# Greenlandic: Massachusettsminngaaneerpunga



## Alxmrphi

In early preparation for a hopeful adventure to Greenland sometime next year I wanted to see what the language was like and I was browsing over some of it, and on a website I saw this:


*Massachusettsminngaaneerpunga* 
Which apparently means *I'm from Massachusetts*.
I don't expect a bunch of Greenlandic experts to just sign up to the forum, the reason I ask, is because structurally it might be similar to a related language like Danish.

The question is just how does it work, basically?


----------



## Joannes

Hi Alex,

I'm afraid (West-)Greenlandic is not at all related to Danish or any Germanic language. It's an Eskimo-Aleut language. Some borrowings may be identified by speakers of Danish, but the languages' structures are very very different.


----------



## Alxmrphi

I thought they were linked cos Danish is the 2nd most spoken language there, like numbers after 12 don't exist, you need to use Danish, and it's part of the Danish kingdom, it's really not related_ at all_?


----------



## Joannes

Linguistically? No, not _at all_.


----------



## jonquiliser

Nope, not related at all  (Or yeah, well, they are, but that's a bit far-fetched to say). Greenland forms part of the Danish state, but the languages have nothing to do with each other.


----------



## jester.

Alex_Murphy said:


> The question is just how does it work, basically?




I have *absolutely* no idea of Greenlandic, but on first sight this looks like agglutination. You might want to check the Wikipedia article on the Greenlandic language itself in order to find out more.


----------



## jonquiliser

Yes. *Massachusettsminngaaneerpunga* should also indicate something along those lines


----------



## Whodunit

jester. said:


> I have *absolutely* no idea of Greenlandic, but on first sight this looks like agglutination. You might want to check the Wikipedia article on the Greenlandic language itself in order to find out more.


 
No, it is a polysynthetic language.

I _think_ that *punga* means _I_, and *minngaaneer* could be the word for _to be from_.


----------



## Alxmrphi

I noticed that "punga" is always in the first person singular so I think you're right Whodunit.
Off to read the pedia now


----------



## Spectre scolaire

Alex Murphy said:
			
		

> I thought they were linked cos Danish is the 2nd most spoken language there, like numbers after 12 don't exist, you need to use Danish, and it's part of the Danish kingdom, it's really not related_ at all_?


 I imagine the difference between Danish and _Kalaallisut_ (which is the _endonymic_ name of West-Greenlandic) would be something like between English and _Martian_. 

It is difficult to imagine the complexity of this language unless you have been told exactly how it works, f.ex. through a university seminar in which a text is being analyzed in details.

Another surprising(?) fact might be that it is simply “_impossible_” for a person outside Greenland to learn this language with some degree of fluency. The only exception seems to be a Dane who teaches – at least, he used to teach – at the University of Copenhagen. Being already an Eskimo scholar he stayed for more than a decade in Greenland integrating completely with the natives. (Who would have time and motivation to do such a thing?)

Many people are able to analyze a text in Greenlandic and make sense out of it, but to generate speech like a native is quite another matter. This language is almost inconceivably intricate – exactly like most American-Indian languages. Of course, I don’t include foreigners who grew up with the language, and I imagine there must be some among the Danes living in Greenland. From an American point of view, however, I wonder how many “Caucasians” you would find who actually learned a native American language from childhood, and who are able to use it fluently as an adult... 

As to previous generations of scholars, it would be interesting to know to what extent a person like Samuel Petrus Kleinschmidt (1814-1886), the author of a _Grammatik der grönländischen Sprache_ (1851), actually mastered the language. I personally doubt it. You can perfectly well write a grammar without knowing the language like a native. 
 ​


----------



## jester.

Whodunit said:


> No, it is a polysynthetic language.





			
				The article you linked said:
			
		

> An example from Western Greenlandic, a polysynthetic *and agglutinating* language


----------



## Whodunit

It is more a polysynthetic than agglutinating language. See here:



> The language, like its relatives, is highly polysynthetic and ergative.


----------



## Joannes

Whodunit said:


> It is more a polysynthetic than agglutinating language.


Do you know many polysynthetic languages that are not agglutinative?


Some more examples of how West-Greenlandic works from pieces of grammars I have here:

*Neriumaanngiliuk?*
neri-umaar-nngi-li-uk
eat-FUT-NEG-INT-2SG-3SG
'Are you not going to eat it?'

*Tassaannginnirpa tuqunniagaat?*
tassaa-nngin-nir-pa tuqun-nia-ga-at
be.that-NEG-wonder.1SG-3SG.INT kill-try.to-PASS.PART-their
'I wonder if he isn't the one they tried to kill?'

I'd rather learn Danish then. 


Edit: I'll add the sources to not violate copyright dinges.
First example from: Sadock, Jerold M. (1984) ‘Interrogativity in West Greenlandic’ In William S. Chisholm Jr. (ed.) _Interrogativity: A Colloquium on the Grammar, Typology and Pragmatics of Questions in Seven Diverse Languages._ p. 189-214. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Second from: Fortescue, Michael (1984) _West Greenlandic._ Londen: Croom Helm.
... neither literally quoted.


----------

