I'm interested in the use of "ligatures", but I'm most interested in the way the ligatures and the possessives can use a combined infix-suffix. I don't understand how such a mixed system could develop. I understand the progression

u tla 'house' > utla (u or tla is class marker?)

u a tla 'house (-a- ligature) > watla

u a m tla 'your house (m 2nd person) > wamtla

but I don't understand how you could get mixed classes.

duri 'boat' > dwarka 'boat (-a- ligature)

duri > dwairka 'my boat'

duri > dwarkam 'your boat'



1 Answer 1


I don't know the history of the Miskito case, but doubling up on morphology is a known development in the history of language. Here are two examples from English/Germanic:

  1. The English word child once had plural childer (regularized from the original invariant plural child). Another pluralizer -en was then added, giving modern children

  2. In Proto-Germanic, there is a class of verbs called preterite presents. These were perfective in Proto Indo-European, but reanalyzed as presents in Germanic. The past tense was then formed by addition of a suffix (cognate with Mod. Engl. -ed). So, the past tense forms of verbs carried two "past" markers -- the original PIE ablaut and the Germanic suffix.

If I had to guess what happened in Miskito, I would say that these words were originally in an infixing class (duri ~ *dwari), and were subsequently reanalyzed as being a suppletive stem in the -ka class. (Suppletion is the operation that occurs when a stem changes form after the addition of a suffix. An example from Mod. Engl. verb inflection is the alternation between bleed and bled (< bleed + ed).) But that analysis is only a guess.

  • your (1) is like in German: Kind -> Kinder
    – Marjeta
    Jan 17, 2014 at 18:16

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.