Re: LONG: Latest Wenetaic Stuff

Dr. David E. Bell>>>>>>
From: Paul Bennett <Paul.Bennett@...>
> Positionals
>
> -a- Near
> -o- Far
> -u- Apparent
> -=EB- Obscure
> -e- Probable/Believed
> -i- Improbable/Disbelieved
Interesting mix of locatives (near, far), epistemic evidentials (appare=
nt,
obscure) and epistemic judgementals (probable/believed,
improbable/disbelieved) this list!  Are these all associated with the s=
ame
word class?  nouns?  verbs?  I ask because while locatives are generall=
y
associated with nominals or adverbials, evidentials and judgementals ar=
e
typically modal predicate modifiers.  Could you elaborate on their usag=
e
here?
<<<<<<

Dr. David E. Bell>>>>>>
> Cases (used in forming particles)
>
> >Gene(ra)tive (these all take the -a- Positional, almost always elide=
d)
> s'e - possessive (normal genetive, something which is possessed)
> ya  - trapping (an habitual or essential possession)
> pa  - familial (technically used for a family member, also extended t=
o
> very close friends.  When used to or of people and things outside the=
> previous definition, it implies a sense of "solidarity" or
> "cameraderie").
Is the distinction between 'possessive' and 'trapping' that between
alienable and inalienable possession or are you going for something els=
e
here?
<<<<<<

That's the gist.  Anyone may own (s'e) a pie, but a pie-maker would own=
 (ya) a
pie.  Likewise a hunter would <ya> an atlatl (if he used it to make a l=
iving),
whereas if someone were to <s'e> an atlatl, it'd be for a decoration (o=
r some
other non-essential function).

Dr. David E. Bell>>>>>>
> tuu - partative (a section of an uncountable substance, or made of
> something)
> ce  - component (a distinguishable, seperate part of an object, or
> member of a countable group)
Hmm, I like this distinction.  Do you also make a  mass/count noun
distinction morphologically?
<<<<<<
No.  I'm working my way thru a book called "Linguistic Individuals" (th=
e author
has a hispanic-sounding name, which I've completely forgotten) which de=
als with
notions of countability in Languages, which is where I first got the no=
tion of
this.  As I read more, I may refine the use of Singular or Plural forms=
 for
various things, as well as possibly enlarge the set of applicable genet=
ives.

Dr. David E. Bell>>>>>>
> so  - produced (that which is made by something)
> nu  - productive (that which forms something)
Not sure I fully understand these!  I would have to see examples of the=
ir
usage.
<<<<<<
They correspond (I think) with the Genetive <s> (so) and the suffix <-g=
enic>
(nu) in English.

Dr. David E. Bell>>>>>>
> >Attributive
> ta  - absolute attributive (used to form similes, metaphors, and so
> forth)
Ditto. Could you give an example of how this is used?
<<<<<<
The examples are given slightly below, but here are more.

Muropta~ - "Like a wall", (~ is the "grunger", replace it with the requ=
ired
gender for what you're describing)
Accordingly, <makhetap Yonutorek> (see below) means "it is like big, mo=
re so
than John".

Dr. David e. Bell>>>>>>
> re  - relative attributive (marks the noun which is being compared
>
> against. "x y-arek" means "as x as y", "x y-orek" means "x-er than y"=
)
> /* the above is misleading gibberish, please see below */
>
> The relative attributive <re> takes the -k- gender as agent, and
> attaches to the attribute to form the superlative.
>
> Examples of Attributives:
> (ap) makhetap - (it is) big
> (ap) makhetap Yonutrek - (it is) as big as John
> (ap) makhetap Yonutorek - (it is) bigger than John
> (ap) makhekrep - (it is) the biggest of its kind
> (ap) makheprep - (it is) about average size compared to an anaphoric =
set
> (ap) makheporep - (it is) the biggest of an anaphoric set
>
> /* "Ar makhertar Yonutcerorek" could be used as a very personal
compliment,
> though one that would probably cause mixed emotions <GGG> */
This looks interesting, but I suspect that there's more here then you'v=
e
explained.  More, more...
<<<<<<

There's not very much more.  I can't describe it using English (yet).  =
Oh, and
for <anaphoric> read <anaphoric or exophoric>.

Dr. David E. Bell>>>>>>
> >Tense
> ng=EB=EB - past tense
> ngoo - future tense
>
> When combined with positionals, the following specific meanings resul=
t:
>  ang=EB=EB, angoo - as in English "recent past", "near future".
>  ong=EB=EB, ongoo - as in English "ancient past", "distant future".
>  =EBng=EB=EB, =EBngoo - "mythical" past, "prophetic" future
>  ung=EB=EB, ungoo - "obvious", "well known" past and future
>  eng=EB=EB, engoo - something like "IMHO", or "IIRC"
>  ing=EB=EB, ingoo - yet to be fully deciphered, often used when descr=
ibing
> enemy propoganda and non-orthodox religious beliefs
Ah, so this is how they (positionals) are used!  Very creative!
<<<<<<

It's probably the best example I have.  I may relex my trans of Nik Tay=
lors
"Magical Tree" excersize to make it conform to this version of the gram=
mar, as
it illustrates a number of semantic wossnames that Wenetaic expresses
explicitly.

Dr. David E. Bell>>>>>>
> Tenses can be compounded infinitely, each tense mark being taken as
> reletive to its antecedent.  For example <takti.m.yi.t.=EB.ng=EB=EB.t=
.a.ngoo.t>
> {VI.{G1.ACC}.{G3.OBS.PAST}.{G3.NEAR.FUT}.G3} means literally "in the =
near
> future of the mythical past, he touches me", but translates as "in th=
e
> mythical past, he was about to touch me".
Is this how aspect is realized?  I would like to see more examples of t=
his.
<<<<<<

Aspect is also controlled by the distinction between Instant and Contin=
uous
verbs, which (kinda) show perfect and imperfect aspect.

Dr. David E. Bell>>>>>>
> >Location /*long and complex history, basically inspired by hearing a=
bout
a
> similar feature in some North American natlangs*/
> yi  - directional (roughly equivalent to Dative Case)
> ru  - locational (roughly equivalent to Accusative Case)
In what sense do you see these equivalencies?
<<<<<<

<yi> denotes the recipient or target of an action, as does Dative

The connection between <ru> and the Accusative is shadier, though it's =
used
about where the accusative is used in German.  I'll have to read and re=
read
Trasks dictionary in order to state it more correctly.

Dr. David>>>>>>
> >Truth Value /* check the CONLANG list archives towards the end of 19=
98
for a
> list of contributors, meng=EB=EBmakh=EBk this thread ran and ran */
> khu - definately true
[snip]
>
> Positionals are used with the above to show evidentiality, ie how/why=
 one
> knows/thinks that this is the truth value.
>
>  akhu, akh=EB, etc - personal experience
[snip]

We are again in the realm of epistemic modality, a favorite topic of mi=
ne.
<<<<<<

And mine, though I didn't realise until the subject came up on the list=
.

Dr D.E.B>>>>>>
My language, amman iar, also has 5 epistemic modal inflections, 3
judgementals and 2 evidentials  (and an even larger number of deontic
modals) :

Judgementals
Assertion : unmarked modality,
Speculative/Possibility : A weak judgment characterized by what is
epistemicly possible or a speculation about an event,
Deductive/Necessity : A strong judgement characterized by what is
epistemically necessary or a deduction about an event,
Evidentials
Quotative/Hearsay : used when the speaker's evidence is based on second=
hand
information.
Sensory : used when the speaker's evidence is based on firsthand sensor=
y
information

The last actually comprises 4 modals depending on which sense provides =
the
evidence (visual, auditory, olfactory or tactile).
<<<<<<
Very cool, and it set me thinking.

I think I'd have a form like <dada.m.ce.m.kh=EB.k> (with *dada standing=
 for a
sensory method) to say "my *dada makes me know this is likely", it's a =
logical
extension of forms like Yonu.m.o.khu.t


Dr. Dave>>>>>> (can you tell I'm doing the "quoting" by hand, and it's =
getting
tiresome? :-)
> >Volitional - /*thanks for insipration to Sally Caves, Matt Pearson a=
nd
Larry
> Schelin, all on the CONLANG list*/
> w=EB - deals with the desire to do/be something in various ways
>
>  aw=EB - want to
>  ow=EB - fail to
>  uw=EB - appear to
>  =EBw=EB - pretend not to / secretively
>  ew=EB - "because it's the right/expected/honorable thing to do"
>  iw=EB - "for no particular/discernable reason", spontaneously
Yes I remember these concepts from both Matt's Tokana and Sally's Teona=
ht.
Two excellant sources of inspiration.  Keep listening to them.
<<<<<<
Yes.  Heaps of kudos to Matt & Sally (though not at the detriment of an=
ybody
else :-)


ddeb>>>>>>
> Affirmative/Negative
>
> Evidentials are used to form standard affirmative/negative responses.=
These can
> be combined with or replaced by restating the word about which the
question was
> asked, with <-ne> to show the negative.
> The word <yaa> is used to give a kind of "grudging" agreement, or an
agreement
> where the respondent has no pertinent evidence to form an opinion.
> The particle <ru> is used when forming pronouns used to point out the=
answer to
> a <kii> question.
A very modal language yours.  It would be interesting to see how these
diverse modal influences interact.  One can imagine some very subtle
semantics emerging.
<<<<<<
Well, I like to think I've made a language where deliberate lying is ou=
tside the
worldview of its natives, (though "toying with the truth" is a popular
passtime).  They are aware of the subjective nature of a lot of life.  =
Instead
of saying "Yes", they'd say "That appears to me to be very probable at =
the
moment".


david>>>>>>
> Suffixes - are used almost exactly the same way as if they were prepo=
sed
to
> their associated word in English.
> /*main sources are the Latin and PIE natlangs*/
>
> -ne  Not
> -khe And
> -ra  Additive Or (x yra zra =3D one or more of x y z)
> -co  Exlusive Or (x yco zco =3D exactly one of x y z)
> (w xco yra zco =3D w (x yra)co zco =3D one or both of x y or one of w=
 z)
> (w xra yco zra =3D w (x yco)ra zra)
There is an interesting book that you might want to read called 'Everyt=
hing
That Linguist Have Always Wanted To Know about Logic But Were Ashamed T=
o
Ask'  by James McCawley.
<<<<<<
I'll look out for it.


David>>>>>>
I've got more comments, but I got to run.  Keep up the good work.
<<<<<<

Please, feel free to rip apart as much of what I post as possible.  I'l=
l try to
either explain myself better, give a counterexample, or say "you've mad=
e me
think".  Either way, I'll try to thank you.  On that note...

Thanks!


Paul





=


*************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential
and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity
to whom they are addressed.
If you have received this email in error please notify the
sender. This footnote also confirms that this email message
has been scanned for the presence of computer viruses.
*************************************************************