|
|
| (228 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| == Tense and Aspect ==
| |
|
| |
|
| '''dono''' = to walk, the act of walking
| |
|
| |
| JARGON ... In English the form of a verb which we use when we are talking about that verb, is called the "infinitive". The English infinitive seems to function pretty much like a noun, though it retains some verb-like characteristics. In Limbawa the form used (the recitation form) when we talk about a verb, is called '''gamba''' (meaning source or origin). It is fully a noun. For example '''kalme''' would be translated as "demolition" rather than "to demolish".
| |
|
| |
| === Past time ===
| |
|
| |
| '''donari''' = I walked
| |
|
| |
| '''donarli''' = I was walking
| |
|
| |
| '''donarwi''' = I used to walk
| |
|
| |
| '''donarti''' = I had walked
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| JARGON ... Above we can see the four past tense forms of '''dono'''.
| |
|
| |
| '''donari''' is the plain past tense. This is most often used when somebody is telling a story (or in a narrative as they say). For example "Yesterday I got up, ate my breakfast and went to school". All three verbs in this narrative are in the simple past tense.
| |
|
| |
| '''donarli''' has stretched the act of walking out time wise. The most common use for this is when you want to fit another action, inside the act of walking. For example "I was walking to school when it started to rain". Occasionally this form is used when you simply want to emphasis that the action took a long time (well in Limbawa anyway, not so much in English). For example "This morning I was walking to school 5 miles (because the bridge over the river was washed away)".
| |
|
| |
| '''donarwi''' is what is called the habitual aspect. '''donarwi''' shows that you had many instances of walking in the past. For example "When I was a young girl, I used to walk 5 miles to school (because that bridge was only built in 1997)"
| |
|
| |
| '''donarti''' is what is called the "perfect" aspect. Logically it doesn't differ that much from the plain past tense. But it emphasises a state rather than describes an action. For example "I had walked 5 miles ..." would be used when he were telling a story and you wanted to reveal why you were feeling tired. This is in contrast to a straight narrative when you would simple say "I walked 5 miles ...".
| |
|
| |
| === Future time ===
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| '''donaru''' = I will walk
| |
|
| |
| '''donarlu''' = I will be walking
| |
|
| |
| '''donarwu''' = I will walk
| |
|
| |
| '''donartu''' = I will have walked
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| Above we can see the four future tense forms of '''dono'''.
| |
|
| |
| Note ... The form '''donaru''' is used if the act of walking is just a one off ... for example in answer to the question "how are you going to the supermarket". But suppose that you had just moved house and the question "how will you get to the supermarket" is envisioning many instances of "walking" ... in that case the answer should use the form '''donarwu'''.
| |
|
| |
| === Present time ===
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| '''donarla''' = I am walking
| |
|
| |
| '''donarwa''' = I walk
| |
|
| |
| '''donara''' = I have walked
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| JARGON ... Because the present, represents only a time instant, instead of a stretch of time, the symmetry we saw in the past two sections breaks down.
| |
|
| |
| You would expect the form '''donarta''', but this has been "eroded" down to '''donara''' thru' much use.
| |
|
| |
| '''donarla''' can only be used if walking is actually happening at the time of speaking.
| |
|
| |
| The form '''donarwa''' is not actually restricted to the present (well it would not be worth mentioning if it was restricted in this way). Maybe I should have classified it under the "Timelesss" tense. However it has the form corresponding to "present time" so I have put it in this section. Instead of being restricted to the present, the usage of this form has been expanded to encompass the past and the future as well. That is it is used if you habitually walk in the past, the present and there is no reason to suppose that you will not do so in the future. Also note that this form doesn't imply that you are actually walking at the time of speaking.
| |
|
| |
| === Timeless ===
| |
|
| |
| '''donar''' = I walk
| |
|
| |
| As with '''donarwa''' the form '''donar''' (I walk) is not restricted to the past, present or future.
| |
|
| |
| Note that in translating "I walk" from English you have a choice of '''donarwa''' or '''donar'''. Generally the "-RWA" form should be used if your possible walking time is interspersed with periods of non-walking. '''donarwa''' could be translated as "sometimes I walk, and sometimes I choose not to walk" or even "I usually walk".
| |
|
| |
| Note ... if you say "I walk to church every Sunday" you have a choice of...
| |
|
| |
| 1) using '''donarwa''' and dropping the Limbawa equivalent to "every".
| |
|
| |
| 2) using '''donar''' and using the Limbawa equivalent to "every".
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| 1) implies that you ONLY go on Sunday
| |
|
| |
| 2) leaves open the possibility that you go to church on other days of the week also.
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| The "-R" form is used to present general truths. For example, in says "birds fly", you would use the "-R" form.
| |
|
| |
| So we have 12 different forms for tense and aspect.
| |
|
| |
| LINGUISTIC JARGON ... tense basically means time and in my system we have past tense "I", present "A" and future "U" tenses.
| |
|
| |
| ... aspect in more difficult to explain ... but you can see from the examples, how the different aspects change how the verb relates to the rest of the text/sentence. In Limbawa, three aspects are included in the verb word. These are continuous "L"
| |
| , habitual "W" and perfect "T".
| |
|
| |
| English has a combination aspect which is missing from Limbawa. Suppose two old school friend meet up again. One is a lot more muscular than he was at school. He could explain his new muscles by saying "I have been working out". The "have" is appropriate because we are focusing on "state" rather than "action". The "am working out" is appropriate because it takes many instances of "working out" to build up muscles. However this lack doesn't mean that Limbawa has big gaps in the nuances it can give an action. Every language has a limited range of ways to give nuances to an action, and language "A" might have to resort to a phrase to get a subtle idea across while language "B" has an obligatory little affix on the verb to economically express the exact same idea. (In Limbawa the muscle-bound schoolmate would probable use the "-rwa" form of the verb ; along with an adverb meaning "now")
| |
|
| |
| == Person and Number ==
| |
|
| |
| '''donari''' = I walked
| |
|
| |
| '''doniri''' = You walked
| |
|
| |
| '''donori''' = He/She/It walked
| |
|
| |
| '''donuri''' = They walked
| |
|
| |
| '''doneri''' = You walked (this form is used when talking to more than one person)
| |
|
| |
| '''donauri''' = We walked (this form is used when the person spoken to, is not included in the "we")
| |
|
| |
| '''donairi''' = We walked (this form is used when the person spoken to, is included in the "we")
| |
|
| |
| Note that the last form is used where in English you would use "you" or "one" (if you were a bit posh) ... as in "YOU do it like this", "ONE must do ONE'S best, mustn't one".
| |
|
| |
| LINGUISTIC JARGON ... This pronoun is often called the "impersonal pronoun" or the "indefinite pronoun".
| |
|
| |
| So we have 7 different forms for person and number.
| |
|
| |
| == Evidentiality ==
| |
|
| |
| About a quarter of the words languages have, what is called "evidentiality" expressed in the verb. That is you can say (or you must say) on what evidence you are saying what you are saying. In Limbawa there are 3 evidentials which can optionally be added to the verb.
| |
|
| |
| '''donori''' = He walked
| |
|
| |
| '''donorin''' = They say he walked
| |
|
| |
| '''donoria''' = I saw him walk
| |
|
| |
| '''donoris''' = I guess he walked
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| The '''a''' form is only used with the plain past tense.
| |
|
| |
| LINGUISTIC JARGON ...These 3 evidential forms would usually be called the "reported", "seen" and "inferred" forms.
| |
|
| |
| So there we have the R-forms of the verb. We must have a "protagonist" part (part ... refers to one dimension, one geographic age ?) (7 choices). We must have a "modifier" part (12 choices) and then we have a proof part which is optional (3 choices).
| |
|
| |
| == the '''sau''' copula ==
| |
|
| |
| The '''sau''' copula has the same 12 modifier as a regular verb. However 3 modifiers are wildly irregular.
| |
|
| |
| The '''w'''-modifiers(habitual aspect) can interpreted as "to be usually".
| |
| The '''l'''-modifiers(progressive aspect) can interpreted as "is in this state but must continually strive to keep in this state" or even "to try and be".
| |
|
| |
| So let's go over all the forms.
| |
|
| |
| === Past time ===
| |
|
| |
| '''sarwi boi''' = I usually was good
| |
|
| |
| '''sarli boi''' = I was being good (but it took effort on my part)
| |
|
| |
| '''*sari boi''' = I was good
| |
|
| |
| '''sarti boi''' = I had been good (so the teacher gave me a gold star) ... for a regular verb, this form emphasises "state". For this copula, this form emphasises "reason".
| |
|
| |
| === Future time ===
| |
|
| |
| '''sarwu boi''' = I will be good (mostly)
| |
|
| |
| '''*saru boi''' = I will be good
| |
|
| |
| '''sarlu boi''' = I will try and be good
| |
|
| |
| '''sartu boi''' = I will have been good
| |
|
| |
| === Present time ===
| |
|
| |
| '''sarla boi''' = "I am good but it is difficult" or "I try and be good"
| |
|
| |
| '''sarwa boi''' = I am generally good
| |
|
| |
| '''sara boi''' = I have been good
| |
|
| |
| === Timeless ===
| |
|
| |
| '''*sar boi''' = I am good
| |
|
| |
| === the wild forms ===
| |
|
| |
| In the above, you will see 3 forms that are marked by an asterix. The asterix means that these forms don't exist.
| |
|
| |
| These 3 forms that don't exist are '''*sari''', '''*saru''' and '''*sar'''
| |
|
| |
| Instead they are realised as '''ri''', '''ru''' and '''ro'''.
| |
|
| |
| Notice that the protagonist part ??? is not included in these forms. Hence it is necessary to have a pronoun when using these forms.
| |
|
| |
| For example ;-
| |
|
| |
| '''sorlu boi''' = He will try and be good ... The subject is indicated by the '''o''' in the verb.
| |
|
| |
| ''' no ru boi''' = He will be good ... The subject is not expressed in the verb, so it must be expressed by a pronoun ('''no''' = he or she)
| |
|
| |
| In fact '''ro''' is usually dropped completely.
| |
|
| |
| '''no boi''' = He is good
| |
|
| |
| It is mostly used for emphasis; like when you are refuting a claim
| |
|
| |
| Person A) ... '''gi mo ro moltai''' = You aren't a doctor
| |
|
| |
| Person b) ... '''pa ro moltai''' = I am a doctor
| |
|
| |
| Notice that '''ro''' is always used when you have the negative particle '''mo'''. This particle must always be directly in front of a verb, so '''ro''' must be expressed.
| |
|
| |
| Another situation where '''ro''' tends to be used is when the subject or the copula complement are long trains of words. For example ????????
| |
|
| |
| AFTER THIS POINT THINGS ARE NOT SORTED.
| |
|
| |
| SORIS JUTU ... He was big (I saw myself) (only occurs with the past tense)
| |
|
| |
| SORON JUTU ... They say she is big
| |
| SORUJA JUTU ... I guess she will be big
| |
|
| |
| SORU JUTU ... SORUJA Quite often added as an afterthought
| |
|
| |
| The above two even dental markers introduce some doubt. When the verity of the sentence is not in question, the unmarked form is used i.e.
| |
|
| |
| Other words that define the VP (verb phrase) included
| |
|
| |
| MO SORON JUTU ... They say she is not big
| |
| LOI MO RO JUTU ... probably she is not big
| |
| LOI MO SORON JUTU ... They say she is probably not big
| |
| MAS MO RO JUTU ... maybe she isn't big
| |
| MAS MO SORON JUTU ... They say maybe she isn't big
| |
|
| |
| SIYA BOI ... be good (when speaking to one person)
| |
| SEYA BOI ... ... be good (when speaking to one person)
| |
|
| |
| ... SAU
| |
|
| |
| == the '''gasa''' copula ==
| |
|
| |
| There is a word with the meaning "have", but it is used rarely. The usual way to say "I have a coat" ... !A KAUNU PAN (there is a coat mine) ... or why not simply !A KAUNAPU ?
| |
|
| |
| A slightly idiomatic usage, is to say !A JEU PAN ... This means "I feel cold" with emphasis on the uniqueness/unexpectedness of "I"
| |
|
| |
| For existence use GASA !A ... there is !AU ... there will be !AI ... there was
| |
| GASA always appears with a noun ... JEUNE !A (coldness there is) ... it is cold
| |
| However if GASA occurs immediately before an adjective, then that adjective is considered to be converted to a noun. For example !A JEU (there is cold) ... it is cold
| |
|
| |
| The word order preferred when using !A/!AI/!AU, is !A/!AI/!AU first.
| |
|
| |
| The forms !A/!AI/!AU can not be used when evidential information, perfect aspect or person other than the third must be included.
| |
|
| |
| GASAR ... I exist
| |
| GASORI ... He/she/it existed (this form can be used as well as the forms NO !AI /A !AI)
| |
| LOI GASORIN ... They say, he probably existed
| |
|
| |
| MO !A god ... god does not exist
| |
|
| |
| == the '''bia''' copula ==
| |
|
| |
| BELIA ... to arrive
| |
| SELAU ... to become. this is the infinitive ... the common form is ( LAR)
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| == Pronouns ==
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| {| border=1
| |
| |align=center| I
| |
| |align=center| '''pas'''
| |
| |align=center| we (includes "you")
| |
| |align=center| '''yuas'''
| |
| |align=center| me
| |
| |align=center| '''pa'''
| |
| |align=center| us
| |
| |align=center| '''yua'''
| |
| |-
| |
| |align=center|
| |
| |align=center|
| |
| |align=center| we
| |
| |align=center| '''wias'''
| |
| |align=center|
| |
| |align=center|
| |
| |align=center| us
| |
| |align=center| '''wia'''
| |
| |-
| |
| |align=center| you
| |
| |align=center| '''gis'''
| |
| |align=center| you (plural)
| |
| |align=center| '''jes'''
| |
| |align=center| you
| |
| |align=center| '''gi'''
| |
| |align=center| you (plural)
| |
| |align=center| '''je'''
| |
| |-
| |
| |align=center| he, she
| |
| |align=center| '''nos'''
| |
| |align=center| they
| |
| |align=center| '''nus'''
| |
| |align=center| him, her
| |
| |align=center| '''no'''
| |
| |align=center| them
| |
| |align=center| '''nu'''
| |
| |-
| |
| |align=center| it
| |
| |align=center| '''as'''
| |
| |align=center| they
| |
| |align=center| '''as'''
| |
| |align=center| it
| |
| |align=center| '''a'''
| |
| |align=center| them
| |
| |align=center| '''a'''
| |
| |}
| |
|
| |
| As seen above ... LIMBAWA has 2 cases : the ergative (-S) and the absolutive (- ). For citation, after a preposition or in copula clauses it is always the unmarked case that is used
| |
|
| |
| Common prepositions
| |
|
| |
| '''da''' ... at '''ne''' ... for
| |
|
| |
| '''kaunu''' ... a coat
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| {| border=1
| |
| |align=center| my coat
| |
| |align=center| '''kaunapu'''
| |
| |-
| |
| |align=center| our coat ("our" includes "you")
| |
| |align=center| '''kaunayu'''
| |
| |-
| |
| |align=center| our coat ("our excludes "you")
| |
| |align=center| '''kaunawu'''
| |
| |-
| |
| |align=center| your coat
| |
| |align=center| '''kaunigu'''
| |
| |-
| |
| |align=center| your coat (with "you" being plural)
| |
| |align=center| '''kauneju'''
| |
| |-
| |
| |align=center| his/her coat
| |
| |align=center| '''kaunonu'''
| |
| |-
| |
| |align=center| their coat
| |
| |align=center| '''kaununu'''
| |
| |}
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| '''na''' before a noun makes a genitive construction and the whole thing can be considered an adjective. For example '''kolo na kaunu''' ... the collar of the coat/the coat's collar.
| |
| '''ni''' before a noun makes a genitive construction and the whole thing can be considered an adjective. However in this case the meaning is strictly "possession" and the noun must be human. When the noun is a pronoun we get a a special possessive form. For example NI PA'''ni pa''' doesn't occur but we get '''pan'''
| |
|
| |
| '''pan''' ... mine
| |
| '''yuan''' ... ours
| |
| '''wian''' ... ours
| |
| '''gin''' ... yours
| |
| '''jen''' ... yours
| |
| '''non''' ... his/hers
| |
| '''don''' ... theirs
| |
|
| |
| Use the same pattern for demonstratives ?
| |
| i.e. '''kaunu de''' ... that coat '''den''' ... that
| |
|
| |
| '''dade''' ... there
| |
| '''dai''' ... here
| |
