Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Conjunction Curiosity

Expand Messages
  • Charles W Brickner
    My apologies! I didn t see that. Charlie From: Constructed Languages List [mailto:CONLANG@LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU] On Behalf Of Logan Kearsley It continues on the
    Message 1 of 26 , Aug 1, 2012
      My apologies! I didn't see that.
      Charlie

      From: Constructed Languages List [mailto:CONLANG@...] On Behalf Of Logan Kearsley

      It continues on the following lines with interlinears:

      He who knows not and knows not he knows not He is a fool. Shun him.

      He who knows not and knows he knows not
      He is a student. Teach him.

      He who knows and knows not he knows
      He is asleep. Wake him.

      He who knows and knows he knows
      He is wise. Follow him.

      -l.
    • Daniel Bowman
      Interesting and difficult translation challenge. Thanks! My conlang Angosey does not use and as a coordinating conjunction between phrases or between verbs
      Message 2 of 26 , Aug 1, 2012
        Interesting and difficult translation challenge. Thanks!

        My conlang Angosey does not use "and" as a coordinating conjunction between
        phrases or between verbs in a phrase. So you can't say "I went to the
        store and I went to the bank". So it can't handle a construction like "He
        who knows not and knows not he knows not is a fool" because I decompose the
        sentence as: "(He knows not and he knows not he knows not) is a fool."

        It took me a while to figure out how to translate this challenge. English
        does well with the repetition of "He who knows not/He who knows not/He who
        knows/He who knows" but it really does not work in Angosey. Instead,
        Angosey starts by stating "This proverb concerns those who know and those
        who do not know" and goes on from there. The compound object "those who
        know and those who don't know" are nomininalized phrases, so it is
        understood that they are two separate people.

        Also: Angosey does not have relative clauses. It turns the subordinate
        phrase into a stand-alone noun. For example: "I saw the man who I hate"
        reads:

        Zira isa al mesha isa al lay.
        SEE I emotive_particle HATE I emotive_particle HIM.

        The sentence "I hate him" becomes the object of "I saw", in other words.

        Abbreviations used:
        ap: Abstract gender particle
        ac: Abstract gender conjugation
        ep: Emotive gender particle
        ec: Emotive gender conjugation
        ev: Class 2 evidentiality marker (i.e. inference by the speaker)
        Translation and interlinears follow.

        Houaveya elr al eysanayara ngey an eysanayara ngey.

        ac-ABOUT PROVERB ep ev-KNOW-AND NOT ev-KNOW-AND ev-HE

        This proverb is about he who knows and he who does not know.


        Eyayrye ei al an eyngasanaya ey tha an eysanaya ngey. Ngey dheraya.

        ev-IS FOOL ep NOT ev-ec-KNOW HE ap NOT ev-KNOW HE. ec-HE SHUN.

        The man who does not know he does not know is a fool. Shun him.


        Eyngaharaya eyngasanaya ey tha an eysanaya ngey al geneth. Ngey hadaya.

        ev-ec-IS ev-ec-KNOW HE ap NOT ev-KNOW ec-HE ep NOVICE. ec-HE TEACH.

        The man who knows he does not know is a student. Teach him.


        Eyavaya al an eyngasanaya ey tha eysanaya ngey. Ngey avanaya.

        ev-SLEEP ep NOT ev-ec-KNOW HE ap ev-KNOW ec-HE. ec-HE AWAKEN.

        The man who does not know that he knows is sleeping. Awaken him.


        Eyayryea la al eyngasanaya ey tha eysanaya ngey. Ngey ryea.

        ev-IS WISE ep ev-ec-KNOW HE ap ev-KNOW ec-HE. ec-HE FOLLOW.

        The man who knows he knows is wise. Follow him.
      • Padraic Brown
        ... Chap. iiij of the Sutra of the Great Sharma Master (Book of the Noble Way*) has: He said: “There are four kinds of man: the Sleeping man, the Ignorant
        Message 3 of 26 , Aug 2, 2012
          --- On Wed, 8/1/12, Charles W Brickner <tepeyachill@...> wrote:

          > David Brumbley wrote:
          > >He who knows not and knows not he knows not
          >
          > Is that all there is to the proverb? 

          Chap. iiij of the "Sutra of the Great Sharma Master" (Book of the Noble
          Way*) has:

          "He said: “There are four kinds of man: the Sleeping man, the Ignorant
          man, the Foolish man and the Wise man. Recognise them, and ye shall surely
          prosper in all things. He who knows, but knows not that he knows is
          asleep: wake him. He who knows not, and knows not that he knows not can be
          taught: teach him. He who knows not but thinks that he knows is a fool:
          avoid him. He who knows, and knows that he knows is a wise man, a prophet:
          follow him.”"

          > The subject "he" doesn't have a verb.

          I think the subject here is "he who knows". Likewise with the other
          "he who" phrases.

          > There's just "he" and three dependent clauses.

          * This is a classic book of religious and philosophical texts from the
          Eastlands. It is largely Christian, but the Noble Way applies equally to
          all paths, including those without gods. In the World, Yeshue is considered
          (apart from those who believe him to be God incarnate) the paragon and
          embodiment of the Way. Religions are generally sorted into those that
          teach the Way and those that don't.

          "Sharma" is the Talarian word for "action of the Way", so right action in
          all things, living a godly life. Could be related to Dharma or descended
          from it -- since other Aryan *dh- words end up with sh- in Talarian, it
          could well predate their contact with ancient Sanskrit speakers.

          Padraic

          > Charlie
        • A. da Mek
          ... Ja¨lak wudbar. or: Ja¨lak wu judbar. Ti¨omum wa Ribqatum ja¨baqan. Gd¨h conjunction W is vocalised: 1) wa when there are several entities: malku
          Message 4 of 26 , Aug 3, 2012
            > I've been using two versions of the coordinating conjunction in
            > Hsassiens without really thinking too much about it. In the case of
            > one subject linked to two different verbs, the conjunction is 'sin.'
            > When two or more nouns, adjectives or adverbs are being listed, the
            > conjunction is 'zem.' So, to HsassiEnglish an example, "He is walking
            > SIN talking at the same time," but "Tommy ZEM Rebecca are fighting
            > again." Just curious if other languages distinguish in the same way,
            > and if so, how.

            Ja¨lak wudbar.
            or: Ja¨lak wu judbar.
            Ti¨omum wa Ribqatum ja¨baqan.

            Gd¨h conjunction "W" is vocalised:
            1) "wa" when there are several entities:
            malku wa kohinu
            king and priest (two different persons)
            2) "wu" when there is only one entity with several attributes or states or
            actions:
            malku wu kohinu
            king and priest (one person with two professions)
            3) it can replace the subject prefix if the subject of the werb is the same
            as the subject of the previous werb.

            Jahwuj kohinum wa kalbum.
            (There was a priest and a dog.)
            Kalbum ja¨kul bas^ram wa kohinum fam jaqtul.
            (The dog ate a meat and the priest killed it.)
            Kohinum kalbam jaqtul waqbur.
            or: Kohinum kalbam jaqtul wu jaqbur.
            (The priest killed and burried the dog.)

            >He who knows not and knows not he knows not, he is a fool. Shun him.
            >He who knows not and knows he knows not, he is a student. Teach him.
            >He who knows and knows not he knows, he is asleep. Wake him.
            >He who knows and knows he knows, he is wise. Follow him.

            Fu, malojdaºh, walojdaºh fotam, mo¨ jalojdaºh, fum t¸apshum; manaºh fa.
            Fu, malojdaºh, wajdaºh fotam, mo¨ jalojdaºh, fum lamdhum; durush fa.
            Fu, majdaºh, walojdaºh fotam, mo¨ jajdaºh, fum s¸allum; faºharar fa.
            Fu, majdaºh, wajdaºh fotam, mo¨ jajdaºh, fum ªhakmum; ºhaqab fa.
          • Charles W Brickner
            ... Behalf Of A. da Mek ... Senjecas handles this construction with apposition without any conjunction. Charlie
            Message 5 of 26 , Aug 3, 2012
              >From: Constructed Languages List [mailto:CONLANG@...] On
              Behalf Of A. da Mek
              >Subject: Re: Conjunction Curiosity

              >2) "wu" when there is only one entity with several attributes or states or
              >actions:
              >malku wu kohinu
              >king and priest (one person with two professions)

              Senjecas handles this construction with apposition without any conjunction.

              Charlie
            • Douglas Koller
              ... Like Hsassiens, Géarthnuns has the two: kfö covers verbs and/or clauses, so it would not only deal with He is walking KFÖ talking. , but also, He is
              Message 6 of 26 , Aug 3, 2012
                > Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2012 17:23:36 -0400
                > From: davidbrumbley@...
                > Subject: Conjunction Curiosity
                > To: CONLANG@...

                > I ran across this proverb recently and thought it would make for a
                > quick and fun translation exercise. I came across a few constructions
                > I hadn't yet been forced to address in Hsassiens, and I'm curious as
                > to whether other con- or nat-langs behave similarly in one aspect.

                > I've been using two versions of the coordinating conjunction in
                > Hsassiens without really thinking too much about it. In the case of
                > one subject linked to two different verbs, the conjunction is 'sin.'
                > When two or more nouns, adjectives or adverbs are being listed, the
                > conjunction is 'zem.' So, to HsassiEnglish an example, "He is walking
                > SIN talking at the same time," but "Tommy ZEM Rebecca are fighting
                > again." Just curious if other languages distinguish in the same way,
                > and if so, how.

                Like Hsassiens, Géarthnuns has the two: "kfö" covers verbs and/or clauses, so it would not only deal with "He is walking KFÖ talking.", but also, "He is walking KFÖ she is talking.", "He thinks that you are ugly KFÖ that your mother dresses you funny."
                , and "He's not going because he's short on cash KFÖ because he finds Subotnick a gate-crashing bore." "zhö" links like elements (nouns, adjectives, adverbs) like your "zem". "kfö" can be used to change polarity; "zhö" cannot (I think? pretty sure). "arkfö" and "arzhö" are used for "but", with similar notions. "arzhö", however, covers "sondern/sino-y" turf, but not just to contrast with a negative. So it would be not only in things like, "It is not blue, but green.", but also "It is blue, (but) not green." As such, it, too, can change polarity.

                > The proverb translation in question, for those who may be interested:

                > He who knows not and knows not he knows not is a fool. Shun him.
                > He who knows not and knows he knows not is a student. Teach him.
                > He who knows and knows not he knows is asleep. Wake him.
                > He who knows and knows he knows is wise. Follow him.

                Tsovíegs lüv sferül, kfö lüv, gü vzöi la höisferül sho, sferül sho, seth lüv sü rhabaks nöi. Öçek la sethet hümobnauf.
                Tsovíegs lüv sferül, kfö seth lüv, gü feg la höisferül sho, sferül sho, seth lüv se frömareths nöi. Öçek la sethet hüzhnígal.
                Tsovíeths lüv sferül, kfö feg lüv, gü seth la höisferül sho, sferül sho, seth lüv se héfalöths nöi. Öçek la sethet hükamel.
                Tsovíeths lüv sferül, kfö lüv, gü thpau la höisferül sho, sferül sho, seth lüv se ngagíörzheths nöi. Öçek la sethet hütöngöz.


                > He who knows not and knows not he knows not is a fool. Shun him.

                Tsovíegs lüv sferül, kfö lüv, gü vzöi la höisferül sho, sferül sho, seth lüv sü rhabaks nöi. Öçek la sethet hümobnauf.
                he,who//who(so)ever-nom./neg. aux.-transcendent/impersonal know, and trans./imper., GÛ he-nom./neg. pres. know-discoursive SHO, he-nom. trans./imper. a fool-nom. be. you-nom. pres. he-acc. shun-imper.

                > He who knows not and knows he knows not is a student. Teach him.


                Tsovíegs lüv sferül, kfö seth lüv, gü feg la höisferül sho, sferül sho, seth lüv se frömareths nöi. Öçek la sethet hüzhnígal.
                he,who//who(so)ever-nom./neg. trans./imper. know, and he-nom./aff. trans./imper., GÛ he-nom./neg. pres. know-discoursive SHO, he-nom. trans./imper. a student-nom. be. you-nom. pres. he-acc. teach-imper.

                > He who knows and knows not he knows is asleep. Wake him.

                Tsovíeths lüv sferül, kfö feg lüv, gü seth la höisferül sho, sferül sho, seth lüv se héfalöths nöi. Öçek la sethet hükamel.
                he,who//who(so)ever-nom./aff. trans./imper. know, and he-nom./neg. trans./imper., GÛ he-nom./aff. pres. know-discoursive SHO, he-nom. trans./imper. a sleeper-nom. be. you-nom. pres. he-acc. wake-imper.

                > He who knows and knows he knows is wise. Follow him.


                Tsovíeths lüv sferül, kfö lüv, gü thpau la höisferül sho, sferül sho, seth lüv se ngagíörzheths nöi. Öçek la sethet hütöngöz.
                he,who//who(so)ever-nom./aff. trans./imper. know, and trans./imper., GÛ he-nom.aff. pres. know-discoursive SHO, he-nom. trans./imper. a wise.one-nom. be. you-nom. pres. he-acc. follow-imper.

                Kou
              • Allison Swenson
                I always love these translation challenges. I haven t completed the translation in my conlang yet, but I did rewrite it to work better in my conlang, so now
                Message 7 of 26 , Aug 3, 2012
                  I always love these translation challenges. I haven't completed the
                  translation in my conlang yet, but I did rewrite it to work better in my
                  conlang, so now it's only a matter of completing the translation of the
                  words--I did half, but was pressed for time and couldn't finish.

                  I was very pleased to discover that although it requires some rewriting, it
                  comes out sounding quite poetic all the same!

                  On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 5:23 PM, David Brumbley <davidbrumbley@...>wrote:

                  > I ran across this proverb recently and thought it would make for a
                  > quick and fun translation exercise. I came across a few constructions
                  > I hadn't yet been forced to address in Hsassiens, and I'm curious as
                  > to whether other con- or nat-langs behave similarly in one aspect.
                  >
                  > I've been using two versions of the coordinating conjunction in
                  > Hsassiens without really thinking too much about it. In the case of
                  > one subject linked to two different verbs, the conjunction is 'sin.'
                  > When two or more nouns, adjectives or adverbs are being listed, the
                  > conjunction is 'zem.' So, to HsassiEnglish an example, "He is walking
                  > SIN talking at the same time," but "Tommy ZEM Rebecca are fighting
                  > again." Just curious if other languages distinguish in the same way,
                  > and if so, how.
                  >
                  >
                  > The proverb translation in question, for those who may be interested
                  > (forgive my attempt at glossing, I'm fairly new at this):
                  >
                  >
                  > He who knows not and knows not he knows not
                  > ----Tesa faeta kameytaks sin kameytaks veahsa tesa kameytaks,
                  > He is a fool. Shun him.
                  > ----Tesaka azgetaza. Hsemayne tazeka.
                  > He who knows not and knows he knows not
                  > ----Tesa faeta kameytaks sin kameyta veahsa tesa kameytaks,
                  > He is a student. Teach him.
                  > ----Tesaka ahyimta. Kewayte tazeka.
                  > He who knows and knows not he knows
                  > ----Tesa faeta kameyta sin kameytaks veahsa tesa kameyta,
                  > He is asleep. Wake him.
                  > ----Tesaka avimha. Fa'eyke tazeka.
                  > He who knows and knows he knows
                  > ----Tesa faeta kameyta sin kameyta veahsa tesa kameyta,
                  > He is wise. Follow him.
                  > ----Tesaka asjetasa. Zemayne tazeka.
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > ----Tesa - He - Definite Article, 3rd person, Masculine (default,
                  > sorry), Subject case, no proximity specified (used for generalizations
                  > or implied referents)
                  > faeta - who - Subordinate clause marker, adjectival, agrees with subject
                  > case
                  > ----kameytaks - knows not - Verb, closed root KMT, *a**a indicative,
                  > **ey* infinitive, ks- negation
                  > ----sin - and - static-form verb conjunction, marks new clause
                  > ----kameytaks - " - takes subject case from previous clause because of
                  > verb conjunction
                  > ----veahsa - that - Subordinate clause marker, accusative
                  > ----Tesaka - He - Definite Article, 3rd person, Masculine, Subject
                  > case, far-away proximity
                  > ----azgetaza - fool - Subject case, noun, closed root ZGZ, a***a
                  > subject, **eta* masculine mortal
                  > ----Hsemayne - Cast-out - Verb, open root HsMN, *e**e imperative,
                  > **ay* infinitive
                  > tazeka - him - Definite Article, 3rd person, Masculine, Accusative
                  > case, far-away proximity
                  > ----kameyta - knows - closed root KMT, *a**a indicative, **ey* infinitive
                  > ----ahyimta - student - Subject case, noun, open root HYT, a***a
                  > subject, **im* masculine mortal
                  > ----Kewayte - Teach - Verb, open root KWT, *e**e imperative, **ay*
                  > infinitive
                  > avimha - Sleeper - Subject case, noun, open root VH, a**a subject,
                  > *im* masculine mortal
                  > ----Fa'eyke - Wake - Verb, closed root FK, *a*e imperative, *ey*
                  > infinitive (note, when mood marker and tense marker are between the
                  > same two consonants, the mood marker takes precedence and a ' is
                  > inserted)
                  > ----asjetasa - Wise one - Subject case, noun, closed root SJS, a***a
                  > subject, **eta* masculine mortal
                  > ----Zemayne - Follow - Verb, open root ZMN, *e**e imperative, **ay*
                  > infinitive
                  >
                • A. da Mek
                  ... Simple apposition _malku kohinu_ is also the usual expression in Gd¨h, but the variant with the conjunction is obligatory in complex expressions like the
                  Message 8 of 26 , Aug 8, 2012
                    >>2) "wu" when there is only one entity with several attributes or states or
                    >>actions:
                    >>malku wu kohinu
                    >>king and priest (one person with two professions)
                    >
                    > Senjecas handles this construction with apposition without any
                    > conjunction.

                    Simple apposition _malku kohinu_ is also the usual expression in Gd¨h, but
                    the variant with the conjunction is obligatory in complex expressions like
                    "the priest of the house of our Lady and the ruler of this city" _kohinu
                    bajti Baºhlatijan wu malku dhi ºhajru_, whereas _kohinu bajti Baºhlatijan
                    malku dhi ºhajru_ would mean that not the priest but the Lady is the ruler
                    of this city.
                  • Charles W Brickner
                    ... Very interesting! In Senjecas: 1) mhuùm aryús mheesósæ vláqmUS e-rijós réƶ(dz)US our lady’s house’s priest this-city’s ruler 2) mhuùm aryÙS
                    Message 9 of 26 , Aug 8, 2012
                      >-----Original Message-----
                      >From: Constructed Languages List [mailto:CONLANG@...] On Behalf Of A. da Mek

                      >Simple apposition _malku kohinu_ is also the usual expression in Gd¨h, but
                      >the variant with the conjunction is obligatory in complex expressions
                      >like "the priest of the house of our Lady and the ruler of this city"
                      >_kohinu bajti Baºhlatijan wu malku dhi ºhajru_, whereas _kohinu bajti
                      >Baºhlatijan malku dhi ºhajru_ would mean that not the priest
                      >but the Lady is the ruler of this city.

                      Very interesting!

                      In Senjecas:

                      1) mhuùm aryús mheesósæ vláqmUS e-rijós réƶ(dz)US
                      our lady’s house’s priest this-city’s ruler

                      2) mhuùm aryÙS e-rijós reƶ(dz)ÙS mheesósæ vláqmus
                      our lady’s this-city’s ruler’s house’s priest

                      Notes:
                      1) I wasn't sure if <ƶ>, i.e., z with stroke, would appear. It = /dz/.
                      2) The <æ> is an epenthetic schwa (/ə/ /@/) to avoid a cluster of three consonants.
                      3) The grammatical endings of the words in apposition are capitalized for clarity.

                      Thanks.

                      Charlie
                    • Anthony Miles
                      The part of my brain that I have allotted to things Siye is screaming That ain t right! . All of the vocabulary items exist in Siye, but the already complex
                      Message 10 of 26 , Aug 8, 2012
                        The part of my brain that I have allotted to things Siye is screaming "That ain't right!". All of the vocabulary items exist in Siye, but the already complex phrase would require this further consideration: is the relationship of the priest and the house alienable or inalienable. If alienable, the phrase "the priest of the house of our lady" would be "kutum sili laye sili le-me-me-ne" ("laye sili-me" means "lady"; if not "le-me-me-me". I think a Siye speaker would have to rephrase it as "laye sili le-me-me kutum sili-me". In this case, if the lady were ruler, it would become "laye sili le-me-me-me kumayam lusili me-pu kutum sili-me", where the "me" of "lusili me" is "this", not the possessive marker. If the priest were the ruler, then it would be "laye sili-me-me-me kutum sili-me kumayam lusili me-pu". Of course a better solution would be to make a relative clause "kutum sili laye sili le-me-me lusili me ekupumame-ne" "The priest of the house of our lady who rules this city" or "laye sili le-me-me-me kutum sili ekupumame-ne" "The priest of the house of our lady, who (i.e. the priest) rules this city. Suffixaufnahme is a real pain to work with!
                      • Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets
                        ... A very interesting thread, and an interesting proverb. Looking at how to translate it in Moten prompted me to look even deeper into how coordination is
                        Message 11 of 26 , Aug 9, 2012
                          On 1 August 2012 23:23, David Brumbley <davidbrumbley@...> wrote:

                          > I ran across this proverb recently and thought it would make for a
                          > quick and fun translation exercise. I came across a few constructions
                          > I hadn't yet been forced to address in Hsassiens, and I'm curious as
                          > to whether other con- or nat-langs behave similarly in one aspect.
                          >
                          > I've been using two versions of the coordinating conjunction in
                          > Hsassiens without really thinking too much about it. In the case of
                          > one subject linked to two different verbs, the conjunction is 'sin.'
                          > When two or more nouns, adjectives or adverbs are being listed, the
                          > conjunction is 'zem.' So, to HsassiEnglish an example, "He is walking
                          > SIN talking at the same time," but "Tommy ZEM Rebecca are fighting
                          > again." Just curious if other languages distinguish in the same way,
                          > and if so, how.
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          A very interesting thread, and an interesting proverb. Looking at how to
                          translate it in Moten prompted me to look even deeper into how coordination
                          is handled in that language.

                          As I've described in this blog post:
                          http://christophoronomicon.blogspot.nl/2012/02/moten-part-vii-particles.html,
                          Moten has a bunch of coordinating clitics, which function somewhat but not
                          exactly like coordinating conjunctions. The relevant ones here are _opa_
                          (described in the post) and _de_ (a particle I discovered a few weeks ago
                          that helped me solve a years-old headache). When used to coordinate noun
                          phrases, they can both be translated by "and", but with a different
                          connotation:
                          - _opa_ has a connotation of "also", and indicates that the two noun
                          phrases refer to separate entities. E.g.: _mjan opa badej_: the cat and the
                          dog (notice how the definite infix -e- only appears on the last noun yet
                          both are definite. This is a strict syntactic rule in Moten: when noun
                          phrases are coordinated, only the last one takes marks of case, number and
                          definition, and those extend to all coordinated phrases in meaning);
                          - _de_ has a connotation of "that is" and indicates that the two noun
                          phrases refer to a single entity. E.g.: _olnesif de vajagzif_: expert and
                          student (refers here to a single person who is considered both an expert
                          and a student, for some reason :) ). _de_ is also used wherever English
                          uses appositions to refer to one entity with more than one noun, including
                          with titles. E.g.: _plisif de Beatliksi_: Queen Beatrix (could also be
                          _Beatliksi de plisejf_, since _de_ is commutative :) . The definite infix
                          -e- reappears in this word order because the last noun is a common noun
                          rather than a proper noun). This was the afore-mentioned headache (in Moten
                          apposition has a different function, so I couldn't use it for those cases).

                          They are similar to A. de Mek's _wa_ and _wu_, although I developed them
                          independently (my _de_ is actually influenced by the Wardwesân particle
                          _ab_, although their uses are not exactly the same).

                          They can also both be used to coordinate verbs, but only in the sense of
                          your _sin_, and very strictly so: verbs coordinated using a coordinating
                          clitic not only share exactly the same arguments (*all* of them, i.e. not
                          only the subject, so you can't use a coordinating clitic for a sentence
                          like "he left the bar and went home", but you can for a sentence like "he
                          took a piece of bread and buttered it" -- and you don't need the resumptive
                          "it" when doing so! --), but also the same tense, aspect, mood and voice!
                          (so you cannot use a coordinating clitic for a sentence like "he did it
                          before and will do it again") The reason is similar to the reason why
                          coordinated noun phrases share the same case, number and definition: only
                          the last coordinated element takes the morphological markings, and their
                          meaning extend to all coordinated elements.
                          When coordinating verbs, _opa_ and _de_ keep their connotations:
                          - _opa_ indicates that the coordinated verbs correspond to different
                          actions. E.g.: _bdan pe|laz opa eze|s ige_: I can see and hear you.
                          - _de_ indicates that the coordinated verbs correspond to a single action,
                          i.e. the second one is meant as a rephrasing or clarification of the first
                          one. E.g.: _gobvuda|n vajaguz de oknestuluz ito_: I know about you, that's
                          to say I've read about you ("to know" here is translated as "to have
                          learned", so the second verb can also be in the perfect).

                          While they can be used to coordinate noun phrases and verbs, the
                          coordinating clitics *cannot* be used to coordinate clauses. In fact there
                          is no such thing as clause-level coordination in Moten. However, this
                          doesn't mean that they can't be used at clause-level at all. In fact they
                          can (like all clitics, when they are put in front of the auxiliary verb,
                          their meaning encompasses the whole clause). It's just that when used that
                          way, they lose their coordinating function, and become more like
                          clause-level adverbs (they can do that at the phrase level too, by the
                          way). In that case, _opa_ becomes equivalent to "also" or "moreover"
                          (indicating the clause is additional, separate information), while _de_ is
                          more like "in other words" or "that's to say" (indicating that the clause
                          is a rephrasing or clarification of the previous one).

                          Now onto the proverb itself!


                          >
                          > He who knows not and knows not he knows not
                          > He is a fool. Shun him.
                          > He who knows not and knows he knows not
                          > He is a student. Teach him.
                          > He who knows and knows not he knows
                          > He is asleep. Wake him.
                          > He who knows and knows he knows
                          > He is wise. Follow him.
                          >

                          OK, my problem is not so much vocabulary (although I do miss a couple of
                          vocabulary items to translate it), but the constructions themselves. You
                          see, we have here coordinated relative subclauses, and as I've explained
                          about Moten doesn't have clause-level coordination. And you can't use
                          verbal phrase-level coordination here as the different parts have different
                          objects. I could possibly have a nominal completed by two separate relative
                          subclauses corresponding to the two elements of the coordination, but I'm
                          wondering whether it's possible (Moten is strictly head-last, with relative
                          subclauses always in front of their heads, and I'm not sure separating a
                          relative subclause from its head with *another* relative subclause is
                          pragmatically possible). Before deciding on how something works
                          syntactically in Moten, I usually check first how Basque and Japanese do
                          it (in terms of syntax, Moten is quite close to both those languages), but
                          I've been unable to find a translation of this proverb in either language.
                          Has anyone got one? It'd help me greatly to figure out how Moten will
                          handle it!

                          All in all, great food for thought!
                          --
                          Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets.

                          http://christophoronomicon.blogspot.com/
                          http://www.christophoronomicon.nl/
                        • Charles W Brickner
                          Message 12 of 26 , Aug 9, 2012
                            >From: Constructed Languages List [mailto:CONLANG@...] On Behalf Of Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets
                            >Subject: Re: Conjunction Curiosity

                            >Moten has a bunch of coordinating clitics, which function somewhat
                            >but not exactly like coordinating conjunctions. The relevant ones here
                            >are _opa_ (described in the post) and _de_ (a particle I discovered
                            >a few weeks ago that helped me solve a years-old headache).
                            >When used to coordinate noun phrases, they can both be translated
                            >by "and", but with a different connotation:....
                          • neo gu
                            Hi, I tried to translate this into C0, but had to use a whole bunch of temporary vocabulary. The headless relative clauses (y- ... d-) are easily enough done
                            Message 13 of 26 , Aug 9, 2012
                              Hi,

                              I tried to translate this into C0, but had to use a whole bunch of temporary vocabulary. The headless relative clauses (y- ... d-) are easily enough done (although I considered using if-clauses). The biggest decision was choosing the pronoun for "him'.

                              yi nosapi et nosapi inosapi
                              di fule; i xono.
                              yi nosapi et sapi inosapi
                              di studente; i lernico.
                              yi sapi et nosapi isapi
                              di dormi; i weiko.
                              yi sapi et sapi isapi
                              di waizi; i seko.

                              > He who knows not and knows not he knows not
                              > He is a fool. Shun him.
                              > He who knows not and knows he knows not
                              > He is a student. Teach him.
                              > He who knows and knows not he knows
                              > He is asleep. Wake him.
                              > He who knows and knows he knows
                              > He is wise. Follow him.
                            • neo gu
                              and now in C2 (VAN), again with temporary vocabulary. 0^(kn0&a^(kn~6^[kn0=fu. [xn!3. 0^(kn0&a(kn~6^[kn0=st. [tc!3. 0(kn0&a^(kn~6[kn0]sl. [wk!3.
                              Message 14 of 26 , Aug 10, 2012
                                and now in C2 (VAN), again with temporary vocabulary.

                                0^(kn0&a^(kn~6^[kn0=fu. [xn!3.
                                0^(kn0&a(kn~6^[kn0=st. [tc!3.
                                0(kn0&a^(kn~6[kn0]sl. [wk!3.
                                0(kn0&a(kn~6[kn0]wz. [fw!3.

                                > He who knows not and knows not he knows not
                                > He is a fool. Shun him.
                                > He who knows not and knows he knows not
                                > He is a student. Teach him.
                                > He who knows and knows not he knows
                                > He is asleep. Wake him.
                                > He who knows and knows he knows
                                > He is wise. Follow him.
                              • MorphemeAddict
                                ... What do all the parts mean? stevo
                                Message 15 of 26 , Aug 11, 2012
                                  On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 7:43 PM, neo gu <qiihoskeh@...> wrote:

                                  > and now in C2 (VAN), again with temporary vocabulary.
                                  >
                                  > 0^(kn0&a^(kn~6^[kn0=fu. [xn!3.
                                  > 0^(kn0&a(kn~6^[kn0=st. [tc!3.
                                  > 0(kn0&a^(kn~6[kn0]sl. [wk!3.
                                  > 0(kn0&a(kn~6[kn0]wz. [fw!3.
                                  >
                                  > > He who knows not and knows not he knows not
                                  > > He is a fool. Shun him.
                                  > > He who knows not and knows he knows not
                                  > > He is a student. Teach him.
                                  > > He who knows and knows not he knows
                                  > > He is asleep. Wake him.
                                  > > He who knows and knows he knows
                                  > > He is wise. Follow him.
                                  >

                                  What do all the parts mean?

                                  stevo
                                • neo gu
                                  ... 0 indefinite pronoun 3 3rd person pronoun (proximative) 6 pronoun referring to subject of matrix verb ( attributive form of following verb [ predicative
                                  Message 16 of 26 , Aug 11, 2012
                                    On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 10:09:18 -0400, MorphemeAddict <lytlesw@...> wrote:

                                    >On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 7:43 PM, neo gu <qiihoskeh@...> wrote:
                                    >
                                    >> and now in C2 (VAN), again with temporary vocabulary.
                                    >>
                                    >> 0^(kn0&a^(kn~6^[kn0=fu. [xn!3.
                                    >> 0^(kn0&a(kn~6^[kn0=st. [tc!3.
                                    >> 0(kn0&a^(kn~6[kn0]sl. [wk!3.
                                    >> 0(kn0&a(kn~6[kn0]wz. [fw!3.

                                    0 indefinite pronoun
                                    3 3rd person pronoun (proximative)
                                    6 pronoun referring to subject of matrix verb
                                    ( attributive form of following verb
                                    [ predicative form of following verb
                                    = (should be \) predicative form of following noun
                                    ] predicative form of following adjective (or univalent verb)
                                    ^ negative polarity of following predicate
                                    &a and
                                    ~ nominalizes what follows
                                    ! imperative
                                    kn know (as verb)
                                    fu fool (as noun)
                                    xn sun (as verb)
                                    st student (as noun)
                                    tc teach (as verb)
                                    sl sleep (as adjective/univalent verb)
                                    wk wake (as verb)
                                    wz wise (as adjective)
                                    fw follow (as verb)

                                    (The content words are all temporary mnemonic substitutes.)

                                    The content word prefixes [ etc. determine which of 3 possible words is used along with its syntactical function.
                                    Attributives modify the preceding noun or pronoun.

                                    Does that help?

                                    >> > He who knows not and knows not he knows not
                                    >> > He is a fool. Shun him.
                                    >> > He who knows not and knows he knows not
                                    >> > He is a student. Teach him.
                                    >> > He who knows and knows not he knows
                                    >> > He is asleep. Wake him.
                                    >> > He who knows and knows he knows
                                    >> > He is wise. Follow him.
                                    >
                                    >What do all the parts mean?
                                    >
                                    >stevo
                                  • Anthony Miles
                                    He who knows not and knows not he knows not ... The challenge here was the increasingly specific man (um tum/-mu- i-/-0- um me). The imperative in the
                                    Message 17 of 26 , Aug 14, 2012
                                      He who knows not and knows not he knows not
                                      > He is a fool. Shun him.
                                      > He who knows not and knows he knows not
                                      > He is a student. Teach him.
                                      > He who knows and knows not he knows
                                      > He is asleep. Wake him.
                                      > He who knows and knows he knows
                                      > He is wise. Follow him.


                                      The challenge here was the increasingly specific 'man' (um tum/-mu- > i-/-0- > um me). The imperative in the last line of the third verse is perfective because to end something is a perfective notion, even though the positive imperative in Siye is imperfective by default. The conditional verb in the first line of the ends in the non-final-verb suffix -(a)m because it is coordinate with the conditional verb in the second line. The conditional verb in the second line does not end in -(a)m because that would indicate that the two if-clauses ending in -sum were separate conditions rather than coordinate ('if' rather than 'iff'). There is some potential ambiguity in the second line, about whether it is protasis or apodosis, since /su/+/am/ > /sum/.

                                      I considered making the fourth line a purpose clause with -ki, but the introduction of another indefinite would have muddied the waters. I had to say 'to know (it)' because knowledge consists of knowing something; also, Siye syntax works much better with a transitive or ditransitive verb. The verb 'to know' might be pi/mu + ki rather than pi/mu + 0 - I'm not sure.
                                      /-/ indicates suffixes, /=/ indicates clitics.

                                      Um tum=na emupipumusumham
                                      i=ya epipumume epipumusum
                                      um me um pimu-ku=ni=pu ikimpukimasu
                                      i=sum susuwima

                                      Um tum=na emupipumusumham
                                      i=ya epipumume epipumasum
                                      um me pinateyam=pu ikimpukimasu
                                      i=tu pisumwinama

                                      Um tum=na emupipumasumham
                                      i=ya epipumame epipumusum
                                      um me um kuna=kem=pu ikimpukimasu
                                      kuna i=ne tusumwisuna

                                      Um tum=na emupipumasumham
                                      i=ya epipumame epipumasum
                                      um me um pimu=ni=pu ikimpukimasu
                                      mi i=me=so=ne emsa sukiwima


                                      If a man does not know it and
                                      he does not know that he does not know it,
                                      that man is a man of no knowledge;
                                      Go away from him.

                                      If a man does not know it and
                                      he knows that he does not know it,
                                      that man is a desirerer of knowledge;
                                      Cause him to know.

                                      If a man knows it and
                                      he does not know he knows it,
                                      that man is a man in sleep;
                                      Cause him to go away from his sleep.

                                      If a man knows it and
                                      he knows that he knows it,
                                      that man is a man with knowledge,
                                      Move inside his feet (footsteps).
                                    • Logan Kearsley
                                      On 9 August 2012 05:24, Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets wrote: [...] ... Perhaps this is just some kind of observation bias I ve got, but it
                                      Message 18 of 26 , Aug 15, 2012
                                        On 9 August 2012 05:24, Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets
                                        <tsela.cg@...> wrote:
                                        [...]
                                        > As I've described in this blog post:
                                        > http://christophoronomicon.blogspot.nl/2012/02/moten-part-vii-particles.html,
                                        > Moten has a bunch of coordinating clitics, which function somewhat but not
                                        > exactly like coordinating conjunctions. The relevant ones here are _opa_
                                        > (described in the post) and _de_ (a particle I discovered a few weeks ago
                                        > that helped me solve a years-old headache). When used to coordinate noun
                                        > phrases, they can both be translated by "and", but with a different
                                        > connotation:
                                        > - _opa_ has a connotation of "also", and indicates that the two noun
                                        > phrases refer to separate entities. E.g.: _mjan opa badej_: the cat and the
                                        > dog (notice how the definite infix -e- only appears on the last noun yet
                                        > both are definite. This is a strict syntactic rule in Moten: when noun
                                        > phrases are coordinated, only the last one takes marks of case, number and
                                        > definition, and those extend to all coordinated phrases in meaning);
                                        > - _de_ has a connotation of "that is" and indicates that the two noun
                                        > phrases refer to a single entity. E.g.: _olnesif de vajagzif_: expert and
                                        > student (refers here to a single person who is considered both an expert
                                        > and a student, for some reason :) ). _de_ is also used wherever English
                                        > uses appositions to refer to one entity with more than one noun, including
                                        > with titles. E.g.: _plisif de Beatliksi_: Queen Beatrix (could also be
                                        > _Beatliksi de plisejf_, since _de_ is commutative :) . The definite infix
                                        > -e- reappears in this word order because the last noun is a common noun
                                        > rather than a proper noun). This was the afore-mentioned headache (in Moten
                                        > apposition has a different function, so I couldn't use it for those cases).
                                        >
                                        > They are similar to A. de Mek's _wa_ and _wu_, although I developed them
                                        > independently (my _de_ is actually influenced by the Wardwesân particle
                                        > _ab_, although their uses are not exactly the same).

                                        Perhaps this is just some kind of observation bias I've got, but it
                                        seems that, despite everyone apparently developing it independently,
                                        this distinction (between co-reference "and" and in-addition-to "and")
                                        has become very popular in conlangs. Is there perhaps a WALS feature
                                        for this, or at least one natlang example that someone could point out
                                        for it?

                                        -l.
                                      • Wm Annis
                                        ... You might find this interesting: http://journals.dartmouth.edu/cgi-bin/WebObjects/Journals.woa/xmlpage/1/article/351?htmlOnce=yes -- William S. Annis
                                        Message 19 of 26 , Aug 15, 2012
                                          On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 11:42 AM, Logan Kearsley <chronosurfer@...> wrote:
                                          > this distinction (between co-reference "and" and in-addition-to "and")
                                          > has become very popular in conlangs. Is there perhaps a WALS feature
                                          > for this, or at least one natlang example that someone could point out
                                          > for it?

                                          You might find this interesting:

                                          http://journals.dartmouth.edu/cgi-bin/WebObjects/Journals.woa/xmlpage/1/article/351?htmlOnce=yes

                                          --
                                          William S. Annis
                                          www.aoidoi.org • www.scholiastae.org
                                        • Anthony Miles
                                          I can t speak for anyone else, but the reason Siye acquired two methods of coordination (the comitative enclitic =ni and the morpheme (h)am/-am/-m) is this.
                                          Message 20 of 26 , Aug 17, 2012
                                            I can't speak for anyone else, but the reason Siye acquired two methods of coordination (the comitative enclitic =ni and the morpheme (h)am/-am/-m) is this. Sumerian, on which I was basing Siye syntax, uses the comitative case for 'and'. The algorithm in my head, however, left the morpheme 'am' also as 'and', from the pre-Sumerian version of Siye, which I composed while sick in February. Since =ni was a nominal case ending, I decided that e'am' had a verbal component. So it became (a) the connector between clauses of the same type (b) the connector between nominalized participles. Since Siye verbs end in a vowel or -m, the originally independent coordinating particle 'am' became a suffix '-(h)am/am/m'.

                                            Incidentally, I solved my issue with the Conjunction Curiosity text: a sequence of verbs ending in -sumham -sum -su (if if then) must be underlyingly -sum-am -sum -su because the -am indicates that the next clause will be of the same type (-sum). A sequence 'if then then' would have verbal endings -sum -sum (<-su-am) -su. Confusing to foreigners (like us Terrans) but clear to Siye-speakers and properly educated Ulos (Ulok-speakers)!
                                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.