Siglisc (Germanic lang) 4.0

A forum for all topics related to constructed languages
User avatar
Omzinesý
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2444
Joined: Fri 27 Aug 2010, 07:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: Siglisc (Germanic lang) 4.0

Post by Omzinesý » Thu 13 Oct 2016, 12:37

Ælfwine wrote:Perhaps you should do a future version of Siglisc as agglutinative, maybe? Or perhaps agglutinative derivation for some verbs? Depends on how far you take the analytical path.
Maybe one day in the future :)
User avatar
Omzinesý
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2444
Joined: Fri 27 Aug 2010, 07:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: Siglisc (Germanic lang) 4.0

Post by Omzinesý » Wed 07 Dec 2016, 14:02

On pronouns

De and di have been mentioned many times.
When used as pronouns, they correspond to English it and they. They are also used as articles, and thus correspond to the.

Her and der mean here and there respectively. The <r> is never pronounced. So they are [he:] and [de:] respectively. De always has a short vowel [de]. Der is homophonic with deh 'would do' though. Her, on the other hand, is homophonic with he 'would have'.

Demonstratives are formed similarly to Swedish.
De her man 'this man', di her man 'these men'
De der man 'that man', di der man 'those men'

Interrogative pronouns can be formed similarly with ver 'where'
De ver man 'which man'
Di ver man 'which men'
User avatar
Omzinesý
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2444
Joined: Fri 27 Aug 2010, 07:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: Siglisc (Germanic lang) 4.0

Post by Omzinesý » Mon 12 Dec 2016, 12:31

Komn as an auxiliary

Komn (PRES kom, PST kam, KONJ.PAST kem)

As a normal verb it means 'to come'.
Ek kam szu de haus. 'I came to the house.'

As an auxiliary it when it takes the particle szu, it is a motion verb.
Ek kam her szu svemn.'I came here to swim.'

Without the particle it means 'should, have to', an external obligation.
Ek kom svemn. 'I should schwim.'

Using 'to came' in that meaning is a feature of Baltic sea region, though I don't think Siglisc is spoken at that area.

Szu is related to English 'to'. Siglish goes through the t->ts change, like High German. Tsu is however sporadically lenited.
Rosenkohl
hieroglyphic
hieroglyphic
Posts: 34
Joined: Wed 04 Sep 2013, 19:22
Location: Warsaw, Poland

Re: Siglisc (Germanic lang) 4.0

Post by Rosenkohl » Mon 12 Dec 2016, 20:55

Very interesting indeed, definitely watching this space for more. :)
Particularly, your relativising morpheme -n has caught my eye. The SAE thing to do would be to use a relative pronoun strategy (yawn, I know), and, after skimming WALS, I couldn't really find anything that quite fits your ACC->REL + gap strategy. It seems a bit sketchy, esp. since it's generally well-documented that subjects are more often relativised than objects.

(Also, you'll have to pardon me for this, but
The etymology of the relativized marker is probably the accusative
is a little... sloppy, isn't it? (Especially when making an a posteriori IE language... To each their own, though, and kudos for attempting something a little more out there!)

You may want to have a look at WALS's chapters 122 and 123, there's some nice typological and theoretical information there. Relativisation is written about quite a bit, so there should be no lack of literature.
User avatar
Omzinesý
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2444
Joined: Fri 27 Aug 2010, 07:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: Siglisc (Germanic lang) 4.0

Post by Omzinesý » Mon 12 Dec 2016, 21:42

Rosenkohl wrote:Very interesting indeed, definitely watching this space for more. :)
Particularly, your relativising morpheme -n has caught my eye. The SAE thing to do would be to use a relative pronoun strategy (yawn, I know), and, after skimming WALS, I couldn't really find anything that quite fits your ACC->REL + gap strategy. It seems a bit sketchy, esp. since it's generally well-documented that subjects are more often relativised than objects.
Thank you for your comment.
Every conlang must have something that doesn't quite fit the picture.
I guess you are right. Accusative isn't the most probable solution for its etymology. Maybe it's just the old gender marker that the definite article/personal pronoun has lost.

Swedish:
Jag såg hunden. 'I saw the dog.'
Jag såg den hund du tyckte om. 'I saw the dog you liked.'

Germanic languages quite often leave the relative pronoun out. It's just a small step to leave it out of clauses with the subject reference as well.
Rosenkohl wrote: (Also, you'll have to pardon me for this, but
The etymology of the relativized marker is probably the accusative
is a little... sloppy, isn't it? (Especially when making an a posteriori IE language... To each their own, though, and kudos for attempting something a little more out there!)

You may want to have a look at WALS's chapters 122 and 123, there's some nice typological and theoretical information there. Relativisation is written about quite a bit, so there should be no lack of literature.
I sometimes like to play a god and sometimes a descriptive linguist.
User avatar
Omzinesý
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2444
Joined: Fri 27 Aug 2010, 07:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: Siglisc (Germanic lang) 4.0

Post by Omzinesý » Mon 12 Dec 2016, 22:21

A short post:

mat 'food' (cognate of English meat)
met 'eat'
Edit: Met is by the way homonymic with 'would make': mak 'makes' - mat 'made' - met 'would make'
'Cooking' cannot be expressed by verb mak.
Not it anymore.
Edit: It is taken to a metaphoric use.
De kansa it my. 'The cancer is eating me.'
De firm it myi all geld.' 'The firm is spending all my money.'

So it means something like 'use, consume, spend, slowly destroy'
User avatar
Omzinesý
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2444
Joined: Fri 27 Aug 2010, 07:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: Siglisc (Germanic lang) 4.0

Post by Omzinesý » Wed 14 Dec 2016, 12:09

The infinite

The infinite -n is the only productive inflectional suffix in Siglisc.

Phonologically it's actually a clitic because it doesn't shorten the preceding vowel, like nasals usually do.
ga [ga:] 'goes', gan [ga:n] 'to go' instead of *[gan]

Syntactically it's though a suffix.
Ek meg [met]n an [slap]n. 'I'd like to eat and sleap.' instead of *Ek meg [met an slap]n.

Historically the infinite derives from three infinite verb forms: the Germanic infinitive (German seh-en 'to see'), the Germanic perfect participle of strong verbs (German ge-seh-en 'seen'), and Germanic present participle (German seh-ende 'seeing). When the prefix ge- was lost, the forms merged. Because the infinite is the only infinite verb form in Siglisc, I call it generally the infinite, isntead of the infinitive.

Syntactically they are the same form:
Ek [vehll an hau] rysn szu Amerika. 'I wanted and did travel to America.' lit. [wanted and have] travel(ed)

The past infinite

-n is quite cliticlike. So it can be added to simple past forms of strong verbs. That's common with ablaut verbs but questionable with k->t verbs. Weak verbs form the past infinite prefrastically (haun + the infinite).
kom 'comes' -> komn 'to come' - kam 'came' -> kamn 'to have come'
mak 'makes' -> makn 'to make' - mat 'made' -> ?matn 'to have made'

Hi mosz kamn red. 'He must have come already.'
Ek mosz haun sin hi red. 'I must have seen him already.'


Infinitive (complemental) use

Most verbs take the pure infinite
Ek kom otgan. 'I should leave.'
Ek kan sprekn siglisc. 'I can speak Siglisc.'
Ek sca skrynv en buk. 'I will write a book.'

Verbs of motion need preposition szu 'to'
Ek ja szu scemn. 'I went to swim.'
Ek vell szu scemn. 'I want to [go to] swim.'

Szu is also used to express purpose
Ek hau keubn en kak, szu makn dau loszi. 'I bought a cake, to make you happy.'
Ek hau naui geld szu it. 'I have no money to use.'

Durativity of action can be emphasized with preposition in 'in'.
Ek hau sin dau slapn. 'I saw you sleep.'
Ek hau sin dau in slapn. 'I have seen you sleeping.'
Edit: 'Is able to' is kan
'Is allowed to' is kan + in

Dau kan gyn him.
' You can walk home.'

Dau kan in gyn him.
'You are allowed to walk home.'
I think some kind of a 'from' preposition can also be used in some constructions.

Action nominal use

In principle the -n form of any verb can be used as an abstract noun, like English -ing or German-en. If the abstract noun of the verb in question is formed by other means, the -n form is rare in that use.
liv 'lives' lyv 'life'

The infinite can though take attributes
Tritn o catscin is insc frendi. 'Kicking of kittens is not nice.' Lit. Kicking of kittens
Brutal tritn o catscin 'brutal kicking of kittens'
The action nominal, being syntactically a noun, cannot have a direct object or by-agent.


Attributive use (participle?)
Siglisc does not have real adjectival participles. A action nominal can though be joined with a noun with preposition o 'of'. Their orientation and tense however depends of natural semantics, lexicalization, and context, so it's not very productive.
Cips o grilln 'grilled chips' Lit. chips of grilling


Compounds can also be formed:
Grilln-cips 'grill chips'
slapn-zyd 'sleeping time'


Converb (adverbial) use

I'm not sure how the finite should behave in those functions. I have two alternatives.
1. Like English -ing gerund. - simultaneous action
Writing my essay, I cannot go outdoors.

2. Like Swedish supine. That use would derive from the perfect participle. - anterior action
När jag skrivit min uppsats, kan jag gå ut. 'When I [have] written my essay, I can go outdoors.'
Last edited by Omzinesý on Fri 30 Dec 2016, 14:15, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
Omzinesý
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2444
Joined: Fri 27 Aug 2010, 07:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: Siglisc (Germanic lang) 4.0

Post by Omzinesý » Fri 23 Dec 2016, 23:15

Participle use

The infinite can also be used as a participle, i.e. a verbal adjective. Like adjectives in Siglisc always do, the infinite is positioned between its head noun and the article.
en lacn mid 'a laughing girl'

The infinite is a merger of both active present (e.g. killing) and passive past (killed) participles. So the orientation (if the referent of the head noun is the subject or the object) and relative time reference (if the action described by the participle is happening simultaneously or has happened anterior) is ambiguous. Orientation and tense can though often be seen from context and natural semantics.
en skryvn man 'a writing man'
en skrivn buk 'a written book'

A by-agent can also be added. Its preposition is of. (See that the genitive preposition is o, which is etymologically the same word but more reduced.) It also precedes the participle.
en of A. A. Milne skryvn buk 'a book written by A. A. Milne'

Other arguments can also be added.
en szu de heus gyn jonge 'a boy going to the town'
INDEF to DEF town going boy

a object can also be added. I'm though not sure if it should have a preposition. In the following example it doesn't.
en en buk lisn jonge 'a boy reading a book'
User avatar
Omzinesý
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2444
Joined: Fri 27 Aug 2010, 07:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: Siglisc (Germanic lang) 4.0

Post by Omzinesý » Sun 25 Dec 2016, 22:45

Omzinesý wrote:The passives

Siglisc has two passives
1. The dynamic passive, formed by sy (the subjunctive present of syn 'to be') in the present and hau syn (the indicative complex past of syn 'to be') in the past.
2. The static passive, formed by s(the present indicative of syn 'to be') in the present and fra (the indicative simple past of syn 'to be') in the past.
The are often called the sy-hau-syn passive and the s-fra passive, respectively.

De man sy caltn. 'The man is being killed.'~'The man gets killed.' Dynamic present
De man hau syn caltn 'The was beeing killed'~'The man got killed.' Dynamic past

De man s caltn. 'The man is killed (i.e. dead).' Static present
De man fra caltn. 'The man was killed (i.e. dead).' Static past

Passives are used much less in Siglish than in English. Their function is to demote the agent. An inanimate patient can be promoted to the preverbal topic position just by changing the word order and natural semantics tells what is the agent and what is the patient.
Si mag yse, 'She like ice ceream.'
Yse mag si. 'Ice cream is like by her.'

The only clear example of a passive with a by-agent is an animate patient being the topic, and so natural semantics not telling what does what.
De mid elsc de jonge. 'The girl loves the boy.'
De jonge sy elscn of de mid. 'The boy is loved by the girl.'
There is a static passive. It's formed by the auxiliary s 'is' fra 'was' fre 'would be' and the infinite form of the main verb. It nearly never has an explicit agent.

Ek s/fra/fre elscn. 'I am/was/would be loved.'

There isn't a real dynamic passive.
When the agent is not expressed, an impersonal 'man/men-passive' is used.

De man means 'the man'. It has even a stronger implication of male gender than man in English. Di men means 'people', which does not have any implication of gender. 'Male persons' is di man.
Anyway, man and men without article are used as impersonal subjects. Man has in implication of a single unknown subject while men implies people generally or several people. Man is best translated by you or one, while men is translated by the English passive or generic they.

Men elsc de mid. 'They love the girl. ~ The girl is loved.'
Man elsc de mid. 'You/one love(s) the girl.'

If there is a demoted agent, it's usually positioned between the auxiliary and the main verb. The construction: [NON-SUBJECT ARGUMENT] [AUXILIARY][AGENT][MAIN VERB] is used with many auxiliaries:
duhn - to focus the non-subject argument
any other verb* - to promote the non-subject argument to the topic

In that construction also the strong verbs form a periphrastic past. In active constructions, a NP can never appear between the auxiliary and the (first) main verb.

* sy is used as a place holder if there is no semantically meaningful auxiliary is needed, i.e. in the indicative present. The clauses below cannot maybe be analysed as true passives. The antecedent of the gap argument in a coordinated clause is still the agent.

De mid sy de jonge elscn. 'The girl is loved by the boy.'
De mid hau de jonge elscn. 'The girl was loved by the boy.'
De mid hau elscn de jonge. 'The girl (has) loved the boy.'

I see no reason why the agent losing man/men pronoun couldn't appear with the changed word order.
De mid sy men elscn. 'The girl is being loved.'
Last edited by Omzinesý on Mon 26 Dec 2016, 00:23, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Omzinesý
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2444
Joined: Fri 27 Aug 2010, 07:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: Siglisc (Germanic lang) 4.0

Post by Omzinesý » Mon 26 Dec 2016, 00:20

Allophony of /ŋ/

/ŋ/ doesn't appeal word-initially
Most /ŋ/s are historically /n/ + /g/. If a vowel follows, the /g/ still appears.

After /u/, /ŋ/ has allophone [ɲ]. That is explained so that vowels before a nasal and a plosive shorten and sort high vowel lower to mid. So the only way for /u/ + /ŋ/ to appear is dophtongization of */y:/ before /n/.
y:n -> ujn -> uɲ
ɲ in that context is just analysed an allophone of /ŋ/.

ʃø:n -> ʃy:n -> ʃujn -> [ʃuɲ] 'beautiful' <scung>
User avatar
Omzinesý
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2444
Joined: Fri 27 Aug 2010, 07:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: Siglisc (Germanic lang) 4.0

Post by Omzinesý » Mon 26 Dec 2016, 11:05

Omzinesý wrote:
Omzinesý wrote:The passives

Siglisc has two passives
1. The dynamic passive, formed by sy (the subjunctive present of syn 'to be') in the present and hau syn (the indicative complex past of syn 'to be') in the past.
2. The static passive, formed by s(the present indicative of syn 'to be') in the present and fra (the indicative simple past of syn 'to be') in the past.
The are often called the sy-hau-syn passive and the s-fra passive, respectively.

De man sy caltn. 'The man is being killed.'~'The man gets killed.' Dynamic present
De man hau syn caltn 'The was beeing killed'~'The man got killed.' Dynamic past

De man s caltn. 'The man is killed (i.e. dead).' Static present
De man fra caltn. 'The man was killed (i.e. dead).' Static past

Passives are used much less in Siglish than in English. Their function is to demote the agent. An inanimate patient can be promoted to the preverbal topic position just by changing the word order and natural semantics tells what is the agent and what is the patient.
Si mag yse, 'She like ice ceream.'
Yse mag si. 'Ice cream is like by her.'

The only clear example of a passive with a by-agent is an animate patient being the topic, and so natural semantics not telling what does what.
De mid elsc de jonge. 'The girl loves the boy.'
De jonge sy elscn of de mid. 'The boy is loved by the girl.'
There is a static passive. It's formed by the auxiliary s 'is' fra 'was' fre 'would be' and the infinite form of the main verb. It nearly never has an explicit agent.

Ek s/fra/fre elscn. 'I am/was/would be loved.'

There isn't a real dynamic passive.
When the agent is not expressed, an impersonal 'man/men-passive' is used.

De man means 'the man'. It has even a stronger implication of male gender than man in English. Di men means 'people', which does not have any implication of gender. 'Male persons' is di man.
Anyway, man and men without article are used as impersonal subjects. Man has in implication of a single unknown subject while men implies people generally or several people. Man is best translated by you or one, while men is translated by the English passive or generic they.

Men elsc de mid. 'They love the girl. ~ The girl is loved.'
Man elsc de mid. 'You/one love(s) the girl.'

If there is a demoted agent, it's usually positioned between the auxiliary and the main verb. The construction: [NON-SUBJECT ARGUMENT] [AUXILIARY][AGENT][MAIN VERB] is used with many auxiliaries:
duhn - to focus the non-subject argument
any other verb* - to promote the non-subject argument to the topic

In that construction also the strong verbs form a periphrastic past. In active constructions, a NP can never appear between the auxiliary and the (first) main verb.

* sy is used as a place holder if there is no semantically meaningful auxiliary is needed, i.e. in the indicative present. The clauses below cannot maybe be analysed as true passives. The antecedent of the gap argument in a coordinated clause is still the agent.

De mid sy de jonge elscn. 'The girl is loved by the boy.'
De mid hau de jonge elscn. 'The girl was loved by the boy.'
De mid hau elscn de jonge. 'The girl (has) loved the boy.'

I see no reason why the agent losing man/men pronoun couldn't appear with the changed word order.
De mid sy men elscn. 'The girl is being loved.'
I realized that construction cannot be asud with any auxiliary.

Ek well dau skryvn. 'I want you to write.' not 'You want to write me.'
User avatar
Omzinesý
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2444
Joined: Fri 27 Aug 2010, 07:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: Siglisc (Germanic lang) 4.0

Post by Omzinesý » Thu 29 Dec 2016, 00:14

A short post concerning the infinite

It is negated by prefix un- (related to English un-).

Ek vell ungan szu skuhl.
'I want not to go to school.'

de my unelscn man
'the man not loving me'


Finite clauses are negated by particle insc (related to German nicht).

Ek vell insc gan szu skuhl.
'I don't want to go to school.'

den man elsc my incs
'the man who doesn't love me'
User avatar
Omzinesý
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2444
Joined: Fri 27 Aug 2010, 07:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: Siglisc (Germanic lang) 4.0

Post by Omzinesý » Thu 29 Dec 2016, 12:56

Message will be extended.
I at the Germanic Translation comparison wrote:Interesting.
I'll translate some of the easiest into Siglisc.

5. In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
In de begin mat God de himle an de grund.

And the earth was formless and empty, and darkness was upon the face of the deep.
An de grund fra haudelos an ler an dunkle dek di dipe.

5. And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower that the sons of Adam had built.
An d-e Here hau nidr-i-n sy szu si-n d-i-n heus an trom d-i son o Adam ha beug-n.
And DEF-SG lord have.PRS down-V-INF REFL to see-INF DEF-PL-RELATIVIZED town and tower DEF-PL son of adam have.PST build-INF

7. Colourless green ideas sleep furiously.
Frablos, grung tenke slap vuci.
I'll translate some sentences and ponder how the words and syntax are built.

7. Colourless green ideas sleep furiously.
Frablus, grung tenke slap vuci.
[fɾablʊs gɾʉɲ te̞nkɛ slap vʊ̈t͡ɕi]

- grung derives from gry:n -> grujn -> gruɲ
- tenke is actually unspecified concerning number 'thought'. To make it plural some kind of an article would be needed: nag 'some', di 'the'.
vuci derives from *vy:tig -> vujtig -> vuɕi


13. My hand is in warm water.
Siglisc: Mye han s in vram vata.
[maj:e̞ han s ɪn vɾam vadʌ]

- Voiced plosives are lost after nasals.
- Vowels before coda nasals are laways short.
- Metathesis or /r/ CVrV -> CrVC
- Word-final unstressed /er/ becomes [ʌ], phonemically apparently /a/.

While she was reading, he came in.
Unda si lis, hau hi inkomn
unda si lis, hau hi in-kom-n
while she read, have he in-come-INF

- Subordinate clauses of simultaneous time can use the present form though the main clause was in the past.
- As usual in Germanic, the subordinate clause is seen as the first constituent and the V2 verb follows it.
- If there is no explicit object of the directional particle/preposition, it's a preverb.
Last edited by Omzinesý on Fri 30 Dec 2016, 11:54, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Omzinesý
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2444
Joined: Fri 27 Aug 2010, 07:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: Siglisc (Germanic lang) 4.0

Post by Omzinesý » Thu 29 Dec 2016, 15:24

Omzinesý wrote:I'm considering adding a new phoneme namely ʟ. It generally appears as a word-final allophone of l in Germanic languages. j + l, which derives from front rounded vowels + l, becomes one phoneme ʎ which is later fronted to l which is the allophone of /l/ word-initially. So both [l]s are interpreted as allophones of one consonant, and ʟ is an independent phoneme, which just doesn't appear word-initially.

There are minimal pairs like <full> [fuʟ] 'fool' and <ful> [ful] 'feel' < fujl < fyl.
*ld also yields /l/.
vel /vel/ < veld 'wild'
vell /veʟ/ 'want'

/l/ also appears before dentals.
zelt 'tent'
User avatar
Omzinesý
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2444
Joined: Fri 27 Aug 2010, 07:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: Siglisc (Germanic lang) 4.0

Post by Omzinesý » Fri 30 Dec 2016, 15:05

A random idea - kinship pronouns

The number of possessive pronouns is limited to mye/i, daue/i, onse/i, jaue/i, sye/i, vye/i 'whose'.
Some kinship terms can however be used as possessive pronouns
mudre/i 'mother's'
fadre/i 'father's'
brude/i 'brother's'
susctre/i 'sister's'

There are words aunt and onkle but they are rarely used.
modre/i brud 'mother's brother(s)', modre/i susc 'mother's sister' are usually used.

Another possessive pronoun cannot be added. So 'my uncle' would be mudre brud o my.
User avatar
Omzinesý
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2444
Joined: Fri 27 Aug 2010, 07:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: Siglisc (Germanic lang) 4.0

Post by Omzinesý » Fri 30 Dec 2016, 23:37

Tense

Tense in Siglisc is a bit tricky system, because the strong verbs have four tenses – present, simple past, complex past, and pluperfect – while the weak verbs only have three tenses – present, complex past, and pluperfect. The functions of the simple past of the strong verbs are divided between the present and the complex past of the weak verbs.

Main clauses


General facts are expressed by the present of both verb types.

(1) De ade ga ron de sun. ‘The globe goes around the sun.’


Present actions are expressed by the present.
(2) Ek ga szu shuhl. ‘I’m going to school.’


Future can be expressed with the present or auxiliary sca (cognate to English shall).

(3a) Ek muc mye fren morgi. ~ (3b) Ek sca mucn mye fren morgi. ‘I (will) meet my friend tomorrow.’


In narratives, the present is used of weak verbs but the simple past of strong verbs. Finn ‘be there’ in (4a) is a strong verb and fan its simple past form, while himin in (4b) is a weak verb and himi its present form.

(4a) En zyt fan en giant. ’Once upon a time there was a giant.’
(4b) De giant himi in en grud haus. ‘The giant lived in a big house.’


Past reference in a normal conversation is expressed by the simple past (ja in (5) being the simple past of verb gan ‘go’) of the strong verbs and the complex past of the weak verbs (hau gyn in (6) being the complex past of verb gyn ‘walk’). Relation to the present is not important. Simple past verbs can be used in the same context with present as well, as fra ‘is’ ~ has been in (7).

(5) Gesza ja ek szu kaubre. ’Yeaterday I went to the shop.’
(6) Gesza hau ek gyn szu kaubre. ’Yeaterday I walked to the shop.’
(7) Ek si da her fra tiv. ‘I see that there has been thieves here.’


The complex past is however used of all verbs if the object should be promoted to the clause-initial topic position and there are no modal auxiliaries, as in (8).

(8) Yse hau ek magn. ‘I liked ice cream.’


The pluperfect is used of all verbs when something is described prior to the past.

(9) Ek ha abitn had an nau ha ek helg. ‘I had worked hard and now I had holiday.’


Subordinate Clauses

When simultaneous event is expressed in the subordinate clause and the main clause is present, the tense of the subordinate clause is present, as well. If the main clause is in the past, the simultaneous subordinate clause has the simple past of strong verbs but the present of weak verbs.

Event anterior to a present main clause are expressed by the complex past of all verbs, and events anterior to the main clause in the past are expressed by the pluperfect.


To summarize

Simple past of strong verbs; present of weak verbs
- Narratives
- Subordinate clauses with simultaneous reference in the past

Simple past of strong verbs; complex past of weka verbs
- Past reference in a conversation

Complex past of all verbs
- Subordinate clauses anterior to a main clause in the present
- Object promoting construction of transitive clauses
User avatar
Omzinesý
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2444
Joined: Fri 27 Aug 2010, 07:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: Siglisc (Germanic lang) 4.0

Post by Omzinesý » Mon 16 Jan 2017, 12:12

A sort post

There is pronoun all, which has:

Uncountable form: all
Hi hau drinkn all vata. 'He drank all water.'

Singular form: alle
Hi hau trefn alle szudent. 'He met every student.' (maybe separately)

Plural form: alli
Hi hau trefn alli szudent. 'He met all stydents.' (maybe together)
User avatar
Omzinesý
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2444
Joined: Fri 27 Aug 2010, 07:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: Siglisc (Germanic lang) 4.0

Post by Omzinesý » Tue 17 Jan 2017, 19:34

Prepositions

o (before consonants) of (before vowels) - 'of' genitive preposition. Siglisc doesn't have the s-genitive of germanic languages, so o/of is the only solution

of 'by' agent preposition
En of de autre skrivn buk 'a book written by the author'

in - 'in' there is no preposition for unspecific location, so English at is also translated with in

op - 'on' 'on the surface of'

szu - 'to' goal preposition - sporadically lenited from zu

aut 'from'

fuj 'for'

I'm still considering the distribution of szu and fuj between recipient/beneficient constructions.
User avatar
Omzinesý
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2444
Joined: Fri 27 Aug 2010, 07:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: Siglisc (Germanic lang) 4.0

Post by Omzinesý » Tue 17 Jan 2017, 20:39

How should I express denominal PPs? 1 looks the most natural - all Germanic languages have it - but 2 and 3 are more interesting.

1. a PP following its head just like in English. The genitive preposition o behaves that way.
en man in de haus 'a man in the house'

2. PP precedes its head just alike an adjective
en in de haus man 'a man in the house'

3. PP followes its head but the preposition is different from that of adverbial PPs. Historically it derives from genitive o and the preposition in question
en man oin de haus 'a man in the house'
User avatar
All4Ɇn
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1775
Joined: Sat 01 Mar 2014, 07:19

Re: Siglisc (Germanic lang) 4.0

Post by All4Ɇn » Tue 17 Jan 2017, 22:23

Of course 1 is the most realistic but personally I quite like the look of 2
Post Reply