Newsgroups: sci.lang
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!news.ultranet.com!news.sprintlink.net!pipex!uknet!festival!edcogsci!iad
From: iad@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Ivan A Derzhanski)
Subject: Re: Esperanto? The EU? (Very, very long)
Message-ID: <D63G5y.LDI@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Organization: Centre for Cognitive Science, Edinburgh, UK
References: <3k56c8$rql@news.halcyon.com> <1995Mar22.013807.9711@Princeton.EDU>
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 10:08:19 GMT
Lines: 31

In article <1995Mar22.013807.9711@Princeton.EDU> mikulska@astro.princeton.edu (Margaret Mikulska) writes:
[re the limitations of the Latin vocabulary]
>How did Hebrew deal with the necessity of creating new words?

1.  By making good use of the lexical material provided by the Bible,
  the Mishnah and the Talmud.  Hence several forms of lexical innovation:

  (a) Using the old words with new meanings.
  (b) Forming compounds.
  (c) Forming new words from the known roots by means of prefixes,
     suffixes and transfixes.
  (d) Forming new roots out of the old ones.  (That usually means
     adding a new radical consonant.)

2.  By borrowing.  This may mean using the loanword as it is and/or
  selecting 3, 4 or 5 consonants from it and treating them as the
  radicals of a 3- to 5-literal root, which (Semitic derivation
  being what it is) means a few dozen new words, in theory, anyhow.

(Source: F L Shapiro, "Nekotorye puti i istochniki popolnenija
slovarnogo sostava sovremennogo jazyka ivrit", in G Sh Sharbatov (ed.),
_Semitskie jazyki_, M.: Izdatel'stvo vostochnoj literatury, 1963.)

How productive are the derivational processes of Latin, I wonder,
compared to the ones of Hebrew?

-- 
`"Na, na ... ah mean, *no wey*, wi aw due respect, ma lady," stammers Joe.'
Ivan A Derzhanski (iad@cogsci.ed.ac.uk)    (J Stuart, _Auld Testament Tales_)
* Centre for Cognitive Science,  2 Buccleuch Place,   Edinburgh EH8 9LW,  UK
* Cowan House E113, Pollock Halls, 18 Holyrood Pk Rd, Edinburgh EH16 5BD, UK
