Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re : Re: Tunu Nouveau

From:From Http://Members.Aol.Com/Lassailly/Tunuframe.Html <lassailly@...>
Date:Wednesday, September 8, 1999, 20:10
Dans un courrier dat=E9 du 08/09/99 18:03:55  , Boudewijn a =E9crit :

> On Fri, 27 Aug 1999, Charles wrote: > =20 > > The long-missing Tunu tribe has been tracked down: > > > > > > Last words of the French researcher before cooking: > > "someone may have useful critics that could help us" > > > =20 > I've been reading way too much linguistics lately - I > misread this for "someone may have useful clitics" ;-) > =20 > I'm not entirely sure I understand the meaning of the > section that starts with: > =20 > clitics merge with pronouns to make verb voices : > =20 > Perhaps a bit more examplification would help :-). > =20
Charles and i are busy trying to make the easiest possible grammar reconciliating SOV jap and SVO indonesian through a common topic/comment structure. years ago as i was forced to translating job in tokyo as a freshie gaijin, i realized that a common structure topic/comment could be contrived by matching main voices and clitics. in other words, you can make agree typical SOV and typical SVO languages. for instance i could match indonesian clitics "oleh, pada, di, etc.", japanese clitics "ga, ni, wo, etc", indo. voices "me-, memper-, di-, etc." and jap. voices "-aru, -eru, -oru, -asu, etc." in the following way : let's take indo "ME-KAN" and jap "-ASU" factive voices (not factitive). i call them "KAY-". let's take an imaginary "levizing" factive clitic "(made) by" - indo "(di-kan) OLEH"; japanese "-NI (saserareta)". i call it "KAW-". -Y is like active and -W is like passive (just stupid dummy words i've made up =E0 la conlangueur) of a KA- auxiliary (not a plain verb for reasons i can explain). now i take a verbal root - preferably a noun of action, state, or result=20 because both languages have verbal voices based on different base-voices. if you make a topic/comment construction, the topic is not necessarily the subject or the object of the verb : confer French :=20 "le papier, l'homme =E9crit dessus" the paper (TOP) the man (S) writes (V) on it (O =3D TOP). "la lettre, l'homme il l'=E9crit". the letter (TOP) the man he (S) it (O =3D TOP) writes (V). what you need is identifying "it" and "he" as TOPIC or SUBJECT. let's make a TOPIC/COMMENT sentence : "man TOP write on paper COM". "paper TOP man write on it COM".=20 an now let's make construct iusing clitic or/and voice : "man TOP paper TOP write on it KAW he". "paper TOP man KAY write on it". what i mean is that matching the 3 or 4 voices and 3 or for clitics already available in both languages and merging them in a TOPIC/COMMENT structure with resuming pronouns make it possible to fuse the two SOV and SVO syntaxes. i believe that's what a good IAL should do. in such a system, subclause is nothing more than a switch of pronouns referring to preceding or next items. with 2 topic&comment tags, 5 pronouns and 4 voice/clitics (=3Dprepositions) you can make a grammar that can be used either SOV or SVO according to one's trend and still be easily understood nonetheless. jap., indo. and french use spacial deictics instead but making a specific set of deictics for that would work no less i'm sure (i can explain why). and you can trans-late that structure in compound & construct level without any problem. i can't explain things quite well on this post, but Charles will make that into an easy page soon. it's not "scientific" at all as you can see, only a guess from my own experience with the asian languages i know and french. critics and scolding welcome - they help a lot.
> Boudewijn Rempt |