Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Evidentiality in gjâ-zym-byn

From:Jeffrey Jones <jsjonesmiami@...>
Date:Monday, August 15, 2005, 5:03
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 22:06:32 -0400, Jim Henry <jimhenry1973@...>
wrote:
> > I've admired the evidentiality systems of languages like > Laadan, Ithkuil, and Qthyn|gai and thought for a while > about whether it would suit to add some kind of > evidentiality marking to gjâ-zym-byn. It needs to be optional, > I think, to fit the spirit of the language (very few categories > are mandatorily marked for). For a while I thought about > introducing a system of adverbial particles for different > modes of evidentiality, corresponding to the existing truth-value > clitics (yes, no, maybe-fact, maybe-plan, to-some-degree). > More recently I've thought of another, more extensible way: > add a suffix that can derive an evidentiality marker from any > root word. Such derived evidentiality markers would > either go after the main verb (probably last in any sequence > of modifiers) or at the beginning of the sentence, like a temporal > adjunct. > > [I'll go on using the ASCII orthography with digraphs > in emails here because most of the > characters I'm using in my website are not available in Latin-1.] > > If I use {-poxm} as the evidentiality suffix, then: > > bly-van ku-poxm pwiqm miq-i. > fall-V.STATE hear-EVD water TOP-at > It's raining (I hear it). > > fiqm-cox-van riqm-poxm pq jqaxr-i. > healthy-OPP-V.STATE see-EVD 3 experiencer-at > He's sick (I saw him). > > lju-poxm jeq'liq miq-i fiqm-fwa nxiqn-i. > read-EVD garlic TOP-at healthy-CAUS CMT-at > (I read somewhere that) garlic is good for you. > > tam-ram-poxm twax-cu poq miq-i jxyn-fwa henx nxiqn-i. > Tom-NAME-EVD sentence-system DEM3 TOP-at interest-CAUS not CMT-at > (Tom tells me that) that book isn't very interesting. > > Comments? I think this can derive markers for many though maybe not > all of the evidentiality modes shown in the languages I mentioned above. > It's less concise than the languages that use a single-phoneme affix or > fusional inflection or monosyllabic particles for evidentiality > (always at least two syllables, sometimes three or more), but still > more concise than the roundabout means for indicating evidentiality > previously available in the language.
That's a nice method, since it makes evidentials an open class. I'm trying out something vaguely like that, but with certain limitations, in a new project. If a word can be used as an evidential, a form with the auxiliary affix is used. This takes person marking, unlike yours, where I guess 1st person is implied by -EVD. Possibly my system is like your previous method? Jeff
> -- > Jim Henry > http://www.pobox.com/~jimhenry/conlang.htm > ...Mind the gmail Reply-to: field >=========================================================================

Reply

Jim Henry <jimhenry1973@...>