Northern Russian dialects (was definite/indefinite articles)

Hello,

[Peter Clark, replying to myself:]
> > Yes, this is true of some Arkhangel'sk dialects - the
> suffixes are, for
> > masc, fem and neut, respectively, -ot, -ta, and -to, as in
> _xozyain-ot_,
> > _xozyaika-ta_ etc.
>         Fascinating. Is there a plural ending, e.g. _chasy-ty_?
Of course. Only the plural, as just that of the normal deictic, is
_-te_.

[...]
>         So rather than _kniga byla napisana tri goda nazad_
> ir would be _knigy byla (bylo?) napisana..._? Very interesting.
_knigu bylo napisano_

Book.ACC be.PAST.SG.NEUT write.PART.PERF.SG.NEUT.

The same holds true for Ukrainian or Polish.

%---------

[John Cowan wrote, replying to BP Jonsson:]
> > The similarity between Arxangel'sk and Bulgarian articles is really
> > fascinating.
> > Maybe its precursor was optionally present in proto-Slavic?
I don't think so. We have the full forms of the adjectives, which are
(by some) supposed to stem form the short ones + cliticized article, but
the deictic element is different (*j- for adjectives, *t- for nouns (and
also *n- and *(o)v- for nouns in literary Macedonian and sometimes also
*s- in certain Bulgarian dialects))

> IIRC the Bulgarian article derives from a demonstrative, just like in
> Romance and Germanic.
Quite true. So do the Northern Russian ones.

Pavel
--
Pavel Iosad               pavel_iosad@mail.ru

Is mall a mharcaicheas am fear a bheachdaicheas
                 --Scottish proverb