Tatari Faran update
|From:||H. S. Teoh <hsteoh@...>|
|Date:||Friday, October 15, 2004, 17:50|
Here's an update on Tatari Faran.
1) In a spate of conlang fever, the lexicon has exploded into a
whopping 94 entries within the past week. Looks like I'm shooting
for basic conversational facility pretty fast this time. (The
progress of Ebisédian was measured in months rather than days!)
2) Tatari Faran has acquired almost all the pronouns it needs now. The
only missing ones are the 1st person plurals, for which I've yet to
decide whether or not to have an inclusive/exclusive distinction.
The current ones are:
1p singular: huu [hu:]
2p singular: tse [ts&]
2p plural: huna [huna]
3p singular: tara' [ta4a?]
3p plural: diin [di:n]
The 2p and 3p pronouns double as vocative/demonstrative markers,
with such common expressions as:
san tse ["san ts&] "You person"
san huna [san "huna] "You people"
diru tse [di4u ts&] "You girl"
bata' huna [bata? "huna] "You chiefs"
san tara' [san tara?] "That person"
tsaritas diin [tsa4itas di:n] "Those monkeys"
(And no, it's _san huna_, not _kahuna_. :-P)
3) More thanks to the denizens of #conlang, I finally got over another
hurdle in making Tatari Faran a head-initial language. It now
tinka aba ["tin.ka aba] under the conifer
tinka ata ["tin.ka ata] on top of the conifer
These postpositions essentially behave like case-marker
replacements. In a sense, this is an "expandible" case-system. :-)
The postpositions may also modify verbs:
huu sa tapa aba kuen na bata.
1pp CVY walk under tree RCP COMPL
["hu: sa tapa aba "kMn na bata]
"I walk under the tree." Lit. "I under-walk the tree."
Note that this is different from:
huu sa tapa kuen aba bata.
1pp CVY walk tree under COMPL
["hu: sa tapa "kMn aba bata]
"I am walking (around) under the tree."
4) More on verb complements: as I've mentioned on #conlang, I've found
some verbs for which there's more than one complement. For example,
the verb _tapa_, "to walk":
tapa ... bata [tapa bata] "to walk" - the usual complement
tapa ... ta'an [tapa ta?an] "to walk to the bottom of"
tapa ... anan [tapa anan] "to walk to the top of"
The complement _ta'an_ also occurs in the unanalysable statement,
peira ta'an. [pej4a ta?an] "It is raining."
From this, we could infer that _ta'an_ carries the meaning of "to
the ground" or "reaching the bottom". The word _peira_ is actually
a neuter noun, not a verb. Another example of this is:
jilanan murimuun. [dzilanan mu4imu:n] "It is foggy."
The complement _murimuun_ has the meaning of "enveloping",
"covering", or "enshrouding", and is used with the verb "to wear":
huu sa kaja tsuna na murimuun.
I CVY wear clothing RCP covering-COMPL
["hu: sa ka.dza "tsunan da mu4imu:n]
"I put on the clothing."
(Note that in Tatari Faran, one "gets into" clothes rather than
applying the clothes to oneself, as is shown by the conveyant case
of the 1st person and the receptive case of "clothing". Also note
the lenition: /tsuna na/ -> [tsunan da])
Another thing about complements is that when a sentence consists of
more than one clause, not all clauses may have a complement. See
(5) below for an example.
5) Conditional statements: the postposition _era_ [&4a], when attached
to verb, has the meaning of "if" or "maybe". If used in the
indicative mood, it means "maybe"; if used in the subjunctive, it
huu sa tapa era buara na bata.
I CVY walk if volcano RCP COMPL
["hu: sa tapa &4a "bwa4a na bata]
"Maybe I will walk to the volcano."
tapa era huu sa buara na, tsaritas ko hamra huu na aram.
walk if I CVY volcano RCP monkey ORG see I RCP COMPL
[ta"pa &4a hu: sa "bwa4a na, tsa4itas kO "ham4a hu: na a4am]
"If I walk to the volcano, I will see the monkey."
Notice in the second example how the verb complement is present
only in the second clause. It serves as a "finalizer", or the bang
at the end, if you will. This construction can also be reversed:
huu na hamra tsaritas ko aram, tapa era huu sa buara na.
I RCP see monkey ORG COMPL walk if I CVY volcano RCP
["hu: na ham4a tsa4itas kO a4am, tapa &4a hu: sa "bwa4a na]
"I would see the monkey, if I walked to the volcano."
As you can see, the bang goes with the consequent clause, but not
with the antecedent clause.
6) The phonology is in a bit of a flux right now... the original /o/
has become /u/, and a "new" /o/ has appeared that seems to want to
be pronounced as [O] rather than [A]. Also, if a noun ends with
_na_, then the receptive particle _na_ seems to want to become
_nda_ instead. I suspect analogous processes will occur with other
nouns whose last syllable is too similar to the case particle.
Sigh... conlangs that acquire a life of their own can sometimes be
hard to tame.
Notwithstanding the eloquent discontent that you have just
respectfully expressed at length against my verbal capabilities, I am
afraid that I must unfortunately bring it to your attention that I am,
in fact, NOT verbose.