Re: Hello again, and a syntax question
| From: | Gerald Koenig <jlk@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Monday, March 29, 1999, 7:32 |
|---|
>Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1999 11:37:59 PST
>From: "J. Barefoot"" <lesfraises@...>"
>Subject: Hello again, and a syntax question
>
>Hello Everybody! Remember me? Well, I barely have time to read this
>thing anymore, let alone input to the conversation. Sorry. I hate
>lurking, but it's a necessary evil.
>Anyway, I have a question. The language I've been working on
>(discovering?) recently has resumptive pronouns (in the formal or high
>register), but I'm not quite clear on how they work. The scheme I've
>been using is:
>
>The shirt that you want is on the bed.
>The shirt -this clause relative- you want it.resumptive topic on the
>bed.
>An fe xiyan na ti ngipai inya wa ma fiy@.
Hi, Jennifer,
I can show you how I would write these sentences in the Nilenga dialect
of NGL if I wanted to follow your schema. I would assign an "it-1" to
the shirt as soon as it is mentioned, thus:
The shirt [name it it-1] that you want: [it-1] is on the bed.
An fe [gua] na ti ngipai [gol] wa ma fiy@. (If I understand you).
<gua> means "I assign 'it-1' to the preceeding word [fe] or phrase."
<gol> means "it-1".
The shirt [I call it it-1] that you want; [it-1] is on the bed.
>
>or one I had some trouble with:
>
>I know that you will not allow me (to do it).
>I know -this clause relative- you not allow me.resumptive
>Is that right? Am I making grammatical errors in my own language? Would
>someone who knows more about syntax please explain this to me?
>And what about when there is no clear referrent in the main clause, for
>example if there's a "dummy object," like:
>
>I know that you will not allow it (to happen).
"Know that (proposition)", and "Allow that (proposition)" can be
considered modals. Modals will modify the truth conditions for an
entire sentence. They refer not to objects (nouns) but to sentences
about objects. On this view, "I know that you conlang" means I know
that the sentence "You conlang" is true. When you say, "you will not
allow it", the [it] refers to an omitted sentence which is in mind for
the speakers. Maybe, "The children play on the street" is [it], or
whatever. Anyway, modals can be nested. Your full sentence might be
written: I know that it is a true statement that "you will not
allow the the statement 'the children play on the street'" to become
true.
Mi kon ke natu vu xap gol. (nilenga)
I know that not-true "you permit it".
I know that it is not true that the predication, "you permit it" is
true. The <gol> refers to the mutually in-mind sentence.
So you are really working with two different kinds of structure, the
resumptive and the modal. Maybe there is some way to combine them if you
see some similarity. Modals took me quite a while to understand and put
into nilenga, so keep on conlanging.
All the best,
Jerry Koenig