|
|
| (68 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| ==.....Other verb forms==
| |
|
| |
|
| Above we have discussed the R-form of the verb.
| |
|
| |
| However there are other verb forms.
| |
|
| |
| ===....the s-form===
| |
|
| |
| This is the subjunctive form. You change the "'''r'''" to an '''"s'''" basically. Nothing comes after the "'''s'''". So there is no tense/aspect or evidentiality expressed on this verb form.
| |
|
| |
| '''doikais''' = Let's walk
| |
|
| |
| ===....the me-form===
| |
|
| |
| This form is used when one action is dependant on another action having taken place.
| |
|
| |
| As with the s-form, there is no '''gwomai''' or evidentiality expressed on the verb.
| |
|
| |
| ===....the mi-form===
| |
|
| |
| The same as the me-form but irrealis. With the me-form there is doubt as to when (and indeed if) the thunder/lightning will happen.
| |
|
| |
| With the mi-form it is accepted that there is no chance of thunder/lightning ... the storm has passed.
| |
|
| |
| ===....the ya-form===
| |
|
| |
| This form is used for giving orders. When the s-form is used in a main clause, it is gently urging some action. With the ya-form you definitely want some action to happen (and you don't expect a discussion about it).
| |
|
| |
| Up until now, 7 protagonists have been expressed in every verb. With the ya-form however only two protagonists can be expressed.
| |
|
| |
| '''doikiya''' = walk (when talking to one person)
| |
|
| |
| '''doikeya''' = walk (when talking to more than one person)
| |
|
| |
| An alternative way to analyse this is to say that there is an '''iya'''-form and an '''eya'''-form. How you choose to analyse it doesn't make any difference to the reality of the situation.
| |
|
| |
| ===....the ai-form===
| |
|
| |
| This is used for when two or more verbs are happening simultaneously. He second verb is the '''gamba''' shorn of its last vowel (or diphthong) and with '''ai''' stuck on.
| |
|
| |
| pass'''orli''' sing'''ai''' = He is passing by singing
| |
|
| |
| You can add as many verbs as you want. The added verbs are understood to have the same protagonists, '''gwomai''' and evidentiality as the r-form verb (or the s-form verb) (or the ??? )
| |
|
| |
| pass'''orla''' sing'''ai''' kite '''fly'''ai = He is passing by singing and flying a kite
| |
|
| |
| It is very common to have the following verbs in their ai-form.
| |
|
| |
| = to be at ('''bia''') ... this can be interpreted in English as "still" ... or as "not yet" in negative sentences. For example ;- pass'''orla''' '''bai''' = "he is still passing by"
| |
|
| |
| = to come
| |
|
| |
| = to go
| |
|
| |
| = to rise
| |
|
| |
| = to descend
| |
|
| |
| = to enter
| |
|
| |
| = to go out
| |
|
| |
| = to return
| |
|
| |
| = to do something in a haphazard manner, to do something in an unsatisfactory manner
| |
|
| |
| = to hurry
| |
|
| |
| The above are often stuck on the end of an utterance ... like a sort of afterthought. They give the utterance a bit more clarity ... a bit more resolution.
| |
|
| |
| ==.....The three copulas==
| |
|
| |
| ===...."bia"===
| |
|
| |
| '''bia''' means "to be at"
| |
|
| |
| For example '''polo bori london''' = Paul was in London
| |
|
| |
| '''polo barta london''' = Paul has been to London
| |
|
| |
| '''auto bor. greta''' = The car is in the street.
| |
|
| |
| '''pele boru briga''' = Paula will be at home
| |
|
| |
| '''bia.''' is the rarest of the copulas and has no irregular forms.
| |
|
| |
| It is often supplanted by '''sau''' ... but if this happens a locative particle must be suffixed to the noun (the noun after the copula). For example ;-
| |
|
| |
| '''polo ri london.pi''' = Paul was in London
| |
|
| |
| '''auto (ro) greta.la''' = The car was in the street (literally "on the street")
| |
|
| |
| '''pele ru briga.do''' = Paula will be at home
| |
|
| |
| The three verbs '''sau''', '''gasa''' and '''bia.''' are special verbs. (LINGUISTIC JARGON ... They are called copulas... in Latin "copulare" meant "to tie", so a copula is a verb that ties. The appropriateness of this is obvious for '''sau''' and '''bia''') In Limbawa they differ from normal verbs, in that they require a specific word order. Also '''s''' is never suffixed to a noun, as normally happens when a verb is associated with two nouns.
| |
|
| |
| ===...."gaza"===
| |
|
| |
| '''gaza''' takes only one noun. It is how you say "there is ... "
| |
|
| |
| '''gaza''' is similar to '''sau''' in that it takes the 12 verb modifiers but 3 of them are wildly irregular. It is the same 3 tense/aspect forms that are irregular. Namely ;-
| |
|
| |
| '''*gazor''' => '''@a.''' meaning "there is"
| |
|
| |
| '''*gazori''' => '''@ai.''' meaning "there was"
| |
|
| |
| '''*gazoru''' => '''@au.''' meaning "there will be"
| |
|
| |
| Actually while theoretically '''gaza''' can have the full range of modifiers enjoyed by a normal verb, in reality all forms other than '''@a.''', '''@ai.''' and '''@au.''' are extremely rare. Occasionally you come across the "infinitive" '''gaza''' (which is actually as a noun).
| |
|
| |
| There is no word that corresponds to "have". The usual way to say "I have a coat" is "there exists a coat mine" = '''@a. kaunu pan'''
| |
|
| |
| For some reason the internal possessives are not allowed with '''gaza'''. That is you can not say '''@aᴴ kaunapu''', but must say '''@aᴴ kaunu pan'''
| |
|
| |
| As I said above, '''gaza''' always comes with one noun. If it comes with an adjective, then that adjective can be considered a noun (well this is one way to look at it)
| |
|
| |
| '''pona''' = cold (an adjective), '''ponahe''' = coldness (a noun)
| |
|
| |
| '''@a. pona''' = "it is cold" ... not '''*@a. ponahe'''
| |
|
| |
| '''@a. pona pan''' meaning "I feel cold" (word for word ... "there is coldness mine")
| |
|
| |
| There is fixed word order : it is always '''gaza''' followed by the noun.
| |
|
| |
| A little quirk of this verb, is that the negation particle '''mo''' comes immediately after instead of immediately before.
| |
|
| |
| '''@a. mo pona''' = "it is not cold"
| |
|
| |
| The particles '''loi.''' (probably) and '''mas''' (maybe) come as normal, before the verb.
| |
|
| |
| '''loi. @au. pona''' = It will probably be cold
| |
|
| |
| Also the evidentials are affixed to the wild forms. Just as with '''sau'''.
| |
|
| |
| '''loi. @aun. mo pona''' = They say it will probably not be cold
| |
|
| |
| '''loi.foi @aun. mo pona''' = Do they say it will probably not be cold ?
| |
|
| |
| ===...."sau"===
| |
|
| |
| '''sau''' is a special verb. When it comes to ''tense/aspect'' markers ( 'modifiers'), '''sau''' keeps the 12 (( .... part (way ??) ... division of an angle ... nuance .... )), the same as a regular verb, however the meaning is skewed somewhat in 9 cases(instances) and the form is wildly irregular in the other three cases.
| |
|
| |
| The '''w'''-modifiers (habitual aspect) can interpreted as "to be usually/generally".
| |
| 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".
| |
| The '''t'''-modifiers (perfect aspect) ... well for a normal verb this form emphasises "state". When used with '''sau''' the emphasis is skewed towards "reason".
| |
|
| |
| The meaning of 9 of these 'angle intervals' is skewed. For 3 ((angles)) the meanings are spot-on, however the forms are wildly irregular.
| |
|
| |
| Let's go over all the forms(( .... part (way ??) ... division of an angle ... nuance .... ))
| |
|
| |
| ==== Past time ====
| |
|
| |
| '''sari boi.''' = I usually was good
| |
|
| |
| '''sari boi.''' = I was being good (but it took effort on my part)
| |
|
| |
| '''*sari boi.''' = I was good
| |
|
| |
| '''sari boi.''' = I had been good (so the teacher gave me a gold star)
| |
|
| |
| ==== Future time ====
| |
|
| |
| '''sarwu boi.''' = I will be good (mostly)
| |
|
| |
| '''*saru boi.''' = I will be good
| |
|
| |
| '''sarlu boi.''' = I will be good (hopefully)
| |
|
| |
| '''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
| |
|
| |
| Their house '''sarwa''' dirty but today clean.
| |
|
| |
| ==== 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 '''mo''' the negative particle. 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 ????????
| |
|
| |
| The evidentials are appended to the wild forms as normal. So we have '''ron''', '''ros''', '''rin''', '''ria''', '''ris''', '''run''', '''rus''',
| |
|
| |
| == Three Infixes ==
| |
|
| |
| Limbawa has a three process for generating new verbs from existing verbs.
| |
| These three processes can be done to any verb.
| |
|
| |
| === '''el''' ===
| |
|
| |
| If you split a verb and insert '''el''' between the final vowel (of the '''gamba''') and the rest of the word, you give the added meaning of "to begin", "inception" or "to start off". For example ;-
| |
|
| |
| '''sau''' = to be
| |
|
| |
| '''selau''' = to become
| |
|
| |
| '''bia.''' = to be at
| |
|
| |
| '''belia''' = to arrive at
| |
|
| |
| '''doika''' = to walk
| |
|
| |
| '''doikela''' = to start to walk
| |
|
| |
| '''logo doikorwi''' = Roger used to walk ...
| |
|
| |
| '''logo doikelorwi''' = Roger used to start walking ...
| |
|
| |
| '''gazelari''' = I was born
| |
|
| |
| '''a ri ki@o''' = it was yellow ... remember that '''ri''' is an irregular form. The regular form would be '''*sori'''.
| |
|
| |
| '''a lori ki@o''' = it became yellow ... '''selau''' is irregular. If it were regular we would have the form '''*a selori ki@o'''
| |
|
| |
| So there are thee irregular verbs in Limbawa (well if you count '''selau''' as a different word from '''sau''') ... '''sau''', '''bia''' and '''selau'''.
| |
|
| |
| === '''ow'''===
| |
|
| |
| If you split a verb and insert '''ow''' between the final vowel of and the rest of the word, you get the meaning that you are making somebody else do the verb. For example ;-
| |
|
| |
| '''no timpiri''' = you hit him
| |
|
| |
| '''(pas.) gis. no timpowari''' = I made you hit him
| |
|
| |
| A '''gamba''' form exists for this construction also. For example;-
| |
|
| |
| '''doikowo''' = to make (somebody) walk
| |
|
| |
| '''gasowa''' has the special meaning "to give birth" and doesn't mean "to create".
| |
|
| |
| ==='''ay'''===
| |
|
| |
| If you split a verb and insert '''ay''' between the final vowel of and the rest of the word, you get the meaning that the verb is being attempted. For example ;-
| |
|
| |
| '''selbaru a''' = I will drink it
| |
|
| |
| '''selbayaru a''' = I will try and drink it
| |
|
| |
| == Three affixes ==
| |
|
| |
| ===Two for Verb => Adjective===
| |
|
| |
| LINGUISTIC JARGON ... these two transformations are called "participles". Limbawa has two participles (as has English). The Limbawa and the English participles share the exact same function. In English these 2 participles are usually called "the present participle" and "the past participle" although "active participle" and "passive participle" would be far more appropriate. In Limbawa there is no special name for these 2 transformations.
| |
|
| |
| '''solbe''' = to drink
| |
|
| |
| '''heŋgo''' = to live (or it could mean "a life")
| |
|
| |
| '''soŋkau''' = to die (or it could mean "death")
| |
|
| |
| '''glabu''' = person
| |
|
| |
| '''moʃi''' = water
| |
|
| |
| '''moʃi solbi''' = the drunk water, the water that has been drunk ... an example of the so-called "past participle".
| |
|
| |
| '''glabu solbana''' = the drinking person, the person that is drinking, the person that drinks ... an example of the so-called "present participle".
| |
|
| |
| '''heŋgana''' = alive, living
| |
|
| |
| '''soŋki''' = dead
| |
|
| |
| ===One for Verb => Verb===
| |
|
| |
| A number of verbs (all with final verb of '''a'''), drop the '''a''' and substitute '''ua''' to make a verb with an opposite meaning. We only have '''ua''' in the '''gamba'''. For all other forms the '''u''' => '''w'''.
| |
|
| |
| '''fuŋga''' = to fasten, to lock
| |
|
| |
| '''fuŋgua''' = to unfasten, to unlock
| |
|
| |
| Note that in all other verb forms, apart from the "'''gamba'''", the '''u''' => '''w'''. For example ;-
| |
|
| |
| '''fuŋgori''' = he fastened
| |
|
| |
| '''fuŋgwori''' = he unfastened
| |
|
| |
| ==Three Prefixes==
| |
|
| |
| ===Two for Noun => Noun===
| |
|
| |
| '''ju.xxxx''' = a mansion
| |
|
| |
| '''ti.xxxx''' = a cottage
| |
|
| |
| ===One for Adj. => Adj.===
| |
|
| |
| '''kaya''' = many
| |
|
| |
| '''ukaya''' = few
| |
|
| |
| '''mutu''' = important
| |
|
| |
| '''umutu''' = unimportant
| |
|
| |
| ===and Adverb => Adverb===
| |
|
| |
| '''toke''' = exactly
| |
|
| |
| '''utoke''' = approximately
| |
|
| |
| '''nan''' = for a long time
| |
|
| |
| '''unan''' = not for a long time
| |
|
| |
| '''unanu''' => momentarily ... (maybe derived from '''unan unan''' originally)
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| === possessive pronouns and "gamba" ===
| |
|
| |
| This is a special construction that relates pronouns to the infinitive form of the verb (or the '''gamba''' form as we say in Limbawa). For example ;-
| |
|
| |
| '''wi.''' = to see '''polo''' = Paul '''timpa''' = to hit '''jene''' = Jenny
| |
|
| |
| '''wori timpa polon''' = He saw paul hitting
| |
|
| |
| '''wori timpa na jene''' = He saw Jenny being hit
| |
|
| |
| '''wori timpa polon na jene''' = He saw Paul hitting Jenny ... it is actually pronounced as '''wori timpa polonna jene''' with the -'''nn'''- pronounced the same way as you would pronounce -nn- in the English word "keanness".
| |
|
| |
| In the above constructions the word order must be as shown above. Also the gamba can never be split and an infix inserted (see next section).
| |
|
| |
| === ... 7 or 8 noun infixes ===
| |
|
| |
| In fact instead of saying '''kaunu pan''' (if you came across '''kaunu pan''' in isolation you would normally take it as meaning '''kaunu ro pan''' = "the coat is mine") it is usual to bury the possessor inside the noun as an infix. So '''kaunu pan''' is usually expressed as '''kaunapu'''.
| |
|
| |
| Below is a table showing the possessor infix paradigm.
| |
|
| |
| {| 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'''
| |
| |}
| |
|
| |
| It can be seen that the infixes are the same as the plain pronouns, but the order of the consonant and vowel are swapped over.
| |
|
| |
| There could also be another entry in the table above. That is the infix '''-it-''' (this is the possessive equivalent of the reflexive pronoun '''ti.''' (see above). It is probably easiest to explain '''-it-''' by way of example;-
| |
|
| |
| '''polo pretoru @autito''' = Paul will drive his car (In English we would normally interpret this to mean "Paul will drive his own car". In Limbawa '''polo pretoru @autito''' must ALWAYS be interpreted as such.
| |
|
| |
| '''polo pretoru @autono''' = Paul will drive his car (In English, this COULD be interpreted as "Paul will drive someone else's car". In Limbawa '''polo pretoru @autono''' would always be interpreted as such.
| |
|
| |
| ==ki- and we-==
| |
|
| |
| The '''we''' prefix produces adverbs (from both adjectives and nouns).
| |
|
| |
| '''wesaco''' = quickly ... actually if '''saco''' came immediately after the verb it was qualifying, it would always just be plain '''saco'''. However as the form '''we.saco''' the adverb can move around the utterance ... wherever it wants to go.
| |
|
| |
| When '''we''' is prefixed to a noun, it can not be dropped if the resulting adverb immediately follows the verb.
| |
|
| |
| '''deuha''' = soldier
| |
|
| |
| doikor wedeuha''' = he walk like a soldier
| |
|
| |
| The '''ki''' prefix produces adjectives (from both nouns and adjectives).
| |
|
| |
| '''ki.gla''' = effeminate
| |
|
| |
| '''ki.bau''' = butch ... slightly negative connotations for most of these ones.
| |
|
| |
| '''hia''' = red
| |
|
| |
| '''kihia''' = reddish
| |
|
| |
| == relating one noun to another noun ==
| |
|
| |
| The particle '''na''' before a noun makes a sort of adjective construction (which is used to describe another noun). For example '''kolo na kaunu di.''' = "the collar of this coat".
| |
|
| |
| The particle '''ni''' before a noun, behaves in a similar way. However with '''ni''' the meaning is strictly "possession" and the noun must be human. For example '''kaunu hia ni jene''' = Jenny's red coat
| |
|
| |
| When the noun is a single word (LINGUISTIC JARGON ... that is when it is a simple noun instead of what is called "a noun phrase". '''kaunu di''' and '''kaunu hia''' are two example of what is called a "noun phrase". '''kaunu hia di''' "this red coat" is another example) -'''n''' can be stuck on to the end of a word (instead of '''na''' or '''ni''' going before the word) to give an adjective.
| |
|
| |
| So instead of saying '''kolo na kaunu''' we would say '''kolo kaunun'''
| |
|
| |
| Instead of saying '''kaunu ni jane''' we would say '''kaunu jenen'''
| |
|
| |
| (LINGUISTIC JARGON ... In the above 2 examples '''kaunu''' and '''jane''' would be said to be in the genitive case. Many languages have a similar system, particularly in European)
| |
|
| |
| When the noun is a pronoun the same thing happens. As in Limbawa it is extremely rare for a pronoun to appear in a noun phrase ...
| |
|
| |
| '''*kaunu ni pa''' => '''kaunu pan''' ... '''*ni pa''' is not allowed and the form '''pan''' must be used. We call '''pan''' a possessive pronoun (more LINGUISTIC JARGON)
| |
|
| |
| Below is a table showing the Limbawa possessive pronouns ;-
| |
|
| |
| {| border=1
| |
| |align=center| mine
| |
| |align=center| '''pan'''
| |
| |align=center| ours
| |
| |align=center| '''yuan'''
| |
| |-
| |
| |align=center|
| |
| |align=center|
| |
| |align=center| ours
| |
| |align=center| '''wian'''
| |
| |-
| |
| |align=center| yours
| |
| |align=center| '''gin'''
| |
| |align=center| yours (plural)
| |
| |align=center| '''jen'''
| |
| |-
| |
| |align=center| his, hers
| |
| |align=center| '''non'''
| |
| |align=center| theirs
| |
| |align=center| '''nun'''
| |
| |}
| |
