Re: a grammar sketch...

On Fri, 29 Sep 2000, H. S. Teoh wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 29, 2000 at 02:11:46PM -0400, Yoon Ha Lee wrote:
> [snip]
> > :-/  If this doesn't make sense I'll drop the system.
>
> Don't. Develop it until it *does* make sense, just like I did with my own
> conlang's weird case system :-P
Eh...I was toying with developing a conlang for a sf alien culture
(Chevraqis is for a fantasy human culture).  The problem is, none of the
ideas I can come up with seem "alien" enough--and I'm not clever enough
to think of something really brilliantly different, like the "quantum
language."

> >  (Is there a word
> > for when you noun a verb, like "Running is fun"?  I can't remember seeing
> > it.)
>
> They are called gerunds.
Oh!  Now why didn't anyone ever explain them *that* way?  I keep thinking
"geranium."  But then, "hemiola" in music always made me think of
"hernia" (I had surgery for a hernia in 4th grade).

> > less than 4 (less than a full cycle) there are "null" utterances that are
> > inserted as placeholders (I'm thinking some brief, abbreviated phrases
> > invoking Deity or Elements).
> [snip]
>
> Wow. Sounds like this language would be more suited for formal rituals
> than everyday speech :-P
That was sort of the idea--I had vague notions of this as a
semi-ritualistic or "high" language used among the warrior/explorer caste.

> [snip]
> > A formal/polite speaker, to sound more "legato," might use a reciprocal
> > construction to say:
> >
> > I visited my friend. (action)
> > (null-actor)
> > She waited for my visit.  (actee)
> > (null-accomplice)
> >
> > I'm sure people in a hurry can ditch this convention.  I'm not all that
> > sure it makes sense, but for the moment I like the idea.
>
> Hmm. My conlang actually is tending somewhat in this direction as well,
> although it isn't quite that strict. Conversation will almost always start
> out with a "nominator sentence" -- which is a single noun or noun-phrase
> in the locative case, marking the topic of subsequent discourse. Then a
> combination of verbal or stative sentences may follow; and it will be
> concluded by one or more "summaritive sentences" -- which use weird
> back-referencing relatives (particles) to recapture the main points in the
> preceding discourse.
> So there's this somewhat a cyclic structure similar to your "cycles":
> nominator --> stative/verbal --> [more stative/verbal] --> summaritive
>
<rueful look>  But your system makes a lot more sense than my sketchy
notes.  I suspect I'm going to have to go back to the drawing board and
see what other structure I can come up with.

> [snip]
> > The action not only has the "action" case-marking, it also inflects for
> > the position-in-cycle, i.e. whether the sentence is an actor-sentence,
> > actee-sentence, etc.
>
> Awesome... this sounds similar to correlatives in (Attic) Greek: whenever
> you have two parallel ideas, whether contrasting with each other or just
> describing two harmonious sides, you insert the postpositive particle
> "me'n" in the first sentence, and "de'" in the second sentence. Although
> the convention is to translate "men" and "de" as "on the one hand" and "on
> the other hand", the English sounds awkwardly repetitive; but in the
> Greek, it gives a very pleasing dual-aspect structure.
Neat!

> In my conlang, I've been toying with a possible extension of this idea:
> the native speakers are obsessed with the number 3, which they associate
> with the 3 colors red, green and blue. I'm thinking of doing a 3-way
> correlative structure, each sentence will be marked with particles
> deriving from "red", "green" and "blue", respectively. This seems to be
> very similar to your "cycle" idea -- each sentence will bear a particle
> that marks its correlation with the other two. I'll probably make this the
> popular convention in native poetry...
<G>  I'm not even trying to think as far ahead as poetry yet, but OTOH
your conlang's a lot better developed than either this sketch or Chevraqis.

> > Anyway...just some ideas I've been scribbling to myself.  I have the bad
> > feeling I'm attempting to do clumsily, with insufficient "real"
> > terminology, what others have probably done before, much more
> > gracefully..  Pointers for reading or websites would be appreciated.
> [snip]
>
> Bah, don't worry about it. I think I'm worse than you when it comes to
> "real" terminology -- I just make everything up :-P  The important thing
> IMHO is to get fresh ideas, whether or not you can express them at the
> moment, and develop them until they are workable, and then pick up (or
> invent!) terminology when the need arises. I'm a firm believer in
> following "gut feelings", esp. in artistic things like conlanging. :-)
I like finding out "real" terminology so I don't confuse people--and
sometimes the actual existing terminology is a lot better than what I can
come up with.  :-)

I think I may put this on hold until I can come up with some better
ideas, more time, etc.  Thanks for your comments, though!

YHL