Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Why Triggers?

From:Christophe Grandsire <christophe.grandsire@...>
Date:Thursday, October 4, 2001, 7:45
En réponse à Kristian Jensen <kljensen@...>:

> > That was ME!!!! I've been on lurk mode for a very very long time. > Old-timers > here know that trigger systems is my cup of tea. But somehow I missed > the recent > discussions on trigger systems. <curses!> >
Hey yeah! Well, as for missing the discussion about trigger languages, you can still look at the archives for the discussion on this week and the past week :) .
> > examples you give. Interestingly, this idea is very good to explain > trigger > > languages (though one can argue whether trigger languages are really > verbless). > > The theory I had did not state that trigger languages were verbless. > It stated that they indeed have verbs, but that whenever they are > used they are always nominalized. E.g.; "eat" becomes "eater" for > actor > trigger; "eat" becomes "the eaten/the food" for patient trigger; "eat" > becomes "eating place" for location trigger; etc. >
Sorry if I wasn't accurate. I was quoting from memory, and you presented your theory about trigger languages quite a while ago.
> > At least, it fitted the facts quite well (from what I know of Tagalog, > the > > subject in nominal sentences is marked like the trigger in verbal > ones, thus > > the idea that trigger sentences are essentially nominal fits quite > well). > > I'm not a native Tagalog speaker, but I know enough of it (being part > Filipino) to confirm that Tagalog sentences are essentially nominal. >
I agree, though my knowledge of Tagalog is confined to reading the webpage whose address I gave to Vasiliy.
> > Note that this idea wouldn't fit in my Itakian, though it's a trigger > language. > > In this language, sentences using the trigger have quite a different > structure > > from nominal sentences (the trigger and the subject are not marked the > same, > > and that's only the smallest difference). > > The fact that sentences using the trigger and ordinary nominal > sentences > essentially have the same structure in Tagalog is enough to convince > me. > > I don't claim to be the authority on trigger systems, and I don't > claim > that the theory is 100% applicable to real-life West Austronesian > langs. > But I use it anyways because it is what I use as the keystone to build > a > unique grammar for my conlang -- Boreanesian. Whether it applies to > real-life West Austronesian langs is besides the point. My concern is > to > make Boreanesian naturalistic yet unique, and I think I managed to do > that > by applying the theory to Boreanesian quite literally. >
By the way, is Boreanesian on the web? I don't remember much about it. I hope you're gonna lurk a little less: you're a very worthy member of the conlang community (also, as soon as I come with morphemes and lexemes for Itakian, I'm gonna present that to the list, and it would be nice to have the opinion of someone who also created a trigger language :) ). Happy to see that you're still around! Christophe. http://rainbow.conlang.free.fr

Reply

Kristian Jensen <kljensen@...>