Trigger language question concerning the use of "to be"
|From:||Alex J. Man <alman9898@...>|
|Date:||Sunday, May 8, 2005, 21:07|
Okay, I've been developing a language that uses a trigger system and
have decided that there will be no "to be." State verbs,
particularly, replace its role. Eg, He is good would be translated as
He goods. However, I have come across the problem when addressing
infinitives. How, exactly, would a sentence such as "To defend is to
attack" for example be handled in this case? Both words are
infinitives, leaving no place for a verb to exist. Is there a
grammatical way around this problem? This is my first true conlang
and this seems to be a big problem. Any help would be much
To be safe, I'll provide a little background information on Valruzi.
Valruzi utilizes a trigger system, like tagalog, in which nouns are
marked as either trigger, oblique, genitive, agentive, or patientive.
the case or role of the trigger, or focus, is marked on the verb.
This eliminates the need for active/passive or
transitive/intransitive. The language also has eliminated to
verb, "to have" in a sense - translating sentences such as "I have a
car" as "My cars exists" (dubbed existence sentences). Gerunds and
participles are also utilized extensively. In addition there are
three aspects that CAN be infixed: inchoative (entering a state),
inceptive (beginning an activity), or cessative (stopping). Three
tenses: present, future, and past are used. whew, sorry if that's a
bit lengthy, but this is my first post and I decided to play it safe
and give some background info on the subject.