zompist bboard

In languages in which adjectives are merely special verbs, how are adjectival adverbs expressed? For example, if there is a verb "to be quiet", how is "quietly" expressed? One obvious way is with a particular case of the verbal noun; are there others?

If the language allows serial verb constructions you might be able to simply use the two verbs in sequence, so "move quietly" would be phrased as "move be.quiet."

In Japanese, the i-adjectives (adjectival verbs) simply change the last -i to -ku. Examples:

atarashii "new" atarashiku "newly"
warui "bad" waruku "badly"
hayai "early; fast" hayaku "early; quickly"

So it's just simple derivation.

Qwynegold wrote:In Japanese, the i-adjectives (adjectival verbs) simply change the last -i to -ku. Examples:

atarashii "new" atarashiku "newly"
warui "bad" waruku "badly"
hayai "early; fast" hayaku "early; quickly"

So it's just simple derivation.

It may be useful to note that Japanese takes this further, in that regular verbs and the copula also have distinct adverbial forms, like adjectival verbs. There are also two distinct adverbial forms for all three:
adjectival verb: -ku, -kute
standard verb: -Ø/-i, -te
copula: ni, de

Basically, the first form makes regular adverbs (except for standard verbs), while the second form turns entire clauses into adverbials.

Atsuku natta.
"It got hot."
(atsui "hot" becomes atsuku "hotly")

Shizuka ni aruita.
"I walked quietly."
(shizuka (na/da) "quiet becomes shizuka ni "quietly")

These are what we think of as standard adverbs.


In these next two forms, the entire first clause modifies the second one.
Atsukute nemurenai.
"It's so hot I can't sleep."
(it being hot, I can't sleep).

Shizuka de kutsurogeru.
"It's quiet and relaxing."
(it being quiet, you can relax)

The difference is that these do not mean "I can't hotly sleep," and "You can relax quietly," but if you changed -kute to -ku and de to ni then that is what they would mean.

Exotically, Lakota uses an adverbialisatorifying suffix, -ya.

For Korean, the suffixes are 이 /-i/ and 게 /-key/, e.g.:

조용하다 /co.yong-hata/ "to be quiet" > 조용히 /co.yong-hi/, 조용하게 /co.yong-hakey/ "quietly"

I'm not sure what their respective etymologies are, but I'm sure I can find them in Martin. 게 looks like it incorporates an old gerundial suffix.

araceli breathed a huge sigh of relief when nobody seemed to notice that she'd used the wrong case in the subject.

I took Latin in high school, but I was lazy and never really memorized any of the declensions. >_>

Not to be pedantic, but ... oh, wait.

araceli wrote:araceli breathed a huge sigh of relief when nobody seemed to notice that she'd used the wrong case in the subject.

Then she cringed when someone insisted that she fix it.

araceli wrote:araceli breathed a huge sigh of relief when nobody seemed to notice that she'd used the wrong case in the subject.

(emphasis mine)

The sun still rises in the east, no big whoop. And besides, in a written forum, no one can hear you scream...

————————————————————————

Oh, and 安静 ānjìng, it's an adjective, a verb, an adverb, a noun... Put adverbially before a verb, it's followed by the particle 地 (pronounced "de"): 安静地Verb
Put adverbially after a verb, it's preceded by the particle 得 (also pronounced "de"): Verb得(很)安静
This is a relatively recent, IMHO kinda faux divvying up of 的 (the ur-"de") usage, and finding someone other than me -- a foreigner -- and perhaps some Chinese publishers, who uses these consistently is tough. And in certain contexts, you could leave out the particles altogether: 安静Verb; Verb安静 (rarer, IME)

I can't help but be remind of the "ROMANES EVNT DOMVS" scene from "The Life of Brian."

CatDoom wrote:If the language allows serial verb constructions you might be able to simply use the two verbs in sequence, so "move quietly" would be phrased as "move be.quiet."

Or be.quiet move. There might or might not be a difference in meaning and there might or might not be rules on what the order is. Most languages with SVC order things roughly according to iconic order, so things things that occur early chronologically are mentioned first. In this case, it's a matter of philosophy wheather you are quiet first or moving first.

Well, Latin and Greek (and quirky obsolescent English) can use verbal participles and other sundry adjs + a noun like hand, foot, mind, soul, tongue etc, (oblique case recommended) in a phrasal way to equate an adverbial idea.

with a running foot - quickly
with a hidden hand - secretively, furtively
(Sorry for lack of actual Greek and Latin examples here. Just go to McCartney's article and get a trove of examples there)

This probably happens a lot in Avestan, Sanskrit, Hebrew, Akkadian, Egyptian and any number of other languages.


Not as concise as the verbal noun suggestion, certainly rather 'clunky' and anergonomic, but a little more poetic. And, who knows - one lucky noun might atrophy over time into an inseparable adverbial suffix. Hey, the ancestors of the Romance languages liked it so much, they [s]bought the company[/s] made it their MO for a lot their adverb constructional needs.

I'm not 100% certain, but Old Norse snimhendis might fit into this category as well.

Further reading:
A pretty thorough disquisition on basically what it says in the title. This should be standard reading for all Romlang enthusiasts!

Eugene S. McCartney. Forerunners of the romance adverbial suffix.
http://books.google.com/books?id=HK5JAA ... ix&f=false

An interesting, much more recent read for the body and soul (from a European-language perspective; sorry, no Japanese):
Hummel, Martin. The adjective-adverb interface in romance and english
http://www.uni-graz.at/~hummelm/publ/AA ... el2013.pdf

[hr][/hr]

PS: I will let the 'De Adjectivorum Verborumque' slide this time because clearly we ALL read 'NATURA' as the last word. Can't you see it there? You almost had me fooled, Araceli.

PPS: I happen to like Greek and Latin adverb historical philology a lot.