You're right, I didn't (and I forgot to mention Tlapthuv's separate superlative suffix)! How did that switch happen? I assume the suffixes are at least partial cognates, but I get the feeling I may be wrong?loglorn wrote: It seems you didn't notice that the Restrictive and Non-restrictive markers are inverted
Tlapthuv, Proto-Gigxkpoyan's Second Son
-
- korean
- Posts: 10372
- Joined: 12 Jul 2013 23:09
- Location: UTC-04:00
Re: Tlapthuv, Proto-Gigxkpoyan's Second Son
Re: Tlapthuv, Proto-Gigxkpoyan's Second Son
They're 100% cognate. PG was not very consistent read: i wasn't very consistent when translating stuff on which form marked what, so the individual languages made different decisions on how it would work. But that suffix exists in some form in every Gigxkpoyan language up to this stage. Mostly, that's another instance of Retla being weird.
Re: Tlapthuv, Proto-Gigxkpoyan's Second Son
I feel like my lang family's boring after reading both gigxkpoyan threads.
Lots of cool stuff here.
Lots of cool stuff here.
I have absolutely no idea what I'm doing.
Re: Tlapthuv, Proto-Gigxkpoyan's Second Son
I felt like my languages were boring when I read your thread so I guess we're evenSḿtuval wrote:I feel like my lang family's boring after reading both gigxkpoyan threads.
Lots of cool stuff here.
Re: Tlapthuv, Proto-Gigxkpoyan's Second Son
Verbs Part 1: Aspect
0. Introduction
Verbs in Tlapthuv, as in Retla, conjugate for Aspect, Polarity, Voice an the Converb Forms. I'm not sure if those truly characterize as proper 'conjugations', but verbs ending in e or o have said vowels reduced to i u, in all cases except before the Subjunctive and the Gnomic. There are no truly irregular verbs (like Retla's copula).
There are, though, those verbs who lenite in the presence of prefixes. The can only happen with verbs starting in p, ph, t or th. Plain plosives always lenite to their fricative counterparts. Aspirated plosives who lenite are somewhat weird; they lenite to their fricatives after k-, th- and jukh- (prefixes ending in plosives) and to /h/ elsewhere:
phip
Tried
kfip
didn't try
tahip
if i try
Aspirated initial verbs who lenite are somewhat rare. There are some verbs starting in t who lenite into ṣ instead of s: tikhṣuj -> kṣikhṣuj (take out, undress).
1. Aspect
The Aspectual system in Tlapthuv is the most representative of PG's system, displaying five aspects and the Subjunctive:
Perfective
Marked by -p; the perfective means that the action is viewed as a single indivisible thing. It is normally past, but adverbs can make it future. When used as future, it marks that the speaker's compromise with the certainty that it will happen, as opposed to the Future/Irrealis, that expresses a much more dubious assertion.
xanpjap khu ktlatinu
cough-PFV 3 loud-ADVZ
He coughed loudly
tlep khu xẕiph
return-PFV 3 tomorrow
He will come back tomorrow (i'm sure of it)
With adverbs that normally force tense into the present, it acquires a meaning of 'about to':
thip traphku
fall-PFV now
I'm about to fall
Gnomic
The Gnomic, marked by -ẕ, marks that the action is realized in some way throughout the whole of the timeline (what exactly comprises the timeline may vary), it is commonly used with the copula for intrinsic qualities.
iliẕ la tju
fly-GNO bird PL
birds fly
miẕ jèh hjusi
COP-GNO sky blue
The sky is blue
Habitual
The Habitual, marked by -lth, is somewhat like the gnomic, except that it does not comprise all of the timeline, but a large chunk of it (that never crosses the present). It may be in either the past or the future (although it is not easy to find context that puts it in the future):
milth pik
COP-GNO young
I used to be young
milth juṣ ptèt koh
COP-HAB 2s old too
You will be old too
The example with 'old' throws the tense into the future, because one cannot have been old and subsequently have stopped being old, so the natural assumption is that you are not old now, and will be some time in the future.
The Habitual has an allomorph -th for when the previous syllable contains an approximant.
Progressive
The progressive, marked by -lt, marks that the action is happening through the present, usually continuously.
tult traphku
eat-PROG now
I'm eating now
There is a sort of three-way ser-estar distinction in the usage of Gnomic, Habitual and Progressive aspects, with the gnomic mostly corresponding to 'ser' and the progressive mostly to 'estar', although the cut isn't exactly the same and the Habitual messes things up (sometimes corresponding to ser and sometimes to estar, if i were to translate):
rjit xanpjat
have-PROG sickness
I am sick
Here the speaker has the flu or something of the like, his sickness is not lasting.
rjith xanpjat
have-HAB sickness
I have been sick
A possible context is that the speaker broke a leg and it didn't heal properly, so its hurting and he is sick in that regard, and has been for a few months/years. (If Tlapthuv speakers got a TARDIS and watched House, him having pain would be in the Habitual)
rjiẕ xanpjat
have-GNO sickness
I am sick
The speaker was born sick, is sick in the present, and probably doesn't have much in the way of hope of stopping to be sick.
The Progressive has an allomorph -t for when the previous syllable contains an approximant.
Future/Irrealis
This is the most tense-like entity in Tlapthuv, being always future, marking the dubiousness:
tliph khu xẕiph
return-FUT 3 tomorrow
He might come back tomorrow
Subjuntive
The subjunctive may be marked by either -j or -0 (zero marking). Zero marking occurs when:
- The verb is polysyllabic and ends in i (hwijesti - to live)
- There is an approximant in the previous syllalbe (rji - to have)
The -j coalesces with the final vowel if it is a, thus resulting in è (thè - to see)
The Subjunctive, in finite clauses, is either an Imperative, when there's no overt subject, or something Deontic (Potential, Optative, etc.) when there is:
ŋej!
sit!
tli khu xẕiph
return-SJV 3 tomorrow
He's probably coming back tomorrow / May he come back tomorrow!
Comparing the example phrases, one can see the future is complex in Tlapthuv, and may come in several flavors, depending on the degree of certainty associated with that assertion.
And, after two weeks, it came. Bow before the might of the full Gigxkpoyan aspect pack!
I was going to add Polarity here too, but it got just so damn long.
0. Introduction
Verbs in Tlapthuv, as in Retla, conjugate for Aspect, Polarity, Voice an the Converb Forms. I'm not sure if those truly characterize as proper 'conjugations', but verbs ending in e or o have said vowels reduced to i u, in all cases except before the Subjunctive and the Gnomic. There are no truly irregular verbs (like Retla's copula).
There are, though, those verbs who lenite in the presence of prefixes. The can only happen with verbs starting in p, ph, t or th. Plain plosives always lenite to their fricative counterparts. Aspirated plosives who lenite are somewhat weird; they lenite to their fricatives after k-, th- and jukh- (prefixes ending in plosives) and to /h/ elsewhere:
phip
Tried
kfip
didn't try
tahip
if i try
Aspirated initial verbs who lenite are somewhat rare. There are some verbs starting in t who lenite into ṣ instead of s: tikhṣuj -> kṣikhṣuj (take out, undress).
1. Aspect
The Aspectual system in Tlapthuv is the most representative of PG's system, displaying five aspects and the Subjunctive:
Perfective
Marked by -p; the perfective means that the action is viewed as a single indivisible thing. It is normally past, but adverbs can make it future. When used as future, it marks that the speaker's compromise with the certainty that it will happen, as opposed to the Future/Irrealis, that expresses a much more dubious assertion.
xanpjap khu ktlatinu
cough-PFV 3 loud-ADVZ
He coughed loudly
tlep khu xẕiph
return-PFV 3 tomorrow
He will come back tomorrow (i'm sure of it)
With adverbs that normally force tense into the present, it acquires a meaning of 'about to':
thip traphku
fall-PFV now
I'm about to fall
Gnomic
The Gnomic, marked by -ẕ, marks that the action is realized in some way throughout the whole of the timeline (what exactly comprises the timeline may vary), it is commonly used with the copula for intrinsic qualities.
iliẕ la tju
fly-GNO bird PL
birds fly
miẕ jèh hjusi
COP-GNO sky blue
The sky is blue
Habitual
The Habitual, marked by -lth, is somewhat like the gnomic, except that it does not comprise all of the timeline, but a large chunk of it (that never crosses the present). It may be in either the past or the future (although it is not easy to find context that puts it in the future):
milth pik
COP-GNO young
I used to be young
milth juṣ ptèt koh
COP-HAB 2s old too
You will be old too
The example with 'old' throws the tense into the future, because one cannot have been old and subsequently have stopped being old, so the natural assumption is that you are not old now, and will be some time in the future.
The Habitual has an allomorph -th for when the previous syllable contains an approximant.
Progressive
The progressive, marked by -lt, marks that the action is happening through the present, usually continuously.
tult traphku
eat-PROG now
I'm eating now
There is a sort of three-way ser-estar distinction in the usage of Gnomic, Habitual and Progressive aspects, with the gnomic mostly corresponding to 'ser' and the progressive mostly to 'estar', although the cut isn't exactly the same and the Habitual messes things up (sometimes corresponding to ser and sometimes to estar, if i were to translate):
rjit xanpjat
have-PROG sickness
I am sick
Here the speaker has the flu or something of the like, his sickness is not lasting.
rjith xanpjat
have-HAB sickness
I have been sick
A possible context is that the speaker broke a leg and it didn't heal properly, so its hurting and he is sick in that regard, and has been for a few months/years. (If Tlapthuv speakers got a TARDIS and watched House, him having pain would be in the Habitual)
rjiẕ xanpjat
have-GNO sickness
I am sick
The speaker was born sick, is sick in the present, and probably doesn't have much in the way of hope of stopping to be sick.
The Progressive has an allomorph -t for when the previous syllable contains an approximant.
Future/Irrealis
This is the most tense-like entity in Tlapthuv, being always future, marking the dubiousness:
tliph khu xẕiph
return-FUT 3 tomorrow
He might come back tomorrow
Subjuntive
The subjunctive may be marked by either -j or -0 (zero marking). Zero marking occurs when:
- The verb is polysyllabic and ends in i (hwijesti - to live)
- There is an approximant in the previous syllalbe (rji - to have)
The -j coalesces with the final vowel if it is a, thus resulting in è (thè - to see)
The Subjunctive, in finite clauses, is either an Imperative, when there's no overt subject, or something Deontic (Potential, Optative, etc.) when there is:
ŋej!
sit!
tli khu xẕiph
return-SJV 3 tomorrow
He's probably coming back tomorrow / May he come back tomorrow!
Comparing the example phrases, one can see the future is complex in Tlapthuv, and may come in several flavors, depending on the degree of certainty associated with that assertion.
And, after two weeks, it came. Bow before the might of the full Gigxkpoyan aspect pack!
I was going to add Polarity here too, but it got just so damn long.
-
- korean
- Posts: 10372
- Joined: 12 Jul 2013 23:09
- Location: UTC-04:00
Re: Tlapthuv, Proto-Gigxkpoyan's Second Son
Hooray! And time to bow, I guess.loglorn wrote:And, after two weeks, it came. Bow before the might of the full Gigxkpoyan aspect pack!
Although I've quoted just this part, I like the usages you've defined for each aspect, both individually and in relation to the others. It's cool how varied meanings seem to have the potential to be.loglorn wrote:There is a sort of three-way ser-estar distinction in the usage of Gnomic, Habitual and Progressive aspects, with the gnomic mostly corresponding to 'ser' and the progressive mostly to 'estar', although the cut isn't exactly the same and the Habitual messes things up (sometimes corresponding to ser and sometimes to estar, if i were to translate):
Also, I'm definitely a fan of the allomorphy/morphophonology mentioned here in the most recent post.
Re: Tlapthuv, Proto-Gigxkpoyan's Second Son
You could say Tlapthuv has one morphophonological rule: Approximants (w r l j x) are deleted when the previous syllable contains approximants. That is universal, and happens to all approximant containing affixes.
The only possible 'exception' is the adjectival -inu/jnu:
When the adjective is vowel final, that j in -jnu is never deleted. It can be seen in jajnu (warm-NRES). But, if the adjective ends in i, there is another allomorph, -nu:
hjusi -> hjusinu NOT *hjusijnu (blue)
When doing my first language, i came across that pretty wikipedia list of moods, and chose a bunch of the cool sounding ones. When i got to writing stuff in the language (Kamëzet) i ended up never using half of them, because i hadn't really thought about what exactly they do and how they differ from one another. I pay especial attention to that since then.
That's probably not a rare newbie mistake.
The only possible 'exception' is the adjectival -inu/jnu:
When the adjective is vowel final, that j in -jnu is never deleted. It can be seen in jajnu (warm-NRES). But, if the adjective ends in i, there is another allomorph, -nu:
hjusi -> hjusinu NOT *hjusijnu (blue)
When doing my first language, i came across that pretty wikipedia list of moods, and chose a bunch of the cool sounding ones. When i got to writing stuff in the language (Kamëzet) i ended up never using half of them, because i hadn't really thought about what exactly they do and how they differ from one another. I pay especial attention to that since then.
That's probably not a rare newbie mistake.
Re: Tlapthuv, Proto-Gigxkpoyan's Second Son
Iŋpij thju toxp ŋujt koh iŋpij kikh wups
DEF.SPEC CL wind conld-RES and DEF.SPEC CL sun
The North Wind and the Sun
thalt iŋpij thju toxp ŋujt koh iŋpij kikh wups le mij thju iŋpij thju ivhklètinu
argue-PROG DEF.SPEC CL wind cold-RES and DEF.SPEC CL sun ACC COP-SJV 3 DEF.SPEC CL strong-SUPL
The sun and the north wind were arguing over who was strongest
jukhxekip joax tzvolt ẕwem jainu.
SEQ-pass-CIRC traveler REL-wear-PROG cloak warm-NRES
When a traveler with a warm cloak came along
tetvuŋip thju le mij iŋpij thju ivhklètinu thju tniswiph le tikhṣutè le iŋpij khu joax prjuth ẕwem jainu
Agree-PFV 3 ACC COP-SJV DEF.SPEC CL strong-SUPL 3 REL-be.able.to-IRR ACC take.out-CAUS-SJV ACC DEF.SPEC CL traveler INS cloak warm-NRES
They agreed that the strongest would be who was able to make the traveler take off the cloak.
pep iŋpij thju toxp ŋujt jukhfip wikaẕ
go-PFV DEF.SPEC CL wind cold-RES SEQ-try-CIRC first
The north wind went to try first
thakvup jukhthakvup iŋpij thju toxp ŋujt
blow-PF SEQ-blow-CIRC DEF.SPEC
The north wind blew and blew
itrap htej htafi tulth iŋpij khu joax ktlèt le xusitè iŋpij khu joax le iŋpij toṣi ẕwem prjuth naf jit khu
do-PF reach-SJV breath LAT DEF.SPEC CL traveler more ACC involve-CAUS-SJV DEF.SPEC CL traveler ACC DEF.SPEC CL cloak INS body GEN 3
The more the breath went at the traveler, the more the traveler drew the cloak around himself
jip iŋpij thju toxp ŋujt le phej.
End-PF DEF.SPEC CL wind cold-RES ACC try-SJV
The north wind finished trying
tnap iŋpij kikh wups le phej.
start-PFV DEF.SPEC CL sun ACC try-SJV
The sun started to try.
phiŋtfip jukhphiŋtfip iŋpij kikh wups
Shine-PFV SEQ-shine-CIRC DEF.SPEC CL sun
The sun shone and shone
jukhṣikhṣup iŋpij khu joax le iŋpij toṣi ẕwem.
SEQ-take.out-CIRC DEF.SPEC CL traveler ACC traveler ACC DEF.SPEC CL coat
and the traveler removed the cloak.
tetvuŋip iŋpij thju toxp ŋujt le mij iŋpij kikh wups iŋpij thju ivhklètinu.
agree-PF DEF.SPEC CL wind cold-RES ACC COP-SJV DEF.SPEC CL sun DEF.SPEC CL strong-SUPL
The north wind agreed that the sun was strongest.
I've been rather busy (i get the feeling everybody has), so my conlanging rhythm has been been severed. The little i've been conlanging has been directed at Chifjaeśí's Semantic Drift history.
DEF.SPEC CL wind conld-RES and DEF.SPEC CL sun
The North Wind and the Sun
thalt iŋpij thju toxp ŋujt koh iŋpij kikh wups le mij thju iŋpij thju ivhklètinu
argue-PROG DEF.SPEC CL wind cold-RES and DEF.SPEC CL sun ACC COP-SJV 3 DEF.SPEC CL strong-SUPL
The sun and the north wind were arguing over who was strongest
jukhxekip joax tzvolt ẕwem jainu.
SEQ-pass-CIRC traveler REL-wear-PROG cloak warm-NRES
When a traveler with a warm cloak came along
tetvuŋip thju le mij iŋpij thju ivhklètinu thju tniswiph le tikhṣutè le iŋpij khu joax prjuth ẕwem jainu
Agree-PFV 3 ACC COP-SJV DEF.SPEC CL strong-SUPL 3 REL-be.able.to-IRR ACC take.out-CAUS-SJV ACC DEF.SPEC CL traveler INS cloak warm-NRES
They agreed that the strongest would be who was able to make the traveler take off the cloak.
pep iŋpij thju toxp ŋujt jukhfip wikaẕ
go-PFV DEF.SPEC CL wind cold-RES SEQ-try-CIRC first
The north wind went to try first
thakvup jukhthakvup iŋpij thju toxp ŋujt
blow-PF SEQ-blow-CIRC DEF.SPEC
The north wind blew and blew
itrap htej htafi tulth iŋpij khu joax ktlèt le xusitè iŋpij khu joax le iŋpij toṣi ẕwem prjuth naf jit khu
do-PF reach-SJV breath LAT DEF.SPEC CL traveler more ACC involve-CAUS-SJV DEF.SPEC CL traveler ACC DEF.SPEC CL cloak INS body GEN 3
The more the breath went at the traveler, the more the traveler drew the cloak around himself
jip iŋpij thju toxp ŋujt le phej.
End-PF DEF.SPEC CL wind cold-RES ACC try-SJV
The north wind finished trying
tnap iŋpij kikh wups le phej.
start-PFV DEF.SPEC CL sun ACC try-SJV
The sun started to try.
phiŋtfip jukhphiŋtfip iŋpij kikh wups
Shine-PFV SEQ-shine-CIRC DEF.SPEC CL sun
The sun shone and shone
jukhṣikhṣup iŋpij khu joax le iŋpij toṣi ẕwem.
SEQ-take.out-CIRC DEF.SPEC CL traveler ACC traveler ACC DEF.SPEC CL coat
and the traveler removed the cloak.
tetvuŋip iŋpij thju toxp ŋujt le mij iŋpij kikh wups iŋpij thju ivhklètinu.
agree-PF DEF.SPEC CL wind cold-RES ACC COP-SJV DEF.SPEC CL sun DEF.SPEC CL strong-SUPL
The north wind agreed that the sun was strongest.
I've been rather busy (i get the feeling everybody has), so my conlanging rhythm has been been severed. The little i've been conlanging has been directed at Chifjaeśí's Semantic Drift history.
Re: Tlapthuv, Proto-Gigxkpoyan's Second Son
Verbs Part 2: Polarity and Voice
1. Polarity
Negative polarity is marked by the prefix i-. i- has an allomorph k- before leniting roots. Such marker can be applied to all finite verb forms (any Voice+Aspect combination).
Due to the behavior of leniting forms (especially with aspirated plosives), there are some pairs of verbs that are normally homophones, but that are distinguished in negative forms, and pairs of verbs who are normally distinct which merge in negative forms:
pep - go; pep - take; phep - wake up; phep - try
ipep - didn't go; kfep - didn't take; iphep - didn't wake up; kfep - didn't try
There are also forms where the four are distinct (but they are not the ones to be dealt with in this post):
thipep; thifep; thiphep; thihep; respectively.
2. Voice
2.0 Transitivity and Alignment
Pertinent to the discussion of voices is the discussion of transitivity and alignment:
Tlapthuv verbs can be intransitive, transitive or ditransitive. Transitiveness is fixed in the vast majority of cases, there being some pairs of verbs differing only in transitivity.
Intrasitive clauses have only a subject (Nominative).
Transitive clauses display a subject (Nominative) and an object (Accusative), Tlapthuv has thus nom-acc alignment.
Ditransitive clauses show a subject (Nominative), a Theme (Instrumental) and a Recipient (Accusative). Tlapthuv is thus dechticaetiative.
2.1 Passive
Passive of Transitives
The passive demotes the subject, relegating it to an optional oblique accompanied by the instrumental preposition, while promoting the object to subject position. The resulting verb is intransitive. This operation is usually related to pragmatic concerns such as keeping the topic as the subject.
thalt kik le iŋpij tju pat
see-PROG 1s ACC DEF.SPEC CL cat
I see the cat
vs.
thajat iŋpij tju pat (prjuth kik)
tha-ja-lt iŋpij tju pat (prjuth kik)
see-PASS-PROG DEF.SPEC CL cat (INS 1s)
The cat is seen (by me)
Passive of Ditransitives
The passive of a ditransitive demotes the subject to an optional oblique, promotes the Recipient to subject position and the Theme to object position. The resulting verb is transitive:
kfap kik le juṣ prjuth pat
give-PFV 1s ACC 2 INS cat
I gave you a cat
vs.
kfajap juṣ le pat (prjuth kik)
give-PASS-PFV 2 ACC cat (INS 1s)
You were given a cat (by me)
To the transitive verb resulting of Ditransitive + Passive, the Passive can be applied once more:
kfajaap pat (prjuth kik) (tulth juṣ)
kfa-ja-ja-p
give-PASS-PASS-PFV cat (INS 1s) (LAT 2)
A cat was given (by me) (to you)
The original Theme ends as the subject, while the original subject ends as an oblique marked by the instrumental and the original Recipient ends as an oblique marked by the lative.
The Passive surfaces normally as -ja, but has an allomorph -a if the previous syllable has approximants (which always is the case in double passives). Double passives then surface as either -jaa or -aja, thus kfajaalt (kfa-ja-ja-lt) and xoajat (xo-ja-ja-lt).
2.2 Causative
The Causative adds another valency slot to the verb, while expressing that the Causer made the Causee to act. Both Intrasitives and Transitives can be Causativized, becoming, respectively, Transitive and Ditransitive. The object is demoted to instrumental and the subject to object, while a new participant (the Causer) is introduced as the subject.
thap kik le pat
see-PPFV 1s ACC DEF.SPEC CL cat
I saw a cat
vs.
thatap juṣ le kik prjuth pat
see-CAUS-PFV 2 ACC 1s INS cat
You showed me (made me see) a cat
kholt kik
run-PROG 1s
I am running
vs.
khotalt juṣ le kik
run-CAUS-PROG 2 ACC 1s
You make me run
Passive of the Causative
The Causative can be Passivized, for topicness concerns or in order to emphasize the forcefulness of the causing:
khotèat kik prjuth juṣ
run-CAUS-PASS-PROG 1s INS 2
I am being made to run (running now is expressly against my will)
-ta-ja surfaces as -tèa
2.3 Reflexive
The reflexive is formed as PASS-CAUS, and it's sole argument is accusative:
roatalt le juṣ
ro-jata-lt le juṣ
hurt-REFL-PROG ACC 2
You are hurting yourself
1. Polarity
Negative polarity is marked by the prefix i-. i- has an allomorph k- before leniting roots. Such marker can be applied to all finite verb forms (any Voice+Aspect combination).
Due to the behavior of leniting forms (especially with aspirated plosives), there are some pairs of verbs that are normally homophones, but that are distinguished in negative forms, and pairs of verbs who are normally distinct which merge in negative forms:
pep - go; pep - take; phep - wake up; phep - try
ipep - didn't go; kfep - didn't take; iphep - didn't wake up; kfep - didn't try
There are also forms where the four are distinct (but they are not the ones to be dealt with in this post):
thipep; thifep; thiphep; thihep; respectively.
2. Voice
2.0 Transitivity and Alignment
Pertinent to the discussion of voices is the discussion of transitivity and alignment:
Tlapthuv verbs can be intransitive, transitive or ditransitive. Transitiveness is fixed in the vast majority of cases, there being some pairs of verbs differing only in transitivity.
Intrasitive clauses have only a subject (Nominative).
Transitive clauses display a subject (Nominative) and an object (Accusative), Tlapthuv has thus nom-acc alignment.
Ditransitive clauses show a subject (Nominative), a Theme (Instrumental) and a Recipient (Accusative). Tlapthuv is thus dechticaetiative.
2.1 Passive
Passive of Transitives
The passive demotes the subject, relegating it to an optional oblique accompanied by the instrumental preposition, while promoting the object to subject position. The resulting verb is intransitive. This operation is usually related to pragmatic concerns such as keeping the topic as the subject.
thalt kik le iŋpij tju pat
see-PROG 1s ACC DEF.SPEC CL cat
I see the cat
vs.
thajat iŋpij tju pat (prjuth kik)
tha-ja-lt iŋpij tju pat (prjuth kik)
see-PASS-PROG DEF.SPEC CL cat (INS 1s)
The cat is seen (by me)
Passive of Ditransitives
The passive of a ditransitive demotes the subject to an optional oblique, promotes the Recipient to subject position and the Theme to object position. The resulting verb is transitive:
kfap kik le juṣ prjuth pat
give-PFV 1s ACC 2 INS cat
I gave you a cat
vs.
kfajap juṣ le pat (prjuth kik)
give-PASS-PFV 2 ACC cat (INS 1s)
You were given a cat (by me)
To the transitive verb resulting of Ditransitive + Passive, the Passive can be applied once more:
kfajaap pat (prjuth kik) (tulth juṣ)
kfa-ja-ja-p
give-PASS-PASS-PFV cat (INS 1s) (LAT 2)
A cat was given (by me) (to you)
The original Theme ends as the subject, while the original subject ends as an oblique marked by the instrumental and the original Recipient ends as an oblique marked by the lative.
The Passive surfaces normally as -ja, but has an allomorph -a if the previous syllable has approximants (which always is the case in double passives). Double passives then surface as either -jaa or -aja, thus kfajaalt (kfa-ja-ja-lt) and xoajat (xo-ja-ja-lt).
2.2 Causative
The Causative adds another valency slot to the verb, while expressing that the Causer made the Causee to act. Both Intrasitives and Transitives can be Causativized, becoming, respectively, Transitive and Ditransitive. The object is demoted to instrumental and the subject to object, while a new participant (the Causer) is introduced as the subject.
thap kik le pat
see-PPFV 1s ACC DEF.SPEC CL cat
I saw a cat
vs.
thatap juṣ le kik prjuth pat
see-CAUS-PFV 2 ACC 1s INS cat
You showed me (made me see) a cat
kholt kik
run-PROG 1s
I am running
vs.
khotalt juṣ le kik
run-CAUS-PROG 2 ACC 1s
You make me run
Passive of the Causative
The Causative can be Passivized, for topicness concerns or in order to emphasize the forcefulness of the causing:
khotèat kik prjuth juṣ
run-CAUS-PASS-PROG 1s INS 2
I am being made to run (running now is expressly against my will)
-ta-ja surfaces as -tèa
2.3 Reflexive
The reflexive is formed as PASS-CAUS, and it's sole argument is accusative:
roatalt le juṣ
ro-jata-lt le juṣ
hurt-REFL-PROG ACC 2
You are hurting yourself
Last edited by loglorn on 18 Dec 2015 14:14, edited 1 time in total.
-
- korean
- Posts: 10372
- Joined: 12 Jul 2013 23:09
- Location: UTC-04:00
Re: Tlapthuv, Proto-Gigxkpoyan's Second Son
Very interesting overall! Everything's explained well, in my opinion, and I don't believe I have any questions, but these are some of the points that I particularly liked:
I think that's awesome. Was this planned, or did things turn out like this more or less on their own?loglorn wrote: Due to the behavior of leniting forms (especially with aspirated plosives), there are some pairs of verbs that are normally homophones, but that are distinguished in negative forms, and pairs of verbs who are normally distinct which merge in negative forms:
There are also forms where the four are distinct (but they are not the ones to be dealt with in this post):Spoiler:
thipep; thifep; thiphep; thihep; respectively.
Allomorphs are always fun, and I quite like the use of the lative preposition to mark what was originally the recipient in situations like these.loglorn wrote: To the transitive verb resulting of Ditransitive + Passive, the Passive can be applied once more:
The original Theme ends as the subject, while the original subject ends as an oblique marked by the instrumental and the original Recipient ends as an oblique marked by the lative.Spoiler:
The Passive surfaces normally as -ja, but has an allomorph -a if the previous syllable has approximants (which always is the case in double passives). Double passives then surface as either -jaa or -aja, thus kfajaalt (kfa-ja-ja-lt) and xoajat (xo-ja-ja-lt).
Nice. I'm definitely a fan of having the reflexive voice marked on the verb like that, and combining the passive and causative affixes is a cool way to mark it, in my opinion. I also like the fact that the only argument of the verb is accusative.loglorn wrote: The reflexive is formed as PASS-CAUS, and it's sole argument is accusative:
Spoiler:
Re: Tlapthuv, Proto-Gigxkpoyan's Second Son
Unplanned really. I just made a bunch of independent decisions (with sc's making some of them for me) and only realized how they were interacting while writing the post. Overall, I make very few morphology oriented decisions when coming up with sound changes, which accounts for most daughterlangs being as tidily agglutinative as the protolang, but makes crazy stuff much more interesting when it happens 'on its own'.shimobaatar wrote:Very interesting overall! Everything's explained well, in my opinion, and I don't believe I have any questions, but these are some of the points that I particularly liked:
I think that's awesome. Was this planned, or did things turn out like this more or less on their own?loglorn wrote: Due to the behavior of leniting forms (especially with aspirated plosives), there are some pairs of verbs that are normally homophones, but that are distinguished in negative forms, and pairs of verbs who are normally distinct which merge in negative forms:
There are also forms where the four are distinct (but they are not the ones to be dealt with in this post):Spoiler:
thipep; thifep; thiphep; thihep; respectively.
-
- korean
- Posts: 10372
- Joined: 12 Jul 2013 23:09
- Location: UTC-04:00
Re: Tlapthuv, Proto-Gigxkpoyan's Second Son
Oh, cool; thanks for the explanation!loglorn wrote:Unplanned really. I just made a bunch of independent decisions (with sc's making some of them for me) and only realized how they were interacting while writing the post. Overall, I make very few morphology oriented decisions when coming up with sound changes, which accounts for most daughterlangs being as tidily agglutinative as the protolang, but makes crazy stuff much more interesting when it happens 'on its own'.
Re: Tlapthuv, Proto-Gigxkpoyan's Second Son
1. Clauses Functioning as Nouns
This section was going to be called 'Complement Clauses', but i realized that terminology was going to get somewhat confusing, since there were clauses patterning with complement clauses that filled roles other than that of complement clauses, and they were going to figure here.
Clauses where the verb is marked with the Subjunctive can pattern much like nouns, receiving prepositions to fill into a variety of roles inside other clauses. They can't, however, receive plain noun modifiers, such as genitives, adjectives and the like.
1.1 As Complements
As opposed to Retla, Aspect is not contrasted in Complement clauses, because the verb is always marked as subjunctive.
ktuẕ kik le tuj le aft
like-GNO 1PS ACC eat-SJV ACC meat
I like to eat meat
thap kik le tuj pi le juth kikh
see-PFV 1PS ACC see-SJV CL.3 ACC orange CL
I saw her eating oranges
As complements of pheki and ptujhi
What translates as the conjunctions 'before' and 'after' is a construction where both clauses are arguments of either 'pheki' or 'ptujhi', which receive the relevant aspectual information.
pheki hnuj hmis le hnuj juṣ
precede-SJV die-SJV ocean ACC die-SJV 2P
May the Ocean die before you do (What you wish for in someone's birthday, as the Ocean is a mythical immortal entity)
lit. May the ocean dying precede your dying
ptujhip xihswiphi thuj khu trit le thè le...
succeed-PFV never-SJV see-SJV CL.3 again ACC see-SJV ACC
He never slept again after seeing...
1.2 Used with adpositions other than le
With prjuth
When used with prjuth, clauses usually take a causal meaning, akin to the conjunction 'because':
pipizip pi prjuth pihè le thè le jèh
run.away-PFV CL.3 INS want-SJV ACC see-SJV ACC sky
He ran away because he wanted to see the sky
With tat
The clause happens simultaneously to the main one. It implies, necessarily, that the subject is shared.
tat xuutè, phnitèalth khu prjuth witèut
LOC fish-SJV think-CAUS-PASS-HAB 3.CL INS wife
While fishing, he was thinking about his wife
With tulth
With the Lative tulth, the clause gets the notion of purpose, 'in order to':
itrap khu le thju tulth itratè praẕkhinu
do-PFV 3.CL ACC CL LAT do-CAUS-SJV happy-ADVZ
He did that to make you happy
With jit
This is used to form Relative clauses, but as opposed to the relative clauses in the next section, these have very specific semantics; they are used for qualities perceived as inherent.
pafkfuth jit tuj le khap
tribe GEN eat-SJV ACC person
Tribe that eats persons
khap jit tepi le thle
person GEN cut ACC tree
Person who cuts trees
Shortenings of this construction are a common mechanism for creating adjectives and nouns (they are not very differentiated anyway):
jit tuj le khap -> tujkhap : cannibal
jit tepi le thle -> tepithle : lumberman
2. Relative Clauses
The verb, when used in relative clauses, is marked bit the prefix th-. In the presence of this prefix, the negative always assumes the i- allomorph.
The form where all four are distinct is the REL-NEG-In the last post i wrote:pip - go; pip - take; phip - wake up; phip - try
ipip - didn't go; kfip - didn't take; iphip - didn't wake up; kfip - didn't try
There are also forms where the four are distinct (but they are not the ones to be dealt with in this post):
thipip; thifip; thiphip; thihip; respectively.
Relative (and, by the way, negative) forms of the Subjunctive do not exist.
nilt le iŋpij tju jut paf thxup, tev xihswiphip thè le thju jit tjeth jit traph!
know-PROG ACC DEF.SPEC CL fish all-RES REL-catch-PFV but never-PFV see-SJV ACC thing GEN likelihood GEN PROX
I remember every single fish i've caught, but i've never seen anything like this!
3. Converbs
The converbs are non-finite forms expressing several notions of adverbial subordination. They are marked through prefixes and don't distinguish aspect, voice or polarity.
3.0 Morphophonemic results of prefixes and stress movement
All the Converb morphemes are prefixes that take the stress away from the verbal root, here i'll mention the regular processes verbs undergo in such environment. Less regular ones will be noted separately.
I already explained the workings of lenition when prefixes are around:
Roots starting with /k/ also undergo morphopho lenition after the Converb prefixes. If the root starts in kV, it will lenite to /j/ only after consonant final converb prefixes:verbs who lenite in the presence of prefixes. The can only happen with verbs starting in p, ph, t or th. Plain plosives always lenite to their fricative counterparts. Aspirated plosives who lenite are somewhat weird; they lenite to their fricatives after k-, th- and jukh- (prefixes ending in plosives) and to /h/ elsewhere.
kip - call-PFV vs. tikip - SIM-call-PFV vs. jukhjip - SEQ-call-PFV
If they start with kC, they lenite to /j/ after vowel final converbs and /i/ after consonant final ones:
ktè - find-PFV vs. tijtalt - SIM-find-PROG vs. jukhitap - SEQ-find-PFV
Monosyllabic verb roots with /e/ or /o/ are always reduced to /i u/ when they become unstressed (the negative i- does not receive stress). Various diachronics reasons prevented that from happening with polysyllabic verbs.
joẕ - walk-GNO vs. kaẕjuẕ - CNSQ-walk-GNO
3.1 Simultaneous
The simultaneous marks that the too actions happen simultaneously, but there's no need for them to share subjects.
nitèap pi le knij le sok thtleph khu, tipilt pezxah
realize-PFV 3.CL ACC NEG-know-SJV ACC question REL-return-FUT 3.CL SIM-go-PROG away
As he went away, she realized she didn't know if he'd come back
It is marked by ti-, while the verb is always marked as Progressive.
3.2 Sequential
This form marks that one action starts as the other ends, without implying causality.
itrap jukhphip
do-PFV SEQ-wake.up-PFV
I'll do it after i wake up (context implies futurity in this case, as the hearer must know i have not done it yet)
Marked by jukh-, the verb is always marked as perfective.
3.3 Consequential
The consequential marks that one action is a logical consequence of the other, in that it'll happen every time the other actual does. It's as factual as a conditional gets. The verb always stands gnomic.
ptaph tulth kijt, kaẕhnuẕ khu
deal.blow-FUT LAT heart CNSQ-die-GNO 3.CL
When you deal a blow to the heart, someone dies
Marked by kaẕ-. keẕ- if the verb contains /i/.
3.4 Conditional
This Converb denotes a counterfactual relation.
khoj tapheph thju
run COND-hear-FUT thing
Run if you hear something
Marked by ta-, the verb is always Future.
3.5 Instances of Irregularity
- All Converb Forms of the verb hej are identical to those of kij
- ti- surfaces as te- with phtè, tatè, ẕè and tlè.
- kaẕ + joẕ surfaces as kaẕijuẕ, not *kaẕjuẕ
- kaẕ + xeki surfaces as keẕixekiẕ not *keẕxekiẕ
Wow. I was unusually creative with those example sentences. With this i think i explained everything i have on Tlapthuv so i'll mostly answer stuff from now on.
I can finally get Tlapthuv off my conscience and work on Chífjaeśí now.
-
- korean
- Posts: 10372
- Joined: 12 Jul 2013 23:09
- Location: UTC-04:00
Re: Tlapthuv, Proto-Gigxkpoyan's Second Son
loglorn wrote: As opposed to Retla, Aspect is not contrasted in Complement clauses, because the verb is always marked as subjunctive.
So aspect can be marked in other ways, it would seem?loglorn wrote: What translates as the conjunctions 'before' and 'after' is a construction where both clauses are arguments of either 'pheki' or 'ptujhi', which receive the relevant aspectual information.
Cool!loglorn wrote: pheki hnuj hmis le hnuj juṣ
precede-SJV die-SJV ocean ACC die-SJV 2P
May the Ocean die before you do (What you wish for in someone's birthday, as the Ocean is a mythical immortal entity)
lit. May the ocean dying precede your dying
Dumb question, most likely, but why not?loglorn wrote: Relative (and, by the way, negative) forms of the Subjunctive do not exist.
Are there no ways to distinguish aspect, voice, or polarity in these situations?loglorn wrote: The converbs are non-finite forms expressing several notions of adverbial subordination. They are marked through prefixes and don't distinguish aspect, voice or polarity.
Wow, congratulations! Let us know if you ever have anything more to share. I'm afraid I don't have any more questions at the moment other than the ones above; hopefully those aren't too stupid.loglorn wrote:With this i think i explained everything i have on Tlapthuv so i'll mostly answer stuff from now on.
Re: Tlapthuv, Proto-Gigxkpoyan's Second Son
Kinda late to bring this up but...
Read my threads, it'll make you both feel better. (Read here: I was a noob, and I am still a noob, and AKG looks ugly) [;(]loglorn wrote:I felt like my languages were boring when I read your thread so I guess we're evenSḿtuval wrote:I feel like my lang family's boring after reading both gigxkpoyan threads.
Lots of cool stuff here.
Spoiler:
Re: Tlapthuv, Proto-Gigxkpoyan's Second Son
Those are very standard Auxiliary Verb Constructions, as far as i can tell.shimobaatar wrote:loglorn wrote: As opposed to Retla, Aspect is not contrasted in Complement clauses, because the verb is always marked as subjunctive.So aspect can be marked in other ways, it would seem?loglorn wrote: What translates as the conjunctions 'before' and 'after' is a construction where both clauses are arguments of either 'pheki' or 'ptujhi', which receive the relevant aspectual information.
Historical reasons. In PG the subjunctive did not pattern with the aspects, it was instead one of many nominalizations, that crept into the aspect system in the course of Tlapthuv development. That means that processes that predate it's creeping into the aspect system are still restricted in combining.shimobaatar wrote:Dumb question, most likely, but why not?loglorn wrote: Relative (and, by the way, negative) forms of the Subjunctive do not exist.
Relativizing a negative verb was also similarly disallowed in PG, but semantics were quite more helpful in this case.
As written in the very phrase you posted, converbs are subordinate verb forms, so aspect, voice and polarity are supplied by the matrix verb.shimobaatar wrote:Are there no ways to distinguish aspect, voice, or polarity in these situations?loglorn wrote:The converbs are non-finite forms expressing several notions of adverbial subordination. They are marked through prefixes and don't distinguish aspect, voice or polarity.
I think i could write my explanations better. Good thing you ask for clarification whenever it is needed.
And today i can safely say i've been shimo'd.
-
- korean
- Posts: 10372
- Joined: 12 Jul 2013 23:09
- Location: UTC-04:00
Re: Tlapthuv, Proto-Gigxkpoyan's Second Son
Sorry, I didn't mean to suggest something was wrong or anything along those lines.loglorn wrote:Those are very standard Auxiliary Verb Constructions, as far as i can tell.
loglorn wrote:Historical reasons. In PG the subjunctive did not pattern with the aspects, it was instead one of many nominalizations, that crept into the aspect system in the course of Tlapthuv development. That means that processes that predate it's creeping into the aspect system are still restricted in combining.
Relativizing a negative verb was also similarly disallowed in PG, but semantics were quite more helpful in this case.
Ah, understood. Thanks for answering my questions, especially those which, in hindsight, have somewhat obvious answers (AKA the "stupid" questions)!loglorn wrote:As written in the very phrase you posted, converbs are subordinate verb forms, so aspect, voice and polarity are supplied by the matrix verb.
Haha, hopefully that's not a bad thing.loglorn wrote: And today i can safely say i've been shimo'd.