Re: [hsteoh: Re: Non-static verbs?]

* H. S. Teoh <hsteoh@...> [000817 03:12]:
> On Thu, Aug 17, 2000 at 02:15:06AM +0200, taliesin the storyteller wrote:
> > * H. S. Teoh <hsteoh@...> [000816 21:37]:
> > > I'm just wondering if this occurs in any natlangs or any other conlangs:
> > >
> > > In my conlang, verbs are *never* used to describe state but specifically
> > > only for describing changes in state.
> >
> > Heh, târuven is just about the opposite, unmarked verbs are in the
> > continous aspect, giving the feel that a sentence is a snapshot of a
> > situation. Changes of state are marked explicitly if it isn't one of
> > the few non-continous verbs.
>
> Interesting... from the POV of my conlang, that would mean you're using
> nouns all the time (which is perfectly valid, in fact). :-)
Ah. I define word-classes morphologically - verbs can't be marked for
plural and case, nouns can't be marked for a whole range of
verb-specific things like aspect, mood, evidentials... Verbs have a
noun-representation though, the meaning being the process of verbing:

'rann (v) "to break something" > 'rann (n) "the process of breaking something"

If you want the result (if any) of the process, you must ask for that
explicitly:

'rann (v) "to break something" > 'rannad' (n) "the broken thing"

A verb meaning "to build" would have been better but there aren't one
yet :) Then you would have:

 to build > "the building goes swiftly" > a building
             ^^^^^^^^^^^^
Or in Norwegian:
 å bygge "to build" > en/ei bygging > en bygning/et bygg

> [snip]
> > "Check" for zero-copula. Adjectives are really stative verbs, and one
> > might say that nouns are stative verbs too... they can all be marked for
> > time :) They all have the existence-bit of the copula built-in, but
> > not the comparison/identity/grouping-bits.
> [snip]
>
> Interesting concept, that nouns are stative verbs.
Didn't say they *are*, just that it is a possible perspective on them.

> Tho my conlang takes somewhat a different view: you have objects, and
> events, and interrelationships between them. These correspond with
> nouns, verbs, and "relatives", respectively. [..] Relatives are used
> mainly for identifying subclauses and adjoining sentences.
Hmm... AFMCL, objects have states, can go from one state to another, start
being or stop being... what you call relatives are mostly also verbs in
my lang. Verbs like âr "to think" and 'syarad' "to decide" require
another sentence, or a phrase marked for benefactive, to be complete.

sâel âr mirrô sïkru nîkeaþ "I think.that cats in-general.kill mice"


t.