Re: some preliminary Prevli

Hallo!

On Mon, 5 Nov 2007 18:47:52 -0500, Roger Mills wrote:

> It's time to let y'all know what's going on....
>
> The sound system is: p b t d k g m n N r l s z y h; vowels i e a u o -- but
> these are only the "underlying" phonemes. A lot happens on the way to the
> surface.
>
> Underlying forms of lexemes can be V(C), CV(C), CVV(C)-- these are rare;
> most are (C)VCV and (C)VCVC. A handful of loans and frozen compounds have CC
> clusters in initial and/or medial position-- _prevli_ itself is one such
> /peda/ 'tongue' + /bili/ 'speak'). Underlying stress in on the penult.
Let me guess: *pedabili > *perevili > prevli ?

> CVCV nouns and verbs keep that form, though the final V can be dropped.
> CVCVC forms > surface C1VC2VC3 (with some mutations) or undergo final-VC
> metathesis > C1VC2C3V (also with mutations depending on the resulting
> cluster)-- this last is the common form for nouns and realis
> verbs/adjectives. I haven't quite decided what will be the function of the
> unmetathesized forms, though for verbs I think it's a gerund/infinitive...
This looks very interesting - a whiff of triconsonantalrootism,
but not quite that.

> Final C mutation: in absolute final position (CVCVC) /ptk/ voice > bdg; both
> final and medial /bdg/ lenit > BrG; others are unaffected. BTW, all C except
> /y h/ can occur in final pos.
Nice!

> Vowel harmony: in CVCVC and CVCCV, the unstressed final /i a u/ change as
> follows:  i--u > i--ü, e--u > e--ö, i/e--a > i/e--& (written ä a-uml); u--i
>  > u--ü, o--i > o--ö, u/o--a > u/o--O (written å a-ring); a--i > a--e, a--u
>  >
> a--o. (/e o/ do not occur in final unstr. syllables).  There are slightly
> different rules for /i a u/ in CVCV and CVV(C) forms :-) Some exs:  /sapit/
>  > saped, sapte, /subat/ > suvOd, suftO. /sagud/ > saGor, saGro etc.
This looks interesting and makes perfect sense.

> The irrealis form of the verb has initial CV metathesis and final stress/no
> V-harm., with more phonetic changes to the resulting clusters); exs. /sapit/
>  > aSpít (vl.stops don't mutate); /sagud/ > aZGúr (vd.stops do, at least so
> far...). A CVCV form /koba/ kovo 'to go' > okfá
An interesting morphology, I must say.

> Realis passive infixes /-i-/ /s-i-apit/ siapte > S&pte, again, more changes
> to the palatalized initial C; irrealis passive prefixes it: /i-aspit/ >
> y&Spit; etc.  All this is set forth in extensive tables in the current draft
> of the grammar....
This looks nice, too.

> Then there are several verbal aspects (right term?): inchoative
> (becoming...), causative, desiderative (want to...), obligative (have to...,
> must...), debitive (ought to, should...), prospective (about to...),
> intentive (going to...), potential (can, able to...) and progressive
> (be...ing); these are mutually exclusive, that is, if /ziza/ 'eat' > caus.
> /ap-ziza/ abzize 'feed s.o.', you can't have a combined form meaning "I must
> feed him"-- in that case, the modal "must" has to be in its independent form
> (with pronoun suffix) followed by the caus. form. + I-him pronoun form.
More precisely, these are _aktionsarten_ (singular _aktionsart_),
but they are indeed often referred to as aspects, so your usage is
OK, I'd say.

> All these aspectual forms can be realis, irrealis, active/passive and even
> imperative, semantics permitting. Oh-- and tenses-- present (unmarked), past
> /-d/, future /-l/, and irrealis-conditional /-s/. I think I shall indicate
> the perfects with a particle.
>
> Enough for now. It's lotsa fun. :-)))))
It is.  This looks like a very interesting language, and I definitely
enjoyed reading your post.  Keep it up!

... brought to you by the Weeping Elf

Reply