The Innovative Usage Thread

[Drydic]

Dear people, I would like to present you some of my weird ideas for future evolutions of some natlangs which do not deserve a separate thread:

Reform Idea for Polish: Direct object agreement for the first and second person singular...

Standard conjugation

kocham - love-1SG
kochasz - love-2SG
kocha - love-3SG
kochamy - love-1PL
kochacie - love-2PL
kochają - love-3PL

New conjugation:

kocham się - love-1SG REFL
kochamasz - love-1SG-2SG
kochama - love-1SG-3SG
kochamamy - love-1SG-1PL
kochamacie - love-1SG-2PL
kochamają - love-1SG-3PL

kochaszam - love-2SG-1SG
kochasz się - love-2SG REFL
kochasza - love-2SG-3SG
kochaszamy - love-2SG-1PL
--- (not logical)
kochaszają - love-2SG-3PL

Reform Idea for Spanish: Attaching subject markers of verbs in the subjunctive to "que" (as in Polish)

Chce, żebym/żebyś/żeby śpiewał(a). - He/she wants me/you/him/her to sing.
Chce, żebyśmy/żebyście/żeby śpiewali/śpiewały. - He/she wants us/you/them to sing.

Quiere que yo venga => Quiere quea venga.
Quiere que vengas => Quiere queas venga.
Quiere que él/ella venga => Quiere quea venga.
Quiere que vengamos => Quiere queamos venga.
Quiere que vengáis => Quiere queáis venga.
Quiere que vengan => Quiere quean venga.

Espero queáis me entienda.

Ok yeah no, changes to natlangs go in one of the C&Cs. As bitchy as this sounds, this thread's for actual instances of innovative usage, not proposals.

[Plusquamperfekt]

Thanks for your clarification, I was not aware of that.

[Thry]

... dios santo

how would that happen in Spanish?

[Izambri]

Ssssssst, or Raelians will find that!

[Drydic]

)+(

[Thry]

Ssssssst, or Raelians will find that!

I initially thought of that as a reference to RAE members.

Not that they're any less scarily doctrinal.

[Izambri]

Ssssssst, or Raelians will find that!

I initially thought of that as a reference to RAE members.

Not that they're any less scarily doctrinal.

It is a reference to them. Thry.

[Thry]

Yea I realized that later, but was lazy to communicate my process further.

déhame

[Izambri]

Yea I realized that later, but was lazy to communicate my process further.

déhame

Entiendo que estos días tienes el cerebro demasiado empanado (trabajo y tal...). Tómate tu tiempo, descansa y, cuando puedas, vuelve dándolo todo. : )

[Thry]

how thoughtful

[R.Rusanov]

In Bulgarian I pretty often hear stuff like "кара-ли-хте до магазина" (kára-li-hte do magazina) for "карахте ли до магазина" (kárahte li do magázina) where 'kárahte' is the 2p.pl aorist of 'kára' - drive - with 'h' being the aorist marker and 'te' the 2p.pl marker, 'do magázina' means 'to the store', and 'li' is the yes-no-question particle. It attaches itself to the end of verbs naturally. But coming even deeper into the body of the verb is very odd for a Slavic language, especially a Slavic language which has lost most its agglutinative-IE-type morphology. Then again, Bulgarian verbs are much more complex than in other Slavic languages, being part of the Balkan sprachbund.

A maybe relevant note is that *карах-ли-те (kárah-li-te), shifting li only one slot deeper into the verb, would cause confusion with "карах ли те" (kárah li te) meaning 'did I drive you?'

[Drydic]

In Bulgarian I pretty often hear stuff like "кара-ли-хте до магазина" (kára-li-hte do magazina) for "карахте ли до магазина" (kárahte li do magázina) where 'kárahte' is the 2p.pl aorist of 'kára' - drive - with 'h' being the aorist marker and 'te' the 2p.pl marker, 'do magázina' means 'to the store', and 'li' is the yes-no-question particle. It attaches itself to the end of verbs naturally. But coming even deeper into the body of the verb is very odd for a Slavic language, especially a Slavic language which has lost most its agglutinative-IE-type morphology. Then again, Bulgarian verbs are much more complex than in other Slavic languages, being part of the Balkan sprachbund.

A maybe relevant note is that *карах-ли-те (kárah-li-te), shifting li only one slot deeper into the verb, would cause confusion with "карах ли те" (kárah li te) meaning 'did I drive you?'

In Bulgarian I pretty often hear stuff like "кара-ли-хте до магазина" (kára-li-hte do magazina) for "карахте ли до магазина" (kárahte li do magázina) where 'kárahte' is the 2p.pl aorist of 'kára' - drive - with 'h' being the aorist marker and 'te' the 2p.pl marker, 'do magázina' means 'to the store', and 'li' is the yes-no-question particle. It attaches itself to the end of verbs naturally. But coming even deeper into the body of the verb is very odd for a Slavic language, especially a Slavic language which has lost most its agglutinative-IE-type morphology. Then again, Bulgarian verbs are much more complex than in other Slavic languages, being part of the Balkan sprachbund.

It attaches itself to the end of verbs naturally. But coming even deeper into the body of the verb is very odd for a Slavic language, especially a Slavic language which has lost most its agglutinative-IE-type morphology.

especially a Slavic language which has lost most its agglutinative-IE-type morphology.

most its agglutinative-IE-type morphology.

agglutinative-IE-type morphology.

ಠ_ಠ

[R.Rusanov]

Do you make a hobby of stalking my profile for new posts to express righteous liberal wrath at?

IE languages trend from agglutinative (pre-proto-IE) to fusional to analytic. Bulgarian is someway between fusional and analytic in its nouns and fusional verbally. Changing verb slot order is agglutinative.

Can't believe I have to explain this to someone who's been here for over a decade now

[Click]

Do you make a hobby of stalking my profile for new posts to express righteous liberal (emphasised by Click) wrath at?

I have no idea where you see politics in Nessari's post. Frankly, I'm baffled.

[Drydic]

Do you make a hobby of stalking my profile for new posts to express righteous liberal (emphasised by Click) wrath at?

I have no idea where you see politics in Nessari's post. Frankly, I'm baffled.

He's seeing what he wants to see. And interpreting the way he wants to interpret, rather than what I meant (which was clear.)

[Whimemsz]

To be fair, I don't see the point in that kind of snide, contentless response to Rusanov's post, which was on-topic and not blatantly wrong. I find many of Rusanov's statements ridiculous, but to automatically reply to every post he makes with a snide one-liner is silly.

[Nortaneous]

drydic what point are you even making, if rusanov is wrong i can't see how other than maybe 'agglutinative' instead of 'fusional' but who cares

[Salmoneus]

To be fair, I don't see the point in that kind of snide, contentless response to Rusanov's post, which was on-topic and not blatantly wrong. I find many of Rusanov's statements ridiculous, but to automatically reply to every post he makes with a snide one-liner is silly.

Yeah. In particular, I have to say I find this gimmick of repeating a supposedly objectionable statement six times to be a particularly cruel sort of mockery. I think I found it funny the first eighty times, five years ago or whenever, but the joke's really, really wearing thin.

[gmalivuk]

Yeah, everyone knows three times is sufficient, anyway: Once for the whole paragraph or similarly-sized block of text, once for just the sentence with the objectionable material, and once for just the objectionable material itself.

[hwhatting]

In Bulgarian I pretty often hear stuff like "кара-ли-хте до магазина" (kára-li-hte do magazina) for "карахте ли до магазина" (kárahte li do magázina) where 'kárahte' is the 2p.pl aorist of 'kára' - drive - with 'h' being the aorist marker and 'te' the 2p.pl marker, 'do magázina' means 'to the store', and 'li' is the yes-no-question particle. It attaches itself to the end of verbs naturally. But coming even deeper into the body of the verb is very odd for a Slavic language, especially a Slavic language which has lost most its agglutinative-IE-type morphology. Then again, Bulgarian verbs are much more complex than in other Slavic languages, being part of the Balkan sprachbund.

A maybe relevant note is that *карах-ли-те (kárah-li-te), shifting li only one slot deeper into the verb, would cause confusion with "карах ли те" (kárah li te) meaning 'did I drive you?'

Interesting observation. Could it be Turkish influence? IIRC, the interrogative suffix goes between temporal suffix and personal ending in Turkish, but it would not be too strange if speakers of Bulgarian would analyse the fused temporal / personal ending as inseparable and therefore insert the interrogative particle between stem and fused ending instead.

[Melteor]

When I was a kid I used to use an weird form for the reflexive, "your-own-self", as in, "Go get your own self!"

[R.Rusanov]

That seems pretty likely. I don't know a lot about Turkish verbs but I wouldn't be surprised if they're the cause of this. Turkish's influence on the Balkans cannot be underestimated in the linguistic sphere (but is very easily overestimated in the genetic)

[----]

When I was a kid I used to use an weird form for the reflexive, "your-own-self", as in, "Go get your own self!"

I've heard that before. I don't believe I've ever heard it in the emphatic form before, though.

'He his own self was the sole winner of the contest'
nah

[Drydic]

When I was a kid I used to use an weird form for the reflexive, "your-own-self", as in, "Go get your own self!"

I've heard that before. I don't believe I've ever heard it in the emphatic form before, though.

'He his own self was the sole winner of the contest'
nah

"Go get your own _____!"
Types of phrases are quite clearly where it genesis'd from.

[Chagen]

This is ridiculously minor, but a few weeks ago I was thinking about some random stuff and used *scrope as the past of scrape.

I guess it was from analogy of break/broke?