Kandi/Sandbox

From Linguifex
Jump to navigation Jump to search


Noun class specifers

There are 9 noun classes in Kandi. They are distinguished by the specifier they use, which is one of few grammatical number dependent elements in the language.

Class Singular Dual Plural
I -ma -im -nna -ūnna -yme -imme people, professions
II -n -i animals, pets, cattle
III -uš -waš predators, pejoratives
IV wa- w- plants, nature
V ki- kin- -ūnna -yunna meat, edibles, bodyparts
VI -iš -sse -issa small/round/short/curved objects
VII -teh -teh -yittah -īttah long/straight/thing objects
VIII -kka -ākka unclear, abstractions
IX -ye -ya -yeh -yeh vast objects, divinity, honorifics

Simple stuff

Predicative expressions

The Kāndi language lacks a clear distinction between nouns and verbs, and exhibits a flexibility between the predicate and argument in a clause. Any Kāndi content word is equivalent to a predicative expression, by default to be + noun. That means that a word like šay would mean (it is a) girl.


katsa
[ˈkat͡sa]
katsa-∅
songbird(II)-PRED

It is a songbird.

(1)

agūrri
[agu͜βrɪ]
agūrri-∅
boy(II)-PRED

It is a boy.

(2)


In a similar fashion there is , yīn (PL), sir; content words for me, you, this, et c., equivalent to English pronouns. In order to create a predicative expression of the type I am + noun/adj, these are fixed to the end of the word. In most circumstances these pronominal predicatives are clitical.


[wɪː]
wī-∅
1SG(I)-PRED

It is I (It is me)

(3)

agūrriwī
[agu͜βrɪwɪː]
katsa-∅=wī
boy(I)-PRED=1SG

I am a boy.

(4)

katsayīn
[ˈkat͡sajɪːn]
katsa-∅=yīn
songbird(II)-PRED=2PL

You are songbirds.

(5)


This is all fine and dandy, but you may ask yourself, what about predicative expressions with adjectives? How do I describe things? Kāndi does not only lack a verb and noun distinction, it does not have adjectives in their own right either. Rather, some content words are more like adjectives than others, confer kirim, something red:

kirim
[kɪˈɾɪm]
kirim-∅
red(IX)-PRED

It is something red (It is red)

(6)

kirimmī
[kɪˈɾɪbmɪː]
kirim-∅=wī
red(IX)-PRED=1SG

I am something red (I am red)

(6)

Specifier

Predicative expressions over more complicated subjects than pronouns and the default are created by means of the specifier (spec). Similarly to Salishan languages, the specifier determines the subject of a clause, amongst other things. The specifier is dependent upon the noun class of the subject, however:

tšanun wušunna
[ˈt͡ʃanun wʊˈʃʊdna]
tšanu-∅-n wušunna-∅
horse(II)-PRED-SPEC sad(IX)-PRED

The horse is sad

(7)

walīlak kirim
[waˈlɪːlak kɪˈɾɪm]
wa-līlak-∅ kirim-∅
SPEC.SG.IV-flower(IV)-PRED red(IX)-PRED

The flower is red

(8)

okūnna amik
[okˈʊːdna aˈmɪk]
ok-∅-ūnna amik-∅
eye(V)-PRED-SPEC.DU.V pebble(VI)-PRED

The eyes are pebbles

(9)

The specifier is difficult to understand, but confer the Salish languages of North America. The specifier is approximated relatively well by the expression that which, which means that tšanun wušunna could be interpreted as That which is a horse, it is sad.

Compound predicative expressions

In a similar manner to the enclitical pronomials previously, the predicate may be incorporated into the subject of the clause, and produce a compound of sorts. The compounds are normally accompanied with a suffix -y- for phonological reasons:

okkamik
[okˈkamɪk]
ok-y-amik-∅
eye(V)-COMP pebble(VI)-PRED

The eyes are pebble/The eye is a pebble

(10)

šayyū
[ˈʃajːʊ͜β]
šay-y-yū-∅
girl(V)-COMP-pretty(VIII)-PRED

The girl is pretty

(11)

These compounds are no longer very common, and they are sometimes used attributively, confer the pretty girl, instead of the girl is pretty. Most of them have become fixed phrases, šayyū is a common way to call for a girl, for example. The word okkamik on the other hand is used for especially unempathetic people. Other examples include omōkkānay, God is great, and wānawakāyuma, the sky is endless.

Intransitive clauses

See also: Kandi/Predicative expressions

Intransitive clauses in Kandi are formed in a very similar manner to predicative expressions. In fact, there is no difference at all. Which... Can be tricky. In essence, there is no grammatical difference between I am biking and I am a bike.

sīkawī
[ˈsɪːkawɪː]
sīka-∅=wī
bike(VI)-PRED=1SG

I am a bike/I am biking

(12)

tēndatšiwī
[ˈtɛːndat͡ʃɪwɪː]
tēnda-∅-tši=wī
know(IX)-PRED-DUB=1SG

I am not sure I know

(13)

yūr kānnami
[ˈjʊ͜βɾ ˈkaːdnamɪ]
yūr-∅ kān-∅-yam-i
goat(II)-PRED sight(V)-PRED-INF-II.SPEC

The goat must have seen

(14)


Do note that the specifier is afficed to the predicate-like part of the clause, in the last case kānnam-i. An apt translation would thus be That which is know(-ing), is a goat. Remember that definiteness and tense are not distinguished in the language.

What's actually inside

  • ᎭᎪᏨ:ᏡᎲᏙᏙᏔᏋᎹ ᎪᏫᏢᎭᎹ:ᎰᎱ;
    yáasúweyikukúusima awushuyamátin?
    [ʝaːsuβ̞ɛʝikuˈkuːβ̞sẽʔa aβ̞uɕuʝʌ̃ˈʔaːtẽ]

    Is that moose crying herring?

(-)