Re: Grammatical Summary of Kemata
| From: | Christophe Grandsire <christophe.grandsire@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Tuesday, December 11, 2001, 22:24 |
|---|
En réponse à Rune Haugseng <haugrune@...>:
> I don't expect anyone on the list will remember me - I posted a few
> times earlier this autumn (or fall, if you prefer), but I've been
> horribly busy at school since then - no time for conlanging at
> all. Nevertheless, I've managed to write a sort of "grammatical
> summary" of my conlang Kemata.
>
Well, your name looks familiar to me at least.
>
> The consonants are also standard European. R is trilled. N is /N/
> before k or g. T, p and k are aspirated at the beginning of words
> (hey, I didn't even know what aspiration was when I started this
> language - just be happy u is no longer the Norwegian half-rounded i
> :-) ).
>
Why? it would have been funny :))) . You're sure you don't want to reinclude it
as a sixth vowel? (maybe written 'y', would be possible :)) )
>
> Class II verbs are of the form CVCV, and form the tenses by changing
> their vowels, e.g.:
>
> Stem hana, write
> Aorist hain
> Past hane, wrote
> Present hana, is writing
> Future hani, will write
> Before hena, (has written, had written)
> After hina
>
Funny, for the Class I verbs the aorist is the basic form, while for the Class
II verbs it's the present. Or does it work only with this verb? Anyway, I find
it nice...
>
> Verbs can also take one of six modal suffixes (I'm not at all sure
> whether
> these are actually moods.).
Well, they actually are IMHO. I can even give them a name that will make them
look more like moods :))) .
With the closest expression in English,
> they are:
>
> -ne, (want to)
Desiderative.
> -wi, (should)
Subjunctive, or maybe conditional like in French. Though I'm not sure.
> -zai, (must), used when someone has *chosen* to do something
> -hu, (must), used when someone is *forced* to do something, or there
> is no choice in the matter
I must say I'm blocked on these ones. Necessitive? Why is "jussive" popping up
in my mind?
> -ma, (can)
Capacitive.
> -koi, (hope to)
Optative (though optative is more "I wish to").
>
> The suffix -ni makes a pronoun reflexive (or reciprocal (if that is
> actually the word that describes "each other")).
It is.
>
> Kemata also has a pretty weird (as far as I know, at least) pronoun,
> which I call a "place-holder pronoun".
>
> Its form is:
> Subject a
> Direct object at
> Indirect object ihat
> (Verb i)
>
> This has two uses:
> - to not say something known from context
>
> A Kematian waiter might, for instance, say:
> I nul abu atnul?
> i nul a-b-u a-t-nul
> - question S-2p-? -DO-which,
> for "What would you like to order?", everything being known already
> (I don't think it would be very polite, though).
>
Or maybe very polite, for a society which considers that asking people to
actually do a specific action they're expected to do is impolite (taking your
example, in a restaurant, when people have not eaten yet and stopped reading
the menus, it would be considered impolite to ask them what they want to
*order*, since they're obviously ready for it, so instead of using the verb
*order*, you use the special word instead - using the verb would be like
repeating the obvious, and it could be considered rude -).
> - to indicate voice:
>
> Ankila a anerle.
> ankil-ha a aner-le
> kill-Pt - animal-DSgN
> The animal was killed.
>
> (This isn't exactly like voice, of course - you can't differentiate
> between "I killed the animal" and "The animal was killed by me".)
>
Maybe it's just a kind of copula (after all, all copulae don't need to be
verbs, in some languages they are prepositions or pronouns). If you could use
it with other adjectives, it would be a good indication of that.
> NOUNS
> -----
>
> A noun (except names and such) always has an article suffixed to it.
>
> The articles are:
> Singular Plural
> Definite Indefinite Definite Indefinite
> Normal form -le -ne -zu -su
> Unique form -ti -pi -la -ho
> Normal negative form -ha -no -ro -vai
> Unique negative form -wu -re -ko -li
>
> The unique articles denote that the noun as a unique specimen of its
> kind (or several of them). The unique form of a word sometimes has an
> idiomatic meaning, such as "raidole", the house, vs. "Raidoti", the
> world, or "nezerne", a lord, vs. "nezerpi", a king.
>
I remembered a discussion about that a few months ago. So you see, somebody
remembered your presence :)) .
>
> Beinuna kaldodaikle.
> beinun-ha kaldo-daik-le.
> man-DSgNNeg place-this-DSgN.
> The man isn't there. (The copula can usually be left out.)
>
Your language could have also more than one copula: one which can usually be
left out between two nouns, and the kind of null pronoun to use between a noun
and an adjective (after all, they are two different kinds of sentences, one
definitive or spatial, and one qualificative. So it's not strange that they
would be constructed differently). What do you think of it?
> Possessives are formed by one of the following suffixes:
> Normal form (owner) Reverse form (owned)
> Normal possession -no -ki
> Association -ndu -wai
> "Possession" through -zik -val
> having made something
> Composition (i.e. what -nut -kar
> something is composed
> of)
>
Interesting, a language which can mark both the "genitive" and the "construct".
I wonder if there are any example in real life...
>
> ADJECTIVES
> ----------
>
> An adjective can be suffixed to its noun if it has not been
> declined; only one adjective can be suffixed per noun. Otherwise the
> adjective follows the noun.
>
That is nearly the exact sentence I have to describe adjectives in
Itakian :))) .
> Comparison of adjectives:
>
> Positive: keimas, many, much beris, red
> keimasin, quite a few/? berisin, a little red
Maybe simply a few, a little, it seems to fit more with the meaning with the
adjective beris.
> keimasinor, quite many/much berisinor, quite red
> keimasindo, very many/much berisindo, very red
> Comparative: keimasor, more berisor, redder
> keimasorin, a little/few more berisorin, a little redder
> keimasoror, somewhat more berisoror, quite redder
> keimasorto, many more berisorto, much redder
> Superlative: keimasto, most beristo, reddest
> keimastoin, almost most beristoin, almost reddest
> keimastor, more-or-less most beristor, more-or-less
> reddest
> keimastoto, most of all beristoto, reddest of all
> ?: keimasene, too many berisene, too red
> keimasuri, not many enough berisuri, not red enough
>
I've seen the term "excessive" which in my opinion gives quite the correct
meaning.
>
> Some grammatical adverbs are:
> tem - begin to (incohative?)
I think the right spelling is "inchoactive", but for the rest it's okay.
> a - (used to hold suffixes for aorist verbs)
> keta - if
"if" is a "grammatical adverb"? Interesting. It reminds me of my conlang Moten,
where "if" is one of the "tenses" of the verb :))) .
> ze - imperative
> ra - again (repetitive)
> nul - question
> nib - present
> hew - past
> dal - future
> (The last three are usually used with verbs in the "before" and
> "after" tenses)
>
Why would they be used for? The meaning of the "before" and "after" tense (in
one conlang of mine, I called them anterior and posterior) is enough, given
that the principal clause is present.
>
> Conjunctions follow the verbs in their clauses (I'm actually thinking
> of making them function as grammatical adverbs):
>
Well, you already did with "if" :)) .
>
> Relative clauses are indicated by putting a personal pronoun before
> the verb of the clause:
>
> Beinunle arai kenira daik
> beinun-le a-r-ai kenir-ha daik
> man-DSgN S-3p-M speak-Pt this
> The man, who said this
>
IIRC, the origin of the relative pronouns in Germanic languages is equivalent,
except that they used the demonstrative pronouns. That's why for instance in
Dutch, the relative pronouns die and dat are identical to demonstrative
pronouns.
Christophe.
http://rainbow.conlang.free.fr
Take your life as a movie: do not let anybody else play the leading role.
Reply