86
edits
Common (na Xafen): Difference between revisions
no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 955: | Line 955: | ||
! | Nominative | ! | Nominative | ||
| we /wen/ | | we /wen/ | ||
| wenar / | | wenar /'we.nar/ | ||
| wenaz / | | wenaz /'we.naθ/ | ||
|} | |} | ||
One special feature of number in the first person, is that the paucal number is used for exclusive (not including the addressee) and the plural is used for the inclusive (including the addressee). These forms are equivalent to the English 'we' and 'us', but the sense of whether the person addressed is included is generally always carried and contrasts with English. However, the normal sense of the paucal (a few of something, or something that can be precisely counted) versus the plural (many of something, or something that is too numerous to conveniently count) is still operative and can create ambiguity as to which sense is meant when a number is used.. Such ambiguity has to be worked out via context or extra phrasing to clarify if needed. | One special feature of number in the first person, is that the paucal number is used for exclusive (not including the addressee) and the plural is used for the inclusive (including the addressee). These forms are equivalent to the English 'we' and 'us', but the sense of whether the person addressed is included is generally always carried and contrasts with English. However, the normal sense of the paucal (a few of something, or something that can be precisely counted) versus the plural (many of something, or something that is too numerous to conveniently count) is still operative and can create ambiguity as to which sense is meant when a number is used.. Such ambiguity has to be worked out via context or extra phrasing to clarify if needed. | ||
====Second Person - Kawas Palisyn (zu)==== | |||
The second person pronoun/article is "zu". Like "we", it is a normal determiner that can take a head term. Unlike 'we', it is actually quite common to use a head term with "zu." Honorific or polite forms of address are virtually mandatory except with intimates, functioning like a T-V distinction in a language like French or Spanish. These are implemented in Common with honorific head terms rather than grammaticalized. Formality and respectful address in Common is an extensive topic that Trafalgar addresses [https://webconlang.infiniterecursion.ca/article/common/23/ here]. | |||
The nominative form of zu is used quite often as a sort of vocative case to address someone directly without syntactically relating it to a verb. Personal names are also often used in this fashion. For example, an imperative sentence like 'Tony, look at the child' could be written as 'Ju Toni te zeul a pocuk'. The 'ju' is required, you could not address a person by name without it. You cannot refer to a person by name in general without including an article, similar to Catalan. | |||
''Declension of '''zu''' (Second Person)'' | |||
{| border="1" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="1" class="bluetable lightbluebg" style="width: 400px; text-align:center;" | |||
! scope="col" | Case/Number | |||
! scope="col" | Singular | |||
! scope="col" | Paucal | |||
! scope="col" | Plural | |||
|- | |||
! | Absolutive | |||
| zu /θu/ | |||
| zur /θur/ | |||
| zus /θus/ | |||
|- | |||
! | Ergative | |||
| ju /ju/ | |||
| jur /jur/ | |||
| juz /juθ/ | |||
|- | |||
! | Dative | |||
| iju /'i.ju/ | |||
| ijur /'i.jur/ | |||
| ijuz /'i.juθ/ | |||
|- | |||
! | Nominative | |||
| zun /θu/ | |||
| zunar /'θu.nar/ | |||
| zunas /'θu.nas/ | |||
|} | |||
Note: The irregularity in the plural was part of the language's original design and something Davidson explained as a result of dissimilation in the language's pseudohistory. | |||
====Third Person - Netys Palisyn (a)==== | |||
The third person is different in that it has two forms, a definite and and indefinite form. The base form is considered to be the definite 'a'. This is not part of the language's original design. Common as it was first spoken on the TV show and by early users had a system of gender for concrete and abstract terms (so it applied both to nouns and verbs), and the way gender manifested was that determiners had to agree with their head term in gender for both nouns and verbs. One of the most radical developments in the language that occurred "in the wild" when the language ceased to be fully under its creator's control was a repurposing of this agreement system, which in nouns resulted in the concrete being reanalyzed as the definite and the abstract being reanalyzed as the indefinite. | |||
With no system of agreement, the gender system became mooted and fell apart. It remains with us in the definite/indefinite and realis/irrealis contrasts in nouns and verbs, and in certain phonological patterns in the vocabulary, especially in early coinings. The gender distinction was made using a high-low vowel harmony, with a low vowel in the main stressed syllable of a term usually being a sign that it was concrete, and a high vowel indicating an abstract term. The article used the same low/high pattern to agree with the head term. | |||
''Declension of '''a''' (Third Person Definite)'' | |||
{| border="1" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="1" class="bluetable lightbluebg" style="width: 400px; text-align:center;" | |||
! scope="col" | Case/Number | |||
! scope="col" | Singular | |||
! scope="col" | Paucal | |||
! scope="col" | Plural | |||
|- | |||
! | Absolutive | |||
| a /a/ | |||
| ar /ar/ | |||
| az /aθ/ | |||
|- | |||
! | Ergative | |||
| ja /ja/ | |||
| jar /jar/ | |||
| jaz /jaθ/ | |||
|- | |||
! | Dative | |||
| ija /'i.ja/ | |||
| ijar /'i.jar/ | |||
| ijaz /'i.jaθ/ | |||
|- | |||
! | Nominative | |||
| na /na/ | |||
| nar /nar/ | |||
| naz /naθ/ | |||
|} | |||
''Declension of '''y''' (Third Person Indefinite)'' | |||
{| border="1" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="1" class="bluetable lightbluebg" style="width: 400px; text-align:center;" | |||
! scope="col" | Case/Number | |||
! scope="col" | Singular | |||
! scope="col" | Paucal | |||
! scope="col" | Plural | |||
|- | |||
! | Absolutive | |||
| y /ə/ | |||
| yr /ər/ | |||
| yz /əθ/ | |||
|- | |||
! | Ergative | |||
| jy /jə/ | |||
| jyr /jər/ | |||
| jyz /jəθ/ | |||
|- | |||
! | Dative | |||
| ijy /'i.jə/ | |||
| ijyr /'i.jər/ | |||
| ijyz /'i.jəθ/ | |||
|- | |||
! | Nominative | |||
| ny /nə/ | |||
| nyr /nər/ | |||
| nyz /nəθ/ | |||
|} | |||
The third person was the only person that required gender agreement, and so it is the only article that has a definite/indefinite distinction in modern Common. The indefinite paucal has the sense of 'some', and the indefinite plural has the sense of 'many' or 'all'. | |||
====Interrogative/Uncertain Pronoun - Na Zikos Samorka (ko)==== | |||
There is one interrogative pronoun in Common, "ko." Ko does not have a definiteness distinction but does have all three numbers. It is used in asking questions, but despite the fact that Common grammarians refer to it as an interrogative, its presence does not always indicate a question. It can also be used just like "what" in English in non-questions, like "I don't care what kind" to "which one," a declarative sentence, where ko's function is to signal that its referent is open to question in some way. Common doesn't actually have a clear and unambiguous way to ask questions (or to give orders) and depends on context and idiom. [https://webconlang.infiniterecursion.ca/article/common/40/] In general, 'ko' can be used as a replacement for 'a' in questions and it signals the questionable element. | |||
Ko glosses as approximately "what" or "which" in English. It can be used for other "wh-" type words by adding a head term that clarifies its meaning. Common doesn't have simple, direct words for things like "who" and "how." | |||
''Declension of '''ko''' (Interrogative)'' | |||
{| border="1" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="1" class="bluetable lightbluebg" style="width: 400px; text-align:center;" | |||
! scope="col" | Case/Number | |||
! scope="col" | Singular | |||
! scope="col" | Paucal | |||
! scope="col" | Plural | |||
|- | |||
! | Absolutive | |||
| ko /ko/ | |||
| kor /kor/ | |||
| koz /koθ/ | |||
|- | |||
! | Ergative | |||
| co /t͡ʃo/ | |||
| cor /t͡ʃor/ | |||
| coz /t͡ʃoθ/ | |||
|- | |||
! | Dative | |||
| ico /'i.d͡ʒo/ | |||
| icor /'i.d͡ʒor/ | |||
| icoz /'i.d͡ʒoθ/ | |||
|- | |||
! | Nominative | |||
| kon /'ko.na/ | |||
| konar /'ko.nar/ | |||
| konaz /'ko.naθ/ | |||
|} | |||
====Relative Pronouns - Nar Zereu Samorka (su and si)==== | |||
There are two relative pronouns. One is used to modify nouns (su), and the other one is used to modify verbs (si). They inflect for case but not number. | |||
''Declension of '''su''' and '''si''' (Relative)'' | |||
{| border="1" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="1" class="bluetable lightbluebg" style="width: 400px; text-align:center;" | |||
! scope="col" | Case/Type | |||
! scope="col" | Nominal | |||
! scope="col" | Verbal | |||
|- | |||
! | Absolutive | |||
| su /su/ | |||
| si /si/ | |||
|- | |||
! | Ergative | |||
| xu /ʃu/ | |||
| xi /ʃi/ | |||
|- | |||
! | Dative | |||
| ixu /'i.ʒu/ | |||
| ixi /'i.ʒi/ | |||
|- | |||
! | Nominative | |||
| sun /sun/ | |||
| sin /sin/ | |||
|} | |||
'''Nominal Relative Pronouns''' | |||
The article su (gloss RELN) is used to introduce a subordinate clause that describes a noun, in effect the entire subordinate clause acting as a modifier to a noun phrase. For that reason, su blurs the line between an article and a modifier. Its placement must always be immediately after the head term after any prepositional phrases and in series with any other relative clauses that modify the noun. The referent of su is the entire noun phrase it modifies. The referent noun is always an actor in relation to the verb of the subordinate clause. The case of su is that of the role of the referent in the relative clause. Phrase order in the relative clause is relatively free, with the caveats that the clause must be introduced by a form of su and that the verb phrase must go last in these causes. A simple example: | |||
''A pocuk su ija paluh noxot triju se an citit.''<br> | |||
3.SG.DEF.ABS child RELN.ABS 3.SG.DEF.DAT dog STRN.NPST.PRF.REAL see NTRN.NPST.NPRF.REAL be happy | |||
"The child that saw the dog is happy." | |||
The article su is in the absolutive case because the referent, the child, is the experiencer of the verb "triju," to see, in the subordinate clause. The verb goes to the end of the clause, and that signals to the listener that the clause is over and subsequent speech belongs to the main clause. The nominative form of "su," "sun," would be used when the referent is not a core argument of the dependent clause verb, and in that case may be preceded by a preposition clarifying the role. | |||
'''Verbal Relative Pronouns''' | |||
The article si (gloss RELV) is used to introduce a subordinate clause that as a whole fills an actor role centered around the verb in the main clause. The case of si is the case for the role the clause performs in the main verb. The clause introduced by si may appear anywhere in the sentence that as simple noun phrase introduced by 'a' could go. Word order within the clause is the same as for su. The clause must be introduced by si and the verb phrase must be the last element in the clause. A simple example: | |||
''A pocuk nox triju ixi a paluh se an citit.''<br> | |||
3.SG.DEF.ABS child STRN.NPST.NPRF.REAL see RELV.DAT 3.SG.DEF.ABS dog NTRN.NPST.NPRF.REAL be happy. | |||
'The child sees that the dog is happy.' | |||
The article si is in the dative case because the verb "triju," to see, is a semitransitive verb, and the thing seen, in this cause, the fact that the dog is happy, therefore must be in the dative case. | |||
Another important use of the relativizer "si" is when a dependent clause if the object of a preposition. In this case, it is mandatory for the dependent clause to be introduced with "sin," the nominative form of "si." | |||
===Modifiers=== | ===Modifiers=== | ||