Re: Verbal distinctions

Quoting vaksje <vaksje@...>:

> Let me coin a few words:
>  uri "I"
>  tana- "to want"
>  kitu- "to live"
>  -0 (finite suffix)
>  -k ('special' suffix)
>
> English: _I want to live_ (want:FIN live:INF.)
> Random Conlang: _uri kitu tanak_ or _tanak kitu_ "I want to live" (want:?
> live:FIN)
>
> This way it's very easy to go from _uri kitu_ ("I live") to _uri kitu tanak_
> ("I
> want to live"), instead of **_uri kitu_ > **_uri tana kituk_ or **_uri kituk
> tana_. The advantage to this is... well there isn't any, but I like it! The
> only
> real problem is I have really no idea what to call this 'special' mode.
> Calling
> it an infinitive is misguiding, since AFAIK it clashes with the way it is
> usually used. Any ideas?
If I'm reading this arightly, what you suggest is at least on the surface very
similar to what happens in (my conlang) Tairezazh. You'd get _ta ken_ "I live"
and _ta ken zent_ "I want to live". _Ken_ is still the finite verb - putting
this in the past tense yields _ta kenk_ "I lived" and _ta kenk zent_ "I wanted
to live".

However, _zent_ "to want" isn't syntactically a verb at all - it's an
uninflectable adverb. Perhaps your -k could be interpreted as an adverbizer?

                                                            Andreas

Reply