An Indo-European Language: Declensions (1)

So, I’ve been fiddling around with a language again. This one is a derivative of Proto-Indo-European; I don’t have a name yet. It’s not a complete thing, just some musings; but here’s a bit about first declension nouns:

MASCULINE FEMININE
Singular Plural Singular Plural
anûft (1e): dark of night fōnâ (1e): grain
Nominative anūft anûfte fōnâ fōnâya
Vocative anûft anûfte fonâ fōnâya
Accusative 1 anûftun anûftanš fonân fōnânš
Comitative anûfte anûftuphi fonâya fōnâphi
Accusative 2 anêvdun anêvdanš fēnân fēnânš
Instrumental anêvde anêvduphi fēnâya fēnâphi
Genitive anêvdeh anêvdon fēnâh fēnâyon
Dative anêvdei anêvdumah fēnâi fēnâmah
Locative anêvdi anêvdu fēnâ fēnâhu
 
  amūnš (1a): month amūnâ (1a): cheek, thigh, young woman
Nominative amūnš amūnše amūnâ amūnâya
Vocative amunš amūnše amunâ amūnâya
Accusative 1 amunšun amūnšanš amunân amūnânš
Comitative amunše amūnšuphi amunâya amūnâphi
Accusative 2 amānšun amānšanš amānân amānânš
Instrumental amānše amānšuphi amānâya amānâphi
Genitive amānšeh amānšon amānâh amānâyon
Dative amānšei amānšumah amānâi amānâmah
Locative amānši amānšu amānâ amānâhu
tum (1e): house tūmâ (1e): village, farm
Nominative tūm tume tūmâ tūmâya
Vocative tum tume tumâ tūmâya
Accusative 1 tumun tumanš tumân tūmânš
Comitative tume tumphi tumâya tūmâphi
Accusative 2 temun temanš tēmân tēmânš
Instrumental teme temphi tēmâya tēmâphi
Genitive temeh temon tēmâh tēmâyon
Dative temei temmah tēmâi tēmâmah
Locative temi temu tēmâ tēmâhu
irôk (1a): husband irōgâ (1e): authority, orderliness, spirit of law
Nominative irōk irôk irōgâ irōgâya
Vocative irôk irôk irogâ irōgâya
Accusative 1 irôkun irôkanš irogân irōgânš
Comitative irôke irôkuphi irogâya irōgâphi
Accusative 2 irâgun irâganš irāgân irāgânš
Instrumental irâge irâguphi irāgâya irāgâphi
Genitive irâgeh irâgon irāgâh irāgâyon
Dative irâgei irâgumah irāgâi irāgâmah
Locative irâgi irâgu irāgâ irāgâhu
xors (1i): implement of torture   tōrvâ (1e): wood
Nominative xōrs xorse tōrvâ tōrvâya
Vocative xors xorse torvâ tōrvâya
Accusative 1 xorsun xorsanš torvân tōrvânš
Comitative xorse xorsuphi torvâya tōrvâphi
Accusative 2 xirzun xorzanš tērvân tērvânš
Instrumental xirze xirzuphi tērvâya tērvâphi
Genitive xirzeh xirzon tērvâh tērvâyon
Dative xirzei xirzumah tērvâi tērvâmah
Locative xirzi xirzu tērvâ tērvâhu

The first declension is small but significant, containing many common words. All the first declension nouns feature alternations between two vowels – one used in the direct cases and one used in the oblique cases. In some cases, these alternations have been created through analogy, or recreated after sound-changes obscured the original alternation. Masculine first declensions ending with a stop also show a voicing alternation, in which the final stop or cluster is voiceless in direct cases but voiced in oblique cases – this alternation has spread by analogy from the final voicing in the nominative and vocative singulars. All first declensions – indeed, all nouns – show a vowel length alternation, with the nominative singular showing a long vowel and the vocative, first accusative and comitative singulars all showing short vowels. The remaining cases show either a long or a short vowel depending on the word – all first declension feminines show a long vowel, while most but not all first declension masculines show a short vowel.

The feminines of the first declension are often collectives or abstracts – but not always. The first declension is not normally productive, but the feminising suffix – is an exception. This suffix has spread by analogy from the derivation of tōrvâ (‘wood’) from toru (‘tree’), and is now used to derive substances from objects, particularly when those substances are to be used in craft or construction. Further examples include šnōurvâ (‘sinew-matter’) from šnēur (‘a sinew’), and ōšīnvâ (‘ash-wood’) from ōšinu (‘ash-tree’). The feminine paradigm shows an interesting reconstruction in the nominative and vocative plurals, which are identical to the comitative singular, by analogy with the same identity in the masculines.

 

 

——-

 

Comments and corrections most welcome!

Rawàng Ata: Verbal Clauses (1)

Obviously, this isn’t finished. But, I thought I’d give a sneak peak for the new year anyway.

————–

CHAPTER 4 – SIMPLE CLAUSES

4.0 – Contents of this Chapter

There are four types of clauses in Rawàng Ata. We will begin with the most complicated type – the verbal clause – and then move on to the others: the absolute clause (nominal or prepositional), and the elementally simple nominal and metatopical clauses.

Verbal clauses are complex. We will consider, firstly, the general composition and ordering of the verbal clause, and then the specific form of verbal clauses centred around dynamic, stative, and motive verbs.  In doing so we will have to consider transitivity and animacy in dynamic clauses, control in stative clauses, and species of indirect object in motive clauses. This will lead us into a discussion of anomalous case-selection, before we turn to the syntax of passive and antipassive voices. We will then consider semantic demands for verbs in the concrete state.

4.1Verbal Clauses

The verbal clause is the heart of the language. It contains at least and no more than one verbal phrase, and will often also include nominal phrases. Nominal phrases are employed to provide the subject and/or object of the verbal phrase.There are never more than two nominal phrases within the verbal clause (except where two or more nominal phrases are included within an overarching more complicated nominal phrase, as through conjunction or apposition).

The basic order in a verbal clause is SVO.

4.2 – Dynamic Clauses

Verbal clauses based  upon dynamic verbs feature a dynamic verb phrase, ‘expect’ a subject nominal phrase, and can optionally also include an object nominal phrase. In saying that the clause ‘expects’ a subject, we mean that in the absence of an overtly expressed subject, one will be assumed according to simple anaphoric rules, which will be discussed later.

The concept of animacy is central to the syntax of dynamic clauses, for two reasons. Firstly, many verbs have ‘animacy-bars’, which set the highest or lowest permitted animacy level for the subject. For instance, sakkung- is ‘animate plus’ – inanimate objects cannot be the subject of this verb. furil-, “to annoy, pester, frustrate, tease”, is ‘feminine minus’ – inanimate, animate non-human, and human female subjects are permitted, but male subjects are not (and nor are pronouns or names).

Secondly, animacy plays a role in determining transitivity. There are two paradigms for dynamic clauses: if the action is transitive, the subject is in the direct case; if the action is intransitive, the subject is in the ergative case. The object, if it is present, is always marked with the accusative case. Transitivity in turn has four criteria:

-          there must be a definite and particular object (though it need not be present in speech).

-          the object must be of lower or equal animacy to the subject.

-          the action must be completed and effective.

-          the action must materially and directly affect the the object.

If the subject is in the ergative, one of these four criteria must not have been met. For example: datta sakkunga kòmana (the sailor kicked the girl) vs. kòmaya kusakkunga dattama (the girl kicked the sailor) – the girl is of lower animacy than the sailor because she is female, so she must be put in the ergative. datta sakkunga vs dattaya sakkunga – both mean “the sailor kicked”, but in the latter case it is intransitive, and therefore means one of three things: the sailor kicked out without an object; the sailor attempted to kick an object but failed to do so, or did so ineffectually, or began to do so but then stopped, or kicked in the direction of an object but did not reach it; or the sailor kicked an object, but had no material effect upon the object (if, perhaps, he kicked a mountain).

There is a clear hierarchy of animacies. First person pronouns, and pronouns with which the verb agrees through first-person prefixes, are of greater animacy than second person (which includes vocatives – however, note that vocatives do not trigger directive verbal syntax), which are of greater animacy than nouns for certain mass animates of power, which outrank humans (including non-humans personified through the use of titles), which outrank animals, which outrank tools, which outrank living plants, which outrank ordinary nouns, which outrank possessed non-tools, which outrank local nouns, which outrank abstractions.

Within the human category, non-females outrank females, and traditionally higher-status individuals would outrank lower-status individuals – however, these days insisting upon the latter hierarchy is seen as archaic, and often offensive. Titled mass animates of power (such as deities) outrank humans.

In order to produce the required effect (transitive or intransitive syntax), speakers will sometimes alter the animacy of arguments – arguments are often raised in animacy by making them vocatives, or by adding titles, and lowered by the use of ‘diminutives’ (nouns referring to a thing of lower animacy, used as metaphors). Some of these diminutives retain their ordinary meaning – fongò still literally means “shovel”, even though it is also used as a diminutive for a man engaged in manual labour, just as kuttin, “frigatebird”, can also be a diminutive for a strong-willed young married woman – while in other cases the diminutive is now associated wholly with the metaphorical meaning: ifari is an inanimate (vegetative) diminutive for a constrictor snake, and is only rarely used in its older meaning, ‘liana’. In these cases of complete meaning transference, there is often ambiguity over the degree of animacy, as the animacy of the new meaning slowly replaces the animacy associated with the old meaning. It is also possible for diminutives to occur in chains (a diminutive replaced by its own diminutive), yielding semantically-obscure substitutions – for example, a human singer may be called by the diminutive ruòhi, literally meaning a type of brightly-coloured fruit – because ruòhi is a diminutive of nalinà, a type of frog, which itself is a direct diminutive used for singers. The apparently obscure substitution comes in two stages: the frog is a euphonous warbler, and its bright-orange throat, blown into a globe in singing, leads to the comparison with the fruit. Other substitutions may be wholly senseless, driven by present or past similarities in sound, or sometimes similarities in sound with another word (sometimes itself archaic) for the same concept. Sometimes interpreting diminutives may require knowledge of local histories and legends, and many diminutives differ from place to place (to such an extent that observing notable diminutives is a common shorthand to imply a particular dialect, often more readily recognised than an attempt to imitate an accent).

4.3 – Stative Clauses

Stative clauses are built around a stative verb. They ‘expect’ an object, and may optionally have a subject also. They are often verbs indicating a state of being, but also may be perception verbs, or on occasion verbs indicated some social transaction. By default, the subject is in the ergative, and the object is in the direct case (i.e. is unmarked). However, if the subject is considered to have an unusually high level of control over, or to have to an unusual degree instigated the state, the object may be placed in the accusative. As with dynamic verbs, some stative verbs have animacy bars – maximum or minimum levels of animacy that are permitted for either the subject or the object. For instance, tōmid-, “to be in debt (to) [o.]” (the object is in debt to the subject (frequently the English translations of stative verbs will reverse the subject-object relation relative to Rawàng Ata – for this reason we note in the definition ‘[o.]’ indicating that the object in Rawàng Ata is the subject of the English translation)), requires both subject and object to at least be human; syuk-, “to be touched by, feel a light passing touch or stroke [o.]” can take any object, but the subject, if any is present, must be at least animate; lokiun-, “consider, regard [o.]” can take any subject, but the object must be at least human.

4.4 – Motive Clauses

Motive clauses are built around a motive verb. They ‘expect’ a subject, and may optionally also take an indirect object. The subject is always in the direct case (i.e. is unmarked). The object, meanwhile, is a noun that has been placed into an indirect case. This may be the lative case (for motion to the object), prolative case (motion past or along the object), accusative case (motion into, out of, or toward or away from the object), avertive case (motion away from, or under fear of, the object), or locative case (a more general motion, often in the vicinity of or within the object). It may even be the ergative case. These case assignments are largely (but not entirely) lexical, and particular verbs may take indirect objects in unexpected cases.

4.5 – Anomalous Cases

Rawàng Ata is a simple language, but not so simple that all nouns always appear in their expected cases. Indeed not. In dynamic clauses, the object (if present) may sometimes appear in the lative, prolative, or ergative, or even the avertive; the subject may rarely appear in the lative. In stative clauses, the object may appear in the locative or avertive, and the subject in the prolative or avertive. In motive clauses, the subject may be ergative, or even accusative.

The lative quite commonly appears as the object of a dynamic verb. Inevitably, the verb must be intransitive, except in certain lexically-conditioned circumstances (that is, when used productively the verb must be intransitive, but for certain verbs the verb can be transitive in some cases) and the lative can usually be read with the meaning of “up to”, or sometimes more generally “towards”, particularly with verbs that are to imply incomplete or unsuccesful action. For example, dattaya sakkunga komàsa may be translated as “the sailor kicks out at the girl” or “the sailor kicks the girl but so weakly it is barely felt”. In this sense, lative objects can accompany almost any verb. Lative subjects are far more rare, but do occur with some specific verbs: for instance, oluìs-, “drip (upon)”, always takes a lative subject.

The prolative, like the lative, is found quite frequently as the object of a dynamic verb – again, the verb will always be intransitive (except in certain lexical instances). The prolative in these cases can be read as “along”, “past”, or “on the surface of”. It can be used to indicate a ‘miss’ – dattaya sakkunga kòmaki might be translated “the sailor kicked the air attempting to kick the girl” – but it can also imply a grazing hit. It is also used with certain verbs associated with tangential motions. It is less common than the lative. Unlike the lative, the prolative can also be found as the subject of a stative verb, most commonly referring to the sensation of light, sound or smell reflected off, or from the periphery of, an object. For example, hiàngingi būkinta kòma  means “the girl was blinded by the glare of the light reflecting off the metal”, where hiàngiya would imply the the metal was itself the source of the light.

The ergative case can be found marking the objects of some dynamic verbs – less frequently than the lative or prolative, but still not unusually, and often productively. It tends to imply either that the stated object is a proxy for the true object (an owner, often, or something related in some other way), or that there is a partitive or durational element to the action. An example of the first type might be datta va kòmaya, roughly “the sailor inserted something sexually into the young woman (polite)”, where the ergative object indicates the unspoken presence of a more direct object (that is, a more literal translation might be “into the belonging-to-the-young-woman thing”); and example of the second type might be datta suta sīya, “the sailor drank a portion of alcohol for a while”, where datta suta sīma would imply “the sailor is an alcohol-drinker” or “the sailor was drinking alcohol”. However, sometimes ergative subjects are used with no obvious motivation, particularly in the formation of idioms – for example, a common euphemism for defecation is rutta lōya, “hold the pot”, where rutta lōma retains the more literal meaning.

The ergative may also be found as the subject of a motive verb. This was until recently seen as ill-spoken, and is an analogy from the use of the ergative with dynamic intransitives. It implies an incomplete or unsuccesful action. This is productive, but not common.

The locative may be found as the object of a dynamic verb. This is the case with a few specialised verbs, but otherwise frowned upon. The object of a stative verb may also be in the locative; this, again, is lexical.

The use of avertive objects for dynamic verbs is primarily lexical, but has also been expanded to other verbs, with the sense of a thing feared or hated, or an object that is acted upon in order to harm it. With stative verbs, on the other hand, the avertive object asserts extreme control over the action. Avertive subjects are lexical for stative verbs.

The accusative is sometimes found as the subject of a motive verb, where it implies self-interest and self-control.

It is important to note that although a verb may allow an anomalous object or subject, this may involve a considerable change of meaning, and this meaning may depend on the nouns involved. Returning to the example of sut-, “to drink”: datta suta sīya is “the sailor drank some alcohol”, datta suta sīma is “the sailor drank alcohol”, datta suta sīki is “the sailor lapped up the alcohol like a cat”, and dattaya suta sīsà is “the sailor tested the temperature of the alcohol”; however, datta suta kòmana is “the sailor performed cunnilingus on the woman”, while dattaya suta kòmaki is “the sailor licked the woman”, dattaya suta komàsa is “the sailor chastely kissed the woman”, and datta suta kòmaya was “the sailor was in love with the woman” or “the sailor enjoyed spending a little time with the woman”. Most verbs are not so fertile, but this perhaps will indicate that great care must be taken with case-selection. This example also shows the interesting way in which sut- regularly takes the prolative (ie takes the prolative without needing to be made intransitive) when the object is a liquid, but not when it is not.

 

TO BE CONTINUED…

Rawàng Ata Verbs and Verb Phrases

Not definitive, of course, but currently the direction in which I’m headed…

CHAPTER 3 – VERBS AND VERB PHRASES

3.0 Contents of this Chapter

This chapter is about verbs and verb phrases. First we will deal with verbs; then, with other elements of the verb phrase.

Verbs occur in finite and nonfinite forms. We will look first at finite verbs, and then at nonfinite verbs.

Finite verbs have two distinct forms – liquid state and concrete state. First, we will deal with the liquid state. The syntactic and semantic principles underlying the choice of state will be dealt with elsewhere.

Verbs also have two distinct nonfinite forms. These are the simple infinitive and the abstract infinitive. These will be dealt with together and their differences explained. There are also nouns formed derivationally from verbs; these will not be dealt with here, except where they overlap with nonfinite verbs.

After addressing the verb itself, we will then discuss other elements: verbal articles, verbal-nominal particles, and adverbs.

Finally we will address serial verb constructions.

3.1 The Liquid Verb

Rawàng Ata verbs have two distinct forms – liquid state and concrete state. First, we will deal with the liquid state. The syntactic and semantic principles underlying the choice of state will be dealt with elsewhere.

Rawàng Ata verbs are cited in the form of a verb root; these roots cannot stand as words themselves, and often could not do so, as they violate the phonotactic constraints by frequently ending in consonants that cannot appear in final position.

Roots may be simple or complex. The great majority are simple, and have one indivisible body. Complex verbs have ‘initial’ and/or ‘terminal’ augments, between the body and which can be placed affixes. Examples of simple verbs include raw- (‘settle, agree, rest, fix’), dil- (‘see’), sakkung- (‘kick’), and lefi-, “touch heads with”; examples of complex verbs include s-dil- (‘notice’), mu-dil- (‘be highly noticeable’), dī-dil (‘perceive indescribably’), and sakkung-t- (‘set into motion by kicking’).

Verbs inflect by marking up to five categories: subject agreement, object agreement, location, voice, and ition.

Subject agreement is by means of prefixes. There are approximately twenty-six commonly-found prefixes, including the zero prefix. These can be divided into fourteen first-person prefixes (wa-, ba-, ka-, kāta-, īku-, iku-, in-, isi-, bana-, ō-, wana-, diyai-, ku-, làka-, bitti-), three second-person prefixes (tu-, ōtu-, angātu-), seven third-person prefixes (sa-, ra-, nà-, ku-, angāna-, i- and -/),one ‘fourth-person’ prefix (lu-), one ‘fifth-person’ prefix (du-), and one ‘sixth-person’ prefix (yay-).

Among the first-person prefixes, ba- is used only by adult male singular speakers. It is used in most formal speech, but in casual speech it has connotations of stuffiness, grandiosity, chauvinism (when used when speaking to women) and arrogance, and is therefore mostly used in asserting or resisting authority and power. kāta- is the female equivalent in terms of grandiosity (and is only ever used when speaking to other women), but is not used in formal settings – instead, īku- is used; it is not seen as potentially offensive like ba- is, so its use is more frequent. iku- is a less formal version that retains the connotation of propriety and modesty, and is used by women when speaking to those who deserve respect but not honour (elders, husbands, etc). ka- is the usual neutral prefix for female speakers. in- is used when typically when speaking to women, and projects a dominant but non-authoritative, young adult male persona – although it is usually used by female speakers; when used by men, it is usually only to address lovers (of either gender), although the oyo gender use it extensively in non-romantic contexts. bana- is the voice of a male child, though it is rarely used by children in practice; it is mostly used by women wishing to stress their own childishness (to appear winsome, for instance, or to pre-empt and defuse accusations of foolishness) – men will only use it when confessing or committing the most foolish actions, and the female kunyi gender emphatically never use it. isi- is a very humble prefix usually used only by women, in cases of marked power imbalence; diyai- is even more humble, and is rarely used in the modern world except by the most penitant wrongdoers, and when addressing the most glorious of masters; isi- and diyai- may perhaps be translated by expressions like ‘I, your lowly servant’ and ‘I, your worthless and inadequate slave’; for men, however, isi- may be more demeaning than diyai-; on the other hand, isi- is more likely to be used playfully or in jest, which diyai- almost never is. wa-, meanwhile, is gender- and status-neutral; it is the default prefix for male speakers, and is used by women in situations that are formal or businesslike but that do not merit the superiority of kāta- or the formalism of īku-; however, some may take moral, sociological or grammatical offense at a woman using wa-, the exception being when a woman is speaking on behalf of others. wa- is often used as a neutral and inclusive exclusive plural, although any other prefix can also be used in this way (for instance, a female speaker using a female prefix with a plural meaning does not entail that she is speaking only on behalf of other women, though it may suggest so). wana- is the standard inclusive plural – that is, used where English would use ‘we’ to mean ‘you and I (and maybe others)’. ō- is a more formal, and more hostile, equivalent of wana-; it may also be used with no clear inclusive or plural meaning, to avoid responsibility, in a similar way to some usages of English ‘one’. làka- is a prefix taught to foreigners, previously only used by removers of human waste; bitti- was once used by those who scavenged discarded items for things that might be of use to others, but is now often used ironically by those who see themselves, or are portraying themselves, as sharp negotiators, or who are defending their decision to speak plainly or coarsely.

There are a great many other first-person prefixes, in theory. Many of these mark varying degrees of social status (of the speaker, of the addressee, and of any audience) and of kin connection – these prefixes are not generally used in modern speech, and are considered rude, obsolete, and inegalitarian, although they may be found in old documents or poems, or occasionally used in highly-literate jest (most speakers are unfamiliar with them). Others are exclusive plurals formed from the various singulars, generally by whole or partial reduplication, or by the affixes ō- or –tō or –tan or –an, or the infix -n-, but most of these are now obsolete. Theoretically, a woman might use the prefix òinkuìnkutan-, but such a form would never in practice be encountered outside comedy.

In general, there is a tendency to avoid any first-person prefix and to speak of oneself in the third person where possible.

Among the second-person prefixes, tu- is used as standard, ōtu- as a more respectful version, and angātu- as an honorific. As it is common to avoid using second-person prefixes except in cases of formality, tu- often has a derogatory connotation; however, this is not always present, when the choice to use a prefix has clearly been made for other reasons (for instance, among family there is less care taken to avoid directly addressing people, and hence there is less connotation attached to the theoretically ‘neutral’ choice of ‘tu’). ōtu- and, particularly, angātu- are also often used in derogatory contexts, particularly to insult foreigners, or others seen as not being fully proficient in the language – distinguishing insult from honour is generally only possible through analysis of the wider context (generally informal usage with highly formal prefixes is probably intended as a covert insult, or at least as a rough jest). As with first-person prefixes, there are a host of obsolete second-person honorific and derogatory prefixes no longer in general use.

Of the third-person prefixes, the zero prefix is used for transitive actions when the subject is a male human (or portrayed as equivalent to human in the case of some fables and children’s stories). In the case of other animates (gods, animals, tools, some natural phenomena), or in the case of human subjects with an intransitive action, or in cases where the human subject is accompanied by a counter (eg plurals), the prefix used is ra-; for inanimates, it is sa-. nà- is used with inanimate mass nouns, when no counter is present (when a counter is present, sa- is used). ku- is used with female human subjects with no counter; angāna- is an honorific. i- is used for subjects that are possessed by something else, unless they are inalienably possessed (in which case lu- is used).

lu- is the ‘fourth-person’ prefix – that is, it is used with the sense of ‘the owner of the thing we’re talking about’. du-, the ‘fifth person’, is used in the vague sense of ‘somebody’, but with the expectation that there is some specific person being talked about – it’s just that the speaker doesn’t know who it happens to be.  The ‘sixth person’, yay- is used in the sense of ‘the causer or controller’ – often someone who has not been explicitly referenced.

These subject prefixes are placed before the root (i.e. after any initial augment). When an initial augment is present, sandhi must be applied where appropriate. For instance, the root s-dil- becomes, with a third person subject, djil-, jadil-, djadil-, jnàdil-, hudil-, sangānadil- or sidil-; dī-dil- yields dīdil-, dijadil-, disadil-, dingàdil-, dīkudil-, dilangānadil- and dīdil-; mu-dil gives mudil-, mujdil-, mujdil-, mùntil-, mukudil-, mangānadil-, and muidil-. This complexity is ameliorated by the small number of complex roots in the language, and the even smaller number of initial augments utilised.

Voice is a ternary category, marked by a suffix. Active voice is unmarked; passive voice is marked by the suffix –ak; antipassive, by the suffix –ut. The use of these voices will be described elsewhere. The suffixes are added to the root directly.

Object agreement is rather more complicated. There are three first-person suffixes (-aw, -awan, -ō), two second-person suffixes (-ut, -angātu), four third-person suffixes (-ar, -as, -i and -/), and one fourth-person suffix (-ul). These are the same as, or transparantly derived from through metathesis, the equivalent subject prefixes. Worth noting is the fact that –ut is the object equivalent of both tu- and ōtu-, that –ō is a formal first-person suffix of either number (-aw being singular and plural exclusive, -awan being plural exclusive), and that zero-marking is used when the object is human and the action is intransitive, or when the subject is human and the action is intransitive.  Object agreement follows the root, or the voice suffix if present.

Version agreement is quaternary. The verb agrees with the version of the noun with which the verb as a whole agrees (object or subject), or, if it agrees with both object and subject, it agrees in version with the subject. First version agreement is unmarked; second version is marked by –a; third version is marked by –ang; fourth-version is marked by –i, but is unmarked if either the subject or the object is marked with –i.

Ition is a binary category: andative (motion away from the deictic locus) or venitive (motion toward the deictic locus). The deictic locus will be explained elsewhere. The andative is marked by a zero suffix, while the venitive is marked by the suffix –u, with the exception explained below. This follows the object suffix if present, otherwise the voice suffix if present, and otherwise the root. The moving thing is the argument which which the verb agrees, or the subject if it agrees with both arguments – although the motion may well be metaphorical.

Location is also a binary category: on land or at sea. This interacts with the ition suffix thusly: andative + maritime = -ni; venitive + maritime = -ai; venitive+terrestrial = -u. Otherwise, the terrestrial is marked by -a, and the maritime is marked with -i. It is important to note that location follows the terminal augment if there is one, and thus may be separated from the ition suffix – in this case, the equations mentioned do not apply. For example, sakkung-t with first-person object, active voice, gives, in the four ition/location combinations: sakkungota, sakkungoti, sakkungòuta, sakkungòuti; sakkung- in the same inflexions gives sakkungawa, sakkungi, sakkungu, sakkungai. In the passive with a third-person inanimate object, sakkung- yields sakkungakasa, sakkungakajni, sakkungakasu, sakkungakasai; in the same inflexions, sakkung-t- yields sakkungakatta, sakkungakatti, sakkungakasuta, sakkungakasuti. In the active, and with zero (or no) object suffix, lefi- yields lefia, lefini, lefiu, lefiai.

It is important to note that not all verbs are marked for both subject and object agreement. Indeed, only verbs in so-called ‘directive’ text do so – ‘directive’ text is any conversation in which the interlocutor is directly addressed, or in which the speaker uses the first-person. In general, directive text is avoided where possible, and is usually found only in relatively formal or intimate contexts – among those who are not family, and who are not talking to their direct superiors, the use of directive text will be perceived as hostile, and possible offensive. An analogue might be the decision to add ‘sir’ to the end of every English sentence when talking to a stranger (and outside a business situation).

In non-directive (‘discursive’) text, either the subject or object may be marked, but not both. This decision is largely lexical – some verbs (dynamic verbs) generally mark the subject and other verbs (stative verbs) generally mark the object. Some verbs can mark either – often with a change in meaning. For example, savota means “it strikes sth.”, while votasa means not “it is struck” but “it is broken by a blow”. Every dynamic verb can be transformed into a stative verb and vice-versa – but in practice, many verbs are only commonly used in one form or the other, or have one form take on a particularly restricted or metaphorical meaning. For example, rasakkunga means “they kick”, but sakkungara means “they feel attacked by new news and developments when they are already unhappy” and is a less common expression.

In addition to dynamic and stative verbs, a third species exists: motive verbs. These are intransitive by definition and only ever mark agreement with the subject – even in directive text. They generally deal with motion, as the name implies, but also include a small number of ‘procedural’, ‘performative’ and ‘textual’ verbs. Examples of these include bortat- (“prepare a meal”, procedural), kal- (“undress for bed”, procedural), iur- (“I resign”, performative), lai- (“I accept”, performative), i- (“I disown you”, performative), hut- (“go away!”, performative), nos- (“remember these words being said”, textual), and yùt- (“believe this statement”, textual). Of these, the performatives are of particular note, as they exist only with first-person agreement, and in a number of cases this is zero-marked. For example, ia is the andative terrestrial of of i-, and iura is the andative terrestrial of iur-; however, the andative terrestrial of lai- is walai, with overt person marking but no overt location marking (one of only a handful of irregular verbs in this regard).

The use of terrestrial and maritime location is also worth commenting on. Generally, these markers mean exactly that – they say whether the event occurred on land or at sea. However, there are cases when the maritime marker is used even when the event occurred on land. Typically, this indicates uncertainty, alienation from others, riskiness, lack of wisdom or moral uprightness, unclear aims or consequences, lack of knowledge by the speaker of the details of the action, and so forth – generally a sense of being ‘far away’ and ‘beyond/without help’. It is also often used for events on land that are not the home island itself – particularly if performed by people who are only ‘passing through’. The terrestrial marker can sometimes be used for actions at sea, but more narrowly – mostly, it is fair to say that an event is ‘on land’ if a person could still easily swim to solid land (which can include swimming down – events passing over reefs can often be ‘on land’).

3.2 The Concrete Verb

The concrete state of a verb can be formed from the liquid state through affixes. In the case of most dynamic and active verbs, this means adding the prefix a- and the suffic –an; in the case of motive verbs, it means adding the prefix to- and the suffix –an. There are also a small number of verbs in which it means adding the prefix kà- and the suffix –a, or the prefix a- and the suffix –ō, or a- and –ìan. Finally, there are some verbs which use the normal affixes in most cases, but replace the suffix –an with the suffix –oto if the object is of a certain type (specifically, where the object is a dual). These irregular verbs are a distinct minority. Verbs with final augments place the suffix after the augment and add an infix between root and augment (almost always –a-); verbs with initial augments place the prefix before the augment.

Concrete verbs inflect to agree with their objects. In the case of motive verbs, there is only one core argument, so this is the same as the ‘subject’ they agree with in liquid state. They agree by means of a prefix. These prefixes are the same as the subject prefixes for liquid state verbs, except that the only first-person prefixes are su- (singular or exclusive) and wa- (inclusive plural), and that with a female object, the same prefix is used as for a male (i.e. ra- or zero); it should be noted also that the rules for zero-marking match those for zero-marked objects in the liquid state. Furthermore, the fourth, fifth and sixth-person prefixes are not used. It is worth reiterating that although in the liquid state wa- indicates singular or exclusive, it indicates inclusive in the concrete state.

Concrete verbs also, in very limited way, inflect to agree with their subjects: this is only true to the extent that a verb that would be dynamic if it were in its liquid state that has a feminine subject will take ku- in place of the concrete prefix a-, and ko- in place of the concrete prefix to-.

Concrete state verbs do not take voice marking. Nor do they take ition marking. They do, however, inflect for location: terrestrial location is zero-marked, while maritime location is marked by –i. This suffix follows the concrete suffix.

For example, “it (inanimate) is kicked” is asasakkungan or asasakkungani. “She  touches heads with him” is kulefìan – the root-final –i takes an accent by analogy with –ìan concretes, and the human subject takes zero marking because the action is intransitive (the details of transitivity will be explained elsewhere).

3.3 Non-Finite Forms of the Verb

Rawàng Ata has not one but three types of infinitive. The simple infinitive is used to refer to an instance or example of the verb but without commenting on its subjects, objects, ition, or location; the abstract infinitive is used to refer to the general concept of the verb. The simple infinitive comes in liquid and concrete states. The difference between simple and abstract infinitive often corresponds to definite/indefinite and undetermined abstract nouns in English – so, for instance, rawàng, the simple infinitive, might be glossed as ‘the agreement’ or ‘an agreement’, and sakkungàng might be glossed as ‘the kick’ or ‘a kick’, while asàrawani might be glossed ‘agreement’, and asàsakkungani might be glossed ‘kicking’.

As can be seen from these examples, the simple infinitive adds the suffix –àng, while the abstract adds the prefix asà- and the suffix –ani. Concrete simples are simply formed from the concrete form of the verb. Verbs with final augments add the suffixes after the augment and an infix between root and augment unless in the concrete state already (-a- for simple infinitives, -asà- for abstracts, with this prefix becoming a- when these abstract infix is present), while verbs with initial augments add the prefix after the augment. Thus, sakkung-t- has the simple liquid infinitive sakkungatàng, the simple concrete infinitive asakkungatanàng, and the abstract infinitive asakkungasàtani; mu-dil has the three infinitives, mudilàng, kàmudilāng, and muasàdilani; lefi- gives lefiàng, alefiànang, and asàlefiani.

3.4 Verbal Accompaniments

Verb phrases in Rawàng Ata involve at least one verb, and can also involve varies small subsidiary words. These words are articles, verbal-nominal particles, adverbs, and motifs.

Articles are short, uninflectable words that precede the verb. They are a relatively small closed class, and they usually carry aspectual, modal, or definiteness information. The most important article is – the definite article. This indicates that the action being discussed is not a new action, but is the same action that has been mentioned earlier in the discourse. It contrasts with , the antidefinite, which indicates that the action is emphatically not the same as any action mentioned previously, no matter what the assumption, but is ‘a different instance of’ the action. Other example articles are: dai, the mirative, which indicates the surprise of the speaker, or their doubt of the event’s veracity, ū, which indicates that the event did not happen (and can have negative or irrealis implications) and no, the distributive, which indicates that for each appropriate object, the action is performed at least once (rather than to all the objects simultaneously).

Verbal-nominal particles are an even smaller closed class: there are only three of them, and can perhaps be considered a part of the verb itself, as they are entirely lexically determined. The three particles are uya, ika and ama – in general, ika is likely to be used with stative verbs, ama with dynamic verbs, and uya with motive verbs, but this is only a guideline. The particles have no real meaning in their own right, but serve syntactically as dummy nouns referring cataphorically to the associated verb, as verbs cannot directly take the place of nouns. The particle precedes the verb, and when appearing in the direct case (ie without suffix) and without any intervening element, it is pronounced as part of the verb itself. In these cases we will mark it with a hyphen. Any article will intervene between particle and verb.

Motifs are a larger class. They are uninflectable particles that follow the verb. They are mostly the same as the motifs that follow nouns. As with nouns, they often suggest  more abstract meanings, or specify paths and participants and perspectives. For example, raw-, “agree, settle, rest, fix, treat” becomes raw- ata, “come to concord together, speak one language with”; similarly, lefi-, “touch heads with” becomes lefi- ata, “have a romantic orgy with”. Birk- mean “scrape”; birk- tos means “skin from head to toe”; birk- hen means “scrape down to the bone”. Similarly, luluaiu- means “lick a tasty liquid from the surface of”, and luluaiu- tos means “lick a tasty liquid from the surface of, from head to toe”; ràj- means “look at admiringly”, while ràj- hen means “inquire deeply into the underlying nature of something apparently admirable or attractive”.  Many motifs are simple prepositions, particularly when applied to motive verbs: dong- means “shuffle or slowly and bouncingly roll, or travel in a cart”, while dong- aban means “shuffle or slowly and bouncingly roll, or travel in a cart, across a street or over a river”.

Adverbs are also a large class, but not entirely open. Adverbs agree with the verb in location but in nothing else. They precede the verb, but follow any article.

3.5 Serial verbs

Serial verb constructions are very important in Rawàng Ata. A sequence of verbs can be placed together to convey simultaneous or in some way unitary action. These sequences are not strictly idiomatic, but nor are they entirely open – they are best learnt as units, although innovative sequences are also found. In a serial verb construction, the subject of each verb must be the same, and this may require the use of passive or antipassive voices. Each verb must agree in location, but will share no other affixes (other than concrete state marking if appropriate). Instead, prefixes are placed on the first verb, and suffixes are placed on the last. For example: the verbs ti- (“move to perform an action on a small-ish object”) and luìk- (“pick up and hold) together form the serial verb construction ratia luìku – “he/it comes here and picks up the…”

Any of the verbs in a serial verb construction may be modified by an article, article or motif, although in general there will be one ‘light’ (often motive) and one ‘heavy’ verb, with the heavy verb taking all modifiers.

Sketching the possessive structures of Rawàng Ata: I

A quick little look at an important part of Rawàng Ata: how it deals with possession. As you’ll quickly realise, it’s heavily Austronesian – I originally just headed in a direction that made sense, and then I discovered that much of it was word-for-word the same as you’d get from a Micronesian language, so I just went with it. As a result, it’s not stunningly original; on the other hand, there’s not a lot of Micronesian flavour in most conlangs, so perhaps some people might be interested in seeing it. I suspect that changes will be made, but here’s a start.

I’m thinking this will be in three parts. Here’s the first.

————————-

 

POSSESSIVE STRUCTURES

Rawàng Ata has six main possessive structures: direct, indirect, locative absolute, appositive, vertive, and dualist.

DIRECT POSSESSION

Direct possession comes in three flavours. In all cases, the possessum is modified with a possessive prefix; the possessor then follows in the ergative, accusative or direct case. This distinction is frequently neutralised by dropping the possessor altogether. In general the accusative indicates particular emphasis is being placed on the possessor, while the ergative stresses the distance between possessor and possessum, and the direct (the default) encourages the two to be considered in close connexion. On occasion, the possessor may be in the prolative case – this emphasises that a part-to-adjacent-part relation is intended.

Nouns may follow any of four possessive declensions. In practice, some nouns may irregularly combine declensions, or else may be found in different forms in different dialects, contexts, or from different speakers. The first declension is very regular; the second and third are broadly regular; the fourth is highly irregular.

PERSON FIRST DECLENSION

(sīnta)

SECOND DECLENSION

(kòma)

THIRD DECLENSION

(-murnay)

(-dia)

(-atūk)

FOURTH DECLENSION

(-kala)

(-tùar)

(-atūk)

I-male ba-

basīnta

- - -
I-female ku-

kusīnta

- - -
I-formal/unspecified i-/a-

asīnta

i-/ī-

īkòma

i-

imurnay

idia

iatūk

s-

satya

sudar

satūk

II tu-

tusīnta

ut-

ukkòma

su-

sungurnay

sulia

suyatūk

ìb-

ìngala

ìnuar

ìbatūk

III-present human ra-

rasīnta

ar-

arkòma

oy-

oymurnay

oydia

olatūk

t-

takya

tudar

tatūk

III-absent human ra-

rasīnta

ar-

arkòma

ar-

armurnay

ajdia

aratūk

an-

ankala

antùar

anatūk

III-formal ōno-

ōnosīnta

- uy-

umurnay

unia

uyatūk

-
III-non-human animate ra-

rasīnta

as-

àkoma

ar-

armurnay

ajdia

aratūk

ar-

arkā

artùar

aratūk

III- inanimate sa-

sasīnta

as-

àkoma

is-

ijmurnay

ìdia

isatūk

ā-

ākā

ātùar

ātūk

IV (1st inclusive plural) wa-

wasīnta

o-

okòma

o-

omurnay

odia

awatūk

fur-

furatya

furuà

furatūk

V (indefinite/unspecified) - - sun-

sumurnay

sundia

sunatūk

anga-

angakā

angàtua

angatūk

VI (mass) ni-

nisīnta

in-

inkòma

uin

uimurnay

uinnia

uinatūk

k-

kakya

kudar

katūk

 

As a general rule, dependent nouns (which cannot occur without a possessive prefix) are always found in the fourth declension (in the case of mereological, regular or anomalous possession) or the third declension (in the case of agentive possession), although some agentives may be found with elements of the second declension. Independent nouns, if possessed, are generally in the first or second declensions – in general, older words, more commonly used words, and more commonly possessed nouns, take the second declension, while loanwords, more recent derivations, nouns less commonly possessed, and words less commonly used take the first declension.

It should be noted that in addition to declension-mixing irregularities, and complex and defunct morphophonemic alternations, some words, particularly in the fourth declension, use suppletion in certain persons. This, for instance, is the declension of –kutui:

PERSON  
I-male basìnuti
I-female kusìnuti
I-formal/unspecified asìnuti
II ìngutuin
III-present human tafoàn
III-absent human anafoà
III-formal ungutui
III-non-human animate arkùtui
III- inanimate ìkutui
IV (1st inclusive plural) fùrnuti
V (indefinite/unspecified) sunkudùi
VI (mass) kafoàti

 

Direct possession is employed to indicate:

-          (mereological) the relation of part to whole (sail to ship; hand to human; wolf to pack; river to tributary)

-          (mereological) the relation of whole to part (ship to sail; human to hand; pack to wolf)

-          (mereological) the relation of part to adjacent part (sail to deck; forearm to elbow)

-          (mereological) the relation of a new being to a being of which it was once a part (child to parent; landslide to mountain; urine to animal; tributary to river (‘time’ in this sense flows along rivers upstream)

-          (mereological) the relation of a being to a new being that was once part of it (parent to child; mountain to landslide; animal to urine)

-          (agentive) the relation of a noun signifying the concrete form of a process to one that is altered by the process, or which benefits from the process (support beam to house; wing to bird; sustenance to animal; malleta to gong; consumer to consumed; fire to fuel)

-          (agentive) the relation of a creator to their creation (scribe to a document; builder to building)

-          (agentive) the relation of a perpetrator of an action to the victim of that action if the victim benefits from or in some way consented to or orchestrated the action (killer to willing murder-victim; thief to willing robbery-victim)

-          (regular) the relation of two objects deeply connected in function, as though two parts of one thing (animal and den; day and night; man and fishing-hook; woman and stiletto)

-          (regular) the relation of a creation to its creator (writing to scribe; building to builder)

-          (regular) the relation of an intimate or sexual item to its user (undergarments, sex toys, piercings, tattoos, penis rings, etc)

-          (regular) the relation of a thing that comes into close physical contact with its user (clothes, jewellary, sleeping mats, etc)

-          (regular) enduring psychological characteristics

-          (anomalous) a relation of possession where the possessum ought to be, should be, is to be, is meant to be, possessed by the possessor

-          (anomalous) a relation of possession where the possessum is certainly, must logically be, is surely, can only be, must therefore be, possessed by the possessor

-          (anomalous) a relation of possession where the possessum is known first-hand to be, has been seen first-hand to be, possessed by the possessor.

Mereological, agentive and regular possession are almost entirely lexical – a certain noun is or is not to be directly possessed by a certain other noun. [An exception to this is that agentive relations do not trigger direct possession if the ‘possessor’ is affected negatively by them and has no control over the situation – a killer is ‘owned’ by their victim if the victim wanted to be killed, but not if they did not; likewise a wing is ‘owned’ by the bird, but a tumour or a diseased lung is not. A second exception is that things that take direct possession because they typically come into close physical contact with the owner do not take always take direct possession if they are not at that time being worn/used].  Anomalous possession, as the name suggests, is applied for semantic purposes wherever the speaker wishes it to be applied, to almost any noun.

Certain nouns, however, can never under any circumstances be directly possessed. This category includes most – though not all – words for humans, as well as some nouns for supernaturally animate forces (mostly weather conditions), some mass nouns (mostly metals), and some other words for particular plants and animals.

A Course in Rawàng Ata: Introduction

This is probably a bad idea.

As you may know, I create languages. The one I’ve spent an unprecedented time on is Rawàng Ata. I’ve posted on it a fair few times – and most of those posts have contradicted each other. I don’t work progressively, you see, I keeping re-doing things. It’s like pruning a plant: you’ve got a vague control over how it looks, but at some times it’s been cut back too heavily, at other times it’s grown too far beyond where you want it. So every year you have another go at it, and hopefully the overall shape takes form over time, through trial and error.

My current error is a series of lessons in the language. The idea is that they should be less boring, and more understandable, than a simple grammar – and I’ve never found a grammar that simple, anyway. In all fair warning: these will probably not be repetitive enough, slow enough, to be real ‘lessons’ in the sense of allowing anyone to learn to speak it. For a start, I’m not going to concentrate on vocabulary. What they should do is present some features of the structure of the language, with examples, in what is hopefully a coherent format.

These lessons are likely to contradict everything I’ve previously said about Rawàng Ata. Never mind.

Finally: the idea is to have discrete ‘lessons’, clumped together into ‘units’, each unit ending with a little exercise. Each lesson will give some grammatical information, and a few words of vocabulary, with cultural explanations. Unfortunately, the lessons vary widely in how much information they contain.

I’ve currently written twelve lessons, which should be three units, though I’ve only written the exercise for the first. I think I’ll post a lesson a day until the end of a unit, and then wait until I’ve got a buffer before moving on to the next. So, this may take quite some time to finish. And I’m going to violate that format today, because the first lesson is so small and worthless. So, two up today.

Hope somebody finds it intriguing – or useful for their own projects.

A Morsel of Chiba – Index

On and off, I play with a little romlang of mine called Chiba. It’s gone through endless revisions, but I think they’re beginning to reach stability. I’m probably happier with this version that I’ve been with any in a long while. Hence, I thought I’d write something up about it.

Here are some introductory posts about Chiba:

Phonology/Orthography

Noun Declension

Verb Conjugation, I

Verb Conjugation, II

Verb Syntax, I

Verb Syntax, II

There’ll hopefully be more to follow eventually, but that’s all for now. And how good it feels to dump all that onto the blog…

Anyway, all feedback welcome. Plausible? Implausible? Incomprehensible? Conventional? Original? Any questions or comments welcome.

Un Mosièl de se Chinzie rRyetaniezi – IV. sŞintax pen so Tempu, iii-viii

iii. Use of the Subjunctives

The primis praisemz is used for commands, exhortations, requests, suggestions and optatives; it is also used for concessions and hypotheticals:

Te vagna il accandor…

You should speak to her

Go on, speak to her

Perhaps you should speak to her

If only you were to speak to her

Yes, you spoke to her, but…

Let us say that you were to speak to her… in that case…

It is also used for clauses of purpose or fear:

…vai te vagna lam accandor

…lest you were to speak to her

… vai te vane lam accandor

…or else you are speaking to her

… pue te vagna lam accandor

… so that you might speak to her

… pue te vane lam accandor

… because you are speaking to her

The şikundis, by contrast, is the typical tense for verb phrases that are the object of another verb, such as intentions, perceptions, and indirect speech. It is also used for plain conditions, and the consequences of hypotheticals and conditional:

T’ave accámd pue te seza lam amár

You have told her that you love her

T’ave accámd pue te sede lam amár

You have spoken to her because you will love her

T’ave accámd pue te vagna lam amár

You have spoken to her so that you might love her

Si te seza lam amár, si te sede lam accagndre

If you love her, you will speak to her

Si te seza lam amár, si te vagna lam accandor

If you love her, you should speak to her

Si te vagna lam amator, si te seza lam accagndre

If you really were to love her, you would surely speak to her

Si te seza lam amár, si te seza lam accagndre

If you were to love her, you would speak to her

The distinction between the concessive hypothetical and the conditional is not clear-cut; in general, the concessive construction has a greater degree of doubt implied, or more explicitly takes the word of the interlocutor, and assumes the condition to be true while expressing doubt about it, while the plain conditional can be used far more widely.

The other two subjunctive tenses are of rather less significance. The primis praisemz is used to denote possibility, particularly possibilities occurring before the reference time of a narration, and often evidential possibilities. The trétejis is used to bemoan counterfactuals: “if only…”.

V’avero se kkani pořát…

If only I were carrying a dog / If only I had carried a dog

Ve vanero se kkani pořator…

I could have been carrying a dog / I could be carrying a dog / I might be carrying a dog

—————————————————————

iv. The Present Tenses

Three present tenses occur. Most common is the atátevis, which is used for all present habits and ongoing intermittent tasks. The narátevis is used only with actions that are taking place at the very moment of speaking. The preféktevis can be used with verbs of opinion, desire and the like, where it is more polite than the atátevis.

V’aio aputtát pue il siémd formosa

I thought she was beautiful (i.e. I think she is beautiful but do not wish to argue)

Ve leppo l’iphètilie

I am reading the letters (right now, as we speak)

Ve vagno l’iphètilie leppator

I am reading the letters (one at a time – I have read some, I have yet to read others)

————————————————–

v. The Narátevis

Aside from its present tense uses, the narátevis can also be found in the past or the present. Broadly, it ‘fixes’ preceding events: once the narátevis occurs, previous events are deemed complete, or their continuance is no longer relevant. Unlike the preféktevis, it has no connotations of completion or relevance – it denotes that completion, duration, relevance and the like are all irrelevant. In a narration, the narátevis will generally become the default tense once tense has been established, with the other tenses used only for passages where more detail is desired.

——————————————————-

vi. Tempa Modala

The modal verbs, deure, poire, goire, ecír and segér, have the meanings ‘to have to’, ‘to have the power to, ‘to want to’, ‘to know how to’ and ‘to be able to’, respectively. Their tenses are absolute tenses.

Deure can be used for any necessity, but is most common with necessities of obligation, duty, and morality. Goire is used for volition, not necessarily for desire. Poire, ecír and segér all denote possibilities, but of different sorts: poire denotes an ability or capability; ecír, a skill, knowledge or aptitude; segér, a logical possibility:

Il ech toccár kolpiján

She knows how to play the piano

Il pos toccár kolpiján

She is able to play the piano (she has a piano, she has fingers, she has all the requisites)

Il seg toccár kolpiján

It’s possible for her to play the piano (if she took certain steps, it might happen)

———————————————

vii. Copulas

Chiba has not one but three copulas: vanér, senzér and otár. Vanér, the auxiliary, is used with nominal predicates that are not predicates of identity; senzér is used with adjectival predicates; otár is used with prepositional predicates and predicates of nominal identity.

Il vagn mhyesarya

She is a banker

Il sémd formosa

She is beautiful

Il otá in una mhyesarye

She is in the bank

Il otá sa myesarya

She is the banker

One exception to this principle is that comparative and superlative adjectives, and ordinal numbers, take vanér, not senzér.

—————————————

viii. Negatives

Only the narátevis, copulas, and the tempa modala may be negated. For maximum emphasis, this is done with the circumposition: ne… …non phuma. …non phuma and …phuma are less stressed equivalents. An exception to this is the negation of modals, where the less stressed version is no…

To negate past or future verbs, the narátevis is used where context is clear. Otherwise, an establishing clause with the appropriate conjugation of otár is used, followed by the negating clause:

Il ab otát e tocca phuma kolpiján

She had not played the piano (lit. ‘she had not stood and plays not the piano’)

When the modals are negated, either the modal or the infinitive may be negated:

Il no deure toccár

She does not have to play

Il deure toccár phuma

She must not play

Un Mosièl de se Chinzie rRyetaniezi – IV. sŞintax pen so Tempu, i-ii.

i. Atátevis vai Preféktevis?

The first dilemma of the Chiba verb is which tense to use. Given that an event is past, present or future, when should the atátevis be used, and when the preféktevis?

If the event occurred before the ‘reference time’ of the narration in question, the answer is simple: use the preféktevis praitéretu, which may function as a pluperfect. This tense is also the case with events that occurred ‘a long time ago’, and that can no longer have any present relevance.

If the event is occurring in the present, the question is instead whether to use the atátevis praisemz or the narátevis.

If, however, the event is occurring in the relevant past or in the future, a choice must be made between the atátevis, denoting events with internal constituency, and the preféktevis, denoting completed events. The distinction may be phrased in terms of pairs of events:

- Where both verbs are atátevis, the events occur at the same time, or the second overlaps the first;

- Where the first verb is atátevis and the second, preféktevis, the first event is interrupted by the second;

-  Where the first verb is preféktevis and the second is atátevis, the first event occurs, is completed, and the second then begins

- Where both verbs are preféktevis, the two events are both completed

A further connotation of the preféktevis is that the event bears continuing relevance, either for the following events or at the time of the relation. The atátevis, by contrast, has no such connotation. It connotes duration, and sometimes iteration; it can also connote incompletion or insignificance. It is also used to show that a person has had experience of something. The preféktevis connotes brevity, and singularity. It also implies that the event had an inherent natural end that was reached, rather than merely a halt.

A further distinction between the preféktevis praisemz and the atátevis praitéretu is that, as the names suggest, the latter is strictly for past events, while the former can also be used with present semantics.

Ve vami kamchator

I used to sing / I was singing

V’aio kamchát

I sang / I have sung

Ve vami kamchator. Il vami dviendor.

I was singing. She arrived while I was singing. Or: I used to sing. She used to arrive while I was singing.

Ve vami kamchator. Il au dviémd.

I was singing, but she arrived.

When the subject matter is not a narration, but isolated statements, the preféktevis is most commonly used for single past events, while the atátevis is used for past habits or to show experience. In the future, the preféktevis is used for stable plans and objectives, while the preféktevis is used for single incidents without inherent worth.

Ve sezo kamchár.

I am going to be singing / I hope to sing

Ve sezo kamchát

I am going to sing / I will have to sing (so as then to…)

—————————————–

ii. Tempa Imćépteva and Tempa Fitura

The inceptive tenses are used in the sense of an event that is/was/will be about to happen at a point of the narration. It should be noted that the imćéptevis praisemz¸unlike the preféktevis praisemz is a genuine present tense, with no preterite meaning. Whether or not the even described does then happen depends upon the following tense. Following events in the atátevis are not held to be relevant; events in the relevant (ie not praitéretu) preféktevis interrupt or prevent events in the imćeptevis; these events only occur if the narátevis occurs before the next preféktevis.

V’abo kamchámz. Il vami dviendor. Il dra un khani.

I was going to sing. She arrived. [I sang]. She brought the dog.

V’abo kamchámz. Il vami dviendor. Il au un khani dráp.

I was going to sing. She arrived. She brought the dog. [I did not sing]

N.B. Such sequences of plain sentences without conjunctions are not good style in Chiba, and serve here only for illustrative purposes.

The distinction between the imćéptevis praisemz and either main future tense is theoretically a near/remote distinction, but in practice the imćéptevis is chiefly used either to make commitments or to invite disagreement:

Ve sezo kamchámz

I’m about to sing… (unless you stop me?)

Ve sezo kamchát

I’m going to sing (and you can’t stop me)

Un Mosièl de se Chinzie rRyetaniezi – III. Konjigatyejona pen Verbi, iii-vii.

iii. Tempa prefékteva

The tempa prefékteva are the less common three tenses used for remote past, near past and future events . The past and present tenses use the verb avér; the future uses serér; all three employ the pratećípejou preféktevis. For regular verbs, this is formed with –át. For irregulars, it is of course more unpredictable:

Egoure

(to write)

Drare

(to bring)

Kandrye (to say) Dvenyer

(to arrive)

Fasre (to make) Fover (to love)
Participle: egríp dráp kámd dviémd fáp fuót

Avér is formed in a similar manner to vanér:

Avér

Present Past
1st s. aio abi
2nd s. ave abèti
3rd s. au ab
1st pl. avém abím
2nd pl. avét abèt
3rd pl. avie abér

———————-

iv. Tempa imćépteva

The tempa imćépteva are likewise threefold. They are formed as the tempa prefékteva, but with the pratećípejou imćéptevis. This is formed through the suffix –ámz. In the irregulars:

Egoure

(to write)

Drare

(to bring)

Kandrye (to say) Dvenyer

(to arrive)

Fasre (to make) Fover (to love)
Participle: eçevyémz draímz kanémz dvenyémz faćiémz fovémz

——————————

v. Tempa páseva

There are, again, three tempa páseva – past, present and future. They are formed with the auxiliaries of the tempa atáteva, but the preféktevis participle:

Il vam fuót

She was loved

It should be noted that this means that the future pásevis and the future preféktevis are identical in form:

Il sei fuót

She will be loved

Il sei fuót

She will love

This ambiguity can be resolved easily by the addition of a further argument – the pásevis can never take a direct object, and will take its obliques with different prepositions.

——————————

vi. Tempa subyoúkteva

Moving to mood, there are four tempa subyoúkteva, known as subyoúktevis primis praisemz, subyoúktevis primis praitéretu, subyoúktevis şikundis and subyoúktevis trétejis. All have both active and passive forms. In the active voice, the primis tenses are formed with a conjugation of vanér and the atátevis participle; the şikundis, with serér and the future participle; the trétejis, with avér and the perfect participle. The passives are all formed with the perfect participle (rendering the trétejis the same in active and passive, save for the number of arguments).

Vanér

Serér Avér
Present Past
1st s. vagna vanero seza avero
2nd s. vagna vanere seza avere
3rd s. vagn vanér sei avér
1st pl. vagnám vagndrém sezám avrém
2nd pl. vagnát vagndrét sezát avrét
3rd pl. vagná vanerie sezá aver

———————————-

vii. Tempa Modala

Finally, the tempa modala are formed with the auxiliary verbs deure, poire, ecír, segér and goire. They are not true independent tenses, in that they can themselves inflect for three tenses: past, non-past and subjunctive.

Deure

Past Non-past Subjunctive
1st s. debi deio deia
2nd s. debeti devi deia
3rd s. deb dei dei
1st pl. debím devím deiám
2nd pl. debét devít deiát
3rd pl. debér devie deiá

Poire

Past Non-past Subjunctive
1st s. poçi poso pósim
2nd s. poçeti pose pósi
3rd s. poc pos pós
1st pl. poçím posoú posím
2nd pl. poçét posèt posít
3rd pl. poçér posue poseí

Ecír

Past Non-past Subjunctive
1st s. ecivi eçó eciri
2nd s. evyeti ecí ecire
3rd s. ecoú ech ecír
1st pl. eceím ecím echrém
2nd pl. evyèt ecít echrét
3rd pl. evyuér eçué echrié

Segér

Past Non-past Subjunctive
1st s. segi sego N/A
2nd s. segeti sega N/A
3rd s. seg seg N/A
1st pl. segím segám N/A
2nd pl. segét segát N/A
3rd pl. segér segie N/A

Goire

Past Non-past Subjunctive
1st s. golvi gelo geli
2nd s. gulveti geli gela
3rd s. goub gei gei
1st pl. gulvím gelím gelám
2nd pl. gulvét gelít gelát
3rd pl. gulvér geleí geleí

Un Mosièl de se Chinzie rRyetaniezi – III. Konjigatyejona pen Verbi, i-ii.

i. Tempis Narátevis

Tempis narátevis is a unique tense, as it is marked through inflection on the verb itself, rather than through auxiliaries. Although there are many conjugations hypothesised, it is easiest to consider there to be only two: regular and irregular. Verbs inflect for person and number. They may do this in two ways: imfliktátyejo şimplex, and imfliktátyejo komplex. [It should be noted that the words konjigátyejo, tempis, narátevis, verbu, şimplex, komplex and imfliktátyejo are all learned medieval borrowings from Latin, which explains their unusual appearance]

For regular verbs, simplex inflexion is straightforward:

Amár (to love) Kandár (to sing sth.) Pořár (to carry sth) Faulár (to tell a story, argue, reason) Fattár (to make)
1st s. amo kando pořo faulo fappo
2nd s. ama kanda pořa faula fappa
3rd s. am kamd poř fau fau
1st pl. amám kandám pořám faulám fattám
2nd pl. amát kandát pořát faulát fattát
3rd pl. amá kandá pořá faulá fattá

The pattern of suffixes should be clear. Fattár is partially irregular, due to stress, and there are sometimes slight alterations in the 3rd person singular form of the verb.

The complex inflexion is more difficult. This incorporates additional object marking. The synthetic suffixes are as follows (subject marking in rows, object marking in columns):

1st s. 2nd s. 3rd s. in. 3rd s. an. 1st pl. 2nd pl. 3rd pl.
1st s. -óz -ót -óc -ou -on -og -olo
2nd s. -ám -áz -ázec -au -an -ac -acho
3rd s. -áte -ác -ai/-az -an -ou -alo
1st pl. -ámme -ámte -ámzec -amzi -amiz -amic -amlo
2nd pl. -aíme -aíte -aízec -azi -atin -atiz -ailo
3rd pl. -ágn -ámd -ándec -andi -amno -amc -anco

Several things should be noted here. The marking of accents is not in accordance with the orthographic rules, as several accents are marked superfluously – this is a form of orthographical analogous levelling. All complex inflections trigger the infinitive root, in the few regular verbs, such as fattár, where this is different from the simple root. Many verbs have no complex inflection, either because they are intransitive (e.g. kamchár, to sing) or because, while semantically transitive, they take objects in the oblique (eg. faulár). The third person subject, third person animate object inflection has two forms – a non-reflexive and a reflexive.

Examples of these inflections:

fattác – they made it

amámme – we love me

pořamc – they carry you

Irregular verbs should probably be learnt individually, although there are some patterns:

Egoure

(to write)

Drare

(to bring)

Kandrye (to say) Dvenyer

(to arrive)

Fasre (to make) Fover (to love)
1st s. egribo dro kano dvenyo faccho foio
2nd s. egribi drai kani dveni facchi fovi
3rd s. egroú dra kagn dviegn fac foi
1st pl. egroúmu dram kagnu dviním facím fovím
2nd pl. egrouti drat kandyi dvinít facét fovét
3rd pl. egrivue drague kanue dvenyue faćie fovie

Complex inflexions of irregular verbs would be so irregular that they are not used. Instead, complex prepositions are used, as with oblique verbs. For these, see a later chapter.

————————————————————————

—————————————

ii. Tempa Atáteva

The tempa atátiva are three tenses used prototypically with states, habits and statuses. They are the default tenses. The first two are formed with the pratećípejou atátevis and an auxiliary verb, while the third, the future, uses the pratećípejou fituris.

The pratećípejou atátevis is formed in the regular verbs with the suffix –ator; in the irregulars, it is more unpredictable:

Egoure

(to write)

Drare

(to bring)

Kandrye (to say) Dvenyer

(to arrive)

Fasre (to make) Fover (to love)
Participle: egrippor drappor kandor dviendor fappor fotor

The pratećípejou fituris is simply the citation form of the verb.

The two appropriate auxiliary verbs are vanér (past and present) and serér (future). Unlike most verbs, vanér has its own past tense.

Vanér

Serér
Present Past
1st s. vanyo vami sezo
2nd s. vane vamèti sede
3rd s. van vam sei
1st pl. vaném vamím serém
2nd pl. vanét vamèt serét
3rd pl. vánie vamér sédie

The auxiliary is placed in the second position, with the participle placed after a direct object and before an oblique phrase (though such phrases may be moved forward for emphasis).

Ve vami t’amator

I loved you

Le sei faulár kor’èza

He will argue with her

Tute vane pèz’egrippor!

You’re the one who’s writing it!

Viego sezo l’iphètilie drare.

I’m the one who will bring the letters

———————–

————————–

———————————–


Un Mosièl de so Vokabolarye

It has probably been noticed that several of the examples verbs given are close to one another in meaning.

Amár is the default word for ‘love’, a strong affection. It can stand in place of any of the other words for ‘love’, but is also particularly used with siblings, close friends, former lovers and the like – it is a strong but equal relationship

Fover is the word for the protective love of a parent for a child, or of a husband for a wife – more generally, love of a dependent. It is also the appropriate word for love of a possession, or a pet. With social changes, it may now sometimes be used for the love of a wife for her husband. It is also used for physical actions – literally for stroking, but it can also be used for anything up to making love.

Kaucár is the word for feelings of affection, goodwill and concern toward others, less strong and particular than usually implied by amár. It is also the word for being charitable to those less well off.

Elalzár is the word for passionate, unreasoning romantic love. It is no longer encountered as frequently as once it was.

Adorár is the opposite of fover – it is the love for one greatly respected or looked up to. It is the love of wives for their husbands, children for their parents, and men for their heroes. It is also used for the romantic love of a young man for an older woman.

Tephár is the preparatory stage of love – a feeling of goodwill, excitement, and intellectual or physical attraction. It is commonly used for the emotion between a couple before they become lovers (though it persists afterward).