Re: Articles, determiners, quantifiers, whatever...

Sally Caves wrote:

> In the meantime, though, you haven't demonstrated the use of my articles in
> the ways I was describing (you cut off my text):  Better: Le Remi
> zemplim-ilz omlo nehsa, ma nrinan-lo vera etsan celil kalalyan ingenyoht.
> "The (volitional) Remi example-an (object) does (volitional)-he seek, but
> finds (non-volitional)-he not same (referring to zemplim) in-the languages
> invented."
Err... Could you translate in English? My knowledge of Teonaht is very
limited. I had half of your site in front of me to write my little
sentence... (Thank you, Mozilla's tabbed browsing!)

"Remi shows an example of what he's looking of but..." That's all I can
translate. I'm not sure about where to apply the negation. "zemplim" isn't
anywhere on your site. (I have a copy on my HD... It's easier to search
through.)

Sorry if I cut your text but, although interesting, it wasn't close enough
to what I was looking for.

> Now Remi, why look for a system of categorization in another person's
> conlang?  Why not just invent your own and put it in a description of
> Shaquelingua?  There it will be "enough" for you.
Then I suddenly realize that I wasn't very clear about what I was looking
for...  ;-)  I already have my categorization system: The shaquean articles
are "quantifiers" built with "aspects". What I wanted was some ideas on how
to organize, how to present this part of the grammar. Now I know that noboby
else but me can write it.

> I suggest that the problem here is in your use of the word "article."  I
> think of "all" and "every/each" as modifiers (an admittedly vague term),
> possibly determiners (another fairly comprehensive term).  But the word
> "article" has more traditional and specific connotations in descriptions of
> the modern European languages, upon which Teonaht was originally based.  If
> you are including "all" and "every/each" in your list of what you're looking
> for, then I get a much better picture of your concept of "article."
You're right. I say "articles" but I'm thinking "quantifiers"... and if I
only opened a dictionary, I would have seen that most of what I called
articles are in fact adjectives. It just sounds too illogical to me. That's
certainly why I grouped all that I thought that should be labelled "article"
and obtained the "quantifiers".  :-)

> Under
> "pronouns" I have a fairly big list of words like "etsa" in Teonaht (same or
> most recent thing mentioned), etsa...ouar (the first and second thing
> mentioned),
I also call "pronoun" the word used to recall anything previously mentioned
but I call it "resumptive" instead as "reiterative" and it can't turn into
an adjective.

I can't resist to the pleasure to insert an example...  ;-)

vo valhça kik'be djife te'kja.
[vo va4.ça kik(i)'be: djife te:'kja]
[from]the sky (descriptor)'(case marking) color (indicative past)'I.
= I saw the color of the sky.

vir'be pølika teo'pevaa.
[vix(i)'be: p94ika te^o:'peva^a]
(descriptor)'(case marking) green (indicative atemporal)'*resumptive*
= *It* is green.
= *The color* is green.

If I change the resumptive into "povaa", now it means "the sky". It makes no
sense here but I could change the resumptive into "pavaa" to represent "I".

sjeo'rja xe sagevo tul'vëë.
[sje^o:'xja x\e: sagevo tu4(u)'vë^ë]
(potential atemporal)'thou some belief (descriptor)'*resumptive*
= You can believe *it.*

This "it" represents the whole previous sentence.

> taiso--or taso (every/each), mimim ("some of"), aiba (this), oba
> (that), ista (that awful), and I explain how they can be used as
> "adjectives" (or determiners).  Etsa vaiua, "this same bird."  Poto is an
> adjective:  poto randon, "all kings."
	[---CUT---]

Now, I know these are adjectives everywhere except in Shaquelingua.

> So I'm
> moved to ask, what exactly is the point of your post?  To let us know that
> you haven't found a conlang description that conforms to your idea of
> lexical categorization?
Not one that would conform to my idea but one that would ressemble. But that
wasn't the point.

> And that you need one to formulate your own
> taxonomy?  To let us know that we SHOULD be thinking of our "articles" in
> terms of a wider category, and revise our descriptions thusly? An
> interesting suggestion; I'll consider it.
That would be presomptuous. I SHOULD change my mind about what articles are
in real languages. And my "taxinomy" is already set as I said before. No
thank you, I don't want to change. I was looking for something I couldn't
find. I have a twisted mind! I can't help it...

> If none of the above, why not
> just write your own explanation for "everything that can be used as an
> article" and put it on the website for your own conlang?  I'm sure we would
> love to look at it.
Let's say thursday/friday. I need some times to write that huge chapter
about the quantifiers. In the mean time, you can go there:

http://perso.normandnet.fr/maxilys/cakesar/index.html

You'll see what I've already (re-)done. That is not much: Only the roman
script (the Shaquean scripts aren't online yet), the pronunctiation (with
funny bad sounds), and the personal pronouns.

And you'll see that I've much work to (re-)do according to my plan.

> Essentially, then, anything that can "determine" a noun
> in a closed list (short of words like "flowery," "shadowed," "unctious,"
> "unhallowed," "benighted," "free," or any other endless parade of
> descriptors.
That's more or less the description of an agglutinative language.
Shaquelingua is agglutinative sometimes but not that far! And, although
there are no real adjectives, the attributes of a noun aren't integrated in
the quantifiers.

Any way, that's an idea I may consider for a future conlang... If I find a
way not to stumble on the old big red house. Besides, it's not so alien.
Look at english "another". Article+adjective in one word.  :-)

> For Teonaht I would list (in a category called Nouns and Determiners) the
> definite and indefinite articles with their status as agent, experiencer,
> and object including some of, a few of, a lot of, etc; further determiners
> like "this," "that," "that yonder," "that awful" with their status as agent,
> experiencer and object and their distinct uses as pronouns or determiners;
> "all," "each," "same," "other" with their status as free-standing pronouns
> and determiners; the possessive pronouns, prefixed or infixed; the prefixed
> plural particles...
All the ones I thought they were articles and that I transformed into
quantifying aspects. Lucky mistake I made!

> what am I leaving out? A lot of what I put under
> prepositions and adverbs:  Li beto cel, "the inside boy" (the boy on the
> inside); vul-, "with respect to (a noun)."  But I'm not sure that this is
> any more helpful, really, than classifying some of these under other
> categories.  What's needed is the page on Syntax and Grammar.  Not finessed
> yet, although I have it written out.
No verb in Shaquelingua. No adverb either. For your example, I'd use a
postposition turned into a kind of adjective that I call "quality".

vi leyo lóku [vi: lewo lOku]
the room inside(post.)
= in the room

vu kyó-lóku jisso [vu: kwO:lOku jis^so]
[about]the (physical quality)-inside child
= the child who is inside

(The particle "kyó" isn't mandatory here; the qualitive role of the
postpostion is obvious.)

> I'm delighted at the interest you take in everybody else's conlangs, Remi.
> That's refreshing!!  And it's always a hoot to see my Teonaht written back
> at me!  :)  So I'd love to see something of yours. Such as the snippet you
> give below.
Err... I'm a quick reader and I don't leave a site until I have --at least--
seen every available page when I feel like it. And I like to read a lot.

If you want so much to read more from me, go to my site and come back to
tell me that it is beautiful. (I like compliments too...)  ;-)

Now, back to work... err... to bed!

See ya,

--
==================
Remi Villatel
maxilys_@_tele2.fr
==================

Reply