118
edits
Middle Ru: Difference between revisions
m
no edit summary
mNo edit summary |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 1,075: | Line 1,075: | ||
<h3>The verb stem</h3> | <h3>The verb stem</h3> | ||
<p>The stem is the main morpheme that decides the meaning of the verb. A MIddle Ru verbal stem will always | <p>The stem is the main morpheme that decides the meaning of the verb. A MIddle Ru verbal stem will always occur with at least one suffix although they will be listed on their most basic form in the dictionary..</p> | ||
<p>Verb stems whose romanized forms seem to end in a vowel, such as <em>da</em> (to remember) actually have a glottal coda (unwritten between vowels): /da.ʔ/, as seen in the conjugated form <em>daiħaŋ</em> (I remembered it): /da.ʔiˈχaŋ/. This is still the case when the vowel in the suffix coincides with the last vowel in the stem, as in <em>daarxes</em> (you remember me): /da.ʔaɹˈʃøs/, although a relatively small number of speakers might have contracted these sequences to a bare vowel (yielding */daɹˈʃøs/ for <em>da[a]rxes</em>). It should be noted that contracting /V.ʔV/ to /V/ is a nearly universal phenomenon for nouns (for instance, the ergative form of <em>c'áza</em> is <em>c'azat</em> rather than <em>**c'azaat</em>). The absence of contractions in verbs might be a result of Middle Ru speakers considering the glottal stop as being part of the verb root itself rather than an artifact of the language's phonology as in nominal affixes.</p> | <p>Verb stems whose romanized forms seem to end in a vowel, such as <em>da</em> (to remember) actually have a glottal coda (unwritten between vowels): /da.ʔ/, as seen in the conjugated form <em>daiħaŋ</em> (I remembered it): /da.ʔiˈχaŋ/. This is still the case when the vowel in the suffix coincides with the last vowel in the stem, as in <em>daarxes</em> (you remember me): /da.ʔaɹˈʃøs/, although a relatively small number of speakers might have contracted these sequences to a bare vowel (yielding */daɹˈʃøs/ for <em>da[a]rxes</em>). It should be noted that contracting /V.ʔV/ to /V/ is a nearly universal phenomenon for nouns (for instance, the ergative form of <em>c'áza</em> is <em>c'azat</em> rather than <em>**c'azaat</em>). The absence of contractions in verbs might be a result of Middle Ru speakers considering the glottal stop as being part of the verb root itself rather than an artifact of the language's phonology as in nominal affixes.</p> | ||
| Line 1,085: | Line 1,085: | ||
<p>In order to incorporate a noun into a verb, the base form of the noun (with no number nor case affixes) is added after the verb stem. A connecting affix <em>-ö-</em> (<em>-e-</em> or <em>-o-</em> depending on the vowel harmony class <b>of the incorporated noun</b>) is used except for vowel-initial nouns. For instance, incorporating the vowel-initial noun <em>áɣa</em> (land, dirt) to the verb <em>myjt</em> (to cover) results in forms such as <em>myjt<b>aɣa</b>iħárga</em> (I covered it with dirt ~ I buried it) while incorporating <em>qana</em> (family) to <em>hwn</em> (to rule) yields forms such as <em>hwn<b>eqana</b>armat</em> (you belong to the ruling dynasty, literally 'you family-rule them'), with an extra <em>e</em> connecting the two words. It should be noted that incorporated nouns <b>might belong to the opposite vowel harmony class</b> as in the latter example (<em>hwn</em> being a dark-class verb while <em>qana</em> is a clear-class noun). In these cases, all suffixes occurring after the noun belong to the same harmony class as the <em>noun</em>. Because of this, we find the clear-harmony affixes <em>-armat</em> in <em>hwneqanaarmat</em> but their dark-harmony counterparts <em>-årmåt</em> when no noun is incorporated to the verb: <em>hwnårmåt</em> (you rule over them).</p> | <p>In order to incorporate a noun into a verb, the base form of the noun (with no number nor case affixes) is added after the verb stem. A connecting affix <em>-ö-</em> (<em>-e-</em> or <em>-o-</em> depending on the vowel harmony class <b>of the incorporated noun</b>) is used except for vowel-initial nouns. For instance, incorporating the vowel-initial noun <em>áɣa</em> (land, dirt) to the verb <em>myjt</em> (to cover) results in forms such as <em>myjt<b>aɣa</b>iħárga</em> (I covered it with dirt ~ I buried it) while incorporating <em>qana</em> (family) to <em>hwn</em> (to rule) yields forms such as <em>hwn<b>eqana</b>armat</em> (you belong to the ruling dynasty, literally 'you family-rule them'), with an extra <em>e</em> connecting the two words. It should be noted that incorporated nouns <b>might belong to the opposite vowel harmony class</b> as in the latter example (<em>hwn</em> being a dark-class verb while <em>qana</em> is a clear-class noun). In these cases, all suffixes occurring after the noun belong to the same harmony class as the <em>noun</em>. Because of this, we find the clear-harmony affixes <em>-armat</em> in <em>hwneqanaarmat</em> but their dark-harmony counterparts <em>-årmåt</em> when no noun is incorporated to the verb: <em>hwnårmåt</em> (you rule over them).</p> | ||
<p>Incorporated nouns most commonly indicate an instrument or material used to perform an action. For instance, 'the city was built with stone' could be translated as <em> | <p>Incorporated nouns most commonly indicate an instrument or material used to perform an action. For instance, 'the city was built with stone' could be translated as <em>cwñep'añeiħañ ɣen</em>, literally 'they stone-built the city', incorporating <em>p'áñe</em> (stone) into the verb <em>cwñ</em> (to build). This kind of sentences, however, might also be expressed with the instrumental case as in <em>cwñwħåñ ɣen syrp'áñe</em> (literally 'they built the city with-stone') and the latter usage seems to have been favoured in official Cadarmeni documents. Incorporated nouns might also be used to indicate generic direct objects as in <em>qyt'ek'et'aiħañ</em> for 'they harvested rice' (incorporating <em>k'ét'a</em>, 'rice', into the verb <em>qyt'</em>, 'to harvested') although this seems to have been limited to a few idiomatic examples.</p> | ||
<p>Additionally, noun incorporation would occasionally yield phrases with an <em>a priori</em> unexpected idiomatic usage. As seen before, <em>hwn</em> (to rule) plus <em>qana</em> (family) yielded a verb that meant ' to belong to the ruling family'. A more systematic example is the usage of <em>qurt</em> (hands) to indicate that an action is done by oneself. For instance <em>cavdoqurtwħåñ sek mimy</em>, literally 'the man hand-cut the trees' will typically imply that the man cut all the trees 'by himself' rather than doing it 'by hand'. <em>Qurt</em> can be incorporated into a verb with a more literal meaning, however: <em>dåfoqurtårmås</em> (incorporating <em>qurt</em> to <em>dåf</em>, 'to eat') would be more likely to be understood as meaning 'I was eating them using my hands (not cutlery)' than 'I was eating them on my own'.</p> | <p>Additionally, noun incorporation would occasionally yield phrases with an <em>a priori</em> unexpected idiomatic usage. As seen before, <em>hwn</em> (to rule) plus <em>qana</em> (family) yielded a verb that meant ' to belong to the ruling family'. A more systematic example is the usage of <em>qurt</em> (hands) to indicate that an action is done by oneself. For instance <em>cavdoqurtwħåñ sek mimy</em>, literally 'the man hand-cut the trees' will typically imply that the man cut all the trees 'by himself' rather than doing it 'by hand'. <em>Qurt</em> can be incorporated into a verb with a more literal meaning, however: <em>dåfoqurtårmås</em> (incorporating <em>qurt</em> to <em>dåf</em>, 'to eat') would be more likely to be understood as meaning 'I was eating them using my hands (not cutlery)' than 'I was eating them on my own'.</p> | ||