Mood in Modern Eastern Armenian

Dum-Tragut, Jasmine

doi:10.1075/slcs.120.27dum

Cited by 3 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Based on palatography and X-ray images, Xačatryan (1988: 170) and Khachatryan & Ayrapetyan (1971: 296) describe these affricates as apical and post-dental, having gingival contact which differs from the greater dental contact in the plosives. Other descriptions have labeled these affricates as alveolar (Fairbanks 1948;Dum-Tragut 2009) and dental (Allen 1950;Johnson 1954). Our speakers express disagreement and uncertainty as to whether the tongue usually makes contact with the back of the upper teeth.…”

Section: Affricates and Fricativesmentioning

confidence: 82%

“…The nasal /n/ has been categorized as 'dental' (Allen 1950;Xačatryan 1988), 'post-dental' (Khachatryan & Ayrapetyan 1971), 'alveodental' (Dum-Tragut 2009), 'alveolar' (Fairbanks 1948), and 'nondistinctly . .…”

Section: Sonorantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the native Armenian hypocoristic suffix /-o/ is used widely, as in /»mARo/ or /mA»Ro/ Մարո , Մարօ from /mAR»jAm/ Մարիամ 'Mariam (name)'. Schwa Khachaturian (1985) and Dum-Tragut (2009) treat the Armenian schwa as a phoneme, but Vaux (1998) and Allen (1950) analyze the schwa as purely epenthetic, and Hovhannisyan (2014: 89) argues that it is excrescent in some environments such as before final rhotics. Acoustically, schwa is mid-central for Yerevan Armenian, but might be transcribed as [´3 ] for Beirut Armenian (cf.…”

Section: Word-initial Vowelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some notable classes of exceptions to the general stress patterns include ordinal numbers, vocatives, and hypocoristics, as well as some common adverbs and a few other idiosyncratic words, suffixes, and clitics, though exceptional non-final stress can be variable (Vaux 1998:ch4;Dum-Tragut 2009). For example, the Yerevan Armenian clitic /el/ էլ 'also' can carry stress, while the Beirut cognate /Al/ ալ cannot, as in Yerevan /tÉ SAkAt »el, tÉ SA»kAt el/ էլ contributed by VP versus Beirut /dÉ ZA»gAd Al/ ճակատ ալ 'also a forehead'.…”

Section: Final Non-schwa Stress With Suffixes and In Compoundsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Armenian (Yerevan Eastern Armenian and Beirut Western Armenian)

Seyfarth,

Dolatian,

Guekguezian

et al. 2023

Journal of the International Phonetic Association

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Armenian (or , /hɑjeˈɾen/, ISO 639-1 hy) comprises an independent branch of the Indo-European language family.1 Its earliest attested ancestor is Classical Armenian in the fifth century CE (see Godel 1975; Thomson 1989; DeLisi 2015; Macak 2016). Modern Armenian is classified into two dialect families: Eastern Armenian (ISO 639-3 hye) and Western Armenian (ISO 639-3 hyw). Eastern Armenian is spoken in modern-day Armenia, and large speaker communities also exist in Georgia, Russia and Iran (shown in Figure 1). Western Armenian was historically spoken in the Ottoman Empire, but now includes varieties spoken throughout the Armenian diaspora in the Middle East, Europe, and the Americas (Donabédian 2018). There are substantial Western Armenian speaker communities in Turkey (Istanbul), Lebanon (Beirut), Syria (Aleppo, Damascus), California (Fresno, Los Angeles County), France (Marseilles), Australia (Sydney) and Argentina (Buenos Aires). There are also recent diaspora communities of Eastern Armenian speakers in California (Karapetian 2014), as well as communities of Western Armenian speakers in Armenia who escaped the Armenian genocide during World War I, who repatriated after World War II, or who fled the ongoing Syrian civil war. UNESCO lists Western Armenian as an endangered language in Turkey, and there are significant language promotion efforts in many diaspora communities that are intended to combat declining use by speaker generations born in the Americas and Europe (Al-Bataineh 2015; Chahinian & Bakalian 2016).

show abstract

Section: Affricates and Fricativesmentioning

confidence: 82%

Section: Sonorantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Word-initial Vowelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Final Non-schwa Stress With Suffixes and In Compoundsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Armenian (Yerevan Eastern Armenian and Beirut Western Armenian)

Seyfarth,

Dolatian,

Guekguezian

et al. 2023

Journal of the International Phonetic Association

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Differential Object Marking in Modern Eastern Armenian (Dum‐Tragut, 2009: 61–63) is suffixal, and thus morphologically comparable with its equivalent in Udi, but it does not show the same distribution as in Udi, Azerbaijani and Tat. The Modern Eastern Armenian unmarked nominative case is used for any inanimate direct object (17), while the dative case (marker ‐i ) is used for any referential human direct objects (example 18 from Scala 2021: 475–476), and most larger non‐human animate direct objects take either the unmarked nominative case or the dative case with no apparent change in meaning (example 19, but see Scala 2021: 474–475 for details):…”

Section: Synchronymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Origin of Differential Object Marking and Tripartite Alignment in Udi (East Caucasian)

Authier

2023

Trans of the Philol Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Thanks to the discovery in Mount Sinai Monastery of the Albanian palimpsest, which contains fragments of the Bible in an ancient form of Udi, this language has become the earliest attested member of the East Caucasian family. However, due to its long evolution in contact with unrelated languages, both old and modern Udi show many characteristics unknown to their closest relatives, including Differential Object Marking. Combined with ergative case marking, this feature results in a rare ‘tripartite alignment’. After describing the case marking of arguments in Lezgian, modern dialects of Udi and the three non‐East Caucasian languages of the area (Tat, Azeri and Armenian) showing Differential Object Marking, we examine the available Old Udi / Caucasian Albanian data, compare them with data from Old Armenian, Old Turkic and Middle Iranian, and try to assess the best candidate for the source of the Udi phenomenon in the light of what is known about its history in terms of contact and sociolinguistic dominance.

show abstract

Large Language Models and Low-Resource Languages: An Examination of Armenian NLP

Avetisyan,

Broneske

2023

Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: IJCNLP-AACL 2023 (Findings)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a comprehensive review of Natural Language Processing (NLP) research on Armenian, a language that, despite its rich history and unique linguistic characteristics, is currently low-resource in the field of NLP. We critically synthesize and evaluate various studies in Armenian NLP, highlighting key advancements, challenges, and areas for improvement. A notable aspect of our work is the underlined lack of application of Large Language Models (LLMs) in Armenian NLP, signifying an area of potential exploration and development. Identifying and discussing these challenges and opportunities lays the groundwork for future research directions in Armenian NLP. The emphasis on Armenian also advocates for increased attention to low-resource languages in NLP research, stressing the importance of linguistic diversity and equity. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first paper providing such an extensive review of Armenian NLP, marking a significant contribution to the field.

show abstract

Mood in Modern Eastern Armenian

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

Armenian (Yerevan Eastern Armenian and Beirut Western Armenian)

Armenian (Yerevan Eastern Armenian and Beirut Western Armenian)

The Origin of Differential Object Marking and Tripartite Alignment in Udi (East Caucasian)

Large Language Models and Low-Resource Languages: An Examination of Armenian NLP

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About