Re: adj.

On Sun, 1 Oct 2000, Marcus Smith wrote:

> >Mario Bonassin wrote:
> > >
> > > I have a question about adjectives that one among you may have the
> > > answer to.  I was planing on having all adj. be form the verb class.
> > > I know that they should conjugate like verbs but should I have an
> > > extra affix to show its an adj.
> >
> >No need to.  There could be a derivative suffix that makes adjectives
> >out of other words.
>
> Telek does not distinguish between adjectives and verbs in any
> way.  Phrases like "a red car" would be literally translated as "a car
> which is red" as a perfect parallel with "a car that crashed".
Chevraqis doesn't either, which I stole from Korean/Japanese (well, I'm
sure it shows up elsewhere but that's where I first saw it, as a
listmember pointed out).  The color adjectives are irregular because I
was getting tired of three-syllable words.  <rueful look>  But they
conjugate as verbs.

> > > and what about adverbs should they work the same way.
> >
> >I don't think so, but I'm not sure how it's dealt with.
>
> It is possible to have no distinct adverbs at all.  For example, instead of
> "quickly", you could have a phrase meaning "it [the action] was quick".  So
> a sentence would be something like "I ran and it [the running] was
> quick".  Or you could do something like "I ran being quick", much like
> English "I went walking to the store".
German does this, doesn't it?

Der Hund läuft schnell.  (The dog runs quickly.)
Der Hund ist schnell.  (The dog is fast.)
Der schnelle Hund läuft.  (The fast dog runs.)

<thinking about Korean>  Drats, don't know enough grammar, but:

Kae ga ppali ttida.  (The dog runs quickly.)
Kae ga ppaluda.  (The dog is fast.)
Ppalun kae ga ttida.  (The fast dog runs.)

Grr.  I can't actually tell, since it's a different form each time and I
don't have the formal grammar.

Chevraqis treats adjectives and adverbs the same.  I got lazy.  <rueful look>

YHL