Re: I luv u
| From: | Andreas Johansson <and_yo@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Thursday, April 19, 2001, 21:29 |
|---|
Since everybody and their grammar book seems to provide alot of different
versions of "I love you", I thought I'd take the chance to show off some
more stuff, namely Tairezazh's modal adverbs ... the ones I've conjured up
yet that is.
Ta tshei shas
"I love you"
Ta tshei zent shas
"I wish to love you" or "I'd like to love you"
(This'd imply that don't actually do it! For "I like loving you" one at the
moment has to say "Ta neir tsheints shas", but I may invent an adverb for
liking.)
Ta tshei tsin shas
"I must love you"
(... whether I like it or not ...)
Ta tshei skei shas
"I'm allowed to love you"
Ta tshei gez shas
"I should love you"
(This too would imply I don't actually do it)
Ta tshei fiks shas
"I'm able to love you"
(... but I don't necessary do!)
Ta tshei fe shas?
"Do I love you?"
This might more naturally be rendered as "Ta shas tshei fe?", but Tairezazh
word order is quite flexible.
The _-s_ in "shas" marks accusative, but the other words are uninflected -
in Tairezazh almost all words have an "umarked" form, which for verbs mostly
function as present for nouns and pronouns as sg nominative. These adverbs
are don't have any inflected forms, but most adverbs and adjectives can be
inflected for comparative and superlative.
Andreas
PS Several people have said things like "I assume "you" to be sg here".
Well, _sha_ is sg "thou" - the 2nd pl pronoun in Tairezazh is _shan_.
PPS The "unmarked form" concept is my current defense for breaking the "not
nominative after a preposition" language universal. Since a noun governed by
a proposition isn't the possessor of anything, nor an direct or indirect
object of a verb it don't qualify for any of the other cases (gen, acc and
dat), and so gets left in the "unmarked", which I usually call "nominative"
for simplicity's sake.
Christophe wrote:
>En réponse à "Matt M." <matt_mcl@...>:
>
> > > > If I may make a suggestion, make that sentence "I love you". For
> > > > some reason it seems to be among very the first people learn in a
> > > > new lang ...
> >
>
>I take "you" to be always singular.
>
>In Reman, the direct translation of "I love you": "T'emu" (from the verb
>emri:
>to love) is a little bit too colloquial. There are more romantic ways to
>say it,
>like:
>
>Degu ì kor a ti: I give you the (my) heart,
>/'degu i'kOr a'ti/
>
>or, in a very solemn situation:
>
>Degu ì kor ad'ì purte dy ti: I give you the (my) heart to your purity.
>/'degu i'kOr adipur'te dy'ti/
>
>In Narbonósc (the language of Romantic love in Ill Bethisad if the powers
>that
>be accept its application :) ), the verb "amâre" is the verb for romantic
>love,
>and to say "I love you", you use an expression remarkably near to French:
>
>(iou) t'aime (amâre is one of those verbs, like mourîre, which undergo
>vowel
>/(ju) 'tEm/ weakening in their stem in part of their conjugation)
>
>In Moten:
>
>Koga bdan inu|n ito. /koga bdan inun_j ito/
>means-I you-acc love-inf-nom be-present
>
>or even
>
>koga bdan invu|n ito. /koga bdan invun_j ito/
>means-I you-acc love-inf-gen be-present
>
>meaning: "I have to love you", "I can't stop loving you".
>In both sentences the subject is not in the nominative case but prefixed
>with
>the instrumental marker ko- (not really a case, more a preposition) to show
>the
>lack of volitionality of the subject (he didn't want specially to fall in
>love,
>but it happened anyway). Using the nominative case (ga bdan inu|n ito)
>would be
>considered quite rude since it would mean that the subject decided to fall
>in
>love, the object of that love becoming thus unimportant.
>
>Finally, in Azak:
>
>Vem-esh-as. /'vemeSas/
>love-you.abs-certainty
>
>The absence of a subject marking shows the lack of control of the subject,
>while
>the contextual affix -as shows that the subject is sure of his/her love
>towards
>the "you". Still, this expression is a little abrupt for a mark of love,
>and
>adding the subject directly in the verb (the sentence would be
>"Vem-esh-ef-as":
>love-you.abs-I.erg-certainty) doesn't work since it means that the subject
>is in
>full control of this action. A good compromise is:
>
>Vem-esh-as n-ef-ak. /'vemeSas 'nefak/
>love-you.abs-certainty lexicalizer-I.erg-erg
>
>The root n transforms the ergative personal suffix -ef into a personal
>pronoun
>(to which you have to add the ergative case marker -ak to show its function
>in
>the sentence). This way of putting the subject out of the main verb shows
>well
>his/her lack of control, and thus lenghthened the expression is less abrupt
>and
>ore elegant, perfect for romance :) . It is also a little familiar, but in
>a
>love declaration familiarity is considered needed in Azak.
>
>BTW, I just remembered that normally I kept all the posts of the
>Valentine's Day
>thread, so if you want i can make a list of all the "I love you"
>translations
>done at that time and send it to you.
>
>Christophe.
>
>
http://rainbow.conlang.free.fr