Tentatively named Qan Hlais ("this speak").
Well, I am going to need more than a few naming languages for a roleplaying setting I've adopted as a forever-work-in-progress, and I'd like some names to have a sort of SE Asian feel to them. Naturally, I'm now battling verbs in a language explicitly created for producing proper nouns. Oh well.The grammar is shaky at this point and I'm not sure where to go with it. I want SOV order and Chinese-style relative clauses, but it seems difficult to make this unambiguous.
What I have so far is as follows.
Phonology
I do love my lateral fricatives. I fear the alveolar PoA is too "heavy," but I actually like the sound of one of my languages for once. /q/ is realized as a glottal stop syllable-finally.
Vowels: /a i u/ <a i u>
All diphthongs are valid, but /wu/ and /ji/ don't occur. I'm a cowardly Westerner, so it's non-tonal. Length is non-phonemic, though I'd consider changing this if macrons were easier to type.
Syllables are (C)CV(C), if one considers diphthongs as single vowels. I'm making this up as I go along, of course, but the only onset blend so far is /sr/.
Declarative statements
For equivalences, use a zero copula.
pa sran 2s ox "You are an/the ox."
pa sran hli 2s ox NEG "You are not an/the ox."
Adjectives are verbs:
sran wang ox large "The ox is large"
For objects, use a particle to precede the phrase.
hai fi sran thas 1s OBJ ox think "I think about the ox."
fi sran hair OBJ ox kill "The ox was killed"
For past tense, use a particle immediately before the verb.
hai fi pa lu hlais 1s OBJ 2s PST speak "I spoke to you."
There's a set of six determiners, specifying the head as proximal, distal, or indefinite ("some"), and animate or inanimate. Animacy is not intrinsic to the noun, and can be used to make useful distinctions.
hai fi qan sran hlir 1s OBJ PRX:A ox discuss "I'm talking about this (living) ox."
hai fi xan sran hlir 1s OBJ PRX:I ox discuss "I'm talking about this ox (carcass)."
Some verbs can be serialized.
hai fi sran lu hair hlais 1s OBJ ox PST kill speak "It's said I killed the ox."
qun sran wang thas DIST:A ox large think "I think that ox (over there) is large."
Now, verby adjectives beg adjective-y relative clauses. Particles like the object can indicate the beginning of a relative clause, which ends with the REL particle. I don't know where else this would happen, but I think it could be done more elegantly.
pa fi wang thas jaq sran lu hair 1s OBJ large think REL ox PST kill "You killed the ox that I thought to be large."
hai fi xu sran wang jaq lu hlais 1s OBJ PRX:I ox large REL PST speak "I said that this is a large carcass."
hai fi pa fi sran lu hair jaq hlais 1s OBJ 2s OBJ ox PST kill REL speak "I'm saying that you killed the ox."
Here's some ambiguity, however:
hai fi pa lu hair jaq sran hlir 1s OBJ 2s PST kill REL ox discuss "I'm talking about the ox you killed." or "The (I killed you) ox is discussing."
The second interpretation is of course nonsense and ungrammatical because of the verb valence and the ox's lack of participation in its own relative clause. I think there shouldn't be any real ambiguity if the verbs are strict about what complements they can take.
We'll throw in some dative particles and adverbs, which precede the verb. Dative particles initiate relative clauses.
hai fi pa mai lu hlais 1s OBJ 2s yesterday PST speak "I spoke with you yesterday."
hai fi pa thu fi sran lu hair jaq mai lu hlais 1s OBJ 2s ABL OBJ ox PST kill REL yesterday PST speak "I spoke to you yesterday about how the ox was killed."
pa fi xan sran fan hai lu laux hli 2s OBJ DIST:I ox ILL 1s PST give NEG "You didn't give that ox carcass to me."
Interrogatives
The question particle can precede an entire clause to question if it is true.
xa pa fi sran lu hair? Q 2s OBJ ox PST kill "Did you kill the ox?"
The negative particle can be added to invert the question.
hli xa pa fi sran lu hair? NEG Q 2s OBJ ox PST kill "Didn't you kill the ox?"
The question particle can replace a noun in a clause to ask for one to take its place.
pa fi hai thu fi xa lu hair jaq mai lu hlais 2s OBJ 1s ABL OBJ Q PST kill REL yesterday PST speak "You spoke to me yesterday about how what was killed?" but also "What was killed, the murder of which you spoke to me about yesterday?"
That's all for now. As you can see, the lexicon is limited right now. If there are any obvious ways this could break, or if it plain doesn't make sense, please alert me to them now. Any other feedback also appreciated.
|