Antarctican: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Antarctican (view source)

Revision as of 03:45, 18 February 2013

6,733 bytes added ,  18 February 2013
More on serial verbs
(Tidied up section on emphatic forms)
(More on serial verbs)
Line 2,507: Line 2,507:
kimyiròemùe /kimʲiʁɜɦmɨɦ/ - to bite me / us (not including you), verb focus
kimyiròemùe /kimʲiʁɜɦmɨɦ/ - to bite me / us (not including you), verb focus


káròemùe /kaʔʁɜɦmɨɦ/ - to bite us (including you), verb focus
'káròemùe /kaʔʁɜɦmɨɦ/ - to bite us (including you), verb focus


kóeròemùe /kɜʔʁɜɦmɨɦ/ - to bite you, verb focus
'kóeròemùe /kɜʔʁɜɦmɨɦ/ - to bite you, verb focus


kieriròemùe /keʁiʁɜɦmɨɦ/ - to bite oneself, verb focus
kieriròemùe /keʁiʁɜɦmɨɦ/ - to bite oneself, verb focus
Line 2,517: Line 2,517:
kabiròemùe /kabiʁɜɦmɨɦ/ - to bite what, verb focus
kabiròemùe /kabiʁɜɦmɨɦ/ - to bite what, verb focus


kúowròemùe /kouʔʁɜɦmɨɦ/ - to bite, verb focus, perfective antipassive
'kúowròemùe /kouʔʁɜɦmɨɦ/ - to bite, verb focus, perfective antipassive


kamiròemùe /kamiʁɜɦmɨɦ/ - to bite, verb focus, imperfective antipassive
kamiròemùe /kamiʁɜɦmɨɦ/ - to bite, verb focus, imperfective antipassive
Line 2,907: Line 2,907:
|}
|}
We (including you) will get sick and die.
We (including you) will get sick and die.
However, all intransitive verbs except the first must be in verb focus form, so the following sentence is ungrammatical:
{| class="wikitable"
|-
| byuowchi-i || sowdla  || kùevèlùun
|-
| bʲouciʔi || sɔudɮa || kɨɦɥɘɦluːɴɦ
|-
| sick.VFCS || soldier.ABS || die.NFCS
|}
The soldier got sick and died. (ungrammatical)
Though the first verb can be in the noun focus form e.g.
{| class="wikitable"
|-
| byuowkùe || sowdla  || kivieli-iewn
|-
| bʲoukɨɦ|| sɔudɮa || kiɥeliʔeuɴ
|-
| sick.NFCS || soldier.ABS || die.VFCS
|}
The soldier got sick and died.
However the constraint against intransitive verbs in the noun focus form when the subject is topicalised still applies, so the following sentence is ungrammatical:
{| class="wikitable"
|-
| sowdla || byuowkùe || kivieli-iewn
|-
| sɔudɮa || bʲoukɨɦ || kiɥeliʔeuɴ
|-
| soldier.ABS || sick.NFCS|| die.VFCS
|}
The soldier got sick and died. (ungrammatical)
Of course, it is perfectly possible to string together three or more verbs e.g.
{| class="wikitable"
|-
| sowdla || byuowchi-i || sòen-gùe || kivieli-iewn
|-
| sɔudɮa || bʲouciʔi || sɜɦɴgɨɦ || kiɥeliʔeuɴ
|-
| soldier.ABS || sick.VFCS || bleed.VFCS || die.VFCS
|}
The soldier got sick, bled, and died.
====Transitive Verbs====
It is also perfectly possible to use transitive verbs in serial verb constructions, subject to the constraint that all of the verbs share the same '''absolutive argument''' (i.e. object for transitive verbs, subject for intransitive verbs). Take the following sentence:
{| class="wikitable"
|-
| sowdlan || kiròemùesè || wùerù || kivieli-iewn
|-
| sɔudɮaɴ || kiʁɜɦmɨɦsɘɦ || wɨɦʁuɦ || kiɥeliʔeuɴ
|-
| soldier-ERG || bite.NFCS || frog.ABS || die.VFCS
|}
A soldier bit a frog and it died.
This sentence can only ever mean that it was the frog that died. Topicalising the subject of the transitive verb (by putting it into the absolutive case) makes no difference to the meaning:
{| class="wikitable"
|-
| sowdla || kiròemùesè || wùerù || kivieli-iewn
|-
| sɔudɮa || kiʁɜɦmɨɦsɘɦ || wɨɦʁuɦ || kiɥeliʔeuɴ
|-
| soldier.ABS || bite.NFCS || frog.ABS || die.VFCS
|}
The soldier bit a frog and it died.
Topicalising the object of the verb by putting it at the front of the sentence makes no difference either:
{| class="wikitable"
|-
| wùerù || sowdlan || kiròemùesè || kivieli-iewn
|-
| wɨɦʁuɦ || sɔudɮaɴ || kiʁɜɦmɨɦsɘɦ || kiɥeliʔeuɴ
|-
| frog.ABS || soldier-ERG || bite.NFCS || die.VFCS
|}
The frog was bitten by a soldier and (it) died.
=====Antipassivisation=====
To say things like "The soldier bit a frog and died" (as in it was the soldier that died), then the verb meaning "to bite" must be converted into an intransitive verb by putting it in the antipassive voice e.g.
{| class="wikitable"
|-
| sowdla || 'kúowròemùe || kivieli-iewn
|-
| sɔudɮa || kouʔʁɜɦmɨɦ || kiɥeliʔeuɴ
|-
| soldier.ABS || <PFV.AP>bite.VFCS || die.VFCS
|}
The soldier bit it and died.
Notice here how the verb meaning "to bite" now takes the verb focus form. This is because it is now intransitive, and Antarctican has a constraint against intransitive verbs taking the noun-focus form when the subject is topicalised. So the following sentence is ungrammatical:
{| class="wikitable"
|-
| sowdla || 'kúowròemùesè || kivieli-iewn
|-
| s&#596;ud&#622;a || kou&#660;&#641;&#604;&#614;m&#616;&#614;s&#600;&#614; || ki&#613;eli&#660;eu&#628;
|-
| soldier.ABS || <PFV.AP>bite.NFCS || die.VFCS
|}
The soldier bit it and died (ungrammatical).
If the verb focus form is to be used, the subject must be de-topicalised by moving it to after the verb e.g.
{| class="wikitable"
|-
| 'kúowròemùesè || sowdla || kivieli-iewn
|-
| kou&#660;&#641;&#604;&#614;m&#616;&#614;s&#600;&#614; || s&#596;ud&#622;a || ki&#613;eli&#660;eu&#628;
|-
| <PFV.AP>bite.VFCS || soldier.ABS || die.VFCS
|}
A soldier bit it and died.
======Patient Re-introduction======
If we want to re-introduce the frog into the sentence, it needs to come after both the antipassivised verb and the subject, take the ergative case, and be followed by the oblique marker '''nyùe''' e.g.
{| class="wikitable"
|-
| 'kúowròemùe || sowdla || wùerùgin || `nyùe || kivieli-iewn
|-
| kou&#660;&#641;&#604;&#614;m&#616;&#614; || s&#596;ud&#622;a || w&#616;&#614;&#641;u&#614;gi&#628; || &#626;&#616;&#614; || ki&#613;eli&#660;eu&#628;
|-
| <PFV.AP>bite.NFCS || soldier.ABS || frog-ERG || OBL || die.VFCS
|}
A soldier bit a frog and died.
Since the verb meaning "to bite" is in the antipassive voice and no longer transitive, it is free from the contrainst against transitive verbs taking the verb-focus form while having both subject and object untopicalised. So the following sentence is grammatical:
{| class="wikitable"
|-
| 'kúowròemùesè || sowdla || wùerùgin || `nyùe || kivieli-iewn
|-
| kou&#660;&#641;&#604;&#614;m&#616;&#614;s&#600;&#614; || s&#596;ud&#622;a || w&#616;&#614;&#641;u&#614;gi&#628; || &#626;&#616;&#614; || ki&#613;eli&#660;eu&#628;
|-
| <PFV.AP>bite.VFCS || soldier.ABS || frog-ERG || OBL || die.VFCS
|}
A soldier bit a frog and died.
The (now absolutive) argument of the verb is topicalised by putting it at the front of the sentence e.g.
{| class="wikitable"
|-
| sowdla || 'kúowròemùesè || wùerùgin || `nyùe || kivieli-iewn
|-
| s&#596;ud&#622;a || kou&#660;&#641;&#604;&#614;m&#616;&#614;s&#600;&#614; || w&#616;&#614;&#641;u&#614;gi&#628; || &#626;&#616;&#614; || ki&#613;eli&#660;eu&#628;
|-
| soldier.ABS || <PFV.AP>bite.VFCS || frog-ERG || OBL || die.VFCS
|}
The soldier bit a frog and died.
However, even though the frog has been re-introduced into the sentence, the verb meaning "to bite" is still intransitive, and is thus subject to the constraint against intransitive verbs taking the noun focus form if their subject is topicalised. So the sentence below is not grammatical:
{| class="wikitable"
|-
| sowdla || 'kúowròemùe || wùerùgin || `nyùe || kivieli-iewn
|-
| s&#596;ud&#622;a || kou&#660;&#641;&#604;&#614;m&#616;&#614; || w&#616;&#614;&#641;u&#614;gi&#628; || &#626;&#616;&#614; || ki&#613;eli&#660;eu&#628;
|-
| soldier.ABS || <PFV.AP>bite.NFCS || frog-ERG || OBL || die.VFCS
|}
The soldier bit a frog and died. (ungrammatical)


[[Category:Languages]][[Category:Conlangs]]
[[Category:Languages]][[Category:Conlangs]]
Retrieved from "https://linguifex.com/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/4505"

Navigation menu