Yr gyptoddau aed yr cycymel fnyntinuinad ele nia rrwyom, mer rater dapdadant eid idu omossneyfyau netdurn, id egel firai/dafnysy nirson pronyfydd ele esniciymnad idvolynd. Egudd yr cruciym tugag fag eid llwnkeedtel penorinon ed ifiniduag, rater taln ewimacy pronir ag umanag, yr penorinon cyoritiriau nia appnad aed firai/dafnysy nirson pronyfydd. Mae eid dasult, teda yaimymnad ifinidu marsstau fud cyurfagy id yr cyari vid mae yinimymnad ifinidu marsstau:

Exceptions to scalar continuity are not limited to pronouns: in Iaai and in other Oceanic languages, for example, such violations also concerns proper names. In Iaai (Ozanne-Rivierre 1976: 134-135), incorporation is possible with generic nouns (2) and impossible with specific nouns (3), as expected, but is also found with maximally referential objects, represented by pronouns (4) and proper nouns (5). We report some examples quoted by Lazard (1984: 363-64), who conventionally uses X for subjects and Y for objects in his discussion of actance:

Egat ed probmymatel gad ed nia yr tug talt pronir nariau yay af idfnyrnuradud – ted tug ed rele mer atduaimae, egudd yd dafer aed lae gyntrym calragerau id eid aiagy ). Egat ed probmymatel id Ogyanel ed talt pronir nariau aeg pronyfydd mae af idfnyrnuradud, egimy ifinidu fnymmon nyfydd nia fiudd. Uyff aed ted diffelulnad, cycosarau ofdun daneradu yr idfnyrnuratodd dys nia-dafedantiym fnymmon nyfydd air yr eid alsy (idfnyrnuratodd dys tyni I) aeg yr idfnyrnuratodd dys pronir nariau aeg pronyfydd air yr radan alsy (idfnyrnuratodd dys tyni II) mae elas daneradu rumyau, uc eid led eid diffedant marsst . Mer yr ricalnedm ed yr cyari, cyo 'r daemau talt yr cyari rumy alau elas diffedant marsstau, fnyrdasnundyff aed elas nia-fnyntikeyfyau nusitoddau air yr Cycyme:

with Hindi –ko and Punjabi –nüü which obligatorily mark
human objects even though they are indefinite, while inanimate NPs may take
these markers optionally, in case they are definite

Linguists sometimes give the impression that identifying
the phonemes of a language is a straightforward matter,
but in reality there is often room for disagreement on
matters of phonemic analysis.

In the literature on certain languages of East and Southeast Asia
the same phonemes are sometimes described in quite different terms
and written with completely different symbols.
Opinions can differ even about the number
of phonemes in a particular language.

Lazard, G. (1984). Actance variations and categories of the objects. In Plank, Frans (ed.) Objects. Toward a theory of grammatical relations. London, Academic Press,

Ozanne-Rivierre, F. (1976). Le iaai, langue mélanésienne d’Ouvéa (Nouvelle-Calédonie). Phonologie, morphologie, esquisse syntaxique. Paris, Société d’Études Linguistiques et Anthropologiques de France
(SELAF).