Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Chevraqis: a sketch

From:Yoon Ha Lee <yl112@...>
Date:Thursday, August 10, 2000, 17:29
On Thu, 10 Aug 2000, Fabian wrote:

> > Verbs: > > Infinitives always end in -u. > > Verbs inflect only by tense, not by number or person. > > By having infinitives, you are implying a lot of pseudo-indo-european > grammar. Japanese lacks this, as does Arabic, on which I thought you were > basing some stuff. > > > I've been having fun with the static/dynamic distinction, and coming up > > with how meanings cluster around these things, though I'm probably > > getting it all wrong. <wry g> > > The arabic approach is that adjectives are essentially static verbs. > Consider HMR (red). the static form (ahmar) is 'to be red'. the dynamic form > (hamar) is classed as a type 1 verb, and means 'to become red ; to blush'. > the type 2 form is hammar, to make someone blush. I've read that there are > about 44 different word shapes for each 3 letter root in arabic. > > Or consider ride (a horse), a static verb, vs mount (a horse), teh dynamic > equivalent, which calques as 'to become riding a horse'. > > The dictioanry form of verbs in Arabic is the 3rd person singular perfect > tense. Sentences such as "he wants to go home" would calque as "he wants he > goes home". No need for an infinitive.
Actually, apologies for the belated realization-- I realize Arabic *doesn't* handle it this way, but what I've been doing is have affixes attach to the three-syllable base morphemes to produce infinitives in different aspects/moods (?). You then conjugate those infinitives by lopping off the -u ending and replacing with whatever suffix. So I guess it's a two-stage process, born of my foolish attempt to marry bits of Arabic verbs and bits of Japanese verbs. We'll see where it goes--I expect to have to do complete overhauls on the grammar every so often anyway. YHL