Re: Tatari Faran update

On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 09:09:39AM -0600, James W wrote:
> >>>> H. S. Teoh<hsteoh@...> 12/6/2004 12:56:28 PM >>>
[...]
> >The structure of an NP containing a relative clause is:
> >	<head_noun> <args ...> <relativised_verb> <case_clitic>
> >
> >The relativised verb is an inflected verb form which marks the case
> >role of the head noun in the relative clause. For example:
> >
> >	kiran     ahuu        tsanan        sa
> >	young_man AUX_ORG-1sp speak-REL_RCP CVY
> >	The young man to whom I spoke.
> >
> >	kiran     nihuu       tsanakan      sa
> >	young_man AUX_RCP-1sp speak-REL_ORG CVY
> >	The young man who spoke to me.
> >
> >	kiran     ahuu        itsana        sa
> >	young_man AUX_ORG-1sp speak-REL_CVY CVY
> >	The young man about whom I spoke.
> >
> >	kiran     ihuu        tsanan        sa
> >     young_man AUX_CVY-1sp speak-REL_RCP CVY
> >	The young man to whom I was spoken about.
>
> It took me two days to grasp what is going on here (I'm slow :) ).
> Marking case on the verb...I like it!
Yeah, this way there's no need for a relative pronoun. :-)

> In my emindahken, if I ever get to verbs, I plan on doing something
> vaguely similar by marking verbs for agent/patient, etc.  My plan is
> to require the nouns of an utterance to appear in some kind of
> animacy heirarchy, and to mark their syntactic roles on the verb.
> Not sure quite how yet...
Hmm. That sounds almost like a "trigger lang", where the role of the
"subject" is marked on the verb.


> I'm still struggling with your cases, although I think they're a great
> change from the IE types.
If you need more info, the case system is described in greater detail
here:
	http://conlang.eusebeia.dyndns.org/fara/cases.html

And yes, it's *very* non-IE. :-) But, so claim people who've learned
Ebisédian (which uses an analogous system), it's really not that
strange once you understand how it works.


[...]
> >	ihuu        tsana'i.
> >	AUX_RCP-1sp speak-INF
> >	To speak about me.
>
> How is this different from 'To speak TO me'? Wouldn't you need AUX_RCP-1sp
> (the receptive case) in in that case ('scuse the pun) as well?
OOPS!!!! Sorry!! That's an incorrect gloss. _ihuu_ is AUX_CVY-1sp, not
AUX_RCP-1sp. The receptive form is _nihuu_. And yes, if it were the
receptive here, it'd be "to speak to me" rather than "to speak about
me".


[...]
> >Infinitive clauses in Tatari Faran are actually nominalized clauses,
> >since they inflect for case by having an appropriate case clitic
> >appended. Here are some examples of full sentences containing an
> >infinitive clause:
> >
> >1) huu na  hamra nidiru       abata'        tsana'i   so  aram.
> >   1sp RCP see   AUX_RCP-girl AUX_ORG-chief speak-INF CVY COMPL
> >   I see the chief speaking to the girl.
>
> Here you use receptive marking on the girl who is spoken TO, where in your
> above example the receptive case marks the 'topic' of the speaking. I'm
> confused...
[...]

Sorry, it was a wrong gloss on the previous example. The receptive
always marks the person being spoken to; it is the conveyant which is
used to mark the person being spoken about (or the thing being
spoken).


T

--
Exaggerate?! I have never, *ever* exaggerated in my whole entire life, not
even 0.000001 times!