577
edits
Balog: Difference between revisions
m
→Verbs
m (→Verbs) |
|||
| Line 149: | Line 149: | ||
==Morphology== | ==Morphology== | ||
=== | ===Contentives (''Xam'')=== | ||
There is only one class of content word in Balog. These form the equivalent of verbs, nouns, adjectives and pronouns in other languages. Words of this lexical category cannot be sorted into separate discrete classes of nouns, verbs etc. using syntax or morphology. With few exceptions, each | There is only one class of content word in Balog. These form the equivalent of verbs, nouns, adjectives and pronouns in other languages. Words of this lexical category cannot be sorted into separate discrete classes of nouns, verbs etc. using syntax or morphology. With few exceptions, each contentive exhibits complete bidirectional subject-predicate flexibility, meaning they can be used in predicates ("verbally") or be preceded by a subject clitic in order to be used ("nominally") as the subject of a clause without any irregular changes in form or meaning. This class of words in Balog is refered to as "contentives". | ||
This situation can distinguished from the extensive zero-derivation, such as that employed by English, whereby verbs and nouns can, with a fair degree of flexibility, change category. Zero derivation results in identical verbs and nouns whose meanings relate to one another in somewhat unpredictable ways. For instance, although, by definition, a '''spy''' ''spies'' and a '''stray''' ''strays'', it cannot be said that, by definition, a '''fish''' ''fishes'' or '''burger''' ''burgers''. A '''tree''' ''grows'', but there is nothing called a '''grow''' that can be said to ''tree''. The verbal and nominal meanings formed by zero-derivation must therefore be regarded as separate (although related) lexical entities in their own right. | This situation can distinguished from the extensive zero-derivation, such as that employed by English, whereby verbs and nouns can, with a fair degree of flexibility, change category. Zero derivation results in identical verbs and nouns whose meanings relate to one another in somewhat unpredictable ways. For instance, although, by definition, a '''spy''' ''spies'' and a '''stray''' ''strays'', it cannot be said that, by definition, a '''fish''' ''fishes'' or '''burger''' ''burgers''. A '''tree''' ''grows'', but there is nothing called a '''grow''' that can be said to ''tree''. The verbal and nominal meanings formed by zero-derivation must therefore be regarded as separate (although related) lexical entities in their own right. | ||
By contrast, the meaning of Balog | By contrast, the meaning of Balog contentives does not change depending on their syntactic position within a clause. Each contentive may be given a nominal or a verbal translation into English, but the relationship between them is consistent. If given a nominal translation, then the verbal translation is simply "be [noun]". If given a verbal translation, the nominal translation is simply the agent noun of it or, more specifically, "entity that [verbs]s", "one who [verbs]", "that which [verbs]", "those that [verb]" etc. | ||
{| class="wikitable" | {| class="wikitable" | ||
|- | |- | ||
! Balog | ! Balog Contentive!! Verbal Translation !! Nominal Translation | ||
|- | |- | ||
| '''dauz''' || be a tree || tree | | '''dauz''' || be a tree || tree | ||
| Line 171: | Line 171: | ||
|} | |} | ||
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 | 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 contentive '''magaz''' (fall over) is semantically a ''verb'' as it describes "an action/state", whereas the contentive '''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 contentive such as '''lisim''' could equally well regarded as a noun meaning "(an) annoyance" or "nuisance" or as a 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 contentive '''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 contentive '''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 contentive '''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 | In many cases, the difference between what semanticists would regard as 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 verbs and also less likely to be translatable by verbs alone in languages with a noun-verb distinction. 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 tree's 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. | 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 or similarity to its conceptual archetype. Throughout a tree's 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. | ||
<pre>Balog | <pre>Balog Verbal | ||
Contentive: Translation: Time:-----------------------------------------------------------------------> | |||
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ | |||
dauz | dauz | be tree | xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx | ||
ŋurad | ŋurad | germinate | X | ||
biyad | biyad | grow: | XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX | ||
zemalik | zemalik | be seedling | XXXXXXXXXXxxx | ||
dauzit | dauzit | be sapling | xxxXXXXXXXXXXXXXxxx | ||
ŋaž | ŋaž | be tall | xxxxxxxxxxxXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX | ||
nax | photosynthesise | X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X | |||
zambilif | zambilif | flower | XX XX XX XX XXX XXX XX XXX | ||
magaz | magaz | fall down | X | ||
dišif | dišif | rot | xxxXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXxxxxx | ||
däžib | däžib | fallen tree, log| XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXxxxxx</pre> | ||
===Adverbs=== | ===Adverbs=== | ||