 |
Vreleksá
The Alurhsa Word for Constructed: Creativity in both scripts and languages
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
StrangeMagic
Admin
Joined: 18 Apr 2007
Posts: 640
|
 Posted: Tue May 15, 2007 8:49 pm Post subject: Sentence Structure |
 |
|
I'm not so good with conlanging but this is my proposed sentence structure.
Please can you check if this is right? The red is the 're-arranged' sentence. Thank you very much.
Time phrase-Preposition-subject-adjective-object-adjective-participle-verb-adverb
Two weeks ago on a hill girl beautiful dog scruffy had found, to home she it took quickly
Two weeks ago, on a hill, a beautiful girl had found a scruffy dog, she quickly took it home.
I you request this bowl-medium-sized put in the bowl-larger which you on shelf-second-far-right will find
I request you put this medium sized bowl in the larger one which you will find on the second shelf on the far right.
She a teacher-very-annoying is who at-me shouts always
She is a very annoying teacher who always shouts at me
I to-downstairs need to-go my-books to-put-away because tomorrow I school have
I need to go downstairs to put away my books because I have school tomorrow |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
eldin raigmore
Admin
Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 1621
Location: SouthEast Michigan
|
| Posted: Tue May 15, 2007 11:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I'm no expert, but it looks great to me. I figure if I don't detect a difficulty, then any "unnaturalness" (if there is any) must be mild. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
halyihev
Joined: 23 Apr 2007
Posts: 175
Location: Vermont, New England / Vrïtálá Kritsensá, Álurhná
|
| Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 1:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
It's no more difficult or unnatural than Turkish syntax, frankly, which it resembles to some extent. And since that's a natlang with a huge number of speakers, I'd say your idea is fine.
_________________
Dwirze ghárìlen ershónyá áqálán.
Álurhsá Ólevár/Alurhsa Website: http://alurhsa.org
Sehályensá Víláren/Bilingual Blog: http://blog.alurhsa.org
Álurhsá Ásálqáren/Alurhsa Board: http://forum.alurhsa.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
StrangeMagic
Admin
Joined: 18 Apr 2007
Posts: 640
|
| Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 3:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I see. Hmm. I believe that for my conlang, there will need to be an extensive use of 'particles' like Korean to define the various parts of a complex sentence to allow easier udnerstanding. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dhanus
Admin
Joined: 06 Jul 2007
Posts: 192
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 09, 2007 10:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
I have a problem too. My language's word order is OSV and I am having a fair bit of trouble working it all out. This is what I have attempted to do so far:
1. One language and the same words the whole earth had now.
2. A plain in the land of Shinar they found and there they settled, as from the east people migrated.
3. "Come, make bricks and burn them thoroughly let us." To one another they said, and brick for stone, and bitumen for mortar they had.
(Most of) The rest I am having trouble with, so could somebody care to help, please?
1. Now the whole earth had one language and the same words.
2. And as people migrated from the east, they found a plain in the land of Shinar and settled there.
3. And they said to one another, "Come, let us make bricks, and burn them thoroughly." And they had brick for stone, and bitumen for mortar.
4. Then they said, "Come, let us build ourselves a city and a tower with its top in the heavens, and let us make a name for ourselves, lest we be dispersed over the face of the whole earth."
5. And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of man had built.
6. And the Lord said, "Behold, they are one people, and they have all one language, and this is only the beginning of what they will do. And nothing that they propose to do will now be impossible for them.
7. Come, let us go down and there confuse their language, so that they may not understand one another's speech."
8. So the Lord dispersed them from there over the face of all the earth, and they left off building the city.
9. Therefore its name was called Babel, because there the Lord confused the language of all the earth. And from there the Lord dispersed them over the face of all the earth. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
eldin raigmore
Admin
Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 1621
Location: SouthEast Michigan
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 10, 2007 12:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| David wrote: | | I have a problem too. My language's word order is OSV |
Well, that's pretty dang weird. Not even the most comprehensive database on languages' word-orders (which had 402 languages) had over 0.5% (half a percent) of them be OSV languages. | David wrote: | | and I am having a fair bit of trouble working it all out. |
I'm not sure I know why; maybe it's just because it's such a rare order-type that it's hard to get your mind in that groove? | David wrote: | This is what I have attempted to do so far:
1. One language and the same words the whole earth had now.
2. A plain in the land of Shinar they found and there they settled, as from the east people migrated.
3. "Come, make bricks and burn them thoroughly let us." To one another they said, and brick for stone, and bitumen for mortar they had. |
Looks great to me, so far.
Are your phrases head-last? Are they dependent-marked?
Verb-final languages tend to be head-final; verb-initial languages tend to be head-initial.
Head-initial languages tend to be head-marking; head-final languages tend to be dependent-marking.
Not knowing whether your language will be accusative or ergative or tripartite or split-S or Austronesian or what, I'm just going to use "-ACC" for the case the O is in and "-ERG" for the case the S is in.
1. One language-ACC and the same words-ACC the whole earth-ERG had now.
2. A plain-DAT in the land of Shinar they-ERG found and there they-NOM/ABS settled, as from the east people-NOM/ABS migrated.
3. "Come-1PL-IMP, make-1PL-IMP bricks-ACC and burn-1PL-IMP them-ACC thoroughly let us-ERG." To one another-DAT they-ERG said-RECIP, and brick-ACC for stone-ESS, and bitumen-ACC for mortar-ESS they-ERG had.
| David wrote: | | (Most of) The rest I am having trouble with, so could somebody care to help, please? |
Here's my first cut at an attempt.
| I wrote: | 4. "Come-1PL-IMP, a city-ACC and a tower-ACC with its top in the heavens ourselves-DAT-BENIF let us-ERG build-1PL-IMP, and a name-ACC for ourselves-DAT-BENIF let us-ERG make-1PL-IMP, lest-EVIT-AVERS over the face of the whole earth we-NOM/ABS be dispersed-PASSIV-EVIT/AVERS.", they said then.
5. And the Lord-ERG came down to-PURPOS the city-ACC and the tower-ACC see-INFIN, which-ACC the children-ERG of man had built.
6. And "Behold-2PL-IMP, one people-NOM/ABS they-NOM/ABS are, and all one language-ACC they-ERG have, and only the beginning-ABS/NOM of what-ACC they-ERG will do this-ABS/NOM is. And impossible for them-DAT/BEN nothing-ACC that-ACC they-ERG propose to do will be now.
7. Come-1PL-IMP, us-NOM/ABS let go down and their language-ACC confuse there, so-RESULT that one another's speech-ACC they-ERG may not understand.", the Lord-ERG said.
8. So them-ACC over the face of all the earth the Lord-ERG dispersed from there, and the city-ACC they-ERG building left off.
9. Therefore Babel-NOM/ABS its name-NOM/ABS was called-PASSIV, because the language of all the earth-ACC the Lord-ERG confused there. And them-ACC over the face of all the earth the Lord-ERG dispersed from there. |
How's that? I didn't really know where to put the Datives, Benefactives, and various subordinate clauses and non-finite verbal phrases, but I guessed. Mostly I put adverbs after the verbs, since that's what I thought you'd want. I used "essive" ("as") case on the bricks and mortar; I could have called it "translative" case. Or you might not want to use a separate case. But you should have at least three cases; among others, subjects, objects, and indirect objects should be different, as should subjects, objects, and beneficiaries. I'm assuming you can work out locative and directional cases on your own. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dhanus
Admin
Joined: 06 Jul 2007
Posts: 192
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 10, 2007 11:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
What do all the capital letters mean? And I do not know anything about Datives, etc. I have looked them up on wikipedia, but do noit understand any fo it. Sorry. 
Thanks for helping out anyway. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
eldin raigmore
Admin
Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 1621
Location: SouthEast Michigan
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 10, 2007 6:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| David wrote: | | What do all the capital letters mean? |
1PL -- 1st person (speaker) plural ("we").
2PL -- 2nd person (addressee) plural ("you" or, better, "y'all").
ABS -- Absolutive; case-"ending" is "zero"; subject of intransitive and object or patient of transitive.
ACC -- "the case the O is in" Accusative (usually direct object or patient).
AVERS -- Aversive; a mood or a case for something to turn aside from or to be turned aside (prevented).
BEN -- Benefactive. (see BENIF).
BENIF -- Benifactive; beneficiary; noun denoting that for whom (or for which), or for whose benefit, the agent did or does the verb. (I may have misspelled this.)
DAT -- Dative. Indirect objects in many languages; the third grammatical relation (after subject and object) in many languages; the recipient; sometimes the beneficiary in some languages; in many languages, the case of a noun which is the focus of an activity, or toward which the activity is oriented, but which is neither affected by it nor the agent of it -- examples, the thing sought in "seek"-like verbs and the thing found in "find"-like verbs.
ERG -- "the case the S is in" Ergative (agent or transitive subject).
ESS -- Essive; the "as" case. "stones AS brick" "slime AS mortar".
EVIT -- Evitative; a mood or a case for something to avoid or escape.
IMP -- Imperative; the mood for commands, etc.
INFIN -- Infinitive. A form of a verb which doesn't inflect for absolutely everything the language ever inflects verbs for, is called a "non-finite" form. Verbal nouns (nouns derived from verbs that still have some of the properties of verbs) are usually non-finite. Ordinarily the most important kind of verbal noun is called "the infinitive", and all the others (if there are any others) are called "gerunds" (their may be only one kind of gerund, or there may be more than one kind); but for some languages it is traditional to have more than one kind of infinitive.
NOM -- Nominative; subject or sole participant of an intransitive or monovalent verb, also subject/agent of a transitive verb.
OSV -- "Object, Subject, Verb".
PASSIV -- Passive voice; the subject is the patient instead of the agent (the agent may be omitted, or may occur as an oblique argument in an adpositional phrase or in some oblique case, or may occur as the direct or indirect object.)
PL -- Plural.
PURPOS -- Purposive; the motivation or reason for doing something.
RECIP -- Reciprocal voice; when two participants both do the verb each to the other.
RESULT -- Resultative; noun denoting the result of the action in the clause, if the clause creates a result; or dependent or embedded clause denoting the result of the action in the main clause.
I used ABS/NOM and NOM/ABS because without knowing your alignment system I won't know whether you call it "nominative" or "absolutive".
I used DAT/BEN and DAT/BENEF because I don't know whether you'll have a Benefactive case separate from the Dative case; and if you do, I don't know whether you want to use Dative or Benefactive for this.
I used EVIT/AVERS because I don't know whether you want this to be a case or a mood, and because I don't know whether you want to call it "evitative" or "aversive". IMO either choice is OK.
I used 1PL-IMP for the hortative, "let us", 1st-person-plural imperative.
I used 2PL-IMP for imperative to a plural 2nd-person; I was just guessing that God was talking to the angels when He said "Behold!".
You may not want to mark all these categories.
| David wrote: | | And I do not know anything about Datives, etc. |
I hope I explained.
Essentially, names of cases are decided by grammarians, and aren't necessarily well-correlated from one language to another. The cases in a language actually exist, but what they get called are up to the grammarians. But there are some names that will be well-understood and well-accepted, because the cases thus named behave in a way other grammarians have come to expect; and other names would be less felicitous.
As for Dative; - in a language with direct objects and indirect objects, "Dative" is often the case for indirect objects.
- In a ditransitive verb such as "give", "show", or "tell", the recipient or viewer or audience is often marked "Dative".
- In many verbs there is a participant important to the meaning of the verb which is neither a patient (it isn't affected or moved or created or destroyed) nor an agent (it doesn't act, affects nothing, has no control and no volition). In many languages the case for such participants is called "Dative" by its grammarians. For instance if I seek something or find something or follow something, it is neither patient nor agent, but it is crucial to the meaning of the verb.
| David wrote: | | I have looked them up on wikipedia, but do not understand any of it. |
I don't know why not; but anyway I hope I helped. IME Wikipedia is not the best nor most reliable guide to linguistic facts nor linguistic terms; I prefer the SIL glossary, but there are some terms the SIL glossary doesn't define but the Wikipedia does. However, as near as I can tell the Wikipedia does a fine job with "dative". I said some stuff about it in this post hoping to explain whatever Wikipedia didn't.
| David wrote: | | Sorry. :( Thanks for helping out anyway. |
Of course, you are welcome. Thanks for thanking me.
Last edited by eldin raigmore on Sat Aug 11, 2007 3:23 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dhanus
Admin
Joined: 06 Jul 2007
Posts: 192
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 11, 2007 1:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Wooh! Thanks for that! I am printing out the whole thing now! Again thank you!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
StrangeMagic
Admin
Joined: 18 Apr 2007
Posts: 640
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 11, 2007 4:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| That is very helpful indeed! I will have a good read through that very soon. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yssida
Joined: 16 Sep 2007
Posts: 253
Location: sa jaan lang
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 10:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
my conlang doesn't have a definite word order since it's head marking. yay!
_________________
kasabot ka ani? aw di tingali ka bisaya mao na
my freewebs site |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
StrangeMagic
Admin
Joined: 18 Apr 2007
Posts: 640
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 6:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ah I see, I guess that is pretty much the same in Korean? I am guessing? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
eldin raigmore
Admin
Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 1621
Location: SouthEast Michigan
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 8:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| yssida wrote: | | my conlang doesn't have a definite word order since it's head marking. yay! |
Most, or at least many, head-marking languages still have a definite word-order. In fact verb-initial (VSO and VOS) languages tend to be head-marking.
A language with a rich poly-personal agreement system and also a rich case-marking system could probably do without a definite word order. It could probably be "non-configurational" or "non-phrase-structured" or "flat".
But some such languages have a definite preferred or dominant word-order anyway. The tendency is for agents to come first and for focussed elements to come last. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
