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

Re: The man is good to the dog.

Expand Messages
  • Casey Borders
    Could you have a way to verb-ize good such that the man goods the dog? * * *Casey Borders*
    Message 1 of 8 , Jan 2, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      Could you have a way to verb-ize good such that the man goods the dog?

      *
      *
      *Casey Borders*



      On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 5:24 PM, Gary Shannon <fiziwig@...> wrote:

      > I'm working on today's sentences for my 30-day conlang project.
      > So far the language is shaping up to be SOVI with a certain hierarchy
      > of requirements.
      > a sentence may take the form:
      >
      > V - Run! - imperative
      > SV - John runs.
      > SOV - John book has.
      > SOVI - John book give-to Mary.
      >
      > There is no need for a preposition with the indirect object because
      > the preposition is implied by the verb.
      >
      > What I haven't allowed so far is anything that uses elements "out of
      > order". For example, SVI is not permitted. "John gives-to charity."
      > would have to include a placeholder noun "something" so it would be
      > "John something gives-to charity."
      >
      > I tried using prepositions but it didn't feel right: *John book give to
      > Mary.
      > Although I kind of liked a pospositional suffix: (*?) John book give
      > Mary-ward.
      >
      > Now I'm looking at sentence #59 in the version of McGuffey's that I'm
      > using:
      >
      > The man is good to the dog.
      >
      > I can't say Man good IS." because the verb I would use for IS in this
      > case really just assigns and adjectival attribute to the noun. There
      > is no implied preposition or required indirect object. "Apple red is."
      >
      > I could introduce a preposition: "Man good is concerning dog." But
      > that doesn't feel right somehow.
      >
      > I could "averb-ize" the indirect object: "Man good is dog-ward-ly."
      >
      > I could have a verb "is-to" which expects and adjective as the direct
      > object and a NP as the indirect object:
      > "Man good is-to dog." "Taste of fruit good is-to me."
      >
      > I can have a verb "treats-well" or "is-good-to" and write "Man dog
      > treats-well., but that is going to mean a lot more verbs, and a lot
      > less generality.
      >
      > I could introduce adverbs (which the language doesn't have yet) and
      > write: "Man dog treats well." but I still don't know where adverbs are
      > going to fall in the SOVI scheme of things. (Probably part of V = VP)
      >
      > So for now I'm working around it until I come up with something that
      > feels right to me.
      >
      > Does anyone have any suggestions?
      >
      > --gary
      >
    • Logan Kearsley
      ... Sounds like a prime opportunity to introduce a voice changing operation to raise indirect objects to direct object status. -l.
      Message 2 of 8 , Jan 2, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        On 2 January 2013 17:35, Casey Borders <thebeast.13@...> wrote:
        > Could you have a way to verb-ize good such that the man goods the dog?

        Sounds like a prime opportunity to introduce a voice changing
        operation to raise indirect objects to direct object status.

        -l.
      • Eugene Oh
        Yes - if the adjective is verbal, ie to be good is a verb as opposed to verb + adj Eugene Sent from my iPhone
        Message 3 of 8 , Jan 2, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          Yes - if the adjective is verbal, ie "to be good" is a verb as opposed to verb + adj

          Eugene

          Sent from my iPhone

          On 2 Jan 2013, at 22:35, Casey Borders <thebeast.13@...> wrote:

          > Could you have a way to verb-ize good such that the man goods the dog?
          >
          > *
          > *
          > *Casey Borders*
          >
          >
          >
          > On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 5:24 PM, Gary Shannon <fiziwig@...> wrote:
          >
          >> I'm working on today's sentences for my 30-day conlang project.
          >> So far the language is shaping up to be SOVI with a certain hierarchy
          >> of requirements.
          >> a sentence may take the form:
          >>
          >> V - Run! - imperative
          >> SV - John runs.
          >> SOV - John book has.
          >> SOVI - John book give-to Mary.
          >>
          >> There is no need for a preposition with the indirect object because
          >> the preposition is implied by the verb.
          >>
          >> What I haven't allowed so far is anything that uses elements "out of
          >> order". For example, SVI is not permitted. "John gives-to charity."
          >> would have to include a placeholder noun "something" so it would be
          >> "John something gives-to charity."
          >>
          >> I tried using prepositions but it didn't feel right: *John book give to
          >> Mary.
          >> Although I kind of liked a pospositional suffix: (*?) John book give
          >> Mary-ward.
          >>
          >> Now I'm looking at sentence #59 in the version of McGuffey's that I'm
          >> using:
          >>
          >> The man is good to the dog.
          >>
          >> I can't say Man good IS." because the verb I would use for IS in this
          >> case really just assigns and adjectival attribute to the noun. There
          >> is no implied preposition or required indirect object. "Apple red is."
          >>
          >> I could introduce a preposition: "Man good is concerning dog." But
          >> that doesn't feel right somehow.
          >>
          >> I could "averb-ize" the indirect object: "Man good is dog-ward-ly."
          >>
          >> I could have a verb "is-to" which expects and adjective as the direct
          >> object and a NP as the indirect object:
          >> "Man good is-to dog." "Taste of fruit good is-to me."
          >>
          >> I can have a verb "treats-well" or "is-good-to" and write "Man dog
          >> treats-well., but that is going to mean a lot more verbs, and a lot
          >> less generality.
          >>
          >> I could introduce adverbs (which the language doesn't have yet) and
          >> write: "Man dog treats well." but I still don't know where adverbs are
          >> going to fall in the SOVI scheme of things. (Probably part of V = VP)
          >>
          >> So for now I'm working around it until I come up with something that
          >> feels right to me.
          >>
          >> Does anyone have any suggestions?
          >>
          >> --gary
          >>
        • Jim Henry
          ... That also seems pretty good. And I don t think it s really sacrificing generality so much -- be good to is an English idiom you don t necessarily want
          Message 4 of 8 , Jan 2, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
            On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 5:24 PM, Gary Shannon <fiziwig@...> wrote:
            > The man is good to the dog.

            > I could introduce a preposition: "Man good is concerning dog." But
            > that doesn't feel right somehow.

            That's probably what I would do, or else:

            > I can have a verb "treats-well" or "is-good-to" and write "Man dog
            > treats-well., but that is going to mean a lot more verbs, and a lot
            > less generality.

            That also seems pretty good. And I don't think it's really
            sacrificing generality so much -- "be good to" is an English idiom you
            don't necessarily want to calque. On the other hand, it's fairly
            transparent as idioms go, sort of parallel to expressions like "That
            painting looks pretty to me" or "This cake tastes good to me", if you
            want to express those things with indirect objects or with some kind
            of "with respect to" or "in the experience of" adposition.



            --
            Jim Henry
            http://www.pobox.com/~jimhenry/
            http://www.jimhenrymedicaltrust.org
          • neo gu
            ... You may want more than one way to translate good , which is a very general word. One of them could mean beneficial to , another might signify approval,
            Message 5 of 8 , Jan 2, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              On Wed, 2 Jan 2013 18:14:13 -0500, Jim Henry <jimhenry1973@...> wrote:

              >On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 5:24 PM, Gary Shannon <fiziwig@...> wrote:
              >> The man is good to the dog.
              >
              >> I can have a verb "treats-well" or "is-good-to" and write "Man dog
              >> treats-well., but that is going to mean a lot more verbs, and a lot
              >> less generality.
              >
              >That also seems pretty good. And I don't think it's really
              >sacrificing generality so much -- "be good to" is an English idiom you
              >don't necessarily want to calque. On the other hand, it's fairly
              >transparent as idioms go, sort of parallel to expressions like "That
              >painting looks pretty to me" or "This cake tastes good to me", if you
              >want to express those things with indirect objects or with some kind
              >of "with respect to" or "in the experience of" adposition.
              >
              >--
              >Jim Henry
              >http://www.pobox.com/~jimhenry/
              >http://www.jimhenrymedicaltrust.org

              You may want more than one way to translate "good", which is a very general word. One of them could mean "beneficial to", another might signify approval, etc. Hopefully, this won't cause other problems later on.

              I expect to do something like this in Dec29, but there I already have a mechanism for bivalent adjectives as in "a good-to-the-dog man".
            • Patrick Dunn
              I know you re already leaning toward an analytic language (a man after my own heart! Analytic languages get unfairly disregarded, I think, sometimes), but you
              Message 6 of 8 , Jan 2, 2013
              • 0 Attachment
                I know you're already leaning toward an analytic language (a man after my
                own heart! Analytic languages get unfairly disregarded, I think,
                sometimes), but you could create a benefactive case to put "the dog" in, so
                it'd be "the man is good dog.benefactive."




                On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Gary Shannon <fiziwig@...> wrote:

                > I'm working on today's sentences for my 30-day conlang project.
                > So far the language is shaping up to be SOVI with a certain hierarchy
                > of requirements.
                > a sentence may take the form:
                >
                > V - Run! - imperative
                > SV - John runs.
                > SOV - John book has.
                > SOVI - John book give-to Mary.
                >
                > There is no need for a preposition with the indirect object because
                > the preposition is implied by the verb.
                >
                > What I haven't allowed so far is anything that uses elements "out of
                > order". For example, SVI is not permitted. "John gives-to charity."
                > would have to include a placeholder noun "something" so it would be
                > "John something gives-to charity."
                >
                > I tried using prepositions but it didn't feel right: *John book give to
                > Mary.
                > Although I kind of liked a pospositional suffix: (*?) John book give
                > Mary-ward.
                >
                > Now I'm looking at sentence #59 in the version of McGuffey's that I'm
                > using:
                >
                > The man is good to the dog.
                >
                > I can't say Man good IS." because the verb I would use for IS in this
                > case really just assigns and adjectival attribute to the noun. There
                > is no implied preposition or required indirect object. "Apple red is."
                >
                > I could introduce a preposition: "Man good is concerning dog." But
                > that doesn't feel right somehow.
                >
                > I could "averb-ize" the indirect object: "Man good is dog-ward-ly."
                >
                > I could have a verb "is-to" which expects and adjective as the direct
                > object and a NP as the indirect object:
                > "Man good is-to dog." "Taste of fruit good is-to me."
                >
                > I can have a verb "treats-well" or "is-good-to" and write "Man dog
                > treats-well., but that is going to mean a lot more verbs, and a lot
                > less generality.
                >
                > I could introduce adverbs (which the language doesn't have yet) and
                > write: "Man dog treats well." but I still don't know where adverbs are
                > going to fall in the SOVI scheme of things. (Probably part of V = VP)
                >
                > So for now I'm working around it until I come up with something that
                > feels right to me.
                >
                > Does anyone have any suggestions?
                >
                > --gary
                >



                --
                Second Person, a chapbook of poetry by Patrick Dunn, is now available for
                order from Finishing Line
                Press<http://www.finishinglinepress.com/NewReleasesandForthcomingTitles.htm>
                and
                Amazon<http://www.amazon.com/Second-Person-Patrick-Dunn/dp/1599249065/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1324342341&sr=8-2>.
              • Ian Spolarich
                In Adranik, verbs and adjectives cannot be created from any other part of speech, so I would have to use an adverb: The man the dog (ACC) good(ly) is = The
                Message 7 of 8 , Jan 2, 2013
                • 0 Attachment
                  In Adranik, verbs and adjectives cannot be created from any other part of
                  speech, so I would have to use an adverb:

                  "The man the dog (ACC) good(ly) is"
                  =
                  The man is good to the dog.

                  That is, unless there is a verb meaning "to be good to," or even one that
                  is "to be X to," where a simple adjective or adverb could be combined with
                  the verb... I'm not sure:

                  "The man the dog (acc) good is (to)"
                  = The man is (being) good to the dog.
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.