Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Development of Silindion verbal inflection

From:Elliott Lash <erelion12@...>
Date:Wednesday, March 15, 2006, 14:07
 As I have shown before many times, in Silindion there
are two main endings for the 3rd person singular [in
the present tense], namely, -n and -r.


   tek¨¦n  "he praises X"
   an¨¢r   "he promises"
   mir    "he falls"
   nen    "he gives X"

The main difference between them is often that -n is
for transitive verbs (not universal however) and -r is
for intransitive verbs (not universal as well).

What I'm beginning to understand is that, in some time
in Silindion's past it must have had a SPLIT
inflection system of some sort. This can account for
the less than straightforward distribution of -r and
-n. (I'm not sure exactly how, but it's a start of a

Anyway, beyond this assumption of an ancient split
system, I also think that the basic divisions in
inflection for Silinestic (Silindion's immediate
predecessor) must have been the following:

predicate with two arguments:
  *tekk-Vm       nistad       lawando-m
   praise-3A/3P  king[AGENT]  hunter-[PATIENT]
 "the king praises the hunter"

predicate with one argument:
  *an-Vr       nistad         gelet¨¥-di
   promise-3S  king[SUBJECT]  gold-[GENITIVE]
  "The king promises gold"

[this is intransitive, really "makes a promise of"]

predicate with no arguments:
   tekkn-V                     lawando-di
   praise.stative-[empty 3s]   hunter-[GENITIVE]
   "The hunter is being praised"
   "There is praising of the hunter"

(the verb here is a n-stative derivative of the root
TEKK "praise". N-statives as derivatives are very
archaic, and mostly have become grammaticalised as
passive 3rd singular presents in Silindion. One
n-stative which is still derivational is   <ser-n- "to
be ready"> as opposed to <ser- "to prepare">)

So, this means that the suffixes -Vm and -Vr may be
compound suffixes,  -V-m and -V-r, with -V being an
empty 3rd singular, -m relating that 3rd singular to
an object, -r relating it to a subject. Found by
itself, the verb remains neutral as to argument count.

Is this at all plausible?


Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around


Elliott Lash <erelion12@...>
Aidan Grey <taalenmaple@...>