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

Re: Possible case system

Expand Messages
  • kechpaja
    To me, this looks like a fairly typical active-stative system. However, I m not entirely sure what is happening in the last two sections (with -azh and -on).
    Message 1 of 10 , May 20, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      To me, this looks like a fairly typical active-stative system. However, I'm not entirely sure what is happening in the last two sections (with -azh and -on). It looks like -azh is an instrumental, and -on is a possessive.

      Could you clarify the situations in which each case is used?

      On May 20, 2013, at 14:17, Adam Walker <carraxan@...> wrote:

      > I have been tinkering with what will eventually become the case system for
      > Gravgaln (now that verbs are stabilizing) and here's what I came up with
      > last night:
      >
      > John-ak ate the cake-ev.
      > John-ak ate.
      > John-ev fell.
      > John-ak fell. (because he threw himself down)
      >
      > John-ak gave Tom-il the book-ev.
      > John-ak gave Tom-il Bob-ev.
      >
      > John-ak killed Bob-ev.
      > John-ev was killed.
      >
      > John-ak killed Bob-ev knife-azh.
      > John-ak killed Tom-azh.
      > John-ak killed Bob-ev Tom-azh.
      >
      > John-ev hairbrush-on is missing.
      > Fifth grade teacher-ev-on is tired.
      > Bob-ak killed Tom-ev cat-on.
      >
      > So, is this an Active-Stative alignment I'm working on here? A slightly
      > wonky Active-Stative System? Something else entirely? Seriously flawed in
      > some way I don't see yet?
      >
      > Adam
    • neo gu
      ... Does that translate as John made Tom kill Bob ? ... I agree that it s Active-Stative, specifically Fluid-S. The only wonky thing is with the possessives;
      Message 2 of 10 , May 20, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        On Mon, 20 May 2013 13:17:14 -0500, Adam Walker <carraxan@...> wrote:

        >I have been tinkering with what will eventually become the case system for
        >Gravgaln (now that verbs are stabilizing) and here's what I came up with
        >last night:
        >
        >John-ak ate the cake-ev.
        >John-ak ate.
        >John-ev fell.
        >John-ak fell. (because he threw himself down)
        >
        >John-ak gave Tom-il the book-ev.
        >John-ak gave Tom-il Bob-ev.
        >
        >John-ak killed Bob-ev.
        >John-ev was killed.
        >
        >John-ak killed Bob-ev knife-azh.
        >John-ak killed Tom-azh.
        >John-ak killed Bob-ev Tom-azh.

        Does that translate as "John made Tom kill Bob"?

        >John-ev hairbrush-on is missing.
        >Fifth grade teacher-ev-on is tired.
        >Bob-ak killed Tom-ev cat-on.
        >
        >So, is this an Active-Stative alignment I'm working on here? A slightly
        >wonky Active-Stative System? Something else entirely? Seriously flawed in
        >some way I don't see yet?
        >
        >Adam

        I agree that it's Active-Stative, specifically Fluid-S. The only wonky thing is with the possessives; it seems you're marking the case for the possessum on the possessor. -on could be interpreted as a sort of construct state. Although I'm not sure what's happening with the Fifth grade teacher.
      • Nicole Valicia Thompson-Andrews
        Do these cases have a name? Mellissa Green @GreenNovelist ... From: Constructed Languages List [mailto:CONLANG@LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU] On Behalf Of Adam Walker
        Message 3 of 10 , May 20, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          Do these cases have a name?

          Mellissa Green


          @GreenNovelist

          -----Original Message-----
          From: Constructed Languages List [mailto:CONLANG@...] On
          Behalf Of Adam Walker
          Sent: Monday, May 20, 2013 11:17 AM
          To: CONLANG@...
          Subject: Possible case system

          I have been tinkering with what will eventually become the case system for
          Gravgaln (now that verbs are stabilizing) and here's what I came up with
          last night:

          John-ak ate the cake-ev.
          John-ak ate.
          John-ev fell.
          John-ak fell. (because he threw himself down)

          John-ak gave Tom-il the book-ev.
          John-ak gave Tom-il Bob-ev.

          John-ak killed Bob-ev.
          John-ev was killed.

          John-ak killed Bob-ev knife-azh.
          John-ak killed Tom-azh.
          John-ak killed Bob-ev Tom-azh.

          John-ev hairbrush-on is missing.
          Fifth grade teacher-ev-on is tired.
          Bob-ak killed Tom-ev cat-on.

          So, is this an Active-Stative alignment I'm working on here? A slightly
          wonky Active-Stative System? Something else entirely? Seriously flawed in
          some way I don't see yet?

          Adam
        • Adam Walker
          ... It **could** mean that. It could also mean that John hired Tom to kill Bob, or tricked him into doing it, or simply handed him the poisoned tart knowing
          Message 4 of 10 , May 20, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
            On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 2:21 PM, neo gu <qiihoskeh@...> wrote:

            > On Mon, 20 May 2013 13:17:14 -0500, Adam Walker <carraxan@...>
            > wrote:
            >
            > >I have been tinkering with what will eventually become the case system for
            > >Gravgaln (now that verbs are stabilizing) and here's what I came up with
            > >last night:
            > >
            > >John-ak ate the cake-ev.
            > >John-ak ate.
            > >John-ev fell.
            > >John-ak fell. (because he threw himself down)
            > >
            > >John-ak gave Tom-il the book-ev.
            > >John-ak gave Tom-il Bob-ev.
            > >
            > >John-ak killed Bob-ev.
            > >John-ev was killed.
            > >
            > >John-ak killed Bob-ev knife-azh.
            > >John-ak killed Tom-azh.
            > >John-ak killed Bob-ev Tom-azh.
            >
            > Does that translate as "John made Tom kill Bob"?
            >

            It **could** mean that. It could also mean that John hired Tom to kill
            Bob, or tricked him into doing it, or simply handed him the poisoned tart
            knowing he would give it to Bob. Tom was the tool that John used to
            accomplish Bob's death.


            > >John-ev hairbrush-on is missing.
            > >Fifth grade teacher-ev-on is tired.
            > >Bob-ak killed Tom-ev cat-on.
            > >
            > >So, is this an Active-Stative alignment I'm working on here? A slightly
            > >wonky Active-Stative System? Something else entirely? Seriously flawed
            > in
            > >some way I don't see yet?
            > >
            > >Adam
            >
            > I agree that it's Active-Stative, specifically Fluid-S. The only wonky
            > thing is with the possessives; it seems you're marking the case for the
            > possessum on the possessor. -on could be interpreted as a sort of construct
            > state. Although I'm not sure what's happening with the Fifth grade teacher.
            >

            Yes, well, I'm not entirely sure that I have given good data there. It
            seemed perfectly rational at the time I wrote out my examples last night.
            It seemed less so when I typed them in my email today, and still less so
            now. The possessives may be just plain wrong. Or I may just have
            incomplete data there, or mostly correct data with an error or two.

            Adam
          • Jyri Lehtinen
            ... Seems like fifth grade teacher-ACC-POSS is tired = [a teacher of the fifth grade]-ACC is tired (using here nominative/accusative for ak/ev). I m not sure
            Message 5 of 10 , May 21, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              > Although I'm not sure what's happening with the Fifth grade teacher.
              >

              Seems like

              fifth grade teacher-ACC-POSS is tired
              = [a teacher of the fifth grade]-ACC is tired

              (using here nominative/accusative for ak/ev). I'm not sure how common it is
              to mark possession with a case
              on the possessed noun. According to Wikipedia the possessed case is
              attested (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Possessive). A more typical way to
              mark possession on the possessed noun is to use possessive affixes, i.e. to
              inflect the noun according to the person and typically number of the
              possessor. You can have this system loose the first and second persons, by
              indicating possession by them always with juxtaposition of pronouns, as
              well as any number marking it has. This way you'll end up with a system
              where the possessum of either third person or non pronoun possessors is
              indicated with a "case" that's used alongside the "proper" cases.

              If you want complete symmetry with regards to possessors, it's not too out
              of place to have the possessed case to generalise also to the first and
              second person possessors. You might have a problem with this last step
              though, if you are aiming for naturalism. That's because it would make the
              possessed noun jump up in grammatical complexity and possession by speech
              act participants is so common that it's hardly the first place to have
              grammatical analogising. But if you are just aiming to get a nice system,
              then scrap that last bit.

              -Jyri
            • Adam Walker
              ... thanks for the interesting info and valuable critique. One problem with this for Gravgaln is the fact that the pronouns don t mark person, but caste.
              Message 6 of 10 , May 21, 2013
              • 0 Attachment
                On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 3:06 AM, Jyri Lehtinen <lehtinen.jyri@...>wrote:

                > > Although I'm not sure what's happening with the Fifth grade teacher.
                > >
                >
                > Seems like
                >
                > fifth grade teacher-ACC-POSS is tired
                > = [a teacher of the fifth grade]-ACC is tired
                >
                > (using here nominative/accusative for ak/ev). I'm not sure how common it is
                > to mark possession with a case
                > on the possessed noun. According to Wikipedia the possessed case is
                > attested (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Possessive). A more typical way to
                > mark possession on the possessed noun is to use possessive affixes, i.e. to
                > inflect the noun according to the person and typically number of the
                > possessor. You can have this system loose the first and second persons, by
                > indicating possession by them always with juxtaposition of pronouns, as
                > well as any number marking it has. This way you'll end up with a system
                > where the possessum of either third person or non pronoun possessors is
                > indicated with a "case" that's used alongside the "proper" cases.
                >
                > If you want complete symmetry with regards to possessors, it's not too out
                > of place to have the possessed case to generalise also to the first and
                > second person possessors. You might have a problem with this last step
                > though, if you are aiming for naturalism. That's because it would make the
                > possessed noun jump up in grammatical complexity and possession by speech
                > act participants is so common that it's hardly the first place to have
                > grammatical analogising. But if you are just aiming to get a nice system,
                > then scrap that last bit.
                >
                > -Jyri
                >

                thanks for the interesting info and valuable critique. One problem with
                this for Gravgaln is the fact that the pronouns don't mark person, but
                caste. Person is marked solely on the verb, so between the two, pronoun
                and verb, you get information on both person and caste of those involved in
                the conversation.

                Adam
              • H. S. Teoh
                ... Sounds like an active-stative system. ... Makes sense, -azh is an instrumental case, I d venture to guess. ... This is just tail-marking for possessives,
                Message 7 of 10 , May 23, 2013
                • 0 Attachment
                  On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 06:00:29PM -0500, Adam Walker wrote:
                  > On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 2:21 PM, neo gu <qiihoskeh@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > > On Mon, 20 May 2013 13:17:14 -0500, Adam Walker <carraxan@...>
                  > > wrote:
                  > >
                  > > >I have been tinkering with what will eventually become the case system for
                  > > >Gravgaln (now that verbs are stabilizing) and here's what I came up with
                  > > >last night:
                  > > >
                  > > >John-ak ate the cake-ev.
                  > > >John-ak ate.
                  > > >John-ev fell.
                  > > >John-ak fell. (because he threw himself down)

                  Sounds like an active-stative system.


                  > > >John-ak gave Tom-il the book-ev.
                  > > >John-ak gave Tom-il Bob-ev.
                  > > >
                  > > >John-ak killed Bob-ev.
                  > > >John-ev was killed.
                  > > >
                  > > >John-ak killed Bob-ev knife-azh.
                  > > >John-ak killed Tom-azh.
                  > > >John-ak killed Bob-ev Tom-azh.
                  > >
                  > > Does that translate as "John made Tom kill Bob"?
                  > >
                  >
                  > It **could** mean that. It could also mean that John hired Tom to
                  > kill Bob, or tricked him into doing it, or simply handed him the
                  > poisoned tart knowing he would give it to Bob. Tom was the tool that
                  > John used to accomplish Bob's death.

                  Makes sense, -azh is an instrumental case, I'd venture to guess.


                  > > >John-ev hairbrush-on is missing.
                  > > >Fifth grade teacher-ev-on is tired.
                  > > >Bob-ak killed Tom-ev cat-on.

                  This is just tail-marking for possessives, right? I like it!


                  > > >So, is this an Active-Stative alignment I'm working on here? A
                  > > >slightly wonky Active-Stative System? Something else entirely?
                  > > >Seriously flawed in some way I don't see yet?
                  > > >
                  > > >Adam
                  > >
                  > > I agree that it's Active-Stative, specifically Fluid-S. The only
                  > > wonky thing is with the possessives; it seems you're marking the
                  > > case for the possessum on the possessor. -on could be interpreted as
                  > > a sort of construct state. Although I'm not sure what's happening
                  > > with the Fifth grade teacher.

                  To me, -on looks just like tail-marking, so yeah, a kind of construct
                  case.

                  But I also don't understand what's going on with the fifth grade
                  teacher.


                  > Yes, well, I'm not entirely sure that I have given good data there.
                  > It seemed perfectly rational at the time I wrote out my examples last
                  > night. It seemed less so when I typed them in my email today, and
                  > still less so now. The possessives may be just plain wrong. Or I may
                  > just have incomplete data there, or mostly correct data with an error
                  > or two.
                  [...]

                  The possessives make total sense to me -- it's just tail-marking or
                  construct case -- except for the 5th grade teacher, of which I'm not
                  sure what the double-marking signifies.

                  Or is there some kind of totally different selection criteria going on
                  here, where agentive/animate nouns receive preferential case marking?


                  T

                  --
                  Nothing in the world is more distasteful to a man than to take the path
                  that leads to himself. -- Herman Hesse
                • James Kane
                  ... To me it seems like the -on is tail marking in that it marks the teacher as: fifth grade its teacher i.e. fifth grade s teacher. Teacher is then also in
                  Message 8 of 10 , May 23, 2013
                  • 0 Attachment
                    >>>
                    >>> John-ev hairbrush-on is missing.
                    >>> Fifth grade teacher-ev-on is tired.
                    >>> Bob-ak killed Tom-ev cat-on.

                    To me it seems like the -on is tail marking in that it marks the teacher as: fifth grade its teacher i.e. fifth grade's teacher. Teacher is then also in the stative case (or whatever) because it is the subject of the stative verb.

                    Maybe it would make more sense if the suffixes were in the reverse order, teacher-on-ev. But then this is inconsistent as in the first and third examples the hairbrush and the cat aren't marked as stative, instead their possessors are which I think doesn't quite make sense.


                    James

                    On 24/05/2013, at 5:42 AM, "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh@...> wrote:

                    >
                    >>>> John-ev hairbrush-on is missing.
                    >>>> Fifth grade teacher-ev-on is tired.
                    >>>> Bob-ak killed Tom-ev cat-on.
                  • Adam Walker
                    Yes, I need to try to reconstruct what my brain was doing when I produced those examples. More and more, I m thinking they just don t make sense. I **think**
                    Message 9 of 10 , May 23, 2013
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Yes, I need to try to reconstruct what my brain was doing when I produced
                      those examples. More and more, I'm thinking they just don't make sense. I
                      **think** I was intending some sort of animacy effect where John and Tom
                      are marked as Patient-NonvoluntaryExpiriencers and their Possessums are
                      marked in the Possessed/Construct/Whatev case, while in the other example
                      Teacher get's both markings because it it the Experiencer AND the
                      Possessum, but the lack fo any marking on fifthgrade is... and the other
                      bit.... Yeah. It's just weird/broken/REDO!

                      Adam

                      On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 2:46 PM, James Kane <kanejam@...> wrote:

                      > >>>
                      > >>> John-ev hairbrush-on is missing.
                      > >>> Fifth grade teacher-ev-on is tired.
                      > >>> Bob-ak killed Tom-ev cat-on.
                      >
                      > To me it seems like the -on is tail marking in that it marks the teacher
                      > as: fifth grade its teacher i.e. fifth grade's teacher. Teacher is then
                      > also in the stative case (or whatever) because it is the subject of the
                      > stative verb.
                      >
                      > Maybe it would make more sense if the suffixes were in the reverse order,
                      > teacher-on-ev. But then this is inconsistent as in the first and third
                      > examples the hairbrush and the cat aren't marked as stative, instead their
                      > possessors are which I think doesn't quite make sense.
                      >
                      >
                      > James
                      >
                      > On 24/05/2013, at 5:42 AM, "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > >
                      > >>>> John-ev hairbrush-on is missing.
                      > >>>> Fifth grade teacher-ev-on is tired.
                      > >>>> Bob-ak killed Tom-ev cat-on.
                      >
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.