Chlouvānem: Difference between revisions

Line 315:

Two different topics are also commonly used in contrasts:

* ''rūdakis mæn tadadrā lili mæn yąlė'' "[my] husband has cooked, but I eat" - husband.DIR.SG.TOPIC. prepare.IND.PERF.3S.EXTERIOR.PATIENT. 1SG.DIR. TOPIC. eat-IND.PRES.1S.EXTERIOR.PATIENT. Note how neither "husband" nor "I" agree with the verbs, and note how different formulations change meanings:

** ''rūdakis mæn tęvis ~~tatadrā~~ lili mæn yąlė'' - main interpretation: "as for the husband, he [=someone else, could be the husband's husband] has cooked for him, but it is me who eats" // other possible interpretation: "as for the husband, he [=as before] has cooked him, but it is me who eats / and I eat him [=either of them]".

** ''rūdakis mæn tęvis tadadrā lili mæn yąlė'' - main interpretation: "as for the husband, he [=someone else, could be the husband's husband] has cooked for him, but it is me who eats" // other possible interpretation: "as for the husband, he [=as before] has cooked him, but it is me who eats / and I eat him [=either of them]".

** ''rūdakis mæn tadadrā sama lili yąluça'' "[my] husband has cooked, and I eat" - unlike in the sentence where "lili" is the topic, here it's explicit that the husband cooked for the speaker. The sentence ''lili mæn rūdakei tadadrā sama yąluça'' may be interpreted with the same meaning, but the topics are different: with the previous one, the conversation is supposed to continue about the husband; in the second one, it's all about the speaker. Note that the agent-trigger voice in the second verb is of vital importance: the sentence ''lili mæn rūdakei tadadrā sama yąlu'' means "it is me my husband has cooked, and [now] he eats me".

*** Another possible interpretation of ''lili mæn rūdakei tadadrā sama yąluça'' is "[my] husband has cooked for me, and now I eat", which is the same as ''lili rūdakei takædadrā sama yąluça'', but the latter is a plain neutral statement.

Line 322:

As such, topics usually avoid repetition and anaphora, acting much like folders where different paper sheets (= the sentences) are contained, e.g. ''nāmñė mæn švai chlouvānumi maichleyuiti, jariāmaile lilašąt, nūšmiya mušigėrisilīm tora bu sama ñikumi viṣam haloe līlas væl. nenėhu haloe līlasuṃghāṇa ga camimarti gṇyāvirė'' - "talking about nāmñai<ref>A kind of tropical seal, iconic and sacred in Chlouvānem culture.</ref>, [they're] animals of the Southern [part of the] Chlouvānem lands, [they] live in seawater but sometimes [they can be found] in tidal lakes too, and another name for [their] cubs is "līlas". From this [name] comes the name of the capital, Līlasuṃghāṇa."

Finally, certain sentences act as answers for different questions due to different implications depending on whether there's an explicit topic or not:

* ''lili mæn lunai tadarė'' "I'm preparing tea", topicalized, clearly answers a question like ''yananū ejulā darire?'' "what's going on here?".

* ''lili lunāyu taçadaru'' "I'm preparing tea" answers ''yavita lunāyu taçadarė?'' "who is preparing tea?", with the meaning of "no one but me is preparing tea".

* With a question like ''yananū sąi darė?'' "what are you doing?", both become synonyms as they introduce the new topic ''lili'' (due to the previous one being ''yananū?'' because of patient-trigger voice); the same question in agent-trigger voice, ''sāmi yananūyu dariça?'', would be answered with the non-topicalized form.

===Noun phrase===

@@ Line 315: / Line 315: @@
 Two different topics are also commonly used in contrasts:
 * ''rūdakis mæn tadadrā lili mæn yąlė'' "[my] husband has cooked, but I eat" - husband.<small>DIR.SG</small>.<small>TOPIC</small>. prepare<small>.IND.PERF.3S.EXTERIOR.PATIENT</small>. <small>1SG.DIR</small>. <small>TOPIC</small>. eat-<small>IND.PRES.1S.EXTERIOR.PATIENT</small>. <br/>Note how neither "husband" nor "I" agree with the verbs, and note how different formulations change meanings:
-** ''rūdakis mæn tęvis tatadrā lili mæn yąlė'' - main interpretation: "as for the husband, he [=someone else, could be the husband's husband] has cooked for him, but it is me who eats" // other possible interpretation: "as for the husband, he [=as before] has cooked him, but it is me who eats / and I eat him [=either of them]".
+** ''rūdakis mæn tęvis tadadrā lili mæn yąlė'' - main interpretation: "as for the husband, he [=someone else, could be the husband's husband] has cooked for him, but it is me who eats" // other possible interpretation: "as for the husband, he [=as before] has cooked him, but it is me who eats / and I eat him [=either of them]".
 ** ''rūdakis mæn tadadrā sama lili yąluça'' "[my] husband has cooked, and I eat" - unlike in the sentence where "lili" is the topic, here it's explicit that the husband cooked for the speaker. The sentence ''lili mæn rūdakei tadadrā sama yąluça'' may be interpreted with the same meaning, but the topics are different: with the previous one, the conversation is supposed to continue about the husband; in the second one, it's all about the speaker. Note that the agent-trigger voice in the second verb is of vital importance: the sentence ''lili mæn rūdakei tadadrā sama yąlu'' means "it is me my husband has cooked, and [now] he eats me".
 *** Another possible interpretation of ''lili mæn rūdakei tadadrā sama yąluça'' is "[my] husband has cooked for me, and now I eat", which is the same as ''lili rūdakei takædadrā sama yąluça'', but the latter is a plain neutral statement.
@@ Line 322: / Line 322: @@
 As such, topics usually avoid repetition and anaphora, acting much like folders where different paper sheets (= the sentences) are contained, e.g. ''nāmñė mæn švai chlouvānumi maichleyuiti, jariāmaile lilašąt, nūšmiya mušigėrisilīm tora bu sama ñikumi viṣam haloe līlas væl. nenėhu haloe līlasuṃghāṇa ga camimarti gṇyāvirė'' - "talking about nāmñai<ref>A kind of tropical seal, iconic and sacred in Chlouvānem culture.</ref>, [they're] animals of the Southern [part of the] Chlouvānem lands, [they] live in seawater but sometimes [they can be found] in tidal lakes too, and another name for [their] cubs is "līlas". From this [name] comes the name of the capital, Līlasuṃghāṇa."
+Finally, certain sentences act as answers for different questions due to different implications depending on whether there's an explicit topic or not:
+* ''lili mæn lunai tadarė'' "I'm preparing tea", topicalized, clearly answers a question like ''yananū ejulā darire?'' "what's going on here?".
+* ''lili lunāyu taçadaru'' "I'm preparing tea" answers ''yavita lunāyu taçadarė?'' "who is preparing tea?", with the meaning of "no one but me is preparing tea".
+* With a question like ''yananū sąi darė?'' "what are you doing?", both become synonyms as they introduce the new topic ''lili'' (due to the previous one being ''yananū?'' because of patient-trigger voice); the same question in agent-trigger voice, ''sāmi yananūyu dariça?'', would be answered with the non-topicalized form.
 ===Noun phrase===