Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Castillian Greek was Re: Slovanik, Enamyn, and Slavic slaves

From:Thomas Leigh <thomas@...>
Date:Sunday, August 4, 2002, 13:22
John Cowan wrote:

> But how different are masculine and neuter these days?
The genitives are the same, but nearly all netuer nouns (apart from one small group I'm aware of) have the nom. and acc. plural in -a. The nom. and acc. singular are likewise always identical, whereas with masc. nouns those two cases are kept distinct. Examples (nom. sg., acc. sg., gen sg., voc sg. [where applicable]; nom/voc pl., acc. pl., gen. pl.) fílos (m.): fílos, fílo, fílu, fíle; fíli, fílus, fílon mathitís (m.): mathitís, mathití, mathití, mathití; mathités, mathités, mathitón patéras (m.): patéras, patéra, patéra, patéra; patéres, patéres, patéron vivlío (n.): vivlío, vivlío, vivlíu; vivlía, vivlía, vivlíon trapézi (n.): trapézi, trapézi, trapeziú; trapézia, trapézia, trapezión máthima (m.): máthima, máthima, mathímatos; mathímata, mathímata, mathimáton A couple of feminine nouns for comparison: kóri (f.): kóri, kóri, kóris, kóri; kóres, kóres, korón mitéra: mitéra, mitéra, mitéras, mitéra; mitéres, mitéres, mitéron Note: 1. first declension (nom sg. in -as/-is) masc. nouns end in -s in the nom. sg. and form all the other cases of the singular by dropping the -s; first declension fem. nouns (nom sg. in -a/-i) have all cases alike in the singular except for the gen. which is formed by adding -s. 2. Except for second declension masc. nouns (nom. sg. in -os), the nom. and acc. cases are identical. 3. Any noun may be used in the vocative where sense permits; however, the voc. is only distinguished from the nom. in form in singular masculine nouns (those of the first declension drop the -s; those of the second declension change -os to -e) Moving on to verbs, I would like to offer a perhaps slightly different analysis from Philip's. This may be due to the fact that I studied Russian before I studied Greek, but I see (modern) Greek as having an aspectual system similar to that of Slavic languages. All verbs have two stems: one denoting an ongoing, continuous or repeated action, and one denoting a single and/or completed action -- in other words, imperfective and perfective. The perfective stem is derived ultimately, from the old s-future (I think; I haven't studied ancient Greek, but there's a tense formed by adding -s to the stem, I think it's the future). Example: the verb gráfo has the imperfective stem graf- and the perfective stem graps-. The present tense, by definition, is formed from the imperfective stem: gráfo, gráfis, gráfi, gráfume, gráfete, gráfun. A present tense can be formed from the perfective stem, but this only occurs after another verb, where other European languages might employ a subjunctive (which doesn't really exist in mod. Greek): compare thélo na gráfis (imperfective): "I want you to write (in general), to be writing") with thélo na grápsis (perfective): "I want you to write (e.g. once, write something down and finish). By adding the past endings (and augment, where necessary, as past tense forms must have a minumum of 3 syllables) to the imperfective stem we get the imperfect: égrafa, égrafes, égrafe, gráfame, gráfate, égrafan ("I was writing, used to write, etc.). By adding the past endings to the perfective stem we get the simple past (preterite, whatever you want to call it): égrapsa, égrapses, égrapse, grápsame, grápsate, égrapsan ("I wrote, you wrote, etc.) The future is formed by adding the particle tha (deriving ultimately from thélo na..., i.e. "I want that...") to the present. Imperfective: tha gráfo, tha gráfis, etc. ("I will be writing", etc.); perfective: tha grápso, tha grápsis, etc. ("I will write [and finish]", etc.) There is a compound perfect and pluperfect formed with the verb éxo ("have") in the present and past (no imperfective/perfective stem difference with this verb) as an auxilliary plus an invariable form ending in -i (spelt epsilon-iota). This is, as far as I've seen, only formed from perfective stems, as they denote a completed action: éxo grápsi, éxis grápsi, etc. ("I have written, you have written", etc.) íxa grápsi, íxes grápsi, etc. ("I had written, you had written", etc.) The imperative (only exists in 2nd person): gráfe, gráfete ("write [continuously, etc.], be writing!"); grápse, grápsete ("write [and finish]!") I don't think it was mentioned before, but there's a whole other set of endings for the passive voice. Not that "I am written", etc. makes much logical sense, but for the sake of using the same verb: imperfective stem graf-, perfective stem graft- pres. imperfective: gráfome, gráfese, gráfete, grafómaste, gráfeste, gráfonde pres. perfective ("subjunctive"): graftó, graftís, graftí, graftúme, graftíte, graftún imperfect: grafómun, grafósun, grafótan, grafómaste/grafómastan, grafósaste/grafósastan, gráfondan simple past: gráftika, gráftikes, gráftike, graftíkame, graftíkaste, gráftikan fut. imperfective: tha gráfome, etc. fut. perfective: tha graftó, etc. perfect: éxo graftí pluperfect: íxa graftí perfective imperative: grápsu, graftíte (endings exist for the imperfective imperative passive, i.e. gráfu, gráfeste, but for whatever reason they are hardly ever used.) I hope this is of help! Best regards Thomas Leigh

Replies

John Cowan <jcowan@...>
Philip Newton <philip.newton@...>