-
Thinking out loud. I’m wondering if this nfr Hr construction is the “resumptive with” in other Afrikan langauges. Most esp the example “nfr.wt n(y.w)t Ha.w=sn” = Di uman *wid dem seski badi* (?) da woman wid dey fine asses (?)
-
90,728 Abibisika (Black Gold) Points
It reminds me of Yorùbá “ní ti” – something like “in/at of”. I usually think of Hna for “with” but I think I see what you’re getting at.-
I think “ni ti”, if I’m understanding correctly, is the same as JA and Ayisyen get the “for them X” — e.g. kay pa mwe(n) = fi mi ous = my house. That’s generally how I’ve been looking at the Kmt.yw n(y) construct. Ex, i could do the above phrase as “fi dem seksi badi uman” (or fi dem uman badi seksi)
-
90,728 Abibisika (Black Gold) Points
When it begins a sentence it works like Twi deɛ ‘as for’. If I was looking to be faithful to mdw nTr grammatical structure and render the sentence into Yorùbá it would be Ẹlẹ́wà ní ti ara wọn. Something like owners of beauty in of their bodies; like when it comes to their bodies.-
How does would the sentence work in Twi?
-
90,728 Abibisika (Black Gold) Points
Mmaa a wɔn ho yɛ fɛ. Women whose bodies are beautiful.-
Medase. So twi does not have a “nì ti” type construct
-
90,728 Abibisika (Black Gold) Points
The ti of Yorùbá like n/nt/nw of mdw nTr functions like an indirect genitive. Akan has a different word order for possession, so it’s unlike either in that respect.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-