Minhast: Difference between revisions

Line 2,108:

=== Word Order ===

Minhast as ~~a whole tends to group the obligatory elements of clauses and sentences;~~ core NPs and the verbs they serve as arguments tend to be adjacent to each other. ~~OBL~~ arguments tend to be placed before the core NPs, so that unmarked word order is XSOV (where X stands for the OBL argument). This observation can be verified statistically by reviewing of the corpus of texts and spoken speech, and this observation holds for almost 60%, close to one standard deviation of all text and recorded speech sampled. XOSV order is the second most common arrangement found, accounting for close to 30% of all observations. Since the Ergative argument in transient clauses are highly salient, the XOSV order defocusses the Ergative (Agent) argument and emphasizes the Absolutive (Patient) argument. SOXV and SXOV orders are regarded as unusual, and OSXV and OXSV orders tend to make ~~some native~~ speakers cringe, although they will concede that those arrangements are grammatical. These arrangements account for the remaining 10% of observations.

Minhast is an SOV language, but within a clause, constituent order is quite free, although there are certain trends as well as restrictions. One noticeable trend is that core NPs and the verbs they serve as arguments tend to be adjacent to each other. Oblique arguments tend to be placed before the core NPs, so that unmarked word order is XSOV (where X stands for the OBL argument). This observation can be verified statistically by reviewing of the corpus of texts and spoken speech, and this observation holds for almost 60%, close to one standard deviation of all text and recorded speech sampled. XOSV order is the second most common arrangement found, accounting for close to 30% of all observations. Since the Ergative argument in transient clauses are highly salient, the XOSV order defocusses the Ergative (Agent) argument and emphasizes the Absolutive (Patient) argument. SOXV and SXOV orders are regarded as unusual, and OSXV and OXSV orders tend to make speakers from the more conservative dialects in Upper Minhay cringe, although they will concede that those arrangements are grammatical. These arrangements account for the remaining 10% of observations.

What is almost inviolable,at least in multi-clausal sentences, is the position of the verb's clause-final position. The main reason for this restriction is most likely because the verb, being extremely suffix-laden, includes clause-linking and coordinating affixes which occur in the Terminatives slot of the Minhast verb template. Thus, the verb serves to mark clause boundaries and coordinate compound and complex sentences, hence the predominance of the verb's clause-final position. Nevertheless, verbs do occur in non-final position under the following circumstances:

# In ~~simple~~ sentences: the sentence ''Rassibararu Anyarde suharak >> rassibar-ar-u anyar=de suharak'' " (reach.for-PAST-TRANS [proper.noun]=ERG book) "Anyar reached for the book" is well-formed, even though the verb occurs in sentence-initial position. Here, the reaching for the book (rassibar~~) is being raised to a high~~ saliency ~~level~~.

# In monoclausal sentences, the verb may be placed as the first constituent of the clause. In the sample sentence ''Rassibararu Anyarde suharak >> rassibar-ar-u anyar=de suharak'' (reach.for-PAST-TRANS [proper.noun]=ERG book) ",Anyar reached for the book" is well-formed, even though the verb occurs in sentence-initial position. Here, the reaching for the book ''rassibar'' has been fronted, thereby raising its saliency in the discourse.

# When the ~~sentence~~ (always either an independent sentence, or the final clause in a clause chain) is joined to a sentence-final adjunct by a Postposed-Wa Construction. The following sentence, containing a sequential clause followed by the final clause of the sentence is well-formed: ''Sayyumperan iknitaharammā, kalluttaharaš wabbāk?'' >> ''sayyumpe=aran ikn-tah-ar-an=mā, kallut-tah-ar-an=š wa=bāk'' ([proper.noun=DAT go-2S.ABS-PAST-INTRANS=SUB eat-2S-PAST-INTRANS=IRREAL CONN=what) "You went to Sayyumpe['s house] and ate what???"~~. Please refer to the related section on Postposed-''Wa'' constructions above~~.

# When the clase (always either an independent sentence, or the final clause in a clause chain) is joined to a sentence-final adjunct by a Postposed-Wa Construction. The following sentence, containing a sequential clause followed by the final clause of the sentence is well-formed: ''Sayyumperan iknitaharammā, kalluttaharaš wabbāk?'' >> ''sayyumpe=aran ikn-tah-ar-an=mā, kallut-tah-ar-an=š wa=bāk'' ([proper.noun=DAT go-2S.ABS-PAST-INTRANS=SUB eat-2S-PAST-INTRANS=IRREAL CONN=what) "You went to Sayyumpe['s house] and ate what???".

# When followed by antitopics, often derogatory in nature, or interjections, e.g. ''Ussar tūmantirektaran hāran, wakkuhakna! >> ussar tūman-tirek=de=aran hā-ra-an, wa=kuhakna'' ([proper.noun] house-3S.NEUT.ABS+1S.ERG=ERG=DAT come-PAST-TRANS, CONN=idiot) "Ussar came to my house, the fool!". Again, this can occur only if the clause is an independent sentence or the final clause in a clause chain.

@@ Line 2,108: / Line 2,108: @@
 === Word Order ===
-Minhast as a whole tends to group the obligatory elements of clauses and sentences; core NPs and the verbs they serve as arguments tend to be adjacent to each other. OBL arguments tend to be placed before the core NPs, so that unmarked word order is XSOV (where X stands for the OBL argument).  This observation can be verified statistically by reviewing of the corpus of texts and spoken speech, and this observation holds for almost 60%, close to one standard deviation of all text and recorded speech sampled. XOSV order is the second most common arrangement found, accounting for close to 30% of all observations.  Since the Ergative argument in transient clauses are highly salient, the XOSV order defocusses the Ergative (Agent) argument and emphasizes the Absolutive (Patient) argument.  SOXV and SXOV orders are regarded as unusual, and OSXV and OXSV orders tend to make some native speakers cringe, although they will concede that those arrangements are grammatical.  These arrangements account for the remaining 10% of observations.
+Minhast is an SOV language, but within a clause, constituent order is quite free, although there are certain trends as well as restrictions.  One noticeable trend is that core NPs and the verbs they serve as arguments tend to be adjacent to each other. Oblique arguments tend to be placed before the core NPs, so that unmarked word order is XSOV (where X stands for the OBL argument).  This observation can be verified statistically by reviewing of the corpus of texts and spoken speech, and this observation holds for almost 60%, close to one standard deviation of all text and recorded speech sampled. XOSV order is the second most common arrangement found, accounting for close to 30% of all observations.  Since the Ergative argument in transient clauses are highly salient, the XOSV order defocusses the Ergative (Agent) argument and emphasizes the Absolutive (Patient) argument.  SOXV and SXOV orders are regarded as unusual, and OSXV and OXSV orders tend to make speakers from the more conservative dialects in Upper Minhay cringe, although they will concede that those arrangements are grammatical.  These arrangements account for the remaining 10% of observations.
 What is almost inviolable,at least in multi-clausal sentences, is the position of the verb's clause-final position.  The main reason for this restriction is most likely because the verb, being extremely suffix-laden, includes clause-linking and coordinating affixes which occur in the Terminatives slot of the Minhast verb template.  Thus, the verb serves to mark clause boundaries and coordinate compound and complex sentences, hence the predominance of the verb's clause-final position.  Nevertheless, verbs do occur in non-final position under the following circumstances:
-# In simple sentences: the sentence ''Rassibararu Anyarde suharak  >> rassibar-ar-u anyar=de suharak'' "  (reach.for-PAST-TRANS [proper.noun]=ERG book) "Anyar reached for the book" is well-formed, even though the verb occurs in sentence-initial position.  Here, the reaching for the book (rassibar) is being raised to a high saliency level.
+# In monoclausal sentences, the verb may be placed as the first constituent of the clause.  In the sample sentence ''Rassibararu Anyarde suharak  >> rassibar-ar-u anyar=de suharak''  (reach.for-PAST-TRANS [proper.noun]=ERG book) ",Anyar reached for the book" is well-formed, even though the verb occurs in sentence-initial position.  Here, the reaching for the book ''rassibar'' has been fronted, thereby raising its saliency in the discourse.
-# When the sentence (always either an independent sentence, or the final clause in a clause chain) is joined to a sentence-final adjunct by a Postposed-Wa Construction.  The following sentence, containing a sequential clause followed by the final clause of the sentence is well-formed: ''Sayyumperan iknitaharammā,  kalluttaharaš wabbāk?'' >> ''sayyumpe=aran ikn-tah-ar-an=mā, kallut-tah-ar-an=š wa=bāk'' ([proper.noun=DAT go-2S.ABS-PAST-INTRANS=SUB eat-2S-PAST-INTRANS=IRREAL CONN=what)  "You went to Sayyumpe['s house] and ate what???".  Please refer to the related section on Postposed-''Wa'' constructions above.
+# When the clase (always either an independent sentence, or the final clause in a clause chain) is joined to a sentence-final adjunct by a Postposed-Wa Construction.  The following sentence, containing a sequential clause followed by the final clause of the sentence is well-formed: ''Sayyumperan iknitaharammā,  kalluttaharaš wabbāk?'' >> ''sayyumpe=aran ikn-tah-ar-an=mā, kallut-tah-ar-an=š wa=bāk'' ([proper.noun=DAT go-2S.ABS-PAST-INTRANS=SUB eat-2S-PAST-INTRANS=IRREAL CONN=what)  "You went to Sayyumpe['s house] and ate what???".
 # When followed by antitopics, often derogatory in nature, or interjections, e.g. ''Ussar tūmantirektaran hāran, wakkuhakna! >> ussar  tūman-tirek=de=aran hā-ra-an, wa=kuhakna'' ([proper.noun] house-3S.NEUT.ABS+1S.ERG=ERG=DAT come-PAST-TRANS, CONN=idiot)  "Ussar came to my house, the fool!".  Again, this can occur only if the clause is an independent sentence or the final clause in a clause chain.