==
My first issue is whether I should introduce a new system of so called null-object descriptives. These are 9 suffixes added to verb stems to give further information about the object of a verb (the pronoun form has no surface form, which is why it is called null-object descriptives). Additionally, the suffixes can be used on the copula to further describe there-existential phrases/verbs. The suffixes describe form or shape of the object or copula-argument.
For example, the suffix -aht- refers to large and formless, scattered, enclosed, contained, dead or bound/wrapped objects. Example;
kiggahtaįa on, hokatatievlia de suvo
[ˈcʰik:ahtɑjãɔ̃ hɔkɑtɑˈtiel:ia de ˈsuvɔ]
Ø-ki<gg>-aht-a-įa-Ø on hoka-ta-Ø-tievl-i-ade suvo-Ø
tr-pick.up.past-ahta-ass.concl.tr-3p.pat.pl-3p.act.ag.sg on down-3p.act.unag.sg-tr-miss-past-ass.cocnl.tr de berry-dat
‘X dropped the berries down and picked them up (from being scattered/into a container/gathered together)’
įasuma kedahta kepsi-ho gaito
[ˈjɑsuma ˈcʰedahta ˈcʰɛp:sihɔ ˈgɑido]
įasuma-Ø ked-aht-a kepsi-Ø–ho g-a-ito-Ø
tanned.skin-act carry-aht-tr mushroom-dat-3p.ani.poss cop.past-ass-iness.rel-3p.act.ag.sg
‘the skin in which X carried mushrooms (as a bag)’
nega on elepri kymivma, nubmahtaįa įu
[ˈnegãɔ̃ ˈelɛpχi ˈcʰymim:a ˈnʊʔpmahtɑjaju]
Ø-n<eg>-a-Ø on eleb-ri kymin-ma, Ø-nu<bm>-aht-a-įa-Ø įu
tr-see.past-ass.concl.tr-3p.act.ag on flower-gen pretty-gen, tr-pick.past-aht-ass.concl.tr-3p.pat.pl-3p.act.ag.sg įu
‘X saw pretty flowers and picked them (into a bouqet)’
I like that I've kept these to a very low number (9) and how it adds info about the object, but I'm not sure whether or not it's worth having this extra thing in Siųa.
What do you think?