zompist bboard

WE ARE MOVING - see Ephemera
It is currently Sun Dec 09, 2018 7:28 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 98 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 12:15 am 
Smeric
Smeric
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 1:55 am
Posts: 1542
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia / Colombie Britannique, Canada
How come I don't see glossed natlangs in these threads that often? Would be nice to see some glossed Welsh and whatnot.

Arabic:

رأيت البيت الذي بناه جاك.‏
/ra?ajtu l-bayt-a llaDi: bana:-hu dZa:k/
see.PERF.1SG DEF-house-DEF.ACC REL build.PERF.3SGM[Jack]-3SGM[house] Jack.NOM
'I saw the house that Jack built.' (baytun 'house' has masculine gender)

أعلم أن جاك بنى ذلك البيت.‏
/?a?\lamu ?an:a dZa:k bana: Da:lika l-bajt-a/
know.IMPERF.1SG SUB Jack.ACC build.PERF.3SGM[Jack] that DEF-house-DEF.ACC
'I know that Jack built that house.'

رأيت البيت حيث ولد جاك.‏
/ra?ajtu l-bajt-a X\ajTu wulida dZa:k/
see.PERF.1SG DEF-house-DEF.ACC where bear.PASS.3SGM[Jack] Jack.NOM
رأيت البيت الذي ولد جاك فيه.‏
/ra?ajtu l-bajt-a X\ajTu wulida dZa:k fi:-hi/
see.PERF.1SG DEF-house-DEF.ACC REL bear.PASS.3SGM[Jack] Jack.NOM in-him[house]
'I saw the house where Jack was born.' (The second one is more like "...the house that Jack was born in".)

أعلم أنك تعلمه.‏
/?a?\lamu ?anna-ka ta?\lamu-hu/
know.IMPERF.1SG SUB-2SG know.IMPERF.2SG-3SG
'I know that you know.'

أعلم ما تعلم/تعلمه.‏
/?a?\lamu ma: ta?\lamu-(hu)/
know.IMPERF.1SG what know.IMPERF.2SG-(3SG)
'I know what you know.' (If the relative pronoun "what" is an object of the verb or a preposition, the anaphoric pronoun is optional.)

I don't think Arabic is typologically that interesting here. Perhaps something about anaphoric pronouns ("I saw the house that Jack built {it}", "...the house that Jack was born in {it}"), but not really.
finlay wrote:
Guitarplayer wrote:
Imralu wrote:
I'm not a native speaker of German, but I'm positive that it's:

TBH I wasn't really sure what the OP was aiming at. I would've translated "I know that you know" as Ich weiß, dass du es weißt 'I know that you know it' first, but then, since this is about relative clauses, I thought it was supposed to be the example for a headless relative clause and maybe idiomatic for 'I know that which you know', which is why I translated it as Ich weiß, was du weißt 'I know what you know'.

It's not idiomatic in English.
It's not idiomatic but it's grammatically correct. In formal contexts I see "that which" used just like "what..." all the time at least...

Here's a couple examples from The Guardian:

"There have been controversies, not least that which befell online giant Absolute Poker" (September 5th, 2011; "that which" is the subject of "befell")

"This raises an obvious question: do these epic photographs deliver that which they capture?" (July 1st, 2011; "that which" is the direct object of "capture")

_________________
ZBB Conlang Index (check first post)


Last edited by Ser on Tue Oct 18, 2011 2:32 am, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 12:57 am 
Avisaru
Avisaru
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 9:33 pm
Posts: 306
Location: オデュッセウスの家
I saw the house that Jack built.
我看到傑克蓋的房子。
wǒ kàn dào jiékè gài de fángzi
1s see done Jack construct GEN house



I know that Jack built that house.
我知道傑克蓋了那間房子。
wǒ zhīdào jiékè gàile nà jiān fángzi
1s know Jack construct-PERF that COUNTER house


The complementizer clause would be more natural in the passive:
我知道那間房子是傑克蓋的。
wǒ zhīdào nà jiān fángzi shì jiékè gài de
1s know that COUNTER house be Jack construct GEN



I saw the house where Jack was born.
我看到傑克出生的房子。
wǒ kàn dào jiékè chūshēng de fángzi
1s see done Jack be_born GEN house



I know that you know.
我知道你知道。
wǒ zhīdào nǐ zhīdào
1s know 2s know

_________________
axhiuk.

看蝦米


Last edited by treskro on Tue Oct 18, 2011 12:59 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 12:59 am 
Sanci
Sanci

Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2011 1:28 am
Posts: 74
Location: Katy, Texas
Serafín wrote:
How come I don't see glossed natlangs in these threads that often? Would be nice to see some glossed Welsh and whatnot.


Ooh, I agree. It'd be nice to see how other natlangs do it, not to mention to see the connection between one's conlang and the natlang of their choice... (even though this thread is technically in Conlangery & Conworlds).

Czech:

I saw the house that Jack built.
    Uviděl jsem dům, který Honza vybudoval.
    [ˈuvɪɟɛl (j)sɛm duːm ˈktɛɾiː ˈɦonza ˈvɪbudoval]
    u-vidě-l jsem dům kter-ý Honza vy-budova-l
    PFV.see-PST.PTCP.MASC be-1.SG house-ACC.SG which-ACC.SG-MASC.INAN Jack-NOM.SG PFV.build-PST.PTCP.MASC
    "Seen I am house, which Jack built."

I know that Jack built that house.
    Vím, že Honza vybudoval ten dům.
    [viːm ʒɛ ˈɦonza ˈvɪbudoval tɛn duːm]
    ví-m že Honza vy-budova-l ten dům
    know-1.SG that Jack PFV-build-PST.PTCP.MASC this/that-ACC.SG-MASC.INAN house-ACC.SG
    "I know that Jack built that house."

I saw the house where Jack was born.
    Uviděl jsem dům, kde se narodil Honza.
    [ˈˈuvɪɟɛl (j)sɛm duːm ɡdɛ sɛ ˈnaɾoɟɪl ˈɦonza]
    u-vidě-l jsem dům gde se na-rodi-l Honza
    PFV.see-PST.PTCP-MASC be-1.SG where REFL-ACC PFV.be.born-PST.PTCP.MASC Jack-NOM.SG
    "I saw the house where himself bore Jack."

I know that you know.
    Vím, že víš.
    [viːm ʒɛ viːʃ]
    ví-m že ví-š
    know-1.SG that know-2.SG
    "I know that you know."

Yeah. Czech and Adwan bear no similarities -_-

_________________
crygfhámg


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 4:41 am 
Avisaru
Avisaru

Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 3:17 pm
Posts: 880
Location: Llundain
I saw the house that Jack built.
I know that Jack built that house.
I saw the house where Jack was born.
[/quote]
Also, I know that you know, since that's what started it.

Gwelais i'r tŷ a adeiladodd Jac.
gwel-ais i'r tŷ a adeilad-odd Jac
see-PRET.1sg 1sg DEF house REL build-PRET.3sg Jack
I saw the house that Jack built.

Gwn i yr adeiladodd Jac y tŷ hwnnw.
gwn i yr adeilad-odd Jac y tŷ hwnnw
know.PRES.1sg 1sg that build-3sg.PRET Jac DEF house that
I know that Jack built that house.

If Jack requires more emphasis:

Gwn i mai Jac a adeiladodd y tŷ hwnnw.
gwn i mai Jac a adeilad-odd y tŷ hwnnw
know.PRES.1sg 1sg that.EMPH Jack rel build-3sg.PRET DEF house that
I know that Jack built that house.

Gwelais i'r tŷ lle y ganwyd Jac.
Gwel-ais i'r tŷ lle y gan-wyd Jac
see-1sg 1sg DEF house where REL give_birth-PRET.0sg Jack
I saw the house where Jack was born.

Gwn i fy mod yn gwybod.
gwn i fy mod yn gwybod
know.PRES.1sg 1sg 1sg.POSS poss/be PRED know.VERBNOUN
I know that I know (it).

Welsh has two main relativisers, a and y, both preverbal particles. A subject of a verb takes a, as does an object of a simple (i.e. conjugated) verb. y deals with relations which were historically non-core: genitives, etc, and typically requires a resumptive pronoun. This includes the objects of periphrastic constructions, since these were originally in the genitive. A causes mutation, y doesn't. So:

Y dyn a welais i.
Y dyn a wel-ais i
DEF man REL REL/see-PRET.1sg 1sg
The man I saw.

Y dyn a welodd i.
Y dyn a wel-odd i
DEF man REL REL/see-PRET.3sg 1sg
The man that saw me.

Y dyn y gwnes i'w weld.
Y dyn y gwn-es i ei wel-d
DEF man REL do-PRET.1sg 1sg 3sg.POSS MUT/see-VERBNOUN
The man I saw.

Y dyn yr o'n ni'n siarad amdano fo.
Y dyn yr o-n ni yn siarad-ø am-dano fo
DEF man REL be.IMP.1pl 1pl PRED speak-VERBNOUN about-3sg.MASC
The man we were talking about.

This is the typical fronting strategy for emphasis: y dyn yr o'n ni'n siarad amdano fo can also be interpreted as 'we were talking about the man' and also for wh-movement:

Beth a welaist ti?
Beth a wel-aist ti?
what REL REL/see-2sg 2sg
What did you see?

Both a and y are typically elided in conversation, however, and confusion between them goes all the way back to Middle Welsh, as might be expected. Both can be negated with the equivalent preverbal particle na, which causes mutation:

Y dyn nad o'n ni'n siarad amdano fo.
Y dyn nad o-n ni yn siarad-ø am-dano fo
DEF man NEG.REL be.IMP.1pl 1pl PRED speak-VERBNOUN about-3sg.MASC
The man we weren't talking about.

Y dyn na welodd i.
Y dyn na wel-odd i
DEF man NEG.REL REL/see-PRET.3sg 1sg
The man that didn't see me.

Note also that bod, 'to be', has a special form which replaces the ungrammatical *a mae when its subject is fronted:

Y dyn sydd yn fy nabod i.
Y dyn sydd yn fy nabod i
DEF man be.REL.PRES.3sg PRED 1sg.POSS know 1sg
The man that knows me.

Subordination is also quite complex. The general subordinator is y:

Gwyddost ti y bawn i'n siarad gydag e.
Gwydd-ost ti y ba-wn i yn siarad-ø gyda e
know-PRES.2sg 2sg SUB be-SUBJ.1sg 1sg PRED speak-VERBNOUN with 3sg.MASC
You know I would speak to him.

Fronted sentences can be subordinated with mai or dialectally taw, frozen forms of 'to be':

Gwyddost mai'r dyn a welodd i ydy o.
Gwydd-ost mai'r dyn a wel-odd i ydy o
know-2sg SUB DEF man REL REL/see-3sg 1sg be.PRES.3sg 3sg
You know that he's the man who saw me.

Imperfect and present indicative forms of 'to be' take a unique construction with a verbnoun. Normally possessive pronouns represent the object, but with this construction, they represent the subject instead:

Gwyddost ti ei fod yn gadael.
Gwydd-ost ti ei fod yn gada-el
know-2sg 2sg 3sg.MASC.POSS POSS/be PRED leave-VERBNOUN
You know that he's leaving.

_________________
كان يا ما كان / يا صمت العشية / قمري هاجر في الصبح بعيدا / في العيون العسلية

tà yi póbo tsùtsùr ciivà dè!

short texts in Cuhbi

Risha Cuhbi grammar


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 5:08 am 
Avisaru
Avisaru

Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 7:34 am
Posts: 382
Location: Paris
Simbri:

Simbri uses the definite articles as relativizers.

I saw the house that Jack built.
Ide ty Jak fairra souse romne.
I ART.cl.5 Jack build.PFV.3s house see.1s.AOR

ty is the class 5 article; souse, house is a class V noun, and thus the head of the noun clause. Changing the word order to ty Jak souse fairra would be grammatical (but unusual).

I know that Jack built that house
Ide so Jak ji souse fairra rymbre.
I ART.cl.7 Jack that house build.PFV.3s know.1s

so, the class 7 article, nominalizes the entire clause: "the fact that Jack built the house" as the direct object of rumbre.

I saw the house where Jack was born.
Ide ty Jak yn haiten souse romne.
I ART.cl.V Jack in be.born.MID.AOR.3s house see.1s.AOR

The construction is identical to the first example. The postposition yn could be omitted; haiten is intransitive, with a clearly identified subject Jak and it's pretty clear that souse has an adverbial role.
I know that you know.
Ide so rò thi rymbrai rymbre
I ART.cl.VII you it know.2s know.1s

thi, it cannot be omitted: rymbra, to know requires a direct object.
Ide so thi rymbrai rymbre means 'I know what you know'.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 5:42 am 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 12:35 pm
Posts: 3600
Location: Tokyo
Serafín wrote:
finlay wrote:
Guitarplayer wrote:
Imralu wrote:
I'm not a native speaker of German, but I'm positive that it's:

TBH I wasn't really sure what the OP was aiming at. I would've translated "I know that you know" as Ich weiß, dass du es weißt 'I know that you know it' first, but then, since this is about relative clauses, I thought it was supposed to be the example for a headless relative clause and maybe idiomatic for 'I know that which you know', which is why I translated it as Ich weiß, was du weißt 'I know what you know'.

It's not idiomatic in English.
It's not idiomatic but it's grammatically correct. In formal contexts I see "that which" used just like "what..." all the time at least...

Ah-ah, hold on, "that which" and "that" are different here. Parsing "I know that you know" as "I know what you know" is neither idiomatic nor grammatically correct, but "I know that which you know" would be parsable as "I know what you know".


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 6:18 am 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 12:35 pm
Posts: 3600
Location: Tokyo
Latin (without macrons because I'm lazy):
Domum quam Iacobus aedificavit vidi.
house-F.SG.ACC REL.F.SG.ACC Jack-M.SG.NOM build-PRF.3SG see.PRF-PRF.1SG
I saw the house that Jack built

Iacobum illam domum aedificavisse scio.
Jack-M.SG.ACC that-F.SG.ACC house-F.SG.ACC build-PRF.INF know-1SG
"I know Jack to have built that house."
(I think that's right, anyway – correct me if it's bad word order or anything, but I know that Latin tends to phrase these kinds of sentences with ACC+INF rather than a complementizer clause.)

Domum qua Iacobus natus est vidi.
house-F.SG.ACC REL.F.SG.ABL Jack-M.SG.NOM born.PART COP.3SG see.PRF-PRF.1SG
I saw the house where Jack was born.

Te scire scio.
2SG.ACC know-INF know-1SG
"I know you to know."


French:
J'ai vu la maison que Jacques a construit.
1SG=PRF.1SG see.PART DEF.F.SG house REL.ACC Jack PRF.3SG build-PART
I saw the house that Jack built.
(How do you gloss a periphrastic perfect? I mean it's not "have see.PART" or something, right? In fact, I don't know how to gloss shit in French, or really in English for that matter, so maybe I should just give up now...)

Je sais que Jacques a construit cette maison-là.
1SG know.1SG REL Jack PRF.3SG build-PART that.F.SG house=there
I know that Jack built that house.

J'ai vu la maison où Jacques est né.
1SG=PRF.1SG see.PART DEF.F.SG house where Jack PRF.3SG born.PART.M.SG
I saw the house where Jack was born.

Je sais que tu sais.
1SG know.1SG REL 2SG.INF know.2SG
I know that you know.
or
Je sais que vous savez.
1SG know.1SG REL 2SG.FRM know.2PL
I know that you know.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 12:49 pm 
Avisaru
Avisaru

Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 2:58 pm
Posts: 807
Are some people trying to translate
"I know that you know"
(complement clause)
while others are trying to translate
"I know what you know"
(relative clause)
?


Last edited by TomHChappell on Tue Oct 18, 2011 1:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 1:21 pm 
Smeric
Smeric
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2003 1:48 pm
Posts: 1128
Location: Litareng, Keynami
No, some people (I) were confusing themselves (myself), which in turn confuses other people after I tried to explain how and why I confused myself.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 4:49 pm 
Avisaru
Avisaru
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 28, 2006 9:01 pm
Posts: 387
Location: Hyperborea
fu niλ [h]e zav tu ɕyð ɕydi ûar jaka
TENSEMARKER.PAST ART.NOM.1PS.DAT COP.PRES see ART.NOM.DEF.SING.ABS house build ART.META.NAME.ERG Jack
"I saw the house that Jack built."

fu ðin bon jaka e ɕydi tu ɕyð
TENSEMARKER.PAST ART.NOM.1PS.OBSERVER ART.NOM.NAME.ERG Jack COP.PRES build ART.NOM.DEF.SING.ABS house
"I know that Jack built the house."

_________________
My conlang lessons
My problem blog


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 4:52 pm 
Avisaru
Avisaru

Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 3:04 pm
Posts: 523
Chuma wrote:
fu niλ [h]e zav tu ɕyð ɕydi ûar jaka
TENSEMARKER.PAST ART.NOM.1PS.DAT COP.PRES see ART.NOM.DEF.SING.ABS house build ART.META.NAME.ERG Jack
"I saw the house that Jack built."

fu ðin bon jaka e ɕydi tu ɕyð
TENSEMARKER.PAST ART.NOM.1PS.OBSERVER ART.NOM.NAME.ERG Jack COP.PRES build ART.NOM.DEF.SING.ABS house
"I know that Jack built the house."


What's the deal with the gloss TENSEMARKER.PAST? Wouldn't just PAST suffice?

_________________
George Corley
Producer and Moderating Host, Conlangery Podcast


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 5:21 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 12:35 pm
Posts: 3600
Location: Tokyo
Chuma wrote:
fu niλ [h]e zav tu ɕyð ɕydi ûar jaka
PAST 1S.DAT COP.PRES see DEF.SG.ABS house build ART.NAME.ERG Jack
"I saw the house that Jack built."

fu ðin bon jaka e ɕydi tu ɕyð
PAST 1S.OBSERVER ART.NAME.ERG Jack COP.PRES build DEF.SG.ABS house
"I know that Jack built the house."

FTFY
TENSEMARKER is redundant: we know it's a tense marker because it, well, marks tense. PAST is a tense, after all. I don't know why you keep using NOM, because that means nominative. Don't bother with ART[ICLE] if you could just mark it DEF[INITE ARTICLE]. 1PS is confusing (although I used to do that too) because P usually refers to plural. So use 1S or 1SG. Similarly, there's no need to write SING when you can write SG.

Of course, I've probably got your grammar all wrong and I welcome your countercorrections. :P


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 5:38 pm 
Avisaru
Avisaru

Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 3:04 pm
Posts: 523
finlay wrote:
Chuma wrote:
fu niλ [h]e zav tu ɕyð ɕydi ûar jaka
PAST 1S.DAT COP.PRES see DEF.SG.ABS house build ART.NAME.ERG Jack
"I saw the house that Jack built."

fu ðin bon jaka e ɕydi tu ɕyð
PAST 1S.OBSERVER ART.NAME.ERG Jack COP.PRES build DEF.SG.ABS house
"I know that Jack built the house."

FTFY
TENSEMARKER is redundant: we know it's a tense marker because it, well, marks tense. PAST is a tense, after all. I don't know why you keep using NOM, because that means nominative. Don't bother with ART[ICLE] if you could just mark it DEF[INITE ARTICLE]. 1PS is confusing (although I used to do that too) because P usually refers to plural. So use 1S or 1SG. Similarly, there's no need to write SING when you can write SG.

Of course, I've probably got your grammar all wrong and I welcome your countercorrections. :P


It's perfectly fine to call an absolutive case nominative, especially if you have a split-S or fluid-S system.

_________________
George Corley
Producer and Moderating Host, Conlangery Podcast


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 5:49 pm 
Avisaru
Avisaru
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 28, 2006 9:01 pm
Posts: 387
Location: Hyperborea
I see. Thanks for the advice.

I guess I figured it looked odd to write an inflection without having something that's inflected - so "tense marker" and "article" are the things being inflected, as I saw it.

If "ART" is redundant, then it would be logical to also consider "COP" redundant, since they work in similar ways - the article marks a noun phrase, and the copula marks a verb phrase. Technically it probably shouldn't say "PRES" since it's marking an aspect/mood combination, not a tense. So I guess I could replace "COP.PRES" with "IPFV.IND" or something. But that would be confusing, since you wouldn't normally think of it as an aspect-mood marker, you would think of it as a this-is-a-verb-phrase marker.

"Nom" is supposed to stand for "nominal form", which admittedly is not obvious, but it's hard to abbreviate in a way that doesn't look like "nominative".

_________________
My conlang lessons
My problem blog


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 5:56 pm 
Avisaru
Avisaru

Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 3:04 pm
Posts: 523
Chuma wrote:
I see. Thanks for the advice.

I guess I figured it looked odd to write an inflection without having something that's inflected - so "tense marker" and "article" are the things being inflected, as I saw it.

If "ART" is redundant, then it would be logical to also consider "COP" redundant, since they work in similar ways - the article marks a noun phrase, and the copula marks a verb phrase. Technically it probably shouldn't say "PRES" since it's marking an aspect/mood combination, not a tense. So I guess I could replace "COP.PRES" with "IPFV.IND" or something. But that would be confusing, since you wouldn't normally think of it as an aspect-mood marker, you would think of it as a this-is-a-verb-phrase marker.


No, COP is fine. ART probably doesn't need it though. Copulas are usually independent of other word classes, whereas an article necessarily has to find a noun phrase.

Quote:
"Nom" is supposed to stand for "nominal form", which admittedly is not obvious, but it's hard to abbreviate in a way that doesn't look like "nominative".


What is meant be "nominal form", then?

_________________
George Corley
Producer and Moderating Host, Conlangery Podcast


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 6:26 pm 
Avisaru
Avisaru
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 28, 2006 9:01 pm
Posts: 387
Location: Hyperborea
Well, my conlang isn't made to be naturalistic, and it does a couple of things that others usually don't. That makes glossing a little tricky.

One notable feature is that all content words are treated the same way - there is no distinction between nouns, verbs, adjectives, even prepositions. Instead it's the function words which tell you if something is a noun phrase or a verb phrase. Articles (a.k.a. "noun articles", "pronouns", "determiners") and copulas (a.k.a. "verb articles") are very much parallels. Save for the difference that the copulas have a ton of inflections, and the articles have three tons.

Apart from case, person, number, definiteness and all that, the articles have another inflection axis; I call it "level", until I find a better word. It can be "nominal", "attributive" or "meta".

Nominal produces an argument to the main verb - i.e. a nominal phrase. Attributive produces an attribute of such an argument. Meta produces an argument to the attribute. Most cases can't be in all of the levels - abs, erg and dat can't be attributive, and genitive can only be attributive. Examples:

NOM.ABS paint NOM.LOC forest COP stand
"The painting stands in the forest."

NOM.ABS paint ATTR.LOC forest COP stand
"The painting in the forest stands."

NOM.ABS paint META.LOC forest COP stand
"The thing which was painted in the forest stands."

Um, does that make any sense? Didn't mean to take up the whole thread, but I do appreciate if you can help me express things in a more linguisticsy way. :)

_________________
My conlang lessons
My problem blog


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 6:43 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 12:35 pm
Posts: 3600
Location: Tokyo
Chuma wrote:
I see. Thanks for the advice.

I guess I figured it looked odd to write an inflection without having something that's inflected - so "tense marker" and "article" are the things being inflected, as I saw it.

If "ART" is redundant, then it would be logical to also consider "COP" redundant, since they work in similar ways - the article marks a noun phrase, and the copula marks a verb phrase. Technically it probably shouldn't say "PRES" since it's marking an aspect/mood combination, not a tense. So I guess I could replace "COP.PRES" with "IPFV.IND" or something. But that would be confusing, since you wouldn't normally think of it as an aspect-mood marker, you would think of it as a this-is-a-verb-phrase marker.

"Nom" is supposed to stand for "nominal form", which admittedly is not obvious, but it's hard to abbreviate in a way that doesn't look like "nominative".

ART is redundant because its meaning is implicit in DEF. I didn't remove it from the other ones. But fair enough, this is a bit moot really. For nominal form, I'd go for NMN. NOM really does just stand for nominative, so it's confusing when it co-occurs with your other case forms.

Also, I would note at this point that I usually just lop out all the bits of my conlang and abbreviations that I can't be bothered explaining every time. For Sentalian this is the noun classes, meaning that I will often gloss any of 'nee', 'nol', 'kam', 'kà', 'kix' and 'nu' as 3.ACC in the same passage, when rightfully they should be 3.PERSON.ACC, 3.ANIMAL.ACC, 3.EDIBLE.ACC, 3.INANIMATE.ACC, 3.ELEMENTAL.ACC and 3.INTANGIBLE.ACC. I only start to include them in longer passages where it's to my advantage because I can keep track easier of which noun belongs to which class for coreference's sake – but I will abbreviate them in that case as 3.PE.ACC, 3.AN.ACC, 3.ED.ACC, 3.DI.ACC, 3.FW.ACC and 3.IN.ACC (DI and FW are from 'disgusting' and 'fire/water' rather than 'inanimate' and 'elemental' – I use these abbrevations in my lexicon as well).

In Yaufulti I have no singular/plural distinction but I do have an equivalent count/mass distinction – sometimes I just omit the word COUNT altogether, sometimes I shorten it to C, and sometimes I include it in full. But then a second problem arises because every noun has a determiner/article prefix (it started with just definite/indefinite, but I've expanded it to include all sorts of quantifiers like all/every, partitive, obviate/proximate, and negative) – a different one for count and mass of course. The count determiners, however, exhibit reduplication (which shouldn't be marked in this kind of gloss, incidentally) of the vowel; they only include an onset consonant and a coda from the possible /i̯ u̯ n l/. It's just that the verb takes this prefix as an agreement suffix (there are some extra agreement suffixes for person and so on too), complete with the vowel. It's obviously coreference, so ideally I want to mark it with a subscript a or something next to it to show that they're essentially the same morpheme. And ideally I also want to mark it with AGR for agreement, although the only thing that shows that it's an agreement suffix is really the fact that it's a suffix, and maybe I want to mark them with OBJ and SUBJ to show which is which, but the only way to tell apart the one for the subject and the object suffixes is which order they occur in (the object is closer to the root). And then ideally I also want to mark it with COUNT.DEF again or whatever the original determiner was. And then I get confused and realise that I'm only doing it for the ZBB so "AGR" should suffice. You don't need to know the inner workings of the language back to front to read a gloss. I might try and get an example of this because this was maybe a bit tldr.

Example:
This, I suppose, is my ideal gloss. I made it a while ago:
Faigaipisu tælukusafaitæ.
fxi-gaipi-su ta-lx-kusa-fxi-tæ
COUNT.DEFa-pot-ACC NONFUT-PFV-break-[AGR.OBJ]COUNT.DEFa-[AGR.SUBJ]1.COUNT
I broke the pot.
AGR.OBJ and AGR.SUBJ are in square brackets because they're implicit in the syntax, as I said.

Here's one I made a few weeks ago (they are the same language, by the way, but the last one was in the Eastern orthography and this one is in the Western orthography, which I've decided I prefer because Eastern is ugly):
Feitenpu sagaluigui lusepultifei.
DEF-man-NOM INDEF-woman-ABL COP-hear-AGR
I hear the man's a woman

See how the second is a lot simpler? Ideally I'd write it like this:
COUNT.DEFa-man-NOM COUNT.INDEFb-woman-ABL IPFV.COP-EVID.heard-[AGR.SUBJ]COUNT.DEFa
and conversely, I could simplify the first one a lot for the sake of the board by writing:
DEF-pot-ACC NFUT-PFV-break-AGR-1


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 7:52 pm 
Avisaru
Avisaru
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 12:59 pm
Posts: 463
Location: Flavor Country™
in Ishtol:

I saw the house that Jack built.
tsat bul ya wek e chachū` i Chak
see I OBJ house REL perf-build SUBJ Jack

I know that Jack built that house.
`ōb bul ya le chachū` wek kwet i Chak
know I OBJ COMP perf-build house that SUBJ Jack

I saw the house where Jack was born.
tsat bul ya wek e `āshets i Chak
see I OBJ house REL LOC:APPL-be:born SUBJ Jack

I know that you know
`ōb bul ya le `ōb kī
know I OBJ COMP know you


The relative particle is e and the complementizer particle is le, but they have other uses as well. e also forms appositions: tū`ip e naya`iwish "my sister the professor", and le on its own without the subject marker i or the object marker ya forms clauses that mean "so that ..."

Also there's a locative applicative in the third sentence. Works like this:

shets i Chak
be:born SUBJ jack
Jack was born

`āshets wek kwet i Chak
LOC:APPL-be:born house that SUBJ Jack
Jack was born in that house

_________________
<Anaxandridas> How many artists do you know get paid?
<Anaxandridas> Seriously, name five.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 19, 2011 12:20 pm 
Smeric
Smeric
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 1:55 am
Posts: 1542
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia / Colombie Britannique, Canada
lctrgzmn wrote:
Ooh, I agree. It'd be nice to see how other natlangs do it, not to mention to see the connection between one's conlang and the natlang of their choice... (even though this thread is technically in Conlangery & Conworlds).
Oh yeah, I actually hadn't realized it wasn't the C&C Quickies forum (where TCs are usually posted). -.- Anyway, I think it'd be rather silly to open a counterpart thread at L&L for the same thing.

Actually, if I wanted to open a thread with a TC like this and wanted to keep it for a long time around for future reference in other discussions, should I post it here (including natlands in spite of being the C&C forum) or should I post it at L&L (in spite of including conlangs)? (Yes, I know I could just save it in my computer, but I'm talking about using it in future threads, pointing it out in relevant discussions for other users to read it again.)

_________________
ZBB Conlang Index (check first post)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 19, 2011 12:47 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 12:35 pm
Posts: 3600
Location: Tokyo
keep it here – their primary purpose is to get people practising their conlangs, although seeing natlangs is always a bonus and a lot of people only produce natlang translations. (I don't think I've ever seen Astraios post anything but Lakota, for instance – does he even have a conlang anymore? :P)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 19, 2011 12:53 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul

Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 2:38 am
Posts: 2974
Location: Israel
Well, he kinda does but a) he doesn't really like it that much because everything he makes seems boring in comparison with Lakota, and b) he has issues with committing to one thing exclusively for a long time.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 19, 2011 1:46 pm 
Avisaru
Avisaru
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 12:17 pm
Posts: 800
Location: The darkest corner of your mind...
He should do a Lakota descendant. :mrgreen:

_________________
Image
The Arrakum language | Conlanging blog


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 19, 2011 1:48 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul

Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 2:38 am
Posts: 2974
Location: Israel
He could try!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 19, 2011 2:03 pm 
Smeric
Smeric
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 11:34 pm
Posts: 1606
Location: Stockholm
I'm a little nervous posting this because it's a litte odd. :/

Í como visie via Jack prementè enconstructùra, la zha.
1SG.M PST see by Jack DPST PASS-build, DEF.SG.F house-ACC.F
I saw the house that Jack built.

Í sciensa Jack prementè constructùra lisu zha.
1SG.M know Jack DPST build DEM.DET.DIST.SG.F house-ACC.F
I know that Jack built that house.

Í como visie Jack prementè nàtività in, la zha.
1SG.M PST see Jack DPST be.born inside DEF.SG.F house-ACC.F
I saw the house where Jack was born.

I need to work with that last type of sentence, because I'm not sure at all how to express it. Is it a place clause?

_________________
Image
My most recent quiz:
Eurovision Song Contest 2018


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 19, 2011 2:25 pm 
Avisaru
Avisaru
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 1:20 pm
Posts: 716
Location: Not Mariya's road network, thankfully.
Ancaron:

I saw the house that Jack built.
Def donripit Dac donpuc muc.
house PST-REL-build Jack PST-see 1

Don't confuse with:
Def donpit Dac donpuc muc.
house PST-build Jack PST-see 1
I saw Jack build the house.

I know that Jack built that house.
Zain def donripit Dac tov muc.
that house PST-REL-build Jack know 1

I saw the house where Jack was born.
Def tan donrisiran Dac donpuc muc.
house in PST-REL-be_born Jack PST-see 1
I saw the house that Jack was born in.

I know that you know
Ritov tov muc.
REL-know know 1
I know (you) know.

Myonian:

I saw the house that Jack built.
I se ði shyuusa ðet bilt Jhek.
1.SG see.PST.1.SG the house REL build.PST.3.SG Jack

I know that Jack built that house.
I wet ðet bilt Jhek ðet shyuusa.
1.SG know.1.SG REL build.PST.3.SG Jack that house

I saw the house where Jack was born.
I se ði shyuusa hweur waz Jhek garierda.
1.SG see.PST.1.SG the house where be.PST.3.SG Jack born

I know that you know
I wet ðet ðyuu wetst.
I wet ðet yu wiþen.

1.SG know.1.SG REL 2.SG.INFORMAL know-2.INFORMAL.SG REL
1.SG know.1.SG REL 2.SG.FORMAL know-2.FORMAL REL


Riraqa Astaraiqos tov Lioku.
Lyhoko wet ðet ist Astraios ovurstreeŋþ biin.

Lyhoko thinks that Astraios is being silly. :P

_________________
Zain pazitovcor, sio? Sio, tovcor.
You can't read that, right? Yes, it says that.
Shinali Sishi wrote:
"Have I spoken unclearly? I meant electric catfish not electric onions."


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 98 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group