Chlouvānem/Syntax

This page treats syntax (kilendarāmita) in the Chlouvānem language. Throughout the page there will be references to the topics treated in the pages on Chlouvānem morphology, positional and motion verbs, and exterior and interior verbs.

Word order

Chlouvānem's word order is usually described as topic-comment; the topic (caṃginutas), whether explicit or "unmarked" (as per Chlouvānem terminology) is always the first element of a sentence and everything else - the comment or paṣukulas - comes afterwards. The most commonly used terminology in native sources distinguishes two different kinds of topics as aplidra caṃginutas vs. gu aplidra caṃginutas (or also tadgerenei aplidra caṃginutas or daradhāve aplidra caṃginutas), translated here as "explicit topic" and "unmarked topic" (or "voice-marked topic" or "verb-marked topic") respectively. Explicit topic (aplidra caṃginutas) is understood as a topic marked by the particle mæn.

The comment's structure could be described as OSV, but the definition of subject and object does not apply fully to Chlouvānem. S is whatever agrees with the verb, i.e. the triggered argument, called tadgerenimišas or simply imišas in Chlouvānem. O, in this broad scheme, stands for any other argument ("object" and oblique ones). Anyway, OSV is a rough but good approximation for that as (see example sentences 3 to 5 below) the closest argument to the verb is the agent when non-triggered in a sentence with unmarked topic, or the direct argument in a sentence with explicit topic. The verb complex always comes in last position in a sentence, except for some particles (notably the interrogative dam).

maikām saṃhārmæ yąlē.
papaya.DIR.SG. boy-ERG.SG. eat-IND.PRES.3SG.PATIENT.EXTERIOR.
The papaya is being eaten by a boy.

saṃhāram maikāmu yąlegde.
boy.DIR.SG. papaya-ACC.SG. eat-IND.PRES.3SG.EXTERIOR-AGENT.
The boy is eating a papaya.

ukyā maikāmu saṃhārmæ yąlērā.
treetrunk.DIR.SG. papaya-ACC.SG. boy-ERG.SG. eat-IND.PRES.3SG.EXTERIOR-LOC.
A boy is eating a papaya [sitting] on the treetrunk. (or: *the treetrunk is being eaten a papaya on by the boy.)'

jubdhā maikāmu saṃhārmæ yąlēmǣ.
pair_of_chopsticks.DIR.SG. papaya-ACC.SG. boy-ERG.SG. eat-IND.PRES.3SG.EXTERIOR-INSTR.
A boy is eating [pieces of] papaya with chopsticks. (or: *the chopsticks are being eaten [pieces of] papaya with by the boy.)'

lilyā ñæltah mæn lære lunaikeike lalteh gun ē ša.
1SG.POSS-ERG. sister.DIR.SG. TOPIC. yesterday. tea_house-LOC.SG. friend.DIR.SG. NEG=be.IND.PAST.3SG.EXTERIOR.PATIENT=NEG.
As for my sister, her friend wasn't at the tea house yesterday. (interpreted as: My sister didn't meet her friend at the tea house yesterday.)'

Non-verb-final word orders are possible, but are practically only ever used in poetry in order to fit into particular metres.

Complement order

The typical organization of the sentence is, therefore:

Sentence with explicit topic:
explicit topic — temporal complement — (anti)benefactives — compl. of manner~stative cases (translative, exessive, essive) — locative complements — semantic patient — semantic agent — direct argument — verb — sentence-final particles

Sentence with unmarked topic:
unmarked topic — temporal complement — (anti)benefactives — compl. of manner~stative cases (translative, exessive, essive) — locative complements — semantic patient — semantic agent — verb — sentence-final particles

Note that temporal complements may, in certain circumstances, act as unmarked topics themselves. In that case, the structure followed is the same as for sentences with explicit topics, i.e. with the direct argument immediately preceding the verb.

buneyi lenta lili mæn lalla alanaleilye maihadhūt nali talaitūmap kurūṣarthom murkadhāna ilivāltate.
female's_older_sister-GEN.SG. together_with. 1SG.DIR. TOPIC. next. alanaleilē-LOC.SG. parents-DIR.DU. for. canoe-INSTR.SG. Kurūṣartha-DAT. Inquisitor.DIR.SG.. guide-IND.FUTINT.3SG.EXTERIOR-AGENT.
My older sister and I, on the coming Alanaleilē, as for our parents' will, will be guided by an Inquisitor on our canoe trip to Kurūṣartha.

lære prājamne lārvājuṣom lili pīdhvu.
yesterday. evening-LOC.SG. temple-DAT.SG. 1SG.DIR. walk.MULTIDIR.PAST-IND.1SG.PATIENT.EXTERIOR.
Yesterday [in the] evening I went to the temple on foot.

Explicit and unmarked topic

Explicit topic is typically used for marking an element that has a semantic but not syntactic role in the sentence. Among sentences that make use of explicit topics rank some of the most basic ones:

lili mæn māmimojende liven.
1SG.DIR. TOPIC. 19₁₂-ORD.DIR. go.UNIDIR.PRES.IND.3SG.PATIENT.EXTERIOR.
I am in my 19₁₂th year of age. (i.e. I am 20₁₀.)

lili mæn ñæltāt jali.
1SG.DIR. TOPIC. sister-DIR.DU. be.IND.PRES.3DU.EXTERIOR.PATIENT.
I have two sisters.

lili mæn līve šulka dvārma jali.
1SG.DIR. TOPIC. apartment-LOC.SG. five.DIR. room.DIR.SG. be.IND.PRES.3PL.EXTERIOR.PATIENT.
In my apartment there are five rooms.

Topics are very commonly used to mark a broad context, acting as a sort of "heading" for a sequence of otherwise seemingly unrelated sentences:

nāmñē mæn švai chlǣvānumi maichleyuñci, jaryāmaile lilah, soramiya mušigērisilīm tora, ñikumi viṣam haloe līlas vi no. nenēhu līlasuṃghāṇa ga camimarti haloe gṇyāvire.
nāmñē.DIR.SG. TOPIC. animal-DIR.PL. Chlouvānem-GEN.PL. south-GEN.SG.. – seawater-LOC.SG. live-IND.PRES.3PL.EXTERIOR.PATIENT. – sometimes. tidal.lake-LOC.PL. also. – cub-GEN.PL. other.DIR. name.DIR.SG.. līlas.DIR.SG. be.IND.PRES.3SG.EXTERIOR.PATIENT. and. — this-ABL. Līlasuṃghāṇa.DIR. ADP. capital.city-GEN.SG. name.DIR.SG. give.birth-IND.PRES.3SG.INTERIOR.COMMON.
Nāmñai are animals of the Southern Inquisition that live in seawater and sometimes can also be found in tidal lakes; another name for their cubs is "līlas". This is the source of the name of the Chlouvānem capital Līlasuṃghāṇa.

Sequences of two different explicit topics are commonly used in order to express a (highly context-dependent) contrast:

snūṣṭras mæn tadadrā lili mæn yąlē.
husband.DIR.SG. TOPIC. cook.IND.PERF.3SG.EXTERIOR.PATIENT. 1SG.DIR. TOPIC. eat-IND.PRES.3SG.EXTERIOR.PATIENT.
The husband has cooked, but I eat. [it's only me who eats OR the meal wasn't meant for me]'

Note that in such a sentence whose husband it is is not known - context likely tells us it's the speaker's husband who does, but given the appropriate context it could also be the listener's one.
Compare with the following three sentences, which all have the exact same meaning, but would be used in different contexts:

snūṣṭras mæn tadadrā lili yąlute (no).
husband.DIR.SG. TOPIC. cook.IND.PERF.3SG.EXTERIOR.PATIENT. 1SG.DIR. eat-IND.PRES.1SG.EXTERIOR-AGENT. (and.)
The husband has cooked, so I eat.

lili mæn snūṣṭrei tadadrā sama yąlute.
1SG.DIR. TOPIC. husband-ERG.SG. cook.IND.PERF.3SG.EXTERIOR.PATIENT. and. eat-IND.PRES.1SG.EXTERIOR-AGENT.
As for me, my husband has cooked, so I eat.

lili nali snūṣṭrei takædadrām yąlute.
1SG.DIR. for. husband-ERG.SG. cook.IND.PERF.1SG.EXTERIOR-BENEF. eat-IND.PRES.1SG.EXTERIOR-AGENT.
The husband has cooked for me, so I eat. (or: I have been cooked for by the husband and eat.)

The lack of contrasting explicit topics implies a consequential, natural action, as if expected. Again, whose husband it is is not specified, but in the second sentence the first-person explicit topic clearly states that the husband mentioned in the comment is the topic's, therefore "my husband" is the correct translation.

In answers, the choice between an explicit and an unmarked topic is usually dictated by the question's form. If the topic explicitely answers the question marker (e.g. "who?" → "me"), then the topic is unmarked; otherwise an explicit topic is used:

(A:) yavita lunāyu tatedarē? – (B:) lili lunāyu tatedaru.
who.DIR. tea-ACC.SG. prepare-IND.PRES.3SG.EXTERIOR-AGENT.
Who is preparing tea? – I [no one but me] is preparing tea.

(A:) yananū ejulā darire? – (B:) lili mæn lunai tadarē.
what.DIR. here. do-IND.PRES.3SG.INTERIOR.COMMON.
What's going on here? – I am preparing tea.

Verb phrase

The tense-aspectual system

The Chlouvānem tense-aspectual system is formed by three times of action (past, present, and future) and two aspects (imperfective and perfective). It is however often considered to be a monoaspectual system, as the tense-aspect combinations (hereafter simply tenses, cf. Chlouvānem avyāṣa, pl. avyāṣai) which are not strictly perfective are not imperfective, but do not distinguish aspect at all - in fact, they can (and, as for the past, very frequently) have perfective meaning too.

Past and perfect

Past and perfect are the two Chlouvānem (morphological) tenses that are used to refer to past actions. Their meanings may be summarized this way:

• The past tense (dāṃdenire avyāṣa, rarely ēktami avyāṣa) always refers to the past, but isn’t always perfective;
• The perfect “tense” (mīraṃnajausire avyāṣa) is always perfective, but isn’t always past - and when it does, it has an impact on the present.

These theoretical meanings may be translated into practice as this: the past is most commonly used to express something that happened in the past and does not influence the present, or it is not meaningful to the time of the action.

1. tammikeike lære yųlaute.

   train.station-LOC.SG. yesterday. eat-IND.PAST.1SG.EXTERIOR-AGENT.

   I ate at the station yesterday.

2. jāyim paliu junikte.

   girl.DIR.SG. face-ACC.SG. paint-IND.PAST.3SG.EXTERIOR-AGENT.

   The girl painted her [own] face.

In an appropriate context, however, the same verb form can carry an imperfective meaning:

1. tammikeike lære yųlaute væse, nanā tammi tadāmek.

   train.station-LOC.SG. yesterday. eat-IND.PAST.1SG.EXTERIOR-AGENT while. – that.DIR. train.DIR.SG. arrive-IND.PAST.3SG.EXTERIOR.PATIENT.

   I was eating at the station yesterday when the train arrived.

2. jāyim palyu junikte : ni nenichladirya meinei muṣkemālchek.

   girl.DIR.SG. face-ACC.SG. paint-IND.PAST.3SG.EXTERIOR-AGENT. – but. hurry-SUBJ.IMPF.3SG.INTERIOR. mother-ERG.SG. ask-INF-run.MULTIDIR-IND.PAST.3SG.EXTERIOR.PATIENT.

   The girl was painting her [own] face, but her mother kept asking her to hurry.

Generally this imperfective meaning is assumed by other words in the sentence, usually væse (while), but commonly also mbu (but) with a related sentence understood to be imperfective (see the following sections for more). Out of context, imperfective past is usually expressed with an analytic construction:

1. tammikeike lære yųlatite lā ēk.

   train.station-LOC.SG. yesterday. eat-SUBJ.IMPF.1SG.EXTERIOR-AGENT. with. be.IND.PAST.1SG.EXTERIOR.PATIENT.

   I was eating at the station yesterday.

The main use of the perfect is expressing something that happened in the past but is still impacting the present; this is a difference very similar to the one between simple past and present perfect in English, and as such the perfect is usually translated that way. Compare, for example:

• jāyim palyu junikte - “the girl painted her [own] face”. Past tense here expresses a generic action: the girl may have painted her face ten years or five minutes ago, but that is irrelevant to the situation. In this particular sentence, the girl’s face may be understood to have now been cleaned, or that she may have cleaned and painted her face again many times - but, actually, whether she did or didn’t is now irrelevant. The actual time when she did it only becomes relevant if it is expressed (e.g. palyas jāyim lære junirek “the girl painted her [own] face yesterday”) and then it is understood that her face isn’t painted anymore.
• jāyim palyu ujunirāte - “the girl has painted her [own] face”. Perfect “tense” here focusses not on the action, but on its result. The girl finished painting her face, and it may be seen that her face is still painted - when she did is still irrelevant, but it happened sufficiently close in time that the result of that action may still be seen.

The Chlouvānem perfect, however, has a broader use than the English one, compare:

• lære dašajildek - “yesterday it rained”. Past tense, implied meaning is that there’s nothing that may indicate that yesterday it rained, or it doesn’t influence the speaker in any way.
• lære dašejilda - *yesterday it has rained. Perfect tense; while wrong in English, this construction is possible - and, in fact, is frequently heard - though it often only makes sense in a broader context. For example, in a sentence like “yesterday it rained and the path collapsed, so we [two] can’t walk there”, English uses both times a simple past, while Chlouvānem uses the perfect, as the path is still not walkable due to the rain: lære menni dašejilda līlta viṣustura no, āñjulā gu pepeithnāyǣ ša.

Note that the “impact on the present” meaning and the use of evidentials are independent from each other. Using a first inferential, for example, does not change the implications given by the use of perfect or past, though the actual interpretation is often heavily dependent from context:

• jāyim palyu juniroste - “apparently, the girl painted her [own] face”. Past tense: it can be assumed that the girl painted her own face sometime in the past; e.g. the girl is now painting her face, and given the way she does it, it’s reasonable to believe it’s not her first time.
• jāyim palyu ujunirṇate - “apparently, the girl has painted her [own] face”. Perfect “tense”: it can be assumed that the girl now has a painted face, but the speaker has not seen her; e.g. in her room there are face painting colours open or that look like they’ve been recently used.

The second inferential changes the speaker’s deduction, but not the implications given by tenses:

jāyim palyu junirākoste - “apparently, the girl painted her [own] face, but probably didn’t”. Past tense: as before, but while she, or something she did, had made the speaker believe she had already painted her face at least once in the past, the way she’s doing it makes think that she probably never did.

jāyim palyu ujunirākate - “apparently, the girl has painted her [own] face, but probably didn’t”. Perfect “tense”: as before; highly dependent on context. For example, there are face painting colours out of place, but it’s unlikely she did paint her face - e.g. it may not be a logical time to do it, or too little colour seems to have been used.

The Chlouvānem perfect is however also used where English would use past perfect or future perfect, as the “impact on the present” is understood to be on the time the main action in the sentence takes place, thus something that happened earlier is considered to have an impact on it:

tammikeike lære uyųlaṃte, utiya nanā tammi tadāmek.

train.station-LOC.SG. yesterday. eat-IND.PERF.1SG.EXTERIOR-AGENT. – then. that.DIR. train.DIR.SG. arrive-IND.PAST.3SG.EXTERIOR.PATIENT.

I had [already] eaten at the station yesterday when the train arrived.

tammikeike uyųlaṃte, utiya nanā tammi taluniṣya.

train.station-LOC.SG. eat-IND.PERF.1SG.EXTERIOR-AGENT. – then. that.DIR. train.DIR.SG. arrive-IND.FUT.3S.PATIENT.EXTERIOR.

I will have [already] eaten at the station when the train arrives.

Note that in the latter example, English uses future perfect and present simple respectively, while Chlouvānem uses perfect and future; the future in the second clause is necessary to give the future perfect meaning to the first one.
Still, note that out of context both pluperfect and future perfect may be expressed analytically, by using the perfective subjunctive plus lā (with) and the past or future tense of jalle (to be).

A notable exception to this use is with so-called “chained actions”, when the second one is a direct consequence of the first and the first one is usually still ongoing; the second one is therefore only a momentane happening inside the broader context of the first, and thus the choice between present and past is once again dependent on the impact on the present. Note that in such cases the two verbs are usually connected with no instead of sama. Compare:

• dašajildek līlta vīkṣṭāṭ no - “it rained, and the path collapsed”. Past tense: the path has since been repaired and it is walkable.
• dašejilda līlta viṣustura no - “it has rained, and the path has collapsed”. Perfect “tense”: the path is not walkable due to it having collapsed.

An extension of this pattern is seen in that use where the past may imply, with some verbs, the cancellation of the original result through the opposite action, e.g.:

• hālyehulca prāgdeiru vuldate - "Hālyehulca (has) opened the window." Here, the perfect implies that the window is still open at the sentence's time (in this case, the present).
• hālyehulca prāgdeiru uldekte - "Hālyehulca opened the window." Here, the past implies that the window has since been closed.

A "translative sām" (i.e. "for a certain period of time") is typically present whenever the past form is used:

• hālyehulca prāgdeiru māmei railan sām uldekte - Hālyehulca opened the window for twelve railai = hālyehulca prāgdeiru vuldate : tū māmei railų nin spṛšekte/aspṛšate - "Hāliehulca opened the window, then closed it twelve railai later". Note that in the latter verb both the past and the perfect may be used freely; in colloquial style this is also possible for the first verb (e.g. hālyehulca prāgdeiru uldekte ...), but this is considered a mistake in more formal contexts, c.f. the alternative translation "Hālyehulca, who had opened the window, ..."

Both the past and the perfect can be frequentative:

• marte mīmišviyek kite lįnek no - "(s)he kept being seen in the city, and [therefore] remained at home" ((s)he has since gone out of home).
• marte memīšveya kite ilįna no - "(s)he has kept being seen in the city, and [therefore] she has remained at home" (actual meaning dependent on a broader context, e.g. āñjulā tatanteħulonaiṣyes "you can find him/her there" (potential agent-trigger future of tatālulke (ta-tad-lun-) "to find")).

In narrative, it is common to use the perfect for a completed action and the (aspectless) past for an action that begins immediately after (examples taken from the excerpt "A festive day", among the example texts on the main Chlouvānem page):

• naina mæn ～ dvārmom nañamṛca kautepuglek - "Naina ran_PERF into the room [and] woke [us] up_PAST"
• hālkenīs yanomųvima keikom namṛcābhe - "we jumped out_PERF of the beds [and] ran_PAST into the yard"
• tainā mæn yanelīsa pārṇami nacu ilakakte nainęs lā ħuldek - "Tainā came out_PERF [of the washing room], got dressed_PERF for the day, [and] played_PAST with Naina"

Compare this other example from the same text where the last two verbs are both in the past because they're contemporaneous actions:

• nilāmulka mæn maildvārmom nañelīsa tainā lili no ṣveye primirtaram ñumirlam - "Nilāmulka entered_PERF the washing room [and] me and Tainā sit_PAST behind the wall [and] waited_PAST"

Tense-aspectual modifiers

Some adverbial particles are used together with certain morphological tenses in order to express a certain tense or aspect. Most of these forms can also be expressed by using auxiliary verbs.

didān

The adverbial particle didān (derived from dǣ dǣ no, literally "again and again", attested in Archaic Chlouvānem) marks repetitivity, i.e. "to keep doing something". As it is semantically imperfective, it is not used with the perfect or the intentional future tenses.

• tū didān yašaute — I kept reading it.
• tū didān yašute — I keep reading it.
• tū didān yahiṣyaṃte — I will keep reading it.

The same form may be expressed with an auxiliary construction made from the infinitive plus mālchake (e.g. tū yahikemālchute "I keep reading it") or with a verb derived by means of the prefix mai- (e.g. tū maiteyašu "I keep reading it").
Conceptually, the frequentative is similar, but the situation implied is different. The iterative tū didān yašute (or equivalents) marks an effort in making the situation repeat itself, in this case the book might be boring but it keeps being read anyway, or the same section is read again and again for an "internal" reason, i.e. the speaker wants to keep reading it. On the other hand, the frequentative tū yāyašveyute merely states that the action frequently happens, typically without much effort (e.g. situations require a passage to be read multiple times). As an example, the iterative sentence above might be used by a student reading the same passage again and again while studying because it is not clear enough for them, while the frequentative would be more appropriate in describing a passage read multiple times during liturgy.

gam and īgam

The adverbial particle gam (and its emphatic variant īgam) implies a moment immediately preceding the one of the action stated, but its actual meaning depends on the tense of the main verb. With the two future tenses and the past, it is a prospective aspect meaning (i.e. "to be about to"), while it means "just" and "right now" with the perfect and present tenses respectively.

• luvāyom gam dāmau — (past → past prospective) "I was about to leave for the store"
• luvāyom gam elīsam — (perfect → "just") "I just left for the store"
• luvāyom gam lå — (present → "right now") "I am walking to the store right now"
• luvāyom gam elīsāltam — (future intentional → present prospective) "I am about to leave for the store"
• luvāyom gam luniṣyam — (general future → future prospective) "I will be about to leave for the store"

The same form can be expressed by the infinitive plus the auxiliary verb įstiāke or maitiāke, e.g. luvāyom lulkayįstetimu (lulke-įs‹te›tim-u) "I am walking to the store right now".

lā

The particle lā "with" is used in two different but analogue analytic constructions. The first of them consists in using it together with an imperfective subjunctive verb and a form of jalle in one of the non-perfective tenses in order to mark an action as ongoing:

• yųlatite lā ū — I am eating.
• yųlatite lā ēk — I was eating.
• yųlatite lā jalṣyam — I will be eating.

The second construction has a perfective meaning (and is therefore meaningless with the perfect or future intentional tenses) and implies a pluperfect or future perfect when used with the past or future respectively. It can theoretically be used also with the present, but the meaning is the same one of the perfect. It is built in the same way, but with the perfective subjunctive form.

• yųlētate lā ēk — I had eaten.
• yųlētate lā jalṣyam — I will have eaten.

As noted before, this temporal collocation may be (and usually is) expressed with the bare perfect provided enough context is given.

Habitual actions

Habitual actions do not have a single way to be marked with. The three most common ways are: using a derived frequentative verb; using the infinitive plus the auxiliary verb ñǣɂake (to be used to) – not possible in the perfect and future intentional tenses; using a temporal adverb that implies frequency (i.e. yaivmiya "always", soramiya "sometimes", gumiya "never"; yaiva "every" plus a day or month name, ...)

Some verbs are also semantically habitual and therefore don't need to be marked as such. Multidirectional motion verbs (in the present) are a common example (they do have frequentative verb forms, but with an iterative meaning); others include tṛlake "to know", lilke "to live", nīkeikake "to be dating", mulke (√mun-) "to be able to".
Note that the verb nairīveke "to learn" (and derivatives) is frequentative in form but not semantically (the underlying root *irī- is not attested elsewhere); it can't, however, form a frequentative verb so another way must be used for it to be marked as habitual.

The optative

The optative mood (purmanūkire darišam) has two main uses: expressing wishes (i.e. optative "may") and expectations or recommendations (i.e. "should" or "ought to"). As an extension of the latter use, it is also the way Chlouvānem forms imperatives.

The optative does not distinguish tenses but aspects, even though the perfective optative is formed with the same terminations of the past indicative and is used for truly irrealizable wishes expressed in remembrance of a past situation (see example sentence 2 below).

1. emiya nanåh svātārṣęe tatalāvē!

   this_time. 3SG.DAT. be_correct-ADV. go.towards-OPT.IMPF.3SG.EXTERIOR.PATIENT.

   May (s)he get it right this time!

2. lūminaise āñjulā jamom!

   if_only. there. be-OPT.PERF.1SG.EXTERIOR.PATIENT.

   If only I had been there!

3. nanā dvārma saminēm gu natyāmorā ša.

   that.DIR. room.DIR.SG. child-ESS.PL. NEG=stay-OPT.IMPF.3SG.EXTERIOR-LOC=NEG.

   Kids shouldn't stay in that room.

4. daudittamai : tamirtatamoldres.

   want-HON-OPT.IMPF.2SG.EXTERIOR-AGENT. be_seated-HON-CAUS-OPT.PERF.2SG.INTERIOR.COMMON.

   Please sit down.

The subjunctive

Chlouvānem's subjunctive mood (milkausire darišam) has a variety of uses and is most commonly found when introduced by certain particles. It can also be used in a main clause, either on its own or with some specific particles. Examples of particles requiring the subjunctive are pa (concerning), ras (to avoid), or najelai (maybe):

1. læmibāgam ħildenu ālīce jālejildētte pa ukuliræ.

   team.DIR.SG. game-ACC.SG. that_way. win-SUBJ.PERF.3.EXTERIOR-AGENT. about. say-IND.PERF.3.REPORT.INTERIOR.COMMON.

   [They say] (s)he has/they have talked about how the team won the match.

2. tammyu pądīte ras nanū halše kāvelīsa.

   train-ACC.SG. miss-SUBJ.IMPF.3.EXTERIOR-AGENT. avoid. more. early. go.out-IND.PERF.3.EXTERIOR.PATIENT.

   (S)he/they left earlier to avoid missing their train.

3. najelai nanāt gu tṛlirī ša.

   maybe. that.EXESS. NEG=know-SUBJ.IMPF.3.INTERIOR.COMMON.

   Maybe (s)he/they don't know [about] it.

When used on its own, it has a supine meaning (i.e. "in order to"):

1. māraih lgutētte luvāmom dāmek.

   mango-ACC.PL. buy-SUBJ.PERF.3.EXTERIOR-AGENT. market-DAT.SG. walk-MONODIR-IND.PAST.3SG.EXTERIOR.PATIENT.

   (S)he went/was going to the market to buy mangoes.

Some verbs naturally require a subjunctive mood argument (typically in the imperfective aspect), like for example nīdhyuɂake (to call for):

1. karthāgo bīdrī nītedhyuɂek.

   Carthage.DIR. destroy-SUBJ.IMPF.3.EXTERIOR.PATIENT. call_for-IND.PAST.3SG.EXTERIOR-AGENT.

   (S)he called for Carthage to be destroyed.

For some verbs, notably lelke, vāgdulke (both "to choose"), and mulke (√mun-, to know how to), the subjunctive is used when the argument is not an impersonal phrase; compare the following two examples:

1. nanā jilde mauṃsme.

   that. perform-INF. be_able_to-IND.PRES.1DU.EXTERIOR.PATIENT.

   We (two) know how to do it.

2. galtirī lalla kaulā nalrākulī elena.

   synod-GEN.SG. next. assembly.DIR.SG. debate-SUBJ.IMPF.3.EXTERIOR-LOC. choose-IND.PERF.3.EXTERIOR.PATIENT.

   It_impers has been chosen to talk about it_topic in the next synodal assembly. (lit. "for it to be talked about").

The subjunctive mood is also vital in forming conditional sentence; see that section for more explanations.

Positional and motion verbs

→ See Chlouvānem positional and motion verbs.

Positional and motion verbs are a semantically and syntactically defined category of Chlouvānem verbs that constitutes one of the most complex parts overall of Chlouvānem grammar, with similar (though often more simplified with time) in all other Lahob languages; the Chlouvānem system is essentially the same as the one reconstructed for Proto-Lahob.

Positional verbs (jalyadaradhūs, pl. jalyadaradhaus) translate verbs such as "to stay", "to be seated", and "to lie", (as well as their middle and causative forms) with prefixes that are semantically comparable to English prepositions. Motion verbs are more similar to English, being satellite-framed (the satellite, in the Chlouvānem case, being the prefix), but there is an added complexity because motion verbs can be monodirectional (tūtugirdaradhūs, -aus) or multidirectional (tailgirdaradhūs, -aus), and most verbs come in pairs, each member of a pair being used in different contexts.

Noun phrase

Direct and vocative cases

The direct case (daradhūkire dirūnnevya) is the most basic form of the Chlouvānem noun. It is most typically used for the "subject", i.e. whatever argument is selected as topic by the trigger on the verb.

1. phēcam eṇē ānotē.

   cat.DIR.SG. table-LOC.SG. lie_on-IND.PRES.3SG.EXTERIOR.PATIENT.

   The cat is lying on the table.

2. eṇāh phēcamap ānotērā.

   table.DIR.SG. cat-INSTR.SG. lie_on-IND.PRES.3SG.EXTERIOR-LOC.

   It is the table a cat is lying on.

Furthermore, direct case is required by copular verbs. The prototypical example is jalle (to be), usually omitted in the present tense, but other such verbs are birdake (to seem, look like) and snujve (to be worth, to cost).

1. nanā gūṇa vi.

   that.DIR. bird.DIR.SG. be.IND.PRES.3S.EXTERIOR.PATIENT.

   It is a bird.

2. nanā gūṇa berdē.

   that.DIR. bird.DIR.SG. seem-IND.PRES.3S.EXTERIOR.PATIENT.

   It seems a bird.

3. nunū nęlte yaltan snijē.

   that.MED.DIR. four.DIR. yaltan.DIR.SG. be_worth-IND.PRES.3S.EXTERIOR.PATIENT.

   It costs four yaltan.

There are particles which require a noun in the direct case: ga (adpositive), nali (benefactive marker), pa (concerning, about), and ras (antibenefactive marker).

The vocative case (halausire dirūnnevya), which is very often identical in form to the direct, is used for direct address:

1. lairei ūñjulā tatemišamai!

   Lairē-VOC. there. look-OPT.IMPF.2SG.EXTERIOR-AGENT.

   Lairē, look there [near you]!

2. mā phēcam yajulā vi?

   mother.VOC.SG. cat.DIR.SG. where. be.IND.PRES.3S.EXTERIOR.PATIENT.

   Mum, where's the cat?

Non-selected arguments

When an argument is not selected as topic by the trigger, each role has its own case to be used:

• Patient → (transitive verbs) accusative case; (intransitive and interior verbs) essive case; (positional verbs) instrumental case
• Agent → ergative case
• Benefacted → direct case + nali
• Antibenefacted → direct case + ras
• Location → locative case
• Instrument → instrumental case
• Dative argument → dative case

Genitive case

The genitive case (cārūkire dirūnnevya) is most commonly used to express simple possession and always comes before the possessed noun (except for poetry):

1. nunū lilyai buneyi jṛṣṇa.

   that.MED.DIR. my-GEN. female's_older_sister-GEN.SG. backpack.DIR.SG.

   That is my older sister's backpack.

2. nenē hilyamāmi yaivų vāndarlire daṃṣrāṇa.

   this.DIR. Hilyamāmah-GEN. all-ABL. be_famous-IND.PRES.3SG.INTERIOR.COMMON. palace.DIR.SG.

   This is Hilyamāmah's most famous palace.

The genitive forms of pronouns are peculiar as they decline for case when used attributively:

lilyā nacai – my clothes (my.DIR. cloth-DIR.PL.)

lilyai nacumi – of my clothes (my-GEN. cloth-GEN.PL.)

A common use of the genitive is to express possession, i.e. what would be translated by the English verb "to have" (there is a Chlouvānem verb, cārake, which is translated as "to have, possess", but it is mostly used in legal or literary contexts, or set phrases). This is especially often done when the possessor is not an explicit topic (as in the second example).

1. kvyāti giṣṭarire lalāruṇa.

   hero-GEN.SG. be_young-IND.PRES.3SG.INTERIOR.COMMON. lalāruṇa.DIR.SG.

   The hero has a young lalāruṇa.

2. lili mæn pogi gu cūllanagdha ē.

   1SG.DIR. TOPIC. village-GEN.SG. no. velodrome.DIR.SG. be.IND.PAST.3SG.EXTERIOR.PATIENT.

   My village used not to have a velodrome.

It is very common for English adjectives to correspond to Chlouvānem genitive nouns:

dāšikī daša – monsonic rain (monsoon-GEN.SG. rain.DIR.SG.)

chlǣvānumi dhāḍa – Chlouvānem language (Chlouvānem-GEN.PL. language.DIR.SG.)

A few intransitive verbs require an argument expressed in the genitive, most commonly ḍhūke (to remember):

1. nanyā ḍhvęru.

   2SG.HIGHER.GEN. remember-IND.PRES.1SG.INTERIOR.COMMON.

   I remember you.

Stative cases

The three stative cases of Chlouvānem are the translative (najamarcūkire dirūnnevya), exessive (nenijamarcūkire ~), and essive (jalausire ~) ones, prototypically referring to entrance, exit, and permanence in a given state.

Often, these meanings correlate to nominal tense, with the exessive expressing a past state, the essive a present one, and the translative another in the future:

1. lili rahēllilan vi.

   1SG.DIR. doctor-TRANS.SG. be.IND.PRES.3SG.EXTERIOR.PATIENT.

   I am a will-be-doctor. (i.e. "I'm studying to become a doctor.")

2. praškeva lenta hūrtalgān rahēllailąs jali.

   male's_older_brother-GEN.DU. together_with. Hūrtalgān.DIR. doctor-ESS.PL. be.IND.PRES.3.EXTERIOR.PATIENT.

   Hūrtalgān and his two older brothers are all doctors.

3. lilyā kaleya mæn nanū aveṣyotārire lallāmahan camimurkadhānan gī gu lilullenāvaute ša.

   my-DIR. spiritual_friend.DIR.SG. TOPIC. more. be_excellent-IND.PRES.3SG.INTERIOR.COMMON. highness-TRANS.SG. great_inquisitor-TRANS.SG. be.SUBJ.IMPF.3.EXTERIOR.PATIENT. NEG=believe.POT-IND.PAST.1SG.EXTERIOR-AGENT=NEG.

   I could not believe that my best friend was the Great Inquisitor-elect.

4. chališiroe mæn šulañšenat jalgudām vi.

   Chališiroe.DIR. TOPIC. husband-EXESS.SG. Jalgudām.DIR. be.IND.PRES.3SG.EXTERIOR.PATIENT.

   As for Chališiroe, Jalgudām is her former husband.

The verb ndǣke (to become), as well as its pragmatic implications, may be completely replaced by a (zero-)copular sentence by means of the translative (and, possibly, exessive too) case. Such sentences may often only be rendered in English periphrastically:

1. tamyā glūkam nūlinyañīnat murkadhānan.

   his_or_her.DIR. brother.DIR.SG. leaf.counter-EXESS.SG. inquisitor-TRANS.SG.

   Her brother, who was a time-waster, is now studying to become an Inquisitor.

The essive is typically used for the patient of most intransitive and interior verbs outside of patient-trigger voice:

1. meinā saminēm hulābdān nīkǣdarāhai.

   mother.DIR.SG. child-ESS.PL. well. behave-IND.PRES.3PL.EXTERIOR-BENEF.

   For/In order to please [their] mother, the children behave well.

2. dvārma taili uṃręs virā.

   room.DIR.SG. many. wardrobe-ESS.SG. be.IND.PRES.3SG.EXTERIOR-LOC.

   In the room there are many wardrobes.

The translative is typically used to express purpose if it directly affects the selected argument:

1. murkadhānan kaminairīveyu.

   inquisitor-TRANS.SG. study-IND.PRES.1SG.EXTERIOR.PATIENT.

   I am studying in order to become an Inquisitor.

2. nadaidanan lairęs lā peithegde.

   get_to_know_person-TRANS.SG. Lairē-ESS. with. walk.MULTIDIR.IND.PRES.3SG.EXTERIOR-AGENT.

   (S)he is going out with Lairē in order to get to know her.

Essive and exessive are also used to state what something is made of, or what something was produced from respectively: māręs jolan lais hælvaiya – a fruit salad predominantly made of mangoes and melons (mango-ESS.SG. melon-ESS.SG. and_INCOMPL. fruit_salad.DIR.SG. jolanat lārmis – melon lārmis (melon-EXESS.SG. lārmis.DIR.SG.)

The exessive is used to state a cause or reason if it is a concrete noun (the ablative is used for abstract ones):

1. kita kūrokat kalpire.

   house.DIR.SG. harmful_fire-EXESS.SG. damage-IND.PRES.3SG.INTERIOR.COMMON.

   The house is damaged because of the fire.

Locational and instrumental cases

The three locational cases are the dative (męliausire dirūnnevya, actually a dative+lative case), ablative (tųlunūkire ~), and locative (yutiūkire ~) ones; they express destination, provenience, and state respectively (see the links in the section below for more).

Aside from destination, the dative expresses the indirect object, prototypically the one something is given to:

dānyom emęliaṃte.
Dāneh-DAT. give-IND.PERF.1SG.EXTERIOR-AGENT.
I've given it to Dāneh.

Similarly, the reverse relation is expressed by the ablative:

bhākrų naviṣyāṣa ilākāltaṃte.
shelf-ABL.SG. book-ACC.DU. take-IND.FUTINT.1SG.EXTERIOR-AGENT.
I'm going to take two books from the shelf.

The dative is also used for purpose but, while the translative (see above) expresses a purpose directly affecting the trigger, a purpose stated with the dative case is a different object (see example sentence 1) or the result of a subsequent, unstated but pragmatically implied, action (see the second example):

maivnaviṣye maivesām khloyute.
dictionary-LOC.SG. word-DAT.PL. search-IND.PRES.1SG.EXTERIOR-AGENT.
I am searching in the dictionary for words.

kǣɂūvi mayābyom rāmyāhai.
plum-DIR.PL. wine-DAT.SG. harvest-IND.PRES.3PL.EXTERIOR.PATIENT.
Plums are harvested for wine.

The ablative case is also used in comparative structures, marking the thing being compared:

dāneh dulmaidanų nanū lalla.
Dāneh.DIR. Dulmaidana-ABL. more. tall.
Dāneh is taller than Dulmaidana.

nanyā ñæltah jardāmų lāma chlǣcæm pūnē.
your.HIGHER.DIR. sister.DIR.SG. Jardām-ABL. HON. better. work-IND.PRES.3SG.EXTERIOR.PATIENT.
Your sister works better than Mr. Jardām.

nenē naviṣya yaivų nanū ñæñuchlire.
this.DIR. book.DIR.SG. all-ABL. more. be_beautiful-IND.PRES.3SG.INTERIOR.COMMON.
This book is the most beautiful.

It is also used to state a cause or reason, if it is an abstract noun:

kairų hånyadaikirek.
love-ABL.SG. be_happy-IND.PAST.3SG.INTERIOR.COMMON.
(S)he was happy for love.

Only

The Chlouvānem construction for "only" is, grammatically, a comparative, with the thing that is "only" in the ablative case, compared to a positive alternative correlative (or, in some cases, nanū) in a negative sentence:

nęltayų viṣāmi gu vi ša, gu našabuṃṣanah!
4_mark-ABL.SG. something_else. NEG=be.PRES.IND.3SG.PATIENT.EXTERIOR.=NEG. – no. drought.DIR.SG.
It's only a nęltayas, it's not a disaster!

lārvājuṣų viñjulyom gu lå ša.
yunyalīlti_temple-ABL.SG. elsewhither. NEG=walk.UNIDIR.PRES.IND.1SG.PATIENT.EXTERIOR.=NEG.
I'm just going to the temple.

lillaukų nanū gu yaccechlašute ša.
moment-ABL.SG. more. NEG=request.HUMBLE-INF-do.HUMBLE-PRES.IND.1SG.EXTERIOR-AGENT.=NEG.
Just a moment, please.

An exactly synonymous construction is made by using the negative alternative correlative in a positive sentence. It is, usually, perceived as much more formal and somewhat more posh than the above:

lārvājuṣų guviñjulyom lå.
yunyalīlti_temple-ABL.SG. nowhither_else. walk.UNIDIR.PRES.IND.1SG.PATIENT.EXTERIOR.
I'm just going to the temple.

Note that this does not apply to every single instance of English "only". "If only" is usually translated with the adverb lūminaise (from Arch. Chl. lūmas "prosperity"), while "not only" as gu emibunaise (nearly perfectly matching French "pas uniquement").

Temporal and spatial case usage

See Chlouvānem positional and motion verbs for spatial case usage.

See Chlouvānem calendar § Expressing time in Chlouvānem for temporal case usage.

Absolute construction

Chlouvānem may use the essive case in order to form an absolute construction which we'll call the "essive absolute" in this section. Much like the Latin ablative absolute, the Chlouvānem essive absolute describes a circumstance which the action takes place in:

1. ṣūbha nūlastāną gvamyų lgutatite lenaute.

   little. money-ESS.SG. nothing-ACC. buy-SUBJ.IMPF.1SG.EXTERIOR-AGENT. choose-IND.PAST.1SG.EXTERIOR-AGENT.

   Having little money, I decided not to buy anything.

2. rālge læmililąs læmibaganarṣā nutvirek.

   gravel-LOC.SG. racing.driver-ESS.SG. team.principal.DIR.SG. be_angry-IND.PAST.3SG.INTERIOR.COMMON.

   [Seeing his/her] driver in the gravel, the team principal got angry.

This construction is only possible as long as there is no verb, as Chlouvānem has no participles and such phrases are translated as nonreduced relative clauses. Sometimes this can be done as alternative to the essive absolute, by leaving the noun in direct case instead of using the essive, but there may be possible subtle distinctions in meaning, cf. rālge læmilila læmibaganarṣā nutvirek "as his/her driver was in the gravel, the team principal was angry", where the lack of essive absolute forces the verb nutvake to be read in a continuous, and not inceptive, sense.

The essive absolute may also be used to give a reasoning in exhortations:

1. kite gu maihadhūgin : talāvi!

   home-LOC.SG. NEG. parent-ESS.DU. come-OPT-IMPF.2SG.EXTERIOR.PATIENT.

   My parents aren't home, come over!

Definiteness

A topicalized argument, whether explicitely marked (i.e. with mæn) or not, is always understood to be definite. On the contrary, this is not the case for non-topic arguments, whose definiteness, in most cases, has to be understood by context (obviously, this does not apply to words that are semantically definite - e.g. pronouns or proper names).
Common strategies to mark definiteness are:

• Simply adding information to the word (e.g. luvai "(a) market" → saṃryojyami lātimi ubgire ṣarivāṃluvai "the state department store on the approach to central Saṃryojyam"). Again, some ambiguity may still remain;
• Using a determiner - distal nanā "that" is perhaps the most common definiteness marker to resolve ambiguity;
• Explicitely topicalizing the ambiguous argument (not always possible);
• A different solution is to mark indefiniteness: this is commonly done by using either emibe "one" or, in colloquial speech, sorasmā "some kind of".

Chlouvānem as spoken in the area around the mid-course of the Nīmbaṇḍhāra river (the central Plain: roughly the whole of the diocese of Raharjātia, most of Jolenītra, Daikatorāma, Vādhātorama, and Namapleta, and parts of Mūrajātana, Perelkaša, Ryogiñjātia and far northern Sendakārva) does have a definite article used with non-topicalized arguments, which is actually the repurposed archaic demonstrative ami (still used as "this" in Archaic Chlouvānem). It declines for case, but not number, mostly following the pronoun declension (that is, exactly as tami without the initial t- except for the accusative (amu) and ergative (amye)).

Relative clauses

Chlouvānem relative clauses are nonreduced and work exactly the same way as adjectival verbs do: both clauses are independent. Time, place, and similar things are expressed with a distal correlative (see the table of correlatives).
The structure is thus as follows:

nanā jāyim sę mešē lilyā buneya.
that.DIR. girl.DIR.SG. 2S.ERG. see-IND.PRES.3S.EXTERIOR.PATIENT. 1S.GEN. older_sister.DIR.SG.
That girl you see is my older sister.

Other examples:

mešute gu tarliru ša.
see-IND.PRES.1S.EXTERIOR-AGENT. NEG- know-IND.PRES.1S.INTERIOR. -NEG.
I don’t know/understand what I see.

lilyā ñæltah līlekhaitom tesmudhiṣya ātiya lę lairkeikom khlavasiṣya.
1S.GEN. sister.DIR.SG. Līlekhaitē-DAT. depart_with_plane-IND.FUT.3S.EXTERIOR.PATIENT. then. 1S.ERG. airport-DAT.SG. go_with.IND.FUT.3S.EXTERIOR.PATIENT.
When my sister takes the plane to Līlekhaitē, I will go with her to the airport.

nanau kulekte ātmena gu tarliru ša.
that.ACC. say-IND.PAST.3S.EXTERIOR-AGENT. that_reason. NEG=know-IND.PRES.1S.INTERIOR=NEG.
I don’t know why (s)he said that.

The same strategy is used for attributes — kamilire pluta "blue bag" or "bag that is blue", including participial-like structures such as the following ones:

lilei pryemęlya pluta - the bag which has been given back by the person (literally: "by the person it has been given back, the bag")

plutu pritēmęlya lila - the person who has given back the bag

plutu dhurvāneiti prikevemęlya lila - the person for whose benefit the bag has been given back to the police

plutu ītulom prituremęlya lila - the person for whose misfortune the bag has been given back to the thief

håmarṣūvī nīpanotē pluta - the bag in which the keys lie

plutu primbyemęlya lila - the person who has been given back the bag

plutua demye maihei primbyemęlya lila - the person who has been given back the bag by his/her own daughter

ītulu lāṇṭaṃrye lilei utugamǣ pluta - the bag with which the thief has been hit on the head by the person

This "attributive" construction is very commonly used. In fact, the first example in this section may be more commonly found as sę mešē jāyim lilyā buneya (or mešite jāyim lilyā buneya).

Such constructions can also be used where English uses gerundive constructions:

plutu demye maihei primbyemęlya lila hånyadaikirek.
bag-ACC.SG. one's_own-ERG. daughter-ERG. give.back-IND.PERF.3.EXTERIOR-DAT. person.DIR.SG. be_happy-IND.PAST.3SG.INTERIOR.COMMON.
The person, having been given back the bag by his/her own daughter, was happy.

ālīce guṃsek lilyā pamih uyūṭarumi rileyek.
that.way. cut-IND.PAST.3SG.EXTERIOR.PATIENT. my.DIR. finger.DIR.SG. operation-GEN.SG. need-IND.PAST.3SG.EXTERIOR.PATIENT.
My finger, having been cut that way, needed an operation.

panaɂetatimu læmilāṇe arūppumei ilakatū læmilila menire memiṃsūyiṣya.
pole_position-ACC.SG. championship-LOC.SG. rival-ERG.SG. take-IND.PERF.3.EXTERIOR-ANTIBEN. driver.DIR.SG. tomorrow. risk-NECESS-IND.FUT.3.EXTERIOR.PATIENT.
The driver, being disadvantaged as (his/her) championship rival has taken pole position, will have to take some risks tomorrow.

Translation of sentential subjects

Using little subordination, sentential subjects common to English are rendered in different ways in Chlouvānem.

Sentences expressing judgement are often translatable with evidentials (and are therefore single-clause):

kite annē.
home-LOC.SG. be.INF1.PRES.IND-3SG.PATIENT.EXTERIOR.
It's probable that (s)he is at home.

lilyā purvās pūnākē.
1SG.GEN-DIR. son.DIR.SG. work.PRES.IND-INF2-3SG.PATIENT.EXTERIOR.
It seems that my son is working.

Other sentences are simply juxtaposed, not subordinated. A dummy "that" in the appropriate case may be inserted if the required case is not direct, accusative, or ergative, but it's often omitted:

kānyahǣṣa demyāṣati dṛkte [nanāt] pęrdirek dām?
Kānyahǣṣa.DIR. one's_own_way. do.PAST.IND-3SG.EXTERIOR-AGENT. [that.EXESS.SG.] annoy.PAST.IND-3SG.COMMON.INTERIOR. INTERR.
Whom did that Kānyahǣṣa did [it] her way annoy?

Conditional sentences

Conditional sentences in Chlouvānem grammar are those generally introduced by the particle pū, meaning "if". There are two general categories of conditional sentences: real and hypothetical.

Real sentences are those where the sentence expresses an implication that is always true. These sentences are generally in the indicative mood; note that in real, just like in hypothetical, sentences, mārim (then) is optionally used in order to introduce the second clause:

1. pū hālyanēṃṣom vasi ndaheɂinē ga lārvājuṣu mišiṣyeste.

   if. Hālyanēṃṣah-DAT. go_with_vehicle.MONODIR-IND.PRES.2SG.EXTERIOR.AGENT. Ndaheɂinē.DIR. ADP. temple-ACC.SG. see-IND.FUT.2SG.EXTERIOR-AGENT.

   If you go to Hālyanēṃṣah, you'll see the Ndaheɂinē Temple.

2. pū yamei naikū lāma udhyuɂeste, mārim tailīsālta.


   if. HON. Naikā-ACC.. HON. call-IND.PERF.2SG.EXTERIOR-AGENT. then. come-IND.FUTINT.3.EXTERIOR.PATIENT.

   If you have called Ms. Naikā, she will come. (or: "...she's expected to come".)

Hypothetical sentences are those where the result may be or might have been true if the condition gets/would have been fulfilled. There are two main possibilities:
 Sentences with a present condition, regardless of whether the condition might be fulfilled or it is completely impossible. If the condition is ultimately fulfillable, then it differs from "real if-sentences" as the result they express is not likely to happen or used as a warning.
The condition (pū clause) is always in the imperfective subjunctive; the main clause can be in the indicative (if stating an implicate result) or, more commonly, in the subjunctive (implying a wish). Some particular meanings always need the subjunctive due to their semantics being incompatible with depicting an "implicate result", e.g. all potential verbs with the meaning of "may". If the condition is impossible, then the second clause is always in the subjunctive:

1. lili mæn pū nanū nūlastān gī lališire hāris lgutēt.

   1SG.DIR. TOPIC. if. more. money.DIR.SG. be-SUBJ.IMPF.3.EXTERIOR.PATIENT. be_new-IND.PRES.3SG.INTERIOR.COMMON. carpet.DIR.SG. buy-SUBJ.PERF.3.EXTERIOR.PATIENT.

   If I had more money, I'd buy a new carpet.

2. lili mæn pū nanū nūlastān gī chlǣcæm lilati.

   1SG.DIR. TOPIC. if. more. money.DIR.SG. be-SUBJ.IMPF.3.EXTERIOR.PATIENT. better. live-SUBJ.IMPF.1SG.EXTERIOR.PATIENT.

   If I had more money, I'd live better.

3. pū nenē tuheiladom kitī āndriṣya.

   if. this.DIR. six_year_plan-DAT.SG. put-SUBJ.IMPF.3.EXTERIOR.PATIENT. build-IND.FUT.3.EXTERIOR.PATIENT.

   If this were included in the [next] six-year plan, it would be built.


In unfulfillable past conditions, the condition is always in the perfective subjunctive, while the aspect of the main clause, always subjunctive, depends on the intended meaning/collocation in time.

1. mei tati pū kulētate yaiva gātarirya.

   yes. QUOT. if. say-SUBJ.PERF.1SG.EXTERIOR-AGENT. all. be_different-SUBJ.IMPF.3.INTERIOR.COMMON.

   If I had said "yes", everything would be different (now)."

2. mei tati pū kulētate nanā gu najēt ša.

   yes. QUOT. if. say-SUBJ.PERF.1SG.EXTERIOR-AGENT. that.DIR. NEG=happen-SUBJ.PERF.3.EXTERIOR.PATIENT=NEG.

   If I had said 'yes', that wouldn't have happened.

Negatives

Chlouvānem negates sentences by using the circumfix gu(n) ... ša on the verb:

nanā lum pṛšcāmvi "I like it" → nanā lum gu pṛšcāmvi ša "I do not like it".

martayinām dvārmu nadāmek "Martayinām walked into the room" → martayinām dvārmu gu nadāmek ša "Martayinām didn't walk into the room".

ejulā ū "I am here" → ejulā gun ū ša "I am not here".

The ša part of the circumfix is omitted if the verb is attributive:

ṣveya gun ujunya ša "the wall hasn't been painted" → gun ujunya ṣveya "the wall that hasn't been painted"

alūs gu kamilire ša "the bottle isn't blue" → gu kamilire alūs "the bottle that isn't blue"

Double negatives are not proper in Chlouvānem — negating a sentence with a negative correlative makes it affirmative:

guvitu mešute "I see no one"

lævitu gu mešute ša "I don't see anyone"

guvitu gu mešute ša "I don't see no one" → "I see someone"

Interrogatives

Chlouvānem yes-no questions are formed with the particle dam at the end of the sentence:

nanā num pṛšcāmvi "you like it" → nanā num pṛšcāmvi dam? "do you like it?"

martayinām dvārmu nadāmek "Martayinām walked into the room" → martayinām dvārmu nadāmek dam? "did Martayinām walk into the room?"

If the sentence is negative, the ... ša part of the circumfix is omitted:

ejulā gu vi ša "(s)he/it is not here" → ejulā gu vi dam? "is (s)he/it not here?"

Choice questions may be formed with dam just like yes-no ones, or may be expanded in a form such as "do you X... or do you X?". dam is only included once, at the end:

javileh nę daudē : grāšatis nę daudē mbu dam? "do you want apples or persimmons?" (lit. "you want apples, or do you want persimmons?")

Non-polar questions are formed by using an interrogative (ya-) correlative, without dam. Unlike English, there is no mandatory wh-fronting in Chlouvānem (word order is usually flexible enough to allow all possibilities):

nenē kita lilyau naimū liląrā "in this house lives my maternal aunt" → nenē kita yavitu liląrā? "who lives in this house?"

jalgudām demyąa praškigin lā luvāyom liven "Jalgudām is walking to the store with his two older brothers" → jalgudām yavitęs lā luvāyom liven? "with whom is Jalgudām walking to the store?"

nane and naihā are "emphatic particles" used in informal Chlouvānem which work like English tag questions; nane expects an answer of the same polarity as the question, while naihā expresses doubt or expectation of a contradictory answer (it can be translated as ", or...?"). dam is not omitted:

saṃryojyame lilaši dam nane? "you live in Saṃryojyam, don't you?"

lære dṛk dam naihā? "it was done yesterday, or...?"

Yes and no

As far as yes-no answers are concerned, Chlouvānem is an agreement language: the words mei (yes) and go (no) have respectively the same and the opposite polarity as the question - translating them as "true" and "false" might give a better idea of how they are used.

kite vei dam? "are you at home?" — mei kite ū "yes, I'm home" ("it's true, I'm home")

kite gu vei dam? "are you not at home?" — mei kite gun ū ša "yes, I'm not home" ("it's true, I'm not home")

kite vei dam? "are you at home" — go kite gun ū ša "no, I'm not home" ("it's false, I'm not home")

kite gu vei dam? "are you not at home?" — go kite ū "no, I'm home" ("it's false, I'm home")

Quoted speech

The English distinction between direct and indirect speech is not present in Chlouvānem; instead, it uses a quotative particle, tati, which follows a quoted sentence; this instance of quoted speech is used basically everywhere English uses indirect speech:

håltęrmim tati kulaikate.

They said they were ready. (or, literally: They said "we are ready")

dvārme palyu jonyegde tati demyai maihi lāṃryāṇom kulekte.

(S)he told his/her daughter's boyfriend/girlfriend that she is painting her face in her room. (… "she paints her face in her room")

cāṃkręe, karthāgo bīdardṛsūyē tati vvlirute.

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam. (literally: "last [but not least], I think: "Carthage must be destroyed")

The verb tṛlake "to know, to understand" simply requires the sentences to be juxtaposed. Note that Chlouvānem uses the natural sequence of tenses:

ajāƾilbādhyom pūrṣei tarliru.

I know you went to Ajāƾilbādhi.

ajāƾilbādhyom pūrṣei tṛlirau.

I knew you had been (= lit.: you went) to Ajāƾilbādhi.

Future in the past also uses juxtaposed sentences, with the future meaning being shown by the general future tense:

ajāƾilbādhyom pūrṣiṣyes gu tṛlirau ša.

I did not know you would have been to Ajāƾilbādhi.

See also

• Chlouvānem