Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

EAK - two problems

From:R A Brown <ray@...>
Date:Sunday, May 20, 2007, 7:31
I will write the EAK in Roman letters so that all can read it  :)
Accent (stress in EAK) is shown by the acute.
Unaccented eta & omega are denoted by _è_ and _ò_ respectively; thus _ê_
and _ô_ denote accented eta & omega.
(These conventions are kept even when quoting ancient Greek,
irrespective of which pitch accent was actually used).
_th_ represents theta.

In the ancient language the same words are used for both, differences being:
Interrogatives are placed first in the clause/sentence and are accented
on the first syllable;
Indefinites are placed in some 'unemphatic' position in the sentence and
are enclitic (i.e. they throw their accent back onto the preceding word
if they can, otherwise the disyllabic words are accented on the second
syllable - monosyllabic lose the accent).

Can I do something similar in EAK, for example (assuming the context
makes it clear we are referring to the future):
Póte se élthe? = When will you come?
Emé élthe poté = I'll be coming sometime.

What if the word is monosyllabic?
Pòs se prásse autó?  How will you do it?
Emé prásse autó pòs _or_ Emé prásse pòs autó = I'll do it somehow

(Note: _élthe_ and _prásse_ are used only to give examples; they may not
be the actual verb forms used in EAK - I haven't 'done the verbs' yet :)

Will this work?

In 'Latino sine flexione' Peano was able to make use of the Latin
preposition _de_ in imitation of the Romancelangs and Vulgar Latin; even
in the written Classical language we find instances of 'de + abl.' used
instead of the genitive in certain situations. There is AFAIK nothing
comparable in Greek, where the genitive persists to the present day.

I had thought of simply using expressions such as _to emé patro_ = 'my
father' (lit. the I/me father). This is close enough to ancient _ho emós
patêr_ where _emós_ is the possessive adjective meaning "my". But we get
problems if the possessor is a noun, e.g. _to to emé patró mètró_ is an
awkward way of expressing "my father's mother - especially awkward IMO
is the repetition of _to_.

I had though of resurrecting the morpheme _then_ (a bound morpheme in
ancient Greek), after all _eméthen_ is actually attested with the
meaning of "my". It could be use, like the modern English _'s_ as the
possessive marker at the end of a noun phrase. But _to to emé then patró
then mètró_ still has the awkward repetition of _to_.

In the ancient language, not only attributive adjectives where place in
the attributive position between article & noun (or after the noun with
the article repeated), but adverbs and prepositional phrases, used
attributively, were place in the same position. I shall retain this
feature in EAK, for example:
to en to selêno andró _or_ to andró to en to selêno = the man in the moon
to nun ánthròpo _or_ to ánthròpo to nun = the person of today (lit. the
now person)

In the above examples I have, following ancient practice, put the
possessive phrases in the same position. But even in Classical Greek,
1st and 2nd persons could alternatively use the genitive of the pronoun
as an enclitic after the noun. This is the only method for pronouns in
modern Greek, where it has extended to the 3rd person as well. I do not
want to introduce enclitics into EAK, but I wonder if the possessive
expressions could not occupy the same position as the determiners such
as _toúto_ "this" (e.g. toúto to andró = this man), so:
emé then to patró _or_ to patró to emé then = my father
emé then to patró then to mètró _or_ to mètró to patró to emé then then
= my father's mother

Darn it!! we've now got a repeated _then_!!!!!


Nid rhy hen neb i ddysgu.
There's none too old to learn.


Philip Newton <philip.newton@...>