En réponse à Amanda Babcock :
> neko ga taberu ringo wa mieta
> cat NOM eat apple TOP was-seen
> "I saw an apple that was eaten by a cat."
Note that in subclauses, 'ga' can be replaced by 'no', normally the
genitive marker.
>This also takes care of the other kind of clause whose name I can't remember
>right now:
>
> neko ga ringo wo taberu koto wa omoshiroi desu.
> cat NOM apple ACC eat matter TOP amusing is.
> "It's amusing that a cat was eating an apple."
That's called a completive subclause. Note her the presence of the filler
word "koto": (material) thing, matter, necessary to anker (sp?) the
subclause in the principal clause. In other words, there's no real
difference between relative subclauses and completive subclauses here. Both
are rendered with a subclause completing a noun. It just depends on the
noun what is meant.
>It also allows for some of the ambiguity that Japanese is famous for;
>"shinjiru hito" could, I think, mean "a person who believes" or "a person
>who is believed in", depending on context.
A wonderful source of expressivity :)) .
>Corrections from the more fluent welcome.
This not-so-fluent guy says you did a very good job in the description :) .
Christophe Grandsire.
http://rainbow.conlang.free.fr
You need a straight mind to invent a twisted conlang.