con quesa wrote:
Correlatives are kind of an Esperanto-specific concept for talking about nonpolar questions, and needn't be any sort of coherent system that you can easily express in a table, although it happens that Esperanto does work that way. You can see by looking at the English translations of the Esperanto correlatives, in English there isn't one coherent way of talking about all of those meaning distinctions, although you certainly can talk about them in some way or another, just like in any other langauge.
Nancy Blackett wrote:
I used to, then I realised it was kind of boring.
Having a table of correlatives doesn't mean making them all cookie-cutter regular and tidy. It can just be a useful way to organize these terms, and even to decide where the irregular forms and gaps should be.
Victot li Rhák has sóqen
, which functions similarly to Saimiar na-
, but is a full word. It's normally used with an appopriate noun, but can stand alone if context allows.Sóqenrhe faset lóbam chevokr xavéy tash?
"What person (=Who) killed my mother/father?"Sóqenrhe lóbam chevokr xavéy tash?
- use of the 3rd person animate verbal ending -r
indicates the subject is a person, so faset
can be left out.
This, I think, will be especially common with the relative pronouns:Lódenam chevokso faset, sóqen _ lódenam chevokr xavéy tash.
"I killed the man/person who killed my mother/father."
VLR correlatives are mostly regular, but there are a few oddities. Some forms cliticize and may undergo changes, e.g. it + faset
, depending on dialect); bí + émi
. And the interrogative form sóqenrhe
is often reduced in colloquial speech, e.g. sóqenrhe faset
["so:tKenR\e "faset] > ["so:tKe:R\ "faset]; sóqenrhe émi
> ["so:tKen"R\e:mi] or ["so:tKn="R\e:mi]; sóqenrhe ri(d)
> ["so:tKe:r "ri].
There are also two words, ash
, which mean "here/there" and "now/then", respectively. Proximity is not distinguished, so they refer to a place/time mentioned earlier, or understood from context. If one needs to disambiguate, the phrases it-shóf / vé-shóf
"this / that place" and it-serh / vé-serh
"this / that time" are used.
There are also two sets of negative forms, one with fen
, which cliticizes, and the other with resok
"not one"), which does not cliticize. The latter is emphatic in meaning, and tends not to require double negation.Relóm rhasso fenfasti
"I don't see anyone" (lit. "I don't see no one")Lóm rhasso resok faset
"I don't see a (single) person, I see not one person"Fenfasti relódenam thobr xav
"No one helped me" (lit. "No one didn't help me")Resok faset lódenam thobr xav
"Not one person helped me"
Also, if you look closely, English has the remains of a more regular system:
what it (< OE "hit") that
where here there
whither hither thither
whence hence thence
Radius Solis wrote:
The scientific method! It works, bitches.
Είναι όλα Ελληνικά για μένα.