Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: How many verbs?

From:Dirk Elzinga <dirk_elzinga@...>
Date:Monday, July 12, 2004, 20:12
On Jul 12, 2004, at 1:10 PM, Gary Shannon wrote:

> This is just a random thought, but I was wondering if > there were any natlangs with this feature that > occurred to me for use in a conlang. The number of > verbs in the language would be very small, covering > only the most basic form of a particular action and > the details would be provided by an adverb-like word > that narrowed down the meaning of the verb.
I think Sylvia's Kelen does this; IIRC, there were four verbs. I hope she'll responed with some more details.
> For example, the language would not have the verbs "to > run" or "to walk", but would use adverbs with the verb > "to move" giving, for example: "to move 'runly'" or > "to move 'walkly'". These adverbs could then be > applied to other verbs to create idioms unique to the > language like: (using English words) > > This boy act-he excitedly too-much did, and speak-he > runly did. Speak-I requestly did, that speak-he > walkly do. > > By using the adverbs "runly" and "walkly" in different > contexts their meanings would somewhat broader and > more versatile, thus keeping the number of such > special adverbs reasonably small as well.
This strikes me as being a common strategy for verbs of motion in particular, especially among the languages of Native America. I'm implementing something like this in Miapimoquitch; here's an example from a message on directionals I posted here quite a while ago: \t waanai tattakatesi [wa:nai tattaGat1si] \m wa= anai ta- ttaka -te -si \g 1= up RED:PAUC- move:UN -FOOT -towards \f 'A few of us are coming up on foot.' In this example, the basic predicate means 'move'. With the addition of a directional predicate and some lexical suffixes, you get the meaning 'come up (the hill) on foot'.
> So I can't help but wonder how small a set of verbs > would constitute a useful set. I'm not thinking of > minimalism for its own sake, but to create as many > verbs as would be useful without violating the spirit > of not creating a new verb when a verb + adverb would > do the job. A mere 10 verbs and 10 adverbs would give > 100 verb + adverb combinations possibly taking over > for 100 separate English verbs, or possibly creating > novel meanings not expressible in English without some > circumlocution.
Again, Sylvia will have thought about this; she should have some interesting observations. Dirk -- Dirk Elzinga Dirk_Elzinga@byu.edu Grammatica vna et eadem est secundum substanciam in omnibus linguis, licet accidentaliter varietur. - Roger Bacon (1214-1294)