Minhast: Difference between revisions
mNo edit summary |
|||
| Line 1,885: | Line 1,885: | ||
=== Discourse Particles === | === Discourse Particles === | ||
Minhast has a wealth of particles used to manipulate discourse, convey attitudes and expectations, express dissent, reconnect prior speech with the present discourse topic, among many other functions. Some of these particles are treated as | Minhast has a wealth of particles used to manipulate discourse, convey attitudes and expectations, express dissent, reconnect prior speech with the present discourse topic, among many other functions. Some of these particles are treated as clause-level dependents and as such are bound to their clause by a ''wa='' construction. The rules as to whether a preposed ''wa='' versus a postposed ''wa='' should be used with these particles is not fully understood. Some particles appear as stand-alone adjuncts, rarely if ever being bound with its clause by a ''wa='' construction. | ||
{| class="bluetable lightbluebg" | {| class="bluetable lightbluebg" | ||
| Line 2,107: | Line 2,107: | ||
# 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. | # 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 clause (always either an independent sentence, or the final clause in a clause chain) is joined to a sentence-final | # When the clause (always either an independent sentence, or the final clause in a clause chain) is joined to a sentence-final particle 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. | # 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 2,118: | Line 2,118: | ||
What is almost inviolable is the position of the verb, which prominently occurs in 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 as 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: | What is almost inviolable is the position of the verb, which prominently occurs in 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 as 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. When the sentence (always either an independent sentence, or the final clause in a clause chain) is joined to a sentence-final | 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. When the sentence (always either an independent sentence, or the final clause in a clause chain) is joined to a sentence-final particle by a Postposed-Wa Construction. The following sentence, containing a sequential clause followed by the final clause of the sentence is well-formed: ''Sayyumpēran iknitaharammā, kalluttaharaš wabbāk? >> sayyumpē=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, kuhakna! >> ussar tūman-tirek=de=aran hā-ra-an'' ([proper.noun] house-3S.NEUT.ABS+1S.ERG=ERG=DAT come-PAST-TRANS, 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 2,254: | Line 2,254: | ||
|- | |- | ||
! Preposed | ! Preposed | ||
| [ | | [Particle/NP] + ''wa=''[Clause] | ||
|- | |- | ||
! Postposed | ! Postposed | ||
| [Clause] + ''wa=''[ | | [Clause] + ''wa=''[Particle/NP] | ||
|} | |} | ||
| Line 2,280: | Line 2,280: | ||
# Like Preposed-Wa structures, to bind demonstrative adverbs to their head clause, e.g. ''Minhast kirmennemu wassappu'' >> Minhast kirim-ennem-u wa=sappu, i.e. ''We speak Minhast here''. | # Like Preposed-Wa structures, to bind demonstrative adverbs to their head clause, e.g. ''Minhast kirmennemu wassappu'' >> Minhast kirim-ennem-u wa=sappu, i.e. ''We speak Minhast here''. | ||
Although both the Preposed and Postposed-Wa structures bind | Although both the Preposed and Postposed-Wa structures bind clause-level particles to their heads, an important determiner for the speaker in selecting which structure to use is the issue of scope. The Preposed-Wa structure has narrow scope, and governs only its particle and the clause immediately following it, whereas the Postposed-Wa structure has wide scope, governing not just its particle and the clause immediately preceding it; its scope governs all the clauses of a sentence. This difference is why the majority of evidential and modal particles are sentence-final; evidentials and modals are in the majority of cases used to cover the speaker's beliefs and attitudes and trustworthiness of the source, which applies to whole statements, but rarely for just individual segments of a given statement. Another important difference is that the Preposed-Wa structure can be preceded by a verb marked with =mā or other subordinating clitic. This means that the number of Preposed-Wa structures can occur for each and every clause in a sentence. Such is not the case with Postposed-Wa structures; only one Postposed-Wa structure can occur for a given sentence. | ||
=== Possession === | === Possession === | ||
| Line 2,336: | Line 2,336: | ||
What is almost inviolable is the position of the verb, which prominently occurs in 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 as 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: | What is almost inviolable is the position of the verb, which prominently occurs in 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 as 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. When the sentence (always either an independent sentence, or the final clause in a clause chain) is joined to a sentence-final | 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. When the sentence (always either an independent sentence, or the final clause in a clause chain) is joined to a sentence-final particle by a Postposed-Wa Construction. The following sentence, containing a sequential clause followed by the final clause of the sentence is well-formed: ''Sayyumpēran iknitaharammā, kalluttaharaš wabbāk? >> sayyumpē=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, kuhakna! >> ussar tūman-tirek=de=aran hā-ra-an'' ([proper.noun] house-3S.NEUT.ABS+1S.ERG=ERG=DAT come-PAST-TRANS, 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. | ||
--> | --> | ||