Reconstruction talk:Proto-Ryukyuan/wa
Problems
[edit]@Kwékwlos, you added this text:
According to Thorpe (1983), the daughter languages show variation in the use of this pronoun. Almost all daughter languages generalized this plural as a singular (like in Japanese) except for Yonaguni, which retains the original distinction.
...except our Yonaguni daughter-term entry at 我ぬ has no such distinction, and only defines this as the singular first-person pronoun "I".
Also, if you have a reference, please cite it as a proper reference. Most readers, myself included, are not familiar enough with who Thorpe is, or what they published in 1983, to be able to find the work at issue. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 20:25, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
- Revisiting this.
- Considering that all daughter-language entries currently define their descendant terms in the singular; considering that I've seen zero evidence for this as a plural; and considering that, even if Yonaguni were to define this as a plural, that itself may be an innovation — I'm removing the comment about this being plural. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 16:53, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
- I'm also removing the Declension section, for which we have no sources, and which doesn't correspond with any of the listed descendants. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 17:03, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
Hangeul?
[edit]Why is the Northern Ryukyuan "wan" written in Hangeul? ALBA-CENTAURI (talk) 12:51, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
- @ALBA-CENTAURI: Very strange, good catch. I'd suggest perusing the versions listed in the History link at the top of any page when you're curious about when a particular change occurred, or who it was that made that change.
- Digging around, I see that @Kwékwlos made that edit here on 2019-06-19. I think what Kwékwlos meant to convey is that the Northern Ryūkyūan term was recorded by Korean scholars in the Haytong Ceykwukki as 완 or wan. However, this is only my guess, and this is unclear notation, and would be more appropriate to add as detail on any page for the Northern Ryūkyūan term. I'll remove that for now as confusing, not least since it links through to the Korean entry at 완 (wan), which has nothing (and indeed shouldn't have anything) about any Ryūkyūan terms. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 17:01, 17 June 2020 (UTC)