Re: Locative constructions in a:seka`eni (long)
| From: | Yahya Abdal-Aziz <yahya@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Wednesday, August 9, 2006, 8:32 |
|---|
Hi James,
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, "James W." wrote:
>
> I'm currently working on the locative constructions in
> a:seka`eni. I found a really interesting paper by Marcus
> Kracht, "On the Semantics of Locatives (2000)" describing
> them as consisting of a configuration and a mode (I only
> made it to about p. 15 before getting lost :( )
>
http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/kracht00semantics.html
>
> So, for a:seka`eni I have come up with eight basic
> configurations: above, below, behind, in front of, beside,
> near, on, in. Each of these configurations can appear in any
> of six modes: stative, cofinal, coinitial, transitory,
> approximative, recessive. The exception to this is in the
> above and below configurations, which don't appear in the
> recessive mode, because they seemed to me to be semantically
> identical to each other in the approximative mode (see the
> chart below for clarification).
> It seems to me that the approximative and recessive (and
> maybe transitory?) are kind of like a continuous aspect,
> where the others are more like a perfective aspect. So there
> is a difference in meaning between, say, a cofinal and an
> approximative construction with the same configuration.
Again, I'm not sure that you can categorise them so. "into" has
configuration IN, mode cofinal, according to your chart. But consider the
sentence:
"As he was walking into the house, he heard a terrifying scream."
This "into" is continuous, surely? And it's unimportant whether he actually
set foot in the house, got two steps inside, or was still two steps outside,
when he heard the scream.
> I've laid out all the possible combinations in the chart
> below. What I need is for you to check my interpretation of
> the config + mode combinations, especially for the
> approximative and recesisve modes. Do they make sense? Are
> there any natlangs with systems that work like this? I'm not
> too concerned if there aren't, but hopefully the system is
> plausible, because it is supposed to be humanly useable.
I think it's a quite plausibly usable system, just going a little further
than does, say, Finnish.
[snip]
> IN
> stative: in, inside
> cofinal: into
> coinitial: out of
> transitory: through
> approximative: entering
> recessive: exiting
>
> There is one construction that I noticed I couldn't find in
> the above combinations: around (encircling). So I have added
> it as another configuration. However, I couldn't come up
> with satisfactory modal shadings of it. So I challenge
> everyone to see if you can come up with some :)
How about:
- AROUND
- stative: circling
- cofinal: gathering around
- coinitial: dispersing in all directions (1)
- transitory: passing all about
- approximative: spreading around, encircling
- recessive: from round about
(1) "He rushed outside, jumped on his horse, and rode madly off in all
directions." Who wrote that? ;-)
> Thanks for looking, and sorry about the length.
None of it was wasted.
> James W.
> ------------------------------
>
Larry Sulky replied:
>
> Interesting and useful, James. Others will have intelligent things to
> add but I have two tiny remarks: Why no "to the side of" or "to the
> left/right", given that "above", "below", "in front of", and "in back
> of" are all represented? ...
I think it already has "to the side of", but not to/from/at/towards/...
"left" or "right", which do seem like rather natural possibilities.
> ... And are temporals to be modeled as locatives
> in this scheme? --larry
Complexity upon complexity! Piling Ossa upon Pelion! ... Ouch!!! I was
just looking for a combination of configuration and "mode" that means
"towards [being] on top of" - the best candidate seemed to me to be ABOVE,
approximative - which you have meaning "ascending"; or ON, approximative,
which you have meaning "arriving at". It seems to me that, for
completeness, we'd want a "touching" vs "non-touching" "aspect" as well, to
distinguish two kinds of "above". "Resting on top of" would be ABOVE,
approximative, touching, whilst "high overhead" would be ABOVE,
approximative, non-touching.
> ------------------------------
>
Henrik Theiling replied:
[snip]
> > I found a really interesting paper by Marcus
> > Kracht, "On the Semantics of Locatives (2000)" describing
> > them as consisting of a configuration and a mode ...
>
> Hmm, a three-dimensional system of distinction is not too uncommon,
> the third dimension being touching vs. non-touching. I think this
> would split the 'modes', and ony locative, allative, ablative, and
> perlative would remain, making the 'approximative' mode a non-touching
> allative. I think I like this better from the engelang point of view,
> since it is more systematic.
Does anyone add yet a *fourth* dimension to the distinctions made by their
conlang's cases?
> It would also have been nice by the author if he had mentioned the
> relationship between spatial, temporal, and notional cases in some
> languages. E.g. spatial case forms in Finnish show quite a clear link
> to some of the notational cases. This would make the system even more
> systematic and link spatial relations with notional ones. Putting the
> Finnish cases into a grid:
>
> 'in' 'at' notational
> location: inessive adessive essive
> towards: illative allative translative
> from: elative ablative partitive
>
> If you compare the endings, still the Modern language shows hints that
> 'in' is expressed with -s- and 'at' with -l- and that the 'mode' part
> of the case is from the notational case endings:
>
> 'in' 'at' notational
> infix: -s- -l- -
>
> location: -ssa -lla -na
> towards: -aan -lle -ksi
> from: -sta -lta -(t)a
This is what I had in mind.
[snip]
> Starting with Qþyn|gài, I used what the author calls 'modes' to mark
> temporal, spatial, and notional relations all alike.
Henrik, did you mean notional or notational?
Regards,
Yahya
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.10.8/413 - Release Date: 8/8/06
Replies