Re: Gevey (Part 1): Verbs - long

> En réponse à Rik Roots <rikroots@...>:
>
> > I have just revised the Gevey verbs. The new setup is described below
> > (best viewed with a fixed-width font). Comments are always welcome...
> >
>
> Then I'll give some :) .
Many thanks for taking the time! Following you down.

> >[snip]
>
> Strange "modes" and "voices". But I am quite a lover of strange
> terminologies so It's okay by me :) .
Please note that I use grammatical terms "loosely" in my description
of Gevey - mainly because I won't let my obvious ignorance of
linguistic terminology get in the way of my vision :->

More on this at the end of the post...

> > Active and incidental voices
> > ----------------------------
> >[snip]
>
> Sounds like the perfect language for poets, dramaturges and writers
> :) . Are your confolks rather cultural-minded? (going very much to
> the theater, reading a lot of poetry, etc...)
I don't think of them being obsessively cultural (though of course it
goes on). They do like to know where they stand in a conversation or
story - who is doing what to whom, and whether the actions they are
trying to achieve/avoid are achievable/avoidable...

> > Gevey has a basic philosophy that an action in the past will
> > directly affect actions in the present and future. The historic
> > tense is used for unalterable, unavoidable or unchangable actions
> > - in effect destiny, while the past tense is used for actions
> > whose repercussions, whilst unavoidable (depending upon the
> > clause's voice), can be altered by later actions.
> >
> Nice distinction. Sounds like it could be part of their mentality,
> or of their religion(s), with accent put on Destiny, but also with
> the fact that you're always the master of your own future.
Yep. They have a very practical view about destiny and the like.

> > Principle verb aspects
> > ----------------------
> > Principle verbs also take a number of verb aspects, which qualify
> > the action of the verb:
> >
> >   Completion aspects
> >   Condition aspects
> >   Emphasis aspects
>
> What are the different aspects found in those categories? I'm
> especially wondering about the "condition" and "emphasis" aspects.
Emphatic aspects
-----------------
There are five emphatic aspect adverbs, which are used to emphasise
or negate the action of a  verb:

  nana - corresponding to never
  na - corresponding to not
  pae - corresponding to uncertainty
  she - giving a positive emphasis to the action of the verb
  shise - giving an emphatic emphasis to the action of the verb

Conditional aspects
--------------------
There are a large number of conditional aspect adverbs. The more
commonly used ones  include:

  haz - would: a conditional desire
  klov - could: a conditional ability or permissability
  gaz - should: a conditional obligation
  man - must: an imperative
  san - must: an imploration or pleading
  tuum - ought to: an obligation
  hon - must: a strong promise
  nezh - will: a desire (not future tense)
  seg - may: a conditional possibility
  tog - might: a weak conditional possibility
  godh - shall: a promise (not future tense)
  trev - can: a permissability
  shiv - ought to: a possibility or liklihood
  stav - can: an emphatic belief
  brav - can: an ability or belief

(there are more elegant ways of conveying such information, but this
system seems to work - I'm after utility rather than beauty with this
language)

> > Verb class
> > ----------
> > All verbs in Gevey are divided into one of two classes:
> >
> >   Transitive verbs
> >   Intransitive verbs
> >
> > Transitive verbs in Gevey are verbs whose actions are normally
> > translated directly to its direct object. Intransitive verbs in
> > Gevey are verbs whose action on the direct object are normally
> > modulated by use of a preposition, which can either be attached
> > at the front of the verb, or will instead attach itself to the
> > direct object.
>
> Does it mean that intransitive verbs can take an object anyway, with
> the help of a preposition, like French so-called "indirect
> transitive verbs" (like "penser à": to think about)? If so, then
> it's a strange way of defining intransitive, but I like it :) .
This is my disgraceful misuse of grammatical terminology tripping you
up. Sorry.

Gevey speakers divide the world of verbs into two types - those that
need a preposition to work, and those that never take a preposition.
All verbs in Gevey can act on a direct object. Your example is spot
on!

> > Compound verbs
> > --------------
>
> I thought Gevey did without passive voice? Or did you just mean that
> it was rendered periphrastically?
Apologies again. There is no "passive voice" in Gevey. I meant
"incidental voice" (which until a couple of weeks ago I was calling
"passive voice", but that was stretching the grammatical lexicon
beyond its endurance so I changed it)

> > Using secondary verb designs
> > ----------------------------
> > [snip]
> >
> > For example:
> >
> >   Te lugzhese ïst'yuu dhoun
> >   I swim in the river
> >
> >   Te lugzhese ïst'yuu dhoun vijan
> >   I prefer to swim in the river
> >
> >   Te lugzhese lougzan ïst'yuu dhoun
> >   I enjoy swimming in the river
> >
>
> Very nice! So it means that while in English the real action is
> rendered through the secondary verb (infinitive or gerund) while the
> principle verb gives the feeling of the subject about it, in Gevey
> it is the contrary? Neat!
Yep. This is one of the very few uses Gevey has for the infinitive.
When used, it appears to be acting as half verb, half verbal aspect
adverb - this is very noticable when the infinitive is placed directly
in front of the verb, though the more normal placement is after the
verb.

I am currently working on producing a native grammar for Gevey ie
a set of Gevey words I can use in the grammatal description of the
language in place of the standard English/Latin lexicon. This will
then allow me to create a definitive grammar, with a terminology annex
which will be a lot easier to update when I realise that I am using
technical terms incorrectly. I don't want to have to keep on
correcting the whole grammar every time I realise my terminology is
misleading. Strangely enough, I'm using theatrical terms (actor,
chorus, prop, stage) to render the grammatical ideas into Gevey, so
maybe the locals do have an artistic view of their lives and language,
after all :->

> Christophe.
Best wishes

Rik

--
http://homepages.enterprise.net/rikroots/gevey/index.html
The Gevey Language Resource.