Plural Formation In Armenian

[nairi]

Note: this topic has been split from: http://hyeforum.com/index.php?showtopic=10682

 

Cheers, Nairi.

The word's being compound - does that mean that like glxatsav its plural takes on the -er rather than the -ner? Refer: http://hyeforum.com/index.php?showtopic=10270&hl=

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

Yes it takes -er, although for some reason I'm always more tempted to say -ner...

Plurals are a little more complicated than just syllable count or "decomposing" compounds. I don't know enough about it to say more.

Edited March 5, 2005 by nairi

[Arpa]

Monosyllabic words take -er, like hayr/hayrer,mayr/mayrer, quyr/quyrer, while multisyllabic words take -ner as in eghbayr-ner. Sometime though, whether correct or not some compound words whose ending syllable is monosyllabic as in glx-a-tsav will end up as glx-a-tsav-er rather than glx-a-tsav-ner. Another rule may be the ending vowel where it take a -ner.

[Stormig]

Cheers.

[nairi]

Monosyllabic words take -er, like hayr/hayrer,mayr/mayrer, quyr/quyrer, while multisyllabic words take -ner as in eghbayr-ner. Sometime though, whether correct or not some compound words whose ending syllable is monosyllabic as in glx-a-tsav will end up as glx-a-tsav-er rather than glx-a-tsav-ner. Another rule may be the ending vowel where it take a -ner.

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

I have a feeling it has to do with morphemes. If a word is considered to be made up of one morpheme, it takes -er, if it's considered to be made up of more than one morpheme, it takes -ner.

 

In the case of glxatsav, those who see this as being composed of glux and tsav, will add -er. Those who see glxastav as one word, will use -ner.

 

The same goes for tsovap. I think the reason some people say tsovapner is because they feel that tsov and ap we're born together if you will, rather than being compounded later.

[nairi]

How about this?

 

When you see a word ask yourself: do I consider this word a compound (i.e. composed of more than one morpheme)?

 

If the answer is no, then the word takes

 

-er if it has one syllable (ap / aper);

-ner if it has +2 syllables (ashxarh / ashxarner).

 

If the answer is yes, then the word takes

 

-er if the last morpheme has one syllable (glxa-tsav / glxa-tsaver);

-ner if the last morpheme has +2 syllables (hanra-vnas / hanra-vnasner).

 

 

I haven't figured out what happens to monosyllabic morphemes when the vowel is reduced, as in: muk-mkner, dzu-dzver, jur-jrer, etc. Something to do with Classical Armenian?

[Harut]

I haven't figured out what happens to monosyllabic morphemes when the vowel is reduced, as in: muk-mkner, dzu-dzver, jur-jrer, etc. Something to do with Classical Armenian?

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

those monosyllabic morphemes that take -ner are just a group that are considered exception to the rule, which you just have to remember (those words, i meant). there is no rule (at least as far as i know) that says which such words take -er, which take -ner...

[Harut]

I have a feeling it has to do with morphemes. If a word is considered to be made up of one morpheme, it takes -er, if it's considered to be made up of more than one morpheme, it takes -ner.

 

In the case of glxatsav, those who see this as being composed of glux and tsav, will add -er. Those who see glxastav as one word, will use -ner.

 

The same goes for tsovap. I think the reason some people say tsovapner is because they feel that tsov and ap we're born together if you will, rather than being compounded later.

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

but is it a matter of consideration? to me, it just doesn't sound right to say 'glxatsavner' or 'tsovapner'...

[MosJan]

yes mi harst unem

inchpes a linum or 1 dzerq@ Aph e linum is yerku Aph@ Bur ??

 

Bur ?>??

[nairi]

but is it a matter of consideration? to me, it just doesn't sound right to say 'glxatsavner' or 'tsovapner'...

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

I think it is, since not all compound words take -er, e.g. tsovagetner, but geter. How do we explain this?

 

Also, I actually went around asking a few native speakers that I know (from Armenia and elsewhere) what the plural of tsovap is and they all said tsovapner, without exception. Which, I think, means that there is something more to take into consideration.

[SAS]

but is it a matter of consideration? to me, it just doesn't sound right to say 'glxatsavner' or 'tsovapner'...

style_images/master/snapback.png

Հարութ,

 

հայերենում, այն բարդ բառերը, որոնց վերջին բաղադրիչը միավանկ բառ է,հոգնակին կարող է ստանալ և՛ -եր, և՛ -ներ վերջավորություն:

 

Եթե վերջին միավանկ բաղադրիչը գոյական է և իր իմաստը պահում է անփոփոխ, ապա հոգնակին ստանում է -եր վերջավորություն: Ըստ այդմ՝

 

գլխացավ(եզ.) = գլխի + ցավ = (հոգնակի) գլխացավԵՐ

ծովափ(եզ.)= ծովի + ափ = (հոգնակի) ծովափԵՐ

 

Եթե վերջին միավանկ բաղադրիչը բայի արմատ է կամ բայի իմաստ ստացած գոյական, ապա հոգնակին ստանում է -ներ վերջավորություն: Օրինակ՝

 

վիպագիր (եզ.) = վեպ գրող. այստեղ գիր՝ գրել բայի իմաստ ստացած գոյական =վիպագիրՆԵՐ

 

տնտեսվար(եզ.) =տնտեսություն վարող. այստեղ վար՝ վարել բայի արմատ =տնտեսվարՆԵՐ

 

Կան միավանկ բառեր, որոնք ստանում են -ներ վերջավորությունը, քանի որ հին հայերենում վերջացել են ն-ով:

Գառ = գառՆ = գառներ, ոտներ և այլն...

[nairi]

Look what I found:

 

34.1vaux.pdf

 

It's an article by Bert Vaux in which he discusses plural formation in WA and EA as a base for his argument that syllables and syllabification cannot be ignored.

I don't have a problem with his initial assumption per se, but I do have a problem with the examples that he uses in order to support his argument, particularly that which concerns EA (since I'm not too competent in WA I'll refrain from commenting).

 

What I'm not too happy about is that he uses a relatively old source like Ajarian. EA has changed (drastically) since Ajarian, in the sense that for instance I have yet to hear a (modern) speaker of SEA use "astghner". As far as I know we say "astgher".

 

This may just be a minor point, but if you are going to use this sort of false examples to analyze plural formation in Armenian, it's a rather big mistake.

 

SAS, you haven't explained why most people say "tsovapner" and NOT "tsovaper" when referring to a "beach". Or does "tsovaper" fall under your second theory, which to me still doesn't make too much sense concerning "tsovap"? How is "ap" a verb or an adjective derived from a verb?

 

Also, an interesting point you raise are words ending in "trill r", like gar.

Although this may be a Classical left-over, I wonder whether there is a phonological rule for monosyllabic words ending in "trill r". Ber becomes berner, but bar becomes barer. We need to come up with a longer list.

 

So far for now.

[Gor-Gor]

SAS, THANK YOU!

 

I was writing a birthday card yesterday and I came upon the word "dzrakir" (tsragir) -- and I stopped writing for a second because I forgot whether to add -ner or -er to make it plural.

 

I knew the basic rule of monosyllable/polysyllable -- but I knew that it was a bit more complicated than that. Thanks for reminding me!

 

Although I'm still confused -- would it be dzrakirner or dzrakirer? Is "kir" acting as a verb here (krel) or as a noun (kroutyoun)?

 

I ended up writing "drakirner" because it sounded better to my ears...

 

Nairi: I would also say "asdgher."

Edited March 5, 2005 by Gor-Gor

[nairi]

I think in order to know what the WA plural for "tsragir" is, you could test it out with a word like "glxatsav". However you form the plural for the latter, you should form the same for the former.

 

In EA, it's supposed to be "tsragrer", since the second element "gir" takes the plural "grer".

 

As for astgh, Ajarian apparently analyzed it as being pronounced /ast@gh/ and thus is correctly predicted to take -ner, since it is now made of 2 syllables. Modern speakers of SEA, however, don't tend to pronounce a schwa between t and gh. Or if they do it is so small that it is insignificant in plural formation (see Vaux's article, p. 105, where he mentions Levin's use of "excrescent" versus "epenthetic" vowels. In the case of astgh, if there is a schwa, it would be considered excrescent, i.e. not participating in phonological processes).

 

Minassian, interestingly, argues that nouns that have an epenthetic shwa in the second syllable take -er, and nouns that have an epenthetic schwa in the first syllable take -ner.

 

In other words: astgh, even if pronounced with an epenthetic schwa, has the shwa in the second syllable, /as-t@gh/, and thus must take -er. See for referal, if you're not convinced with the "astgh" example, a noun like" akr" pronounced as /a-k@r/, which takes -er.

 

A word like skizb, which is pronounced as /@s-kizb/, is correctly predicted to take -ner, since the schwa is in the first syllable.

 

Edit: Brainstorming on the internet is probably the worst thing.. I want to take back "akr" as an example, because it seems to be more complicated than that, namely, we lose the schwa when we say "akrer". We don't say /ak@rer/, but /akrer/. Bad example. No time right now to come up with something better. Maybe later.

Edited March 5, 2005 by nairi

[Siamanto]

Also, I actually went around asking a few native speakers that I know (from Armenia and elsewhere) what the plural of tsovap is and they all said tsovapner, without exception. Which, I think, means that there is something more to take into consideration.

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

 

SAS, you haven't explained why most people say "tsovapner" and NOT "tsovaper" when referring to a "beach". Or does "tsovaper" fall under your second theory, which to me still doesn't make too much sense concerning "tsovap"? How is "ap" a verb or an adjective derived from a verb?

style_images/master/snapback.png

I have never heard "dzovaper," always "dzovapner."

 

 

 

I haven't figured out what happens to monosyllabic morphemes when the vowel is reduced, as in: muk-mkner, dzu-dzver, jur-jrer, etc. Something to do with Classical Armenian?

style_images/master/snapback.png

In Western Armenian, I've never heard "mgner," rather "mouger."

 

How about:

1- Tserk: I've heard both "tesrker" and "tesrner."

2- Vodk: I've heard both "vodker" and "vodner."

 

 

I think in order to know what the WA plural for "tsragir" is, you could test it out with a word like "glxatsav". However you form the plural for the latter, you should form the same for the former.

 

In EA, it's supposed to be "tsragrer", since the second element "gir" takes the plural "grer".

style_images/master/snapback.png

In Western Armenian, I've heard/read both "dzrakirner" and "dzrakrer." "Dzrakirner" being the common form, "dzrakrer" the "literary???"

 

 

 

To make things a bit more complicated and interesting, I would add that when reading newspapers from Armenia, I have noticed that "n" is suffixed to many words - not??? as a result of declination (holovoum!) Unfortunately, I don't have in mind an example, so please take it with a grain of salt!

Edited March 5, 2005 by Siamanto

[Siamanto]

How about:

Tour: I've heard both "tourer" and "trner!"

[Harut]

Եթե վերջին միավանկ բաղադրիչը  բայի արմատ է կամ բայի իմաստ ստացած գոյական, ապա հոգնակին ստանում  է -ներ վերջավորություն: Օրինակ՝

 

վիպագիր (եզ.) = վեպ գրող. այստեղ  գիր՝  գրել  բայի իմաստ ստացած գոյական  =վիպագիրՆԵՐ

 

տնտեսվար(եզ.) =տնտեսություն  վարող. այստեղ վար՝  վարել բայի արմատ =տնտեսվարՆԵՐ

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

ՍԱՍ, իմ կարծիքով այստեղ մի նրբություն կա:

Ինչպես նշեցիր՝ վիպագիր բառը, որպես մաստագիտություն, կազմված է վեպ և գրող արմատներից: Իսկ գրող բառը ինքնին արդեն բազմավանկ է: Հետևաբար՝ վիպագիրներ: Իսկ եթե վերձնենք վիպագիր բառը որպես գործ, ստեղծագործություն, այն արդեն կազմված է գիր արմատից, որը միավանկ է: Հետևաբար՝ հոգնակին կլինի վիպագրեր:

 

edit: Նույնը վերաբերում է տնտեսվարին, որտեղ վերջնարմատը վարողն է, այլ ոչ թե վարը:

Edited March 6, 2005 by Harut

[nairi]

I have never heard "dzovaper," always "dzovapner."

 

Well, tsovaper would hypothetically be right if we are speaking of "shores of sea", but the second we are talking about "beaches", it becomes "tsovapner". Which is why I introduced the idea of morphemes and the fact that some words are not considered to be compounds anymore, and are thus treated as single morphemes.

 

In Western Armenian, I've never heard "mgner," rather "mouger."

 

Interesting.

 

How about:

1- Tserk: I've heard both "tesrker" and "tesrner."

2- Vodk: I've heard both "vodker" and "vodner."

 

Dzerqer/dzerner are also used in SEA. It makes sense since both dzer and dzerq are accepted forms in SEA and I assume in SWA. But "dzerer" sounds too awkward. The "trill r" again here...

 

Votq is only votqer (at least according to one source) in SEA. On the other hand, I've heard "voter". Both make sense since both vot and votq, like dzer and dzerq, are accepted in SEA.

 

In Western Armenian, I've heard/read both "dzrakirner" and "dzrakrer." "Dzrakirner" being the common form, "dzrakrer" the "literary???"

 

SWA doesn't really exist, which is probably why there are so many "standard" forms. On the other hand, anything can happen in dialects..

 

To make things a bit more complicated and interesting, I would add that when reading newspapers from Armenia, I have noticed that "n" is suffixed to many words - not??? as a result of declination (holovoum!) Unfortunately, I don't have in mind an example, so please take it with a grain of salt!

 

Do you mean the article "the", as in "Sa mer bakn e"?

 

How about:

Tour: I've heard both "tourer" and "trner!"

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

In SEA it's drner.

 

It's interesting because I remember making plural mistakes in Armenian as a kid. I used to say things like durer and tunn (instead of tann - at home). And I still catch myself saying "erzhan" instead of "ezhan" (cheap). It's just easier to pronounce!! I caught my grandmother saying "arzhan" last summer! But that's a whole different topic..

 

 

Harut, I don't understand what vipagirner is as opposed to vipagrer? The second is a job, but then what is the first?

Edited March 6, 2005 by nairi

[Harut]

Harut, I don't understand what vipagirner is as opposed to vipagrer? The second is a job, but then what is the first?

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

take the example of պատմագիր. it has two meanings, one as պատմագիր ստեղծագործություն, the book, the writing, and պատմագիր as one who writes պատմություն. thus,

 

պատմագիրներ - historiographers

պատմագրեր - historical writings

[nairi]

Ach so. That's an interesting observation. Could we say the same for tsragir?

[Siamanto]

Well, tsovaper would hypothetically be right if we are speaking of "shores of sea", but the second we are talking about "beaches", it becomes "tsovapner". Which is why I introduced the idea of morphemes and the fact that some words are not considered to be compounds anymore, and are thus treated as single morphemes.

Interesting.

Dzerqer/dzerner are also used in SEA. It makes sense since both dzer and dzerq are accepted forms in SEA and I assume in SWA. But "dzerer" sounds too awkward. The "trill r" again here...

 

Votq is only votqer (at least according to one source) in SEA. On the other hand, I've heard "voter". Both make sense since both vot and votq, like dzer and dzerq, are accepted in SEA.

style_images/master/snapback.png

nairi,

Thank you for the explanations. I really enjoy savoring words and I'm fascinated by the subtleties of languages (and as you may have noticed, I often play with words.) It really saddens me each time I realize how "embryonic" is my Armenian. In a text, I would have certainly missed a subtlety such as

պատմագիրներ - historiographers

պատմագրեր - historical writings

style_images/master/snapback.png

Harut, thanks! I really appreciated it.

On the rare occasions when I read Armenian, I'm delighted by the beautifully rich and subtle words: it reflects an evolved and refined mind.

 

 

 

Do you mean the article "the", as in "Sa mer bakn e"?

style_images/master/snapback.png

No! I would also say: "ays mer pagn e."

It's not always at the end of the word i.e. "kentron" - "getron" in Western Armenian. I'll let you know if I think of a word where the 'n' is suffixed.

It did not really surprise me because it also exists in other languages. For instance, in French, the consonant 'n' - when following a vowel and followed by a different consonant or end of a word - is more or less silent, depending on the accent/region. Examples are, "centre" - "kentron" - and "contradiction" - both occurrences of 'n'.

Also, the Spanish "corazon" becomes in Portugese "coração."

 

 

It's interesting because I remember making plural mistakes in Armenian as a kid. I used to say things like durer and tunn (instead of tann - at home). And I still catch myself saying "erzhan" instead of "ezhan" (cheap). It's just easier to pronounce!! I caught my grandmother saying "arzhan" last summer! But that's a whole different topic..

style_images/master/snapback.png

Is she half Western Armenian? I would say "azhan er " but "arzhani er." (I'm aware it's a pun!)

It is noteworthy that Germans pronounces "er" in - for instance - "vater/mutter" as something between the English "er" - in "father/mother" - and "a."

[Gor-Gor]

Nairi: For some reason, I feel like I just remembered this from my elementary Armenian grammar classes -- well, either I remembered, or I just made it up. lol Anyway. Perhaps when the 'part par' is made of two words that are NOT joined by a helping letter (ie, the letter 'ayp' -- I forgot the proper word for it), then the word is treated as a regular, polysyllabalic word, and hence takes on 'ner.' This sounds so wrong, yet somehow I feel like I'm onto something....lol This does explain dzovapner at least, so now you can sleep easily at nights.

 

As for Standard Western Armenian -- my grammar books and teachers would beg to differ on there being no SWA!! lol No, but I understand what you mean. Spoken Western Armenian is all one big melting pot of different regional dialects. How something approaching a standard was developed and sustained is still quite an achievement in itself! With that said, there are accepted standard Western Armenian forms -- but they are little known and little used because of a lack of the need for formal use. Like, we did learn that the plural or 'moog' is 'mgner' and 'kir' becomes 'krer' etc -- but who ever says mgner and kirer?? No one! ...Until you open up a (Western) Armenian newspaper... Anyway -- bottom line is that there is a SWA, but it is rarely used because of a lack of support from any state.

 

Siamanto: Thanks for bringing up kentron/getron. This fascinates me! What's interesting is not only that EA adds the 'n' but also that they are spelled differently! EA uses duin/tuin and WA uses ta/da. The end result is that both versions pronounce the word with "T" sound, but they are spelled differently. This RARELY happens in Armenian when we take a loan word. Generally, it is transliterated from the foreign language using EA pronunciations (think: foreign place names). But in this case, it seems WA decided to protest a bit. lol The only other example I can think of is Beirut, where WA spells it with a be/pe, and EA with a pen/ben. But this is quite understandable.

 

As for tserk and odk, aren't those plural forms themselves, much like achk? The singular forms are tser(n), vod(n), ach -- and when they become plural, they keep the krapar form of pluralization, meaning they drop the 'n' and take on a 'q.' So is 'tserker' wrong? I dunno...

 

Oh also -- why doesn't the krapar 'n' return in ALL cases of holovum? For instance, vodNlva (religious washing of the feet ceremony); but tserakir (the 'n' doesn't return)...

 

God I love this stuff!

[nairi]

No! I would also say: "ays mer pagn e."

It's not always at the end of the word i.e. "kentron" - "getron" in Western Armenian.

 

This sounds more like a loss of /n/ in WA than an addition of /n/ in EA!

 

Is she half Western Armenian? I would say "azhan er " but "arzhani er." (I'm aware it's a pun!)

 

She's 100% jughtsi! (from Nor Jugha)

 

Nairi: For some reason, I feel like I just remembered this from my elementary Armenian grammar classes -- well, either I remembered, or I just made it up. lol Anyway. Perhaps when the 'part par' is made of two words that are NOT joined by a helping letter (ie, the letter 'ayp' -- I forgot the proper word for it), then the word is treated as a regular, polysyllabalic word, and hence takes on 'ner.' This sounds so wrong, yet somehow I feel like I'm onto something....lol This does explain dzovapner at least, so now you can sleep easily at nights.

 

It sounds like an interesting theory. Can you come up with a counter-example?

 

As for tserk and odk, aren't those plural forms themselves, much like achk? The singular forms are tser(n), vod(n), ach -- and when they become plural, they keep the krapar form of pluralization, meaning they drop the 'n' and take on a 'q.' So is 'tserker' wrong? I dunno...

 

Yes, but the Classical plural is pretty much extinct in Modern Armenian, resulting in words ending in /q/ as being either singular or meaning something completely different (like girq = book, not letters).

 

Also, according to Vaux's article, WA tends to double plurals anyway, like mardikner. So adding a productive plural suffix (-er/-ner) to an extinct plural suffix (q) shouldn't be of much concern to you!

 

Oh also -- why doesn't the krapar 'n' return in ALL cases of holovum? For instance, vodNlva (religious washing of the feet ceremony); but tserakir (the 'n' doesn't return)...

 

I have no idea. Will have to think about it. Just a question: what do you understand under holovum?

 

By the way, in EA it's votnalva (maybe it was just a typo. Doesn't make a difference anyway).

Edited March 6, 2005 by nairi

[Siamanto]

This sounds more like a loss of /n/ in WA than an addition of /n/ in EA!

style_images/master/snapback.png

Yes, that is a more accurate way of saying it! In general, silent consonants like 'n' and 's' are dropped/lost.

 

Does the fact that 'n' is - at times - silent help us understanding - at least - some of the "irregularities" of the plural form in Armenian?

 

 

 

She's 100% jughtsi!

style_images/master/snapback.png

Which "djugh" (branch) - of the Armenian Nation - would that be?

[Harut]

what SAS said above and Gor-Gor mentioned, those monosyloble words that receive -ներ are words that in Classical Armenian ended with -ն. one way to test whether the word is such word is to use it in a complex word. գառնարած, դռնապան, ձեռնափայտ, ոտնաման, մկնապուր (), ակնոց, ձկնեղեն, etc...

i don't see any pattern here and don't remember studying any in school, just words that used to end with -ն.

 

edit: well... maybe not so true... i just saw Gor-Gor mentioned ձեռագիր, and it doesn't contain ն...

Edited March 6, 2005 by Harut

[Siamanto]

what SAS said above and Gor-Gor mentioned, those monosyloble words that receive -ներ are words that in Classical Armenian ended with -ն. one way to test whether the word is such word is to use it in a complex word. գառնարած, դռնապան, ձեռնափայտ, ոտնաման, մկնապուր (), ակնոց, ձկնեղեն, etc...

i don't see any pattern here and don't remember studying any in school, just words that used to end with -ն.

style_images/master/snapback.png

I don't know if that is historically correct, but it makes sense to me.

In krapar, did those words end with 'n' i.e. "vodn?'

(nairi, I just found out that "sharzhoum" - movement - in krapar is "sharzhoumn" - how do you say it in Esatern Armenian?)

 

 

 

 

edit: well... maybe not so true... i just saw Gor-Gor mentioned ձեռագիր, and it doesn't contain ն...

style_images/master/snapback.png

Considering the long history of the Armenian language we should not expect to find a unique rule that explains all cases.

 

 

P.S.

It is noteworthy that - at least in some cases - the 'n' at the end of a word was replaced by '@' i.e. "dasn/inn" - in krapar" - "das@/in@" in Western Armenian.