Talk:hólǫ́

Derived term or conjugation/declension?
Should hólóní, hólónígíí, and dahólónígíí be added here, as some kind of related term or conjugation? 71.66.97.228 21:17, 25 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I don’t think so. They are not conjugation forms, nor regular words, but hólǫ́ with various prefixes and suffixes that relate to it sort of like which relates to is. Although it is common to say "which is" in English, it doesn’t really merit a separate entry. —Stephen (Talk) 21:55, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

So they are not commonly used words deserving of their own entries? As they are spelled as single words, it would make it easier for people to look up terms if they had entries (or at least mentions in the root word's entry). Of course, German sticks a lot of words together and I guess Wiktionary doesn't try to have entries for all of the infinite combinations. 71.66.97.228 22:23, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Well...we do have an entry for the somewhat notable . ;) 50 Xylophone Players talk 22:42, 25 November 2010 (UTC)


 * They are common and spelled as single words, but they are not words in the English sense. Their meanings are difficult to describe except in context with other words. —Stephen (Talk) 22:48, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I see...I had already got the feeling that Navajo was somewhat...awkward from looking at a few entries. 50 Xylophone Players talk 00:12, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Verb root relationships
Does anyone have any details on how the verb root is related to the given verb-root etymon of, and how the sound changes?

Also, what relationship to the verb root ?

‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 18:16, 30 November 2015 (UTC)


 * The stems are:
 * Momentane Imperfective: -lįįh
 * Mom. Usitative: -lįįh
 * Mom. Perfective: -lįįd
 * Mom. Future: -lįįł
 * Mom. Optative: -lįįh, -leʼ


 * Transitional Usitative: -dlįįh
 * Trans. Optative: -lį́į́ʼ


 * Neuter Imperfective: -lǫ́


 * The stem -lįįd (perfective) is concerned with existence or being. It is probably cognate with the stem -lį́į́ʼ / -lįįd (dooleeł, be, become; ílį́, be valuable; nilį́, to be). —Stephen (Talk) 19:01, 30 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Given some of the work of Vajda in uncovering ancient fusional verb-stem suffixes, my understanding is that many verb stems with nasals represent past fusion of a terminative -n suffix, indicating completion. Assuming,  seems to make sense, and has parallels in other languages (where constructions analogous to have become can be used to mean to be).
 * The vowel shift from to  doesn't seem too strange.  However, the vowel shift from  or  to  is a bit odder, and I'm unclear what would cause this.  There are other I-to-O shifts, such as many future forms where inceptive  + 3p peg element  appears to produce doo-, but I don't understand the phonetic process.  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 21:05, 30 November 2015 (UTC)