lexico
Chukchi Salmon
From ToMach's definition of clearly segmented particles which carry the grammatical function, your examples of Finnish and Turkish clearly look like agglutination. If the particles show more agreement than Japanese, then the over all degree of agglutination could be considered "more" agglutinative. But I don't know if that is the standard nomenclature.Elizabeth said:Does it then follow that languages, such as Turkish or Finnish, can be more highly or strongly aggluntinative than Japanese if they attach a greater number of affixes (showing agreement in person, tense, case, etc or would that make them inflected ? ).
Certainly there are full sentences in those two languages able to be expressed with a single agglutinative word, whereas with Japanese it is only the predicate.
I wonder if the number of agglutinative parts of speech combined with the number of segmented particles and the number of ways to affixate them should also be considered when deciding upon the degree of agglutination.
I know that Korean nouns, adjective-verbs, and verbs can take a huge number of suffixes to express what corresponds to the English prespositons, suffixes, pluraliztion, gerund, pluperfect, conjunctions, adverbials, adverbs, tense, participials, etc. These are all clearly segmented and compose the productive rules of morphology (save a few fossilized archaisms). I don't know how Korean compares to Japanese or other languages in this respect.
Last edited: