zompist bboard

Thought I'd put up another snippet of Rawàng Ata: this time, how it deals with possession. It'll be a series of three posts, I think. And, as always, it's a work in process.

Part one: http://vacuouswastrel.wordpress.com/201 ... ang-ata-i/

update: http://vacuouswastrel.wordpress.com/201 ... ng-ata-ii/

Now dealing with indirect possession.

Do feel free to comment.

You probably won't like this question, but do you have links to any of the natlang resources that you drew on? Not because I'm claiming it's implausible, but because I want to see them (preferably PDFs if there are any...)

As for your own work, I think it's awesome, especially the special male/female-line dependent forms.

This was unbelievably hard to find.

Cathbad wrote:You probably won't like this question, but do you have links to any of the natlang resources that you drew on? Not because I'm claiming it's implausible, but because I want to see them (preferably PDFs if there are any...)

As for your own work, I think it's awesome, especially the special male/female-line dependent forms.

Thanks.

No, I don't have any links. However, they shouldn't be to find, since I'm fairly rudimentary in my own searching skills.

This sort of possessive system is most associated with the Pacific, and to a lesser extent with the Americas (in the Pacific, possessive classifiers are mostly selected by function, whereas in the Americas, they're based more on the nature and origin of the property right). Most Oceanic languages show some trace of the direct/indirect distinction, and many have multiple possessive classifiers - in particular, Micronesian languages tend to have very large classifier inventories (as in dozens of them - some languages have arguably open classifier inventories), but some Polynesian languages have gone the same way as well (eg iaai).

Iirc, I first learnt about possessive classifiers from "The Oceanic Languages", (Lynch et al). You can probably find further matter yourself on google.

Salmoneus wrote:

Cathbad wrote:You probably won't like this question, but do you have links to any of the natlang resources that you drew on? Not because I'm claiming it's implausible, but because I want to see them (preferably PDFs if there are any...)

As for your own work, I think it's awesome, especially the special male/female-line dependent forms.

Thanks.

No, I don't have any links. However, they shouldn't be to find, since I'm fairly rudimentary in my own searching skills.

This sort of possessive system is most associated with the Pacific, and to a lesser extent with the Americas (in the Pacific, possessive classifiers are mostly selected by function, whereas in the Americas, they're based more on the nature and origin of the property right). Most Oceanic languages show some trace of the direct/indirect distinction, and many have multiple possessive classifiers - in particular, Micronesian languages tend to have very large classifier inventories (as in dozens of them - some languages have arguably open classifier inventories), but some Polynesian languages have gone the same way as well (eg iaai).

Iirc, I first learnt about possessive classifiers from "The Oceanic Languages", (Lynch et al). You can probably find further matter yourself on google.

OK, thanks! I just found the entire system extremely unique - i.e. also with further conlanging potential At least I know where to look for now.

Just to mention that I posted the third and final little section some time ago to wrap up the loose ends.

http://vacuouswastrel.wordpress.com/201 ... g-ata-iii/

Salmoneus wrote:Now dealing with indirect possession.

I really like it!
I'd known about possessive classifiers for a while, but I'd not known details of either the Oceanic or the American systems.
I imagine the variety and complexity would make it hard to memorize.
The interaction with something like evidentiality -- "first-hand hearsay" (from the owner) vs. "second-or-later-hand hearsay" -- is quite interesting; is that also reflected in some RL natlang(s)?
The way the property was achieved might be something I'd want to adopt into my own conlang(s) since some of my concultures have several different kinds of inheritance (among them: oldest son, oldest daughter, youngest son, youngest daughter).

Salmoneus wrote:Just to mention that I posted the third and final little section some time ago to wrap up the loose ends.

It would seem to me that the second-most-popular kind of "dualism" -- or at least another popular kind -- might have the Topic be the Possessum and the subject of the Comment be the Possessor.
Does that make sense, and is it true of your conlang?

TomHChappell wrote:

Salmoneus wrote:Now dealing with indirect possession.

I really like it!

Thank you.

I'd known about possessive classifiers for a while, but I'd not known details of either the Oceanic or the American systems.
I imagine the variety and complexity would make it hard to memorize.

True - and I imagine that denigrated 'dialects' have simplified it all to a greater or lesser degree. but sometimes complexity and difficulty are considered assets - mastering all the classifiers shows a well-spoken and well-brought-up individual.
Also, it's worth bearing in mind that many other parts of Rawàng Ata are very simple compared to European languages.

The interaction with something like evidentiality -- "first-hand hearsay" (from the owner) vs. "second-or-later-hand hearsay" -- is quite interesting; is that also reflected in some RL natlang(s)?

It is indeed!

The way the property was achieved might be something I'd want to adopt into my own conlang(s) since some of my concultures have several different kinds of inheritance (among them: oldest son, oldest daughter, youngest son, youngest daughter).

Salmoneus wrote:Just to mention that I posted the third and final little section some time ago to wrap up the loose ends.

It would seem to me that the second-most-popular kind of "dualism" -- or at least another popular kind -- might have the Topic be the Possessum and the subject of the Comment be the Possessor.
Does that make sense, and is it true of your conlang?

I see what you mean. My initial thought is that it doesn't happen in Rawàng Ata, but I can't really think of any good reason why not. I'll have to think about it more.