Re: Two part verbs (Why They Shouldn't Make Me Wait)

>From: Mia Soderquist <verimund@...>
>
>While sitting in a waiting room recently, I scribbled out a system of verbs
>where every verb has two parts-- an auxiliary that carries
>tense/aspect/mode/person/number, and then the part that carries the
>content. I thought about a series of auxiliaries that don't mean anything
>on their own, but do contribute to the meaning of the verb phrase. For
>instance, there would be an auxiliary form that is used with verbs about
>"being", another for "doing",  "making", "having/acquiring",
>"giving/receiving", etc. Perhaps the same content word for mental action
>used with the "be" auxiliary would mean "believe", with "do" would mean
>"think", with "give/receive" would mean "feel (emotionally)".
>

Verbs in my "Ricadh" language do exactly that:  a verb itself doesn't take
markings, but the separate auxiliary word marks the entire sentence for
tense, voice, etc.  I've been experimenting with sentence structure in this
style of language -- Ricadh started as a VSO language with the auxiliary as
a verbal prefix, but it's evolved recently to place the content-part of the
verb at the end -- SOV -- while retaining the separate auxiliary as the
first word in a sentence.

A couple of corollaries I've "discovered" in this Ricadh verb style:  the
auxiliary is generally retained as a verbal prefix to mark dependent
clauses.  The auxiliary can also be used on its own in a sentence, without a
verbal counterpart; this structure functions as a simple copula.

_________________________________________________________________
WIN up to $10,000 in cash or prizes – enter the Microsoft Office Live
Sweepstakes http://clk..atdmt.com/MRT/go/aub0050001581mrt/direct/01/