Re: Auxiliary verbs

Yahya Abdal-Aziz, and Sapthan too, wrote, in response to my questions about
Spanish and Indonesian-- much useful commentary, for which many thanks.
> Note that we don't say "you can not-go" in English
> for this meaning,
Oh yes we do :-) though usually in a snarky tone of voice:
A: I really ought to go [do XX], but I don't want to...
B: Well, you can [always] NOT go....

Sometimes a double negative is more useful:
A: I'm not going to complain [about S].
B: Hey, you mustn't NOT complain (I.e. you must complain)

It's rather like one of my favorite expressions: "Let's not and say we did"
:-))

With intonation, all things are possible.

> "mungkin" for "to be possible that"
>  - "mungkin kau masuk" = "it is possible that you enter"
>  - "tak mungkin kau masuk" = "it is impossible that you enter"
>  - "mungkin kau jangan (*) masuk" =
>    "mungkin kau tak masuk" = "it is possible that you don't enter"
>  - "tak mungkin kau jangan (*) masuk" = "it is impossible that you don't
> enter"
>  (implying "how could you not enter?")
Aha... I'd forgotten how useful "jangan" can be.... As well as all those
wonderful se...nya expressions, which were somewhat, though not totally,
overlooked in our lessons.  Hmm, is "sebolehnya" possible?
>
>
> > Needless to say, the problem hasn't cropped up in Kash either; I'm
> > suspecting it might work something like my proposed Indonesian---
> >
> > harumbo (ha)cosa 'you may go' ~ ta harumbo (ha)cosa 'you may not go'
> > (permission)
> >
> > rumbo/ni, ta hacosa 'you may [not go]' (option) Lit. "may-of.it,
> > you don't
> > go" but that's probabaly colloq.  I can't think of a "proper" way
> > to say it.
> > Maybe: yarumbo re ta hacosa ' it may (be) that you don't go' (sounds
> > unlikely or stilted at best)??
>
> "Possibly you won't go" or "it is possible you won't
> go" seem like reasonable approaches to me.  If you
> have the word "possible" or "possibly", you can
> express an attitude about the possiblility of any
> [non-]event.  (But you probably won't use the
> modal "will/won't", will you?)
Nope; Kash usually only marks tense (esp. future, which can imply certainty
or obligation) when absolutely necessary, or in "good" written work.......

 Still, if you want to
> avoid a reflex of either an English or a Malay/Indo-
> nesian structure - why not simply choose a new
> structure for this purpose?
Actually, that "yarumbo re..." constitutes a new structure that I'll need to
investigate further.

I rather like the
> (logical) idea of simply putting the "not" before
> the relevant verb, as you do with your "ta" above.
"Harumbo ta hacosa" (for the option sense) just doesn't look/sound right.

> Your "/ni" also asserts that the "may" governs
> some other clause (your going).  How about:
>  - rumbo/ni, hacosa 'you may go'
>  - ta rumbo/ni, hacosa 'you may not go'
>  - rumbo/ni, ta hacosa 'you may [stay = not go]'
>  - ta rumbo/ni, ta hacosa 'you may not [stay = not go]'
>
All good possibilities.  You're acquiring some fluency in Kash!! (sometimes
verb+ni is quite close to the Indon. se...nya things; also verb+nya e.g.
katanya 'he/she said...' other times close to Spanish "lo ADJ es...",
probably because Kash <revealing professional secret> often combines
niceties from both languages :-))

> Not in my AusE, it's not!  One might say:
>  - you may nót go (you are not permitted to go)
>  - you máy: not go (you are permitted not to go)
>
> I think the pause, or lengthened diphthong, is
> probably essential to being understood here.
Yes-- it's what I meant; that's the problem with email.