Balog: Difference between revisions

Verbs in Balog are the equivalent of verb, nouns, adjectives and pronouns in other languages. It is impossible to divide the category of verbs up to include separate discrete classes of nouns, verbs etc. using syntax or morphology alone. With few exceptions, each verb exhibits complete bidirectional subject-predicate flexibility, meaning they can be used in predicates ("verbally") or become nominalised by a subject marker in order to be used ("nominally") as the subject of a clause without any irregular changes in form or meaning.

It could be argued that a non-syntactic division of the category of verbs into classes of true verbs, nouns, adjectives etc., could be made on the basis of semantics. For example, semanticists may argue that the verb'''magaz''' (fall over) is semantically a true verb as it describes "an action/state",  whereas the verb '''dauz''' (be a tree) is semantically a noun because it describes "an entity". This semantic approach to the creation of additional categories that are not supported by syntactic analysis will, however, inevitably cause disagreements as semantic categories have fuzzy edges. A verb such as '''lisim''' could equally well regarded as a noun meaning "(an) annoyance" or "nuisance" or as a true verb meaning "annoy" or "bother". The question as to whether ''lisim'' refers to an entity or to an action/state can be answered with "Both!" '''Lisim''' refers to the action and the agent of that action. Likewise, the verb'''vaŋ''' could be argued to be a true verb meaning ''hunt'' (an action) or a noun meaning "hunter" (an entity or that performs the action). Even in more apparently clear-cut cases,  although the verb '''magaz''' "fall over", which patently seems to describe an action, is most conveniently translated into English as a verb, it also describes an ''entity that falls over'' (a "faller-over"). Likewise, the verb '''dauz''' describes an entity, a "tree", yet it also describes the action/state of '''being a tree'''. Balog simply makes no syntactic or lexical distinction between performing an action or being the agent of such an action.  

In many cases, the difference between what semanticists would regard as true verbs or nouns depends on the the intrinsic temporal aspect or ''Aktionsart'' of the word's definition. Words describing relatively long-lasting and static attributes of an entity, such as '''dauz''' "be a tree" or '''ŋaž''' "be tall" are less likely to be perceived by semanticists as true verbs. They also frequently use "be" to achieve verbal translations in English. Dynamic states or actions involving movement or change, especially transient or momentane descriptions of an entity that the entity may quickly pass through, are more likely to be regarded as intrinsically "verb like" and, when translated into English, may frequently have awkward, clunky nominal translations involving relative clauses headed by "entity that", "one who" or "that which".

The following table illustrates the temporal duration of varying attributes of what may be regarded as a single entity, a tree. This entity can be regarded as performing the action "be tree" for a substantial period of time, although, archetypally, it would most likely be described as a tree when fully grown and not yet fallen over. The size of the X's in the table indicates the suitability of the word. Throughout a trees life, it undergoes dynamic, changing action/states, some only for a single moment such as germinating or falling over, others, such as flowering may continue for a few weeks or months at a time and recur intermittantly. Other action/states, such as verbal "growing", occur for similar durations of time as more semantically nominal action/states such as "be tree", "be sapling", however these are regarded by semanticists as verbal merely due to the focus of the word on the change of state, contrasting with "be tree", in which changes of state are not in focus.