Re: Participles in Natlangs and in Conlangs

In Ankanian there really are no participles in the strict sense.
Though of course there are ways to represent all the related meanings.
For example, instead of saying the "running man" one would say
"the man who runs"="akana fotil" which has the reduced form
"akana fot", so I suppose "fot" might be called a present participle.
There is a word formation that yields a word like a past participle,
but it is more accurately a passive present participle, but in a few
situations can be a past active participle. Ex.: mesi=fall; mers=fallen;
kosi=like; kors=liked. These are virtually never used in passive
constructions. (Instead of Korsu-ng=she was liked, one would find:
Kosu nge=there was a liking of her.)

All other verbal descriptions are performed by sub-clauses which
have all the possible verbal variations of the main clause. Ex.:
kurma gek-ondi-le=a sword which has been broken
(lit. sword, there has been a breaking of it)
ngeva vesö-l=a girl who will speak

These often reduce to a single word so one could call them
participles, also as they occupy the same position as adjectives
(since adjectives* follow)
but an ankanian would not see them as special forms.

*Now that I think of it, ankanians wouldn't recognize
adjectives either, since they are just reduced relative clauses
as well.

Harold