zompist bboard

17:34 < nort> gjerdou is the most conservative variety
17:34 < nort> raston has uhh
17:35 < nort> 2-raising, high lax vowel tensing except in U
17:35 < dhok> is this a priori nort?
17:35 < nort> diphthongization is pretty old
17:35 < nort> dhok: yes
17:35 < dhok> ah
17:35 < nort> gjerdou has it so everything has it
17:36 -!- Zayk [Cevvv@f29a922b.c3-0.nwb-ubr1.chi-nwb.il.cable.6ca6e6e8.com.hmsk] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
17:37 < nort> hm so
17:37 < nort> proto-north-of-gjerdou probably had
17:39 < nort> { Q E 9 O I Y U | a: 3: e: 9: o: i: y: u: | ea eo ie y2 uo | ei 2y ou
17:39 < nort> raston goes 9 > 8, 9: > 8:
17:40 < nort> 8 > U, 8: > 2:
17:40 < nort> wait no 8: > Ui
17:40 < nort> then O o: > 3\ 2:
17:41 < nort> then the length distinction collapses
17:41 < nort> E was probably like @\ because I merges into it
17:41 < nort> 3: > a@
17:42 < nort> > Q@
17:42 < nort> hm so
17:42 < nort> if i don't have that chain shift
17:42 < nort> and i instead do
17:46 < nort> uhhh
17:46 < nort> well gjerdou unrounds all its front vowels so
17:47 < nort> { > E > @, 9 > @,
17:47 < nort> i would merge all of I Y U into 1 but i do that a lot
17:47 < nort> fuck it
17:47 < nort> gjerdou doesn't i think
17:47 < nort> { > E > @, 9 > @, I Y U > 1
17:48 < nort> 9: > 3: > @:
17:48 < nort> y: > 1: like in gjerdou
17:48 < nort> so that leaves me with
17:48 < nort> Q E @ O 1 | a: e: 3: o: i: y: u: | diphthongs
17:49 < nort> length distinction collapses, as happens in pretty much all arve
17:49 < nort> a Q E @ O e 3 o i 1 u
17:49 < nort> i should break 3: into like 1@, it breaks in raston too
17:50 < nort> so a Q E @ O e o i 1 u
17:51 < nort> then diphthongs give a: Q: i: 1: u: e: @: o:
17:52 < nort> ehhh fuck breaking diphthongs vahkatton is pretty far north for a southern dialect
17:53 < nort> what if i turn them all into like
17:53 < nort> ja jo je j@ wo ai a1 au
17:54 < nort> fuck it only low vowels contrast for length
17:54 < nort> ai a1 au > E: a: O:
17:59 < nort> that is a horrible mess
18:00 < H13> wasn't arve always
18:08 < nort> [ˈsɑzə hʲeːʀ ɛlˈleɣɒː zi joe̯h]
18:09 < nort> [çʌ̰i̯r çøə̯ʀɪ̃ lʊi̯kʰɐ tʂʌi̯r ʏ hen]
18:09 < nort> [ˈʃatʃɨ je ˈʃaʁɜŋ ˈljækʰɔ zɨ djoʃ]
18:09 < nort> hm what about a sentence with no grammatical differences other than gjerdou conjugation loss
18:10 < dhok> nort
18:10 < dhok> can you actually pronounce
18:10 < dhok> any language you have ever made
18:10 < nort> Kes satter jöug scheng kes vold, trei zäuche je stön kes kand.
18:11 < nort> oh wtf
18:11 < nort> scheng vold rather
18:11 < nort> that sentence is from 2011
18:13 < nort> ston kand
18:13 < nort> çʌ̰i̯r jœy̯xʷ çiə̯ʀ vuo̯ts tʂʌi̯ tsɛu̯xʷɪ jɪ çʊi̯n kɒə̯r
18:15 < H13> what is arve
18:15 < H13> megakhmer vowels and
18:15 < H13> retroflex german consonants I guess?
18:15 < nort> ʃatʃɨ jaːk ʃjeːʁ vwoːts ze tsjohɨ jɜ ʃjaŋ kʰjoːr
18:17 < guitarplayer_> H13: arve is megadanish
18:18 < nort> sazə jæːk hʲiːɢ wuːts zə tsæfə jə sən kɒː
18:18 < H13> H Y P E R B O R E A
18:18 < nort> also *kʰjoːr, *vuə̯ts
18:18 < guitarplayer_> iːɢ, srsly
18:18 < guitarplayer_> no backing?
18:18 < nort> yeah e:G\ probably
18:18 < guitarplayer_> or is the pharyngealization implicit?

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.

I am standing by the corner.

Zeuhel:
En sattes räd y särg.
[ɾ̥ɛi̯s ɾax ʏ çeʁ]

Raston:
En satter räd en y särg.
[r̥ʌ̰i̯s rah ɪn ʏ seə̯ʀ]
Räd y särg en sattes en.
[rah ʏ seə̯ʀ r̥ʌ̰i̯s ɪn]

Gjerdou:
Räd y särg en sattes jost.
[ræt ɨ seːʁ sɑ joç]

I kick dogs.

Zeuhel:
En trei stärg scheng entjar.
[ɾ̥ɛi̯ ɕex ɕia̯xtɕɐ]

Raston:
En trei stärg scheng.
[r̥ʌi̯ çeə̯ʀ çiə̯ʀ]

Gjerdou:
Treis stärg dan scheng en sattes.
[zə seːʁ tɑ siːʁ sɑ]

* Z. collective from Kett influence
* R. doesn't incorporate objects, southern dialects do
* R. can incorporate non-object arguments.

Is this actually common, or should it be the other way around? Probably the other way.

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.

_________________
Blog:
Conlangs: | | |

Can there be instrumental/benefactive/locative incorporation without object incorporation?

I should've included glosses -- the first group is locative incorporation (made obvious since the verb is necessarily transitive and takes the reflexive pronoun, which is only distinct from the standard pronoun in the southern dialects), and the second group is object incorporation. Extent of incorporation varies north-south, since above the northern border is a language that doesn't have incorporation at all: the dialect of Zeuhel, a northern border town, has no incorporation except in a few fossilized expressions (and other signs of influence from the language above, such as a collective construction), and the dialect of Gjerdou, the southernmost district of the island of Harue, has a lot of incorporation. But incorporating constructs kick the auxiliary verb to the end (or add a dummy perfective auxiliary in imperfective verb complexes in Gjerdou), for reasons that I think I had a justification for three years ago when I decided that but hell if I know now

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.

Was the phonology of Arve based on some inspiration, or did it evolve out of an earlier language? Or did you work backward to make a proto-language, etc?

I know it's been said but it really reminds me of Danish or Germanesque, no other inspiration involved from my perspective, but if it reminds others of Southeast Asian languages maybe I don't know those languages as well as I should. lol :S

_________________
[bɹ̠ˤʷɪs.təɫ]
Nōn quālibet inīquā cupiditāte illectus hoc agō
Yo te pongo en tu lugar...
Taisc mach Daró

pseudoswedish + collapse of consonant clusters

it was originally supposed to have celtic-style palatalization but i dropped that early on. i wonder if i could find an early version of it, i think it had tone once too

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.

Meung tense/aspect:

Present continuous:
/ā tʂà makʰō/

/s makʰō ā tʂà/

Present:
/āvi tʂâɴ makʰɔ̄/
/s makʰɔ̄ āvi tʂâɴ/

Present negative:
/nǎ tʂâɴ makʰɔ̄/
(nǎ/jóɴ/sná/wɨná/jôɴ/d̪iná)

Close past:
/ā təɴtʂə̀ makʰō/
/ûə̯ makʰō ā təɴtʂə̀/

Close past negative:
/ā éɴ təɴtʂə̀ makʰō/
/wə̀ɴ makʰō ā təɴtʂə̀/

Remote past:
/ā pɯ̄ɴ tʂə̀ makʰō/
/ûə̯ makʰō ā pɯ̄ɴ tʂə̀/

Remote past negative:
/ā éɴ pɯ̄ɴ tʂə̀ makʰō/
/wə̀ɴ makʰō ā pɯ̄ɴ tʂə̀/

Past continuous:
/āvɨɴ tʂâɴ makʰō/
/s makʰō āvɨɴ tʂâɴ/

Past continuous negative:
/ā éɴbɨɴ tʂâɴ makʰō/
/wə̀ɴ makʰō āvɨɴ tʂâɴ/

Close future 1:
/āmə tʂà makʰō/
/s makʰō āmə tʂà/

Close future 2: (used for volunteering to do something for someone else)
/ō tʂà makʰō/
/s makʰō ō tʂà/

Remote future:
/ā kɴtʂà makʰō/
/s makʰō ā kɴtʂà/

Future negative:
/nǎ kɴtʂà makʰō/
/éɴ makʰō ā kɴtʂà/

Future continuous: (can also be used as imperative)
/ā kɴpitʂà makʰō/
/s makʰō ā kɴpitʂà/

Future in past:
/ā wəkənətʂə̌ makʰō/
/ûə̯ makʰō ā wəkənətʂə̌/

Future in past continuous:
/ā wəkəɴpitʂà makʰō/
/ûə̯ makʰō ā wəkəɴpitʂà/

Propositive/jussive?: (can take either s or ua)
/skø̄ tʂà makʰō/
(conjugation: CFUT1 fʃỳɴ fìɴ skø̄ fʃòɴ CFUT1)
(note that there's no separate conditional form in Meung)

There might be more.

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.

What was the Meung phonology based off?

_________________
Hello there. Chirp chirp chirp.

I looked at the Zzyt wqnp dictionary and saw that Nyancat meant bear. That made me laugh.

_________________
Hello there. Chirp chirp chirp.

_________________
Hello there. Chirp chirp chirp.

What is Ngmwragh, Insular Kett, Kànnow, and Miar based off of?

_________________
Hello there. Chirp chirp chirp.

Kannow started as an alt-Georgian, but I had to fuck with it to get the sound changes to Enzielu to come out right and now I guess it's Salishan or something.
As for the rest, I don't know. Miar might have been based on Amharic.

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.

Some Deghuri declensions:

*vogún > vūgun vūgum vugnī vūgunja vūgni
*harx > hāsh hārgham hadhī harghī hādhi
*chárox > charūx chārgham chadhī charghī chadhi
*chubish > chuvish chūvsham chuvshī chūvissha chūvshi

intermediate forms:
vūgun vūgunm vūgunī vūgunzha vūgni
hārx hārxam hārxi hārghazh harxi (x > gh, Rzhi Rzhe > Ryi Rye)
charūx charūxam charūxī charuxuzh charūxi (azh uzh > əy > i:)
chuvish chuvisham chuvishī chuvishzha chuvishi

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.

*tahám 'serving of soup' > dahān dahām dahnī dahānja dahni
Regularized: m > n because -m is erg/gen; plural gets regularized from dāhni.

*dzéra > dzīra dzīram dzirī dzirī dzīri
*také > takī takīm takī takī taki

also Zzyx-wqnp ɲā.n̩̄.tsá must be from V'eng nja.ni.Psaʔ, I'll derive it like Russian so -ni is like -er, nja = eat, Psa' = ksa' = honey. this is necessary so that 'mason' is <vanibrö> and not <bröni>

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.

Otkh is shit so it's probably dead.

newlang

proto:
b t d k
f s z h
m n ŋ
(l) r j v

a e o i u ( + ɤ ɨ?)
ai au ei eu ou + probably some more diphthongs
absence of tone is probably fine given japanese/mongolian/manchu vs chinese

stress is final. this is important for diachronics, since stressed vowels absorb following CC into coda and cluster

ŋ > k > ʔ
iʔ uʔ > ɪʔ ʊʔ
t ʔ > high tone / V_C
ʔ > 0 / _# _C
ɪ ʊ lower preceding high vowels
V1C{glottal}V2 > V2: -- high tone if ʔ
m n > ŋ / _#
rt rd mb nt nd nk > tʃ dʒ m s n ŋ (if in the same syllable)
r.t n.t > rd nd
stress retracts to rightmost long vowel, or penultimate on >2-syllable words or disyllabic words with a consonant cluster in the middle
long diphthongs break to triphthongs ending in schwa
short diphthongs monophthongize straightforwardly before r
long vowels shorten before another long vowel [this also happens in Deghuri, except i think it's between two long vowels]
aiə auə eiə euə ouə > ɔː jæː eː ɤː ɤː
P > 0 / _P if in same syllable, with compensatory lengthening
i ɪ ʊ > ɨ i ʊ, Duhai influence
unstressed final vowels are lost
r n > ɲ / _j _i
ɲ > ŋ unless _i
d k > ð ɣ unless C_ _C [except l r] or onset of stressed syllable, also not before 1 for Reasons
/f/ is lost in all clusters
aɣa > ɔː
length distinction is lost, stress > high tone [can this happen?]

cuhairt /ʔɔtʃ/
cuhairtic /ʔɔrðɨ́/
cuhairticin /ʔarðíːŋ/
cuhairticine /ʔarðíːn/

eh nah i can't get this to not look ugly nvm

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.

20:03 < Legion> it's interesting this thing of Romance language to have irregular forms for the negative imperative
20:03 < Legion> (although it's not the same irregularity in French as in Italian and Spanish)
20:05 < Legion> come to think of it it's also different in Italian and Portuguese
20:07 -!- dhok [webchat@6ca5f07e.14055ad3.129.15.imsk] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
20:08 < Legion> so italian: parla! (speak!) > non parlare! (don't speak); Spanish parla! > no parles!; and finally French, a bit more subtle: parle-moi ! (speak to me) > ne me parle pas ! (don't speak to me!)
20:10 < Legion> so Italian uses an infinitive, Spanish a subjunctive, and French has an irregular clitic-verb inversion that disappears in the negative
20:10 < Legion> f a n c y t h a t
20:11 < nort> hm
20:12 < nort> amqoli would have
20:13 < nort> zhu qoltse "say something" > lkha qoltse "don't say anything"
20:13 < nort> root + pronoun
20:13 < nort> p boring
20:14 < nort> hm what would vian do
20:18 < nort> gzp jje (ye) cyp wqnp
20:18 < nort> ->
20:19 < nort> gzp bbix wqnp

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.

Is bbq an acceptable word in Vian?

EDIT: I see you've already used it in the conlang fluency thread. What a coincidence

<bbq> /mbQ/ is the regular outcome of V'eng syllables of the form (C)ma(C), with the exception of mya > jjo /ndZo/

nasals > prenasalized stops before oral vowels. <mq> /mQ~/ is a word, but it's from mang

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.

ɨ > u, uw > u
implosives > m ʎ
stress moves to the first syllable of the root, but the accent of the word stays -- leaving two pitch accents. (the protolang probably has two contrasting word-level pitch contours, but that's not written here since I haven't gotten around to writing that down yet. the contrast is preserved, but this only leaves three possibilities, since pitch contours are connected to stress.) call first syllable stress 'acute' and other 'grave'.
word-final m > ŋ
i u > ja wa / _[+uvular]
ʁ > ŋ / a_{C #}, why not, then it disappears in all other codas
ʁ > ɣ
final stop/fricative devoicing
[+palatal] and [+round] spread to consonants from high vowels, Cj Cw absorption.
loss of unstressed final vowels and even-numbered vowels in VC_CV -- monosyllables and polysyllables have separate pitch contours so this takes a fourth, and then merges into the grave accent.
ʎ > j
ɣw > w, Vw > Vu
[+palatal]/[+round] features ejected as diphthongs onto previous vowels
voicing assimilation, nasal place assimilation, r{P F}[-voice] > sh
affricates merge into fricatives except after nasals
can't have two diphthongs in adjacent syllables -- second one collapses
first element of non-{FP NP RP PF[-voice] PR} cluster drops, but PN assimilates to NN and PP > FP for /p k b g q/
Pr Fr > tS dZ S Z
diphthongs in i > front vowels
x > h
unstressed mid vowels > high vowels

these should have b instead of v I think but w/e
vougun vöüŋni <vougun vouigni>
vouguŋ vöüŋniŋ <vougung vouigning>
vougus vöügis <vougus vouigis>
vouŋnyaŋ vöüŋnü <vougnyan vouigniu>
vouŋne vöüŋni <vougne vouigni>
vougunch <vougunch>
euvgun euvgin <euvgun euvgin>
euvguŋ euvguyiŋ <euvgung euvguying>
euvgus euvguyis <euvgus euvguyis>
euvgun euvgün <euvgun euvguin>

ˈdzerɨ kaˈparenis baˈgulim qaduˈmardzu tɨˈxorti. baˈguli uŋkaˈpariʁ ˈdzeram daqaˈbamdzɨ da nɨ dʒaʁ. eʁ baˈɗɨw ɗem ˈhatu ʃɨt ʃa ɗem haqʃi ˈʁarɨ.
Ezru kachinis bauiging qaunmuz tuhuisht. Euvgin umkaching zeurung daghbaundz da njang. E baui yeng haut shut sha yeng haiqsh ghaur.
[ezru katʃinis baʉ̯giŋ qau̯nmuz tuˈhyʃt. eu̯vgin uŋkatʃiŋ zeu̯ruŋ daɣˈbau̯ndz da ndʒaŋ. e baʉ̯ jeŋ hau̯t ʃut ʃa jeŋ haiqʃ ɣaur.]
+ tone

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.

I might move that language down to take the place of Otkh, or I might make another one.

p t ts k b d dz g ʔ f v s z h m n ɲ r j w
a e ə o i ɨ u

'kənira 'a:kənira u'kənira ukə'niraki u'kənirə
'ku:nira 'a:ku:nira mu'ku:nira muku:'niraki mu'ku:nirə
->
kɨɲrə akɲir kuɲ(ə)r kɲirki kuɲri
kuɲrə akuɲrə mukuɲrə mukuɲirki mukuɲri

basaku abasaku ubasaku ubasakuki ubasakə
etc
->
basku ab(ə)sək bosk basəkki boskə
busku abusku mubuskə mubusəki mubuski

tsəfa 'a:tsəfa u'tsəfa u'tsəfaki u'tsəfə
tsu:fa 'a:tsu:fa mu'tsu:fa mu'tsu:faki mutsu:fə
->
tsɨfə atsfə tsufə tsufki tsufɨ
tsufə atsufə mutsufə mutsufki mutsufɨ

or if ə gets reanalyzed as an epenthetic vowel:
kɨɲrə akɲir kuɲrə kɲirki kuɲri
kuɲrə akuɲrə mukuɲrə mukuɲirki mukuɲri
basku abəsk bosk basəkki bosk
busku abusku mubusk mubuski mubuski
tsɨf atsfə tsuf tsufki tsufɨ
tsuf atsuf mutsuf mutsufki mutsufɨ

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.

Proto-Kharidze:
p pʲ t ts tʃ k q
b bʲ d dz dʒ g ʁ
ɓ ɗ
s ʃ x h
z ʒ
m n nʲ ŋ
l lʲ r rʲ j

The main subgroups are:
AR
nʲ ŋ > dʒ ʁ
ɓ ɗ > m lʲ

D
nʲ ŋ > n g
pʲ bʲ > p b
rt rd rts rdz rtʃ rdʒ > ʃt ʒd ʃ ʒ ʃ ʒ

AR group develops articles from demonstratives *badzé *nʲu (lqora is an Amqoli innovation and bdza is because mid vowel shenanigans), but A loses them because D influence.

So: Rengni badz bougun / ebadz euvgun "the [nearby] man", ju bougun / eju euvgun "the [far away] man" = Amqoli bgul because Deghuri vugon.

Fuck it, let's say Rengni lenites syllable-final voiced stops, throw in some reduction, and say clitics don't get weird rounding shit. Baz bougun, ev euvgun, ju bougun, ezh euvgun.

Proper nouns take demonstratives, why not.

Ezh ezru kachinis bauiging qaunmuz tuhuisht. Euvgin umkaching ju zeurung daghbaundz da njang. E baui yeng haut shut sha yeng haiqsh ghaur.

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.

the first two lines are, yes. i forget what the third one is but the amqoli cognate of haiqsh is haqshi so search that. i added it because i wanted examples of implosives

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.

crosspost from Austronesian alignment thread

Insular Kett works like that [Tagalog]: the topic is marked with =on, and the verb marks what role it is, with other nouns mostly unmarked. But the marking is more extensive.

Kaibann letak harakünnera.
kaibat=n letak ha-rakünne-ra

The book was read by a person.

Letaññ kaibat harakünnet.
letak=on kaibat ha-rakünne-t

A person read the book.

Leradaññ letak kaibat haleurriam.
leradañ=on letak kaibat ha-leur-ra-am

It was at the store that the person bought the book.

Letaññ leradañ am kaibat haleurt.
letak=on leradañ am kaibat ha-leur-t

The person bought the book at the store.

Cf. Arve:

Kes tegnarger luje räch skeil rakjun.
ç-iə̯ʀɐ lyə̯ rɐx çʌi̯ɐ raə̯cʊn

Or:
Luje dan skeil kes tegnarger rakjun.
lyə̯ dɐn çʌi̯ɐ ç-iə̯ʀɐ raə̯cʊn

The book was read by a person.

Kes tegnan luje rakjun skeil.
ç-ɛŋɐ-n lyə̯ raə̯cʊn çʌi̯ɐ

The person read the book.

Zed sach de jäntam kes tegnarger rakjun skeil. (this is the form in most dialects, but it's artificial in Raston proper, which would would say dan jäntam)
tsɛx sɔɣɐ jeə̯r̥ɐm ç-iə̯ʀɐ raə̯cʊn çʌi̯ɐ

It was at the store that the person bought the book.

Kes tegnan zed rakjun sach de jäntam skeil.
ç-ɛŋɐ-n tsɛx lyə̯ raə̯cʊn sɔɣɐ jeə̯r̥ɐm çʌi̯ɐ

The person bought the book at the store.

The southern dialects have developed agent markers from a reduced version of (formerly repeated) satte -- think "the man <long verb phrase>, he did" -- so in Gjerdou Arve, the fourth sentence (using all the same words, which may not be idiomatic) would be zed sach de jäntam kes tegnarger rakjun skeil satter [tseʔ sɒ ceːsem ʃiːʀe rɒːjin ʃæː zɑ]. But this is in addition to word order: Arve is generally VOS.

edit: I should clarify that the Kett constructions are both unmarked for transitivity (you can say kaibann rakünnera "the book was read" or letaññ harakünnet "the person read something"), the Arve construction *is* passive vs. active (so you can't say *kes tegnarger luje skeil rakjun or *kes tegnan luje skeil), but arguments can be incorporated into the verb complex and that's not marked at all (although the -ger V räch construction *is* marked, except in the northern dialects).

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.