SBäk e Dlor

[Omzinesý]

I decide that verb pairs like

find - look for
see - look/watch
hear - listen

will be expressed with Antipassive.

Tlee nábek ka.
'I'm looking for you.'

Tlee bék ka.
'I found you.'

---

I also decided that 'acorn' will be lâm e krom 'egg of tree'.

[Omzinesý]

Verb morphology

This post will not be the final or complete description.

Dnor morphology is extremely simple. The root is CV(C) and all but one prefixes are CV-. The Middle voice prefix is just s-. Compounding does not happen and all verbs have thus just one root.

The verb template is

-4/-3 Middle voice /Applicative (Their order can vary, so they can both appear in the same slots.)
-2 Instrumental causative
-1 Associated motion
0 The root

I think I have to reconsider the order of the prefixes. Now that I have both stressed "verby" field prefixes and unstressed "nouny" field prefixes (earlier caller instrumental prefixes), I have to decide if both appear in the same slot, which should be the first one to be able to be unstressed, or in tow distinct slots.

---

I also decided that nel will be 'to like', and its middle voice form snel will be 'to want', i.e. to 'to like as your own'.

[Omzinesý]

I should go to motion verbs.
Something preliminary:

Dlor motion verbs code very much.

Applicative prepositions do not affect them. They are used like applicatives are used with any verb.

Associated motion prefixes behave differently with motion verbs.
While jo- usually means 'to came and V', with motion verbs, it means 'to come V-ing'. Most motion verbs do not code goal without it.

Field prefixes express manner of motion. ba-V 'to verb with a vehicle'.

[Omzinesý]

I got stuck with word 'jump' in Cat and fish story.
Most of verb derivation is based on body parts in Dlor. It could well be something like 'leg-jump' but the root would still be the same.
'Leg-fly' maybe?

[Omzinesý]

How to derives verbs 'to be hungry' from 'to eat'? 'to mind-eat' maybe?

[thethief3]

How to derives verbs 'to be hungry' from 'to eat'? 'to mind-eat' maybe?

want+eat seems good

[Omzinesý]

How to derives verbs 'to be hungry' from 'to eat'? 'to mind-eat' maybe?

want+eat seems good

'want to eat' is a bit different. And verbs (or basically anything) cannot be compounded in Dlor.

[Omzinesý]

I started translating the Machiavelli quote (''Men desire novelty to such an extent that those who are doing well wish for change as much as those who are doing badly.') and found that I have no way to say 'novelty'. Ra jén 'COMPL is.new' would translate 'Men desire that they are new'.

[Omzinesý]

Motion verbs

Kâj 'to go' (on the ground)
Sab 'to fly'
Bées 'to swim'
Mût 'to go fast'
Bïr 'to go slowly'
Nub 'to follow'

The typical lexical prefixes that can be attached to them are:
ba- 'by a vehicle'
tlu- 'by foot'

Directional prefixes are also often attached to them. Without them, they mean 'to go about', 'to swim about' ...
Jo- 'to arrive'
Be- 'to leave'

Tlee jo-ba-nub lu s-lûrud.
SG1 ARRIVE-VEHICLE-move.fast at DEF-towm.
'I drove to the town fast.'

Edit: I'm stillthinking if the directional prefixes should have varians coding if you arrive to the deictic center or somewhere else.

[Omzinesý]

I started translating the Machiavelli quote (''Men desire novelty to such an extent that those who are doing well wish for change as much as those who are doing badly.') and found that I have no way to say 'novelty'. Ra jén 'COMPL is.new' would translate 'Men desire that they are new'.

I decided that ra is the normal complementizer and sra is a kind of nominalizer. Clause-externally sra behaves like a noun. It can take prepositions and follow the verb. Ra cannot do that. A subordinate clause starting with ra has the same subject as the head clause unless another subject NP is present. The subject of sra can be generic, thus sra jén can be translated 'novelty'.

Etymologically s- is the third person personal / demonstrative pronoun.

[Omzinesý]

ATM my LaTex document of Dlor grammar has 33 subordinate conjunctions. One dimension is role: complement/relative, adverbial, some kind of contrast. The second one is tense: simultaneous, anterior, posterior. The third one is mood: factual, non-factual, counterfactual.

A natural system is not that symmetric. I should probably drop some of them and make some of them compositional.

[Omzinesý]

Verb morphology

This post will not be the final or complete description.

Dnor morphology is extremely simple. The root is CV(C) and all but one prefixes are CV-. The Middle voice prefix is just s-. Compounding does not happen and all verbs have thus just one root.

The verb template is

-4/-3 Middle voice /Applicative (Their order can vary, so they can both appear in the same slots.)
-2 Instrumental causative
-1 Associated motion
0 The root

I think I have to reconsider the order of the prefixes. Now that I have both stressed "verby" field prefixes and unstressed "nouny" field prefixes (earlier caller instrumental prefixes), I have to decide if both appear in the same slot, which should be the first one to be able to be unstressed, or in tow distinct slots.

It must be horrible to try to follow my messy thread.

So verbs have three syllabic prefixes (and the non-syllabic middle voice prefix).
- lexical prefix
- applicative/nominalizer
- directional prefix

Lexical prefixes and applicatives can be added to nominal stems to derive verbs too. (Technically, they could be homonymic prefixes.)



Stress lies on the first syllable that can have it.

Because the lexical prefix (usually deriving from a body part) is the only one that can and cannot have a stress (with a semantic distinction), it should be the first prefix.

I think the morphemic order can well be
-3 lexical prefixe (body part)
-2 directional
-1 applicative
0 root

If an applicative prefix is used as a derivational prefix (deriving verbs from nouns) a new applicative cannot be added.
If a lexical prefix is used as a derivational prefix (deriving verbs from nouns) a new lexical prefix can be added. The derivational prefix precedes the other prefixes.

Bo-ku-ses
HAND-MOUTH-bread
'to eat bread with hands'

Ku derives a verb from the noun 'to eat N'. Only bo is a real lexical instrumental prefix here.

[Visions1]

Maybe reorganize what you have and compile it into a PDF? That would make for not only organization, but the beginnings of a proper ref. grammar.

[Omzinesý]

Maybe reorganize what you have and compile it into a PDF? That would make for not only organization, but the beginnings of a proper ref. grammar.

I do have one but, you know, you don't write it from the beginning to the end. There are many holes too. It's far from publishable.

[Visions1]

It doesn't need to publishable - is anything we make here? So long as it doesn't dampen you from posting and explaining this to us on the forum, it might be able to help.

[Omzinesý]

Maybe Dlor does not need a distinct prefix for body parts as instruments and objects.

If the object is the subject's own body part, adding a middlevoice marker is enough.
But if it is the object's body part?

[Omzinesý]

sek 'to be dead'

ssek 'to die' (middle voice makes statives inchoatives)

bosek 'to kill with hands' (an instrumental prefix adds a causative meaning to an (unaccusative) intransitive verb)

bossek 'one's hand becomes paralyzed' (adding an instrumental prefix to a middle voice form expresses the body part that undergoes the change of state)

sbosek 'to kill oneself with hands', 'to get killed with hands'


nëer 'to bake, to massage'
böneer 'to bake/massage with hands'
snëer 'to get baked/massaged'
mösneer 'one's body/back gets massaged'

In principle, mösneer cannot be transitivized, but adding an adjunct agent does not differ much from the normal transitive construction.
Mösneer na tlee. 'I'm massaging his/her body/back.'