Mr. Dambisya:
Now, I do know that there are differences in the thought process of a UPC-supporter vs, say a DP supporter. But that is neither here nor there, with respect to counting.
My point in Luganda vs Lugwere was simply that enkoko in Luganda is uncountable in that it can denote 1 or more birds, whereas in Lugwere one knows immediately that it is reference to 2 or more birds.
If you care to delve into Luganda grammar a bit, I'll oblige you. There are several (5?) classes of nouns in Luganda, e.g.
mu - ba class -- ergo: muntu - bantu
mu - mi class musota - misota
etc.
So as soon as I say miti, a Luganda speakers knows that I refer to 'trees'; wheras muti is tree (in singular). Thus mu- denotes singular, and mi- denotes plural. in this class.
There several good texts on Luganda grammar, e.g.
1. Nsimbi et al Tuyige Oluganda -- a series of 5 or so books used in primary school.
2. J.D. Chesswas 1967 Essentials of Luganda
3. Dan Kyagaba 1997 Ggulama W'Oluganda Omusengejje
And, for the web-enabled, www.buganda.com (click on Language).
Further, R.A. Snoxall's 1967 Luganda-English Dictionary has several pages, at the beginning, about Luganda grammar.
Incidentally, Snoxall's dictionary which is now out of print, is available online as part of UC Berkeley's CBOLD project (Comprehensive Bantu Online Dictionary?).
Snoxall also wrote a Swahili-English Dictionary.
Musamize
ps: how is counting done in your mother-tongue>
YOSWA DAMBISYA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
YOSWA DAMBISYA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 08/25/04 12:33AM >>>
an aside:
In Luganda anaimals are generally uncountable. Thus enkoko can mean 1
or many chickens, and so it is with cattle and many animals (empologoma,
embizzi, embuzi , etc)
However, as a friend told me, in Lugwere -- with which Luganda has
about 68% lexical similarity, onkoko is one chicken and enkoko is 2 or
more. Likewise, onte is one cow, and ente are 2 or more cows.
What about counting in other languages?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Compatriot Ssemakula, I thought you would take that observation to its
logical conclusion, which in line with the thesis of the summarised
report should suggest that there are differences in the way the Bagwere
and Baganda "think". Not that I expect any such inference to stand to
scrutiny.
On a more serious note,don't you think your example is out of context
to the extent that it suggests that one can never know whether a Muganda
is talking about one chicken or more than one? "My chicken is lost" is
certainly understandably different from "My chickens are lost" - Enkoko
yange........ vs Enkoko zange.........., not so?
After all, even English,ever confused as it is, has one sheep, 2
sheep.....; but I thought the point of the report (as summarised) was
that when it comes to 1,2,3........, the group studied did not make a
fine distinction between fairly large numbers.
Interesting stuff!
Best regards,
Yoswa
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
