Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

verb conjugations and participles...

From:cybersolutions <assai@...>
Date:Thursday, September 13, 2001, 23:09
I am trying to create a language ( as we all are, I imagine.) I am using a
positional system of grammar, like english, where the order is
Subject-Verb-DirectObject-IndirectObject. I am stuck now on how I can or should
conjugate my verbs.

Some goals I amtrying to fulfill with verbs are:
1) I would like to be able to express all the verb flavors in english, ie:
He *has been walking* for some time.
He *had walked* since noon.
He *will have walked* 100 miles come the end of the day.
He *is walking* now.
He *walks* on.

2) I would like for every past tense to have a macthing future tense. In general,
I would like my language to be symetrical and regular.

3) I would like for verbs to be dealt with more regularly and logically with
respect to particples and how English has done it:
ie, :
"The boy is running and yelling." is no different than "The running boy is
yelling", therefor, I would like to call "running" either an adjective or an
adverb, and call the main (and only) verb of the previous sentence,"is". Why
should the sentences "The boy is pink" and "The boy is running" be any
different from each other, or any different from "The pink boy is" or "The
running boy is"
Note: I understand that the arrangment creates a *connotative* difference, as we all
infer that a non-"standard" arrangement of words muct have been chosen for a
reason, and we therefore associate emphasis connotatively based on the word
But *denotatively*, why should the grammar of the sentences be any different?

One rough and unpolished idea I had was to use some like the following:
(btw, my lang does not use person or number with verb conjugation)
(also, I am using english words as placeholders for the as yet uncreated vocabulary
for my language - I want to get the grammar down *before* I start creating a

Simple Past Tense: He walked.
Simple Present Tense: He walks.
Simple Future Tense: He will walk.

Use the base verb (walk) with any of the tense of the verb "to be" for the participle effect:
He was walk.   ie, He was walking.
He is walk.    ie, He is walking.
He will walk.  ie, the same.

Add in "been" or "going" for the perfect(?) past or future:

     was                           had been
He   is     been walk.  i.e, He    has been   walking.
   will be                      will have been


     was                           had been
He   is     going walk.  i.e, He   has been   going to walk.
   will be                      will have been

Is this complete?  Will this cover every possible english nuance and use of the verb?
Is this symetrical, or has a dimension been ignored?
Will treating particilpes as non-verbs grammatically have any undesirable repercussions?

Once I get past the stumbling block of verb conjugation, I think the rest will flow
smoothly, but I seem to be blocked on this. Can any help, or offer advice?




Paul Sherrill <sherril2@...>