Japanese would be original research and is also covered under Pseudoscientific language comparison. If you look at Basque language and these results from Google you can see that some have proposed a relationship between the two. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 19:22, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Your edits at Object Verb Subject
I had to remove the examples that you gave since they were not only unsourced but also didn't illustrate OVS wordorder. In both examples the first element that you glossed as an object was in fact not an object. The verb Atiqaqpunga does not take a direct object because it is not transitive - it only takes a subject. Sammik is marked with the -mik suffix which is the suffix for the instrumental case which is used for instruments and oblique objects. In the second case the -titut suffix on qablunaq- means "like" Qablunaaqtitut thus means "like an englishman" and functions like an adverbial phrase not an object of the verb usuungunngittunga, which is also an intransitive verb that cannot take a direct object. I surmise that you are probably a native speaker and of course I respect that your examples and their translations are correct (they must however be sourced to published sources to be included)- however you do not seem to have linguistic training enough to correctly analyse and gloss examples of inuit grammar, this is another important reason that you should only use analyses presented in published sources by professional linguists.·Maunus· ƛ · 19:27, 26 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, what are you calling this Inuktitut are reverse? OVS or VOS etc? But Inuktitut unlike ::English SVO. But sometimes Inuktitut can be SOV just like Japanese SOV/OVS etc


 * Taipkua ukpirusungniqanngittunga are OVS too? meaning (I do not believe that)
 * taipkua ukpirusungniq qaq nngit tunga
 * that    believes         don't   I
 * Obj     verb                   Subj yes?


 * Yes you are right im native speaker of Inuktitun cause im inuk..of course thats my L1. (Haqqalikitaaq (talk) 05:45, 27 October 2008 (UTC))


 * The important thing here is that the V S O scheme only applies to transitive verbs, the above example is also intransitive. Further more the -tunga first person is not a free word it is a bound suffix that can only attach to a verb - affixes don't count when determining the word order. The free word for I is probably Uanga or some related word - try to insert uanga or the inuktitut equivalent in the sentence above.


 * In Inuktitut and other Inuit languages transitive verbs have A a transitive ending (-aa -ara -akkit etc.) and they also take one participant in the ergative case E.g. "Piitaup paliisi takupauk?" Where the agent Peter has the ergative case, the object police has absolutive case and the verb has the transitive interrogative ending -pauk. Here the wordorder is SOV which is indeed the basic wordorder of most Inuit languages. Besides the OSV, VOS, SVO classification only applies to BASIC wordorder which means that it must be the most common wordorder in the language. This is the reason that Inuktitut cannot be used as an example of OVS word order even if it did allow that order. ·Maunus· ƛ · 06:09, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


 * well, depends what their sentence with roots/affixes when english sentence translate inuktitut's sentence...Uanga in Kalaallisut (Greenlandic) dialect...we say 'Uvanga'....but it is meaning more 'me' not 'I'...Uvangauvunga meaning (Me-being-I) 'It's Me' Uvanga more meaning 'me' than 'i'


 * "I going to school"
 * Ilinniarvingmuaqpunga
 * School-going to-am I
 * Obj-verb-Subj


 * 'ilinniarvik' School "object' thing, building etc 'Ilinniarvik meaning 'place to learn'
 * 'muaq' going to thats verb meaning action right?
 * 'punga' I (person, I) subject

But if with uvanga


 * Uvanga ilinniarmuaq <-- make no sense
 * I-school-go (I-School-Go) not really...

SO inuktitut can be OVS.VSO.SOV....rarely SVO (Haqqalikitaaq (talk) 10:33, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

You can say "Uvanga ilinniarvingmuaqpunga". What I say is that you cannot compare the inuktitut verb with its english equivalent like that. You can't say that iliniarvinmuaqpunga is V then S - because it is only one word a V - the fact that there is a suffix expressing the subject of the verb on the verb has nothing to do with wordorder. When we ytalk about wordorder we only talk about free words. That is why I told you to add Uvanga the free word form - I didn't tell you to take away the suffix. Can you for example say "Paliisi Piitaup takuaa"? That would be an example of a OSV sentence because it has both Object and Subject as free words. But is it correct?·Maunus· ƛ · 11:04, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Oh i see, so Word order means free sentence and not free sentence with roots?

But i see Klingon OVS i noticed its not free


 * 'Dah mojaqmeyvam divusnisbe e vihar' ??????
 * DaH mojaq-mey-vam  DI-vuS-nIS-be'           'e'   vI-Har
 * now suffix-PL-DEM   1PL.A.3PL.P-limit-need-NEG  that 1SG.A.3SG.P-believe
 * "I believe that we do not need to limit these suffixes now."

So i translate That english sentence to Inuktitut


 * Maanna suffixesup sapkuariaqanngittugut tamna ukpirisungniqpunga
 * maanna suffixes-up sapkua-riaqaq-nngit-tugut tamna ukpirisungniq--punga
 * Now   Suffixes-REL these-do not need to limit-3SG that believe-ISG

If you disagree with me so maybe im misunderstandly anyway

If or you see Japanese and Inuktitut's sentence are exactly sentence reverse not like English froward

Japanese (OVS)?
 * kono fuyu wa samuku naru darou.
 * this-winter-(topic particle)-cold-become-wonder I

Inuktitut: (OVS/What?)
 * una ukiuq silanga ikkiirnaquuqpa isumauvunga
 * this-winter-(Weather)-cold-become-wonder I

English
 * I wonder if it will be cold this winter.


 * I cannot give a good analysis of the japanese example since I don't know any japanese. But I do know that Japanese is not OVS - only two or three known languages have a basic OVS wordorder (Hixkaryana is one of them). Many languages allow object initial wordorder but hardly any of them have it as the basic order. The inuktitut "suffixesup" example also doesn't work because the object of the main clause "I believe" is a clause "that the suffixes do not need to be limited". The word "suffixes" is the subject in the subclause and appears in the ergative case which is weird since the verb "need to limit" isn't transitive ans shoudn't be able to take an ergative argument. ·Maunus· ƛ · 13:49, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

I read Hixkaryana is very same as Inuktitut OVS too
 * toto yonoye kamara (Hixkaryana)
 * person	3SG-eat-DIST.PAST.COMPL jaguar
 * The jaguar ate the man.
 * angut nirijaujuq jaguarmit (Inuktitut)
 * man  eat-pass-3SG jaguar-abl

OR If 'The Ravens ate the man'
 * angut nirijaujuq tulukkaanmit
 * man  eat-pass-3SG raven.pl-abl
 * The Ravens ate the man

What about 'Inungmik takujaujuq Amaqqut' are OVS?
 * meaning 'Wolves is seen by mean of the Person'
 * Inung-mik taku-jau-juq Amaqqut
 * Person-obj see-pass-3sg.itr.nom.part wolf.plural
 * Wolves is seen by of the Person

(Haqqalikitaaq (talk) 06:29, 23 November 2008 (UTC))


 * Hixkaryana is one of the only known OVS languages - Inuktitut is not. The first example is a passive phrase where the object is treated as a subject - passive sentences cannot be used to find basic word order. The second example is not transitive and inungmik is a so called oblique object (marked by the instrumental suffix -mik) - word order is decided only on the basis of Transitive sentences with both a freestanding direct object and subject.·Maunus· ƛ · 09:09, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Kivallirmiutut
A tag has been placed on Kivallirmiutut requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. VasuVR ( talk,  contribs ) 09:00, 17 December 2008 (UTC)