Re: Vardelm's Scratchpad (NP: Devani OVS order)

[Vardelm]

There, they are often called "agentive voice" and "patientive voice", and I think these terms should be quite suitable for your conlang too. (I'm also using them in my current project Lerudųrunį.)

Yep, got that in my dwarvish language earlier in the thread.

"Agentive" and "patientive" might not quite work for this lang, mostly since the stative verbs do things in an unusual manner, but I think this might be a good direction to think about.

Perhaps "subjective" vs "objective" voices, or "subjective" vs "adjunct" voice? In passive voices, the patient becomes the subject. I think I've seen the various other arguments - direct object, indirect object, adjunct agents (for passives), locations, goals, etc. - all referred to under the term "objects". If that's correct, then "objective voice" might work. For all verbs, I think the 1st argument after the verb could be called the "subject". The 2nd argument is what's hard to pin down. In active verb, that's mostly going to be a patient, but for stative verbs, it will vary quite a bit I think.

[Vardelm]

Just taking some new verb forms out for a test drive.


Devani Volitional Verb Form Test Run

V = "verb stem"


Realis Forms

	EGO	VIS	NVI	REP	DIR	IND
1P	V-a	V-e	V-anti	V-alu
2P	V-iva	V-ire	V-anti	V-alu
3P	V-iva	V-e	V-anti	V-u

Irrealis Forms

	EGO	VIS	NVI	REP	DIR	IND
1P	V-i	a-V-e	a-V-anti	a-V-alu	mu-V-am	mu-V-is
2P	m-V-iva	v-V-ire	v-V-anti	v-V-alu	ha-V-am	ha-V-is
3P	m-V-iva	v-V-e	v-V-anti	v-V-u	ha-V-am	ha-V-his

Example verb: tiprash "to repeatedly post verb forms"


Realis Forms

	EGO	VIS	NVI	REP	DIR	IND
1P	tiprasha	tiprashe	tiprashanti	tiprashalu
2P	tiprashiva	tiprashire	tiprashanti	tiprashalu
3P	tiprashiva	tiprashe	tiprashanti	tiprashu

Irrealis Forms

	EGO	VIS	NVI	REP	DIR	IND
1P	tiprapshi	atiprapshe	atiprapshanti	atiprapshalu	mutprapsham	mutprapshis
2P	mitprapshiva	vitprapshire	vitprapshanti	vitprapshalu	hatprapsham	hatprapshis
3P	mitprapshiva	vitprapshe	vitprapshanti	vitprapshu	hatprapsham	hatprapshis

Forms were made with the idea that certain evidentials are associated with a particular person moreso than others, and therefor change form more or less than the others. Those associations are:

• 1P = egophoric
• 2P = visual
• 3P = reportative

[Vardelm]

Another iteration of verb forms; this time w/ non-volitional as well.


Devani Volitional Verb Form Test Run II

V = "verb stem"


Realis Forms

		EGO	VIS	NVI	REP	DIR	IND
	1P	V-a	V-uram	V-anti	V-acho
Vol	2P	V-iva	V-uram	V-anti	V-acho
	3P	V-iva	V-am	V-anti	V-ahe
	1P	V-ai	V-ire	V-yin	V-alu
Non-Vol	2P	V-ath	V-ire	V-yin	V-alu
	3P	V-ath	V-e	V-yin	V-u

Irrealis Forms

		EGO	VIS	NVI	REP	DIR	IND
	1P	V-i	a-V-uram	a-V-anti	a-V-acho	mu-V-anti	mu-V-eson
Vol	2P	m-V-iva	v-V-uram	v-V-anti	v-V-acho	ha-V-anti	ha-V-eson
	3P	m-V-iva	v-V-am	v-V-anti	v-V-ahe	ha-V-anti	ha-V-eson
	1P	V-ith	a-V-ire	a-V-yin	a-V-alu	mu-V-yin	mu-V-is
Non-Vol	2P	m-V-ath	v-V-ire	v-V-yin	v-V-alu	ha-V-yin	ha-V-is
	3P	m-V-ath	v-V-e	v-V-yin	v-V-u	ha-V-yin	ha-V-is

Notes:

• Affix of a single vowel replaces an initial/final vowel in the stem
• 1st vowel/consonant of a suffix is epenthetic (dropped if the final stem phone is also vowel/consonant respectively)
• Vowel in a CV- prefix dropped if 1st phone in stem is a vowel
• C- prefixes add reduplicated 1st vowel of stem if stem starts with consonant; original 1st vowel removed if phonotactics allow

Example verb: tiprash "to repeatedly post verb forms"


Realis Forms

		EGO	VIS	NVI	REP	DIR	IND
	1P	tiprasha	tiprashuram	tiprashanti	tiprashacho
Vol	2P	tiprashiva	tiprashuram	tiprashanti	tiprashacho
	3P	tiprashiva	tiprasham	tiprashanti	tiprashahe
	1P	tiprashai	tiprashire	tiprashin	tiprashalu
Non-Vol	2P	tiprashath	tiprashire	tiprashin	tiprashalu
	3P	tiprashath	tiprashe	tiprashin	tiprashu

Irrealis Forms

		EGO	VIS	NVI	REP	DIR	IND
	1P	tiprapshi	atiprapshuram	atiprapshanti	atiprapshacho	mutiprapshanti	mutiprapsheson
Vol	2P	mitprapshiva	vitprapshuram	vitprapshanti	vitprapshacho	hatiprapshanti	hatiprapsheson
	3P	mitprapshiva	vitprapsham	vitprapshanti	vitprapshahe	hatiprapshanti	hatiprapsheson
	1P	tiprapshith	atiprapshire	atiprapshin	atiprapshalu	mutiprapshin	mutiprapshis
Non-Vol	2P	mitprapshath	vitprapshire	vitprapshin	vitprapshalu	hatiprapshin	hatiprapshis
	3P	mitprapshath	vitprapshe	vitprapshin	vitprapshu	hatiprapshin	hatiprapshis

EDIT: Tweaked the VIS column a bit. There was a couple errors, and decided to make the 1P & 2P suffixes the same.

[Vardelm]

Devani: Syntax Intro

Topic	Subject	Verb
mechani scholar the TOP	mida he.3P.ANIM	paramam read

Regarding the scholar: he is reading.

Topic	Subject	Verb	Object
kridam book the TOP	mechani scholar	paramam read	dao it.3P.INAN

Regarding the book: the scholar is reading it.



Notes:

• Devani is a topic prominent language (as should be obvious)
• Comment order is SV intransitive, SVO transitive
• I'm tempted to make the comment order OVS
• Most of the upcoming posts on Devani will ingore the topic for now because 1) that will be easier for showing verb inflections for now and 2) I have some grasp of topic-comment stuctures, but it feels academic, so I'd like to learn a bit more before doing too much with it for now.
• The examples here will probably be edited since there are still some inflections that need to be worked out

[Vardelm]

Devani: Realis vs Irrealis Stems

Verb	Realis Stem	Irrealis Stem
to read (stems)	param	pararm-
read.3P.VIS.VOL	paramam	vaprarmam

Notes:

• The main division in Devani verb inflection is realis vs irrealis, rather than perfective vs. imperfective
• The realis stem is the lemma. It might be used for a gerund or participle.
• The irrealis stem is formed by reduplicating the 1st consonant of the stressed syllable, and placing it immediately after the stressed syllable. If needed for phonotactics, the stressed vowel is also reduplicated.
• The irrealis stem never appears without additional affixes (hence the "-" in the table)
• The irrealis stem is sometimes referred to as the "infix form", due to the forms resulting from reduplication and infixes that are added in particular inflections

[Vardelm]

Devani: Pronouns

1st person	vi
2nd person informal	ne
2nd person polite	numi
3rd person inanimate	dao
3rd person neuter	etha
3rd person masculine	mida
3rd person feminine	mithu
Demonstrative	raň

Notes:

• No distinctions for number
• 3rd person neuter used for groups of people with mixed gender or verb arguments of unknown gender
• Only one demonstrative: raň, so no distinction for distance. dao "it" can be used to refer to a second argument.

[Vardelm]

Devani: Verbal Person, Evidentials, & Volition

The tables are (obviously) a repost from the test run above. I like the verb forms, so I'm going to run with them. There may be some minor modifications in the future, like adding or subtracting a vowel to adjust the phonotactics. A bit more info on the inflections plus examples are below as well.


Realis Forms

		EGO	VIS	NVI	REP	DIR	IND
	1P	V-a	V-uram	V-anti	V-acho
Vol	2P	V-iva	V-uram	V-anti	V-acho
	3P	V-iva	V-am	V-anti	V-ahe
	1P	V-ai	V-ire	V-yin	V-alu
Non-Vol	2P	V-ath	V-ire	V-yin	V-alu
	3P	V-ath	V-e	V-yin	V-u

Irrealis Forms

		EGO	VIS	NVI	REP	DIR	IND
	1P	V-i	a-V-uram	a-V-anti	a-V-acho	mu-V-anti	mu-V-eson
Vol	2P	m-V-iva	v-V-uram	v-V-anti	v-V-acho	ha-V-anti	ha-V-eson
	3P	m-V-iva	v-V-am	v-V-anti	v-V-ahe	ha-V-anti	ha-V-eson
	1P	V-ith	a-V-ire	a-V-yin	a-V-alu	mu-V-yin	mu-V-is
Non-Vol	2P	m-V-ath	v-V-ire	v-V-yin	v-V-alu	ha-V-yin	ha-V-is
	3P	m-V-ath	v-V-e	v-V-yin	v-V-u	ha-V-yin	ha-V-is

Notes:

• V = "verb stem"
• Affix of a single vowel replaces an initial/final vowel in the stem
• 1st vowel/consonant of a suffix is epenthetic (dropped if the final stem phone is also vowel/consonant respectively)
• Vowel in a CV- prefix dropped if 1st phone in stem is a vowel
• C- prefixes add reduplicated 1st vowel of stem if stem starts with consonant; original 1st vowel removed if phonotactics allow

Person:

• Agreement is for the subject of the verb
• Standard 1st, 2nd, & 3rd person: nothing much to see here
• No number, gender, etc.
• Playing with the possibility of being pro-drop or not

Volition:

• Pretty much a standard definition of volition
• Volitional = intentional, willing actions
• Non-volitional = unintentional, unwilling, involuntary, and/or unconscious actions
• Verbs with an inanimate subject generally take non-volitional inflections (volitional endings would be humorous)

Evidential Uses:

• EGO = Egophoric
  • personal participation / involvement
  • speaker's intentions, feelings, etc.
  • experience &/or knowledge of a process
• VIS = Visual
  • visual observation of event in progress
  • line between visual & egophoric can be blurry; depends on how much involvement speaker has
• NVI = Non-visual
  • "observation" of event in progress through hearing, smell, touch, taste, etc.
  • There may be some level of inference here; level of certainty & immediacy will probably separate this from using DIR
• REP = Reportative
  • direct quotes
  • hearsay from other people/general community
• DIR = Direct
  • inference/extrapolation based on:
    • info from visual or non-visual nature
    • physical evidence after event
    • resulting states from event
    • previous experience & knowledge
• IND = Indirect
  • inference/extrapolation based on:
    • reportative (quotes or hearsay evidence)
    • assumptions & guessing
• The direct & indirect inference evidentials are always in the irrealis. I don't remember where, but I read that languages draw the line at different points for evidentials as to what constitutes realis or irrealis. Orginally, I had the reportative as irrealis as well. Based on the number of additional irrealis inflections (for mood, to be detailed later) I decided to move reportative to the realis stem. It's purely a meta-design decision to balance the number of inflections for realis vs. irrealis.

Examples:

vi parama vi I.1P param-a read.RLS-VOL.EGO.1P I am reading. (I should know; I'm ME!)

ne paramuram ne you.2P param-uram read.RLS-VOL.VIS.2P You are reading. (I'm watching you do it.)

ne paramanti ne you.2P param-anti read.RLS-VOL.NVI.2P You are reading. (I can hear you turning the pages.)

mechani paramahe mechani scholar param-ahe read.RLS-VOL.REP.3P The scholar is reading. (Someone who saw him told me so.)

mechani hapararmanti mechani scholar ha-pararm-anti 3P-read.IRS-VOL.DIR.3P The scholar is reading. (A book that is the scholar's and was on the table is now missing.)

mechani hapararmeson mechani scholar ha-pararm-eson 3P-read.IRS-VOL.DIR.3P The scholar is reading. (I'm guessing; the scholar isn't here right now and that's generally what scholars do.)

[Vardelm]

I mentioned this topic earlier in the thread, but only in passing. The old forum had a version of this as well, so here's the new & improved tense system.


Devani: Tense


Verb stem form used for tense:

		Non-future	Future
EGO, VIS, NVI, REP		Realis Stem	Irrealis Stem
	Past	Non-past
DIR, IND	nu + Irrealis Stem	Irrealis Stem

Notes:

• The egophoric, visual, non-visual, and reportative evidentials used the realis stem for the non-future tense and the irrealis stem for future
• The direct and indirect inference evidentials use the irrealis stem for both past and non-past, but add the prefix nu- for the past.
• There are several non-indicative moods which also form tenses like the direct & indirect (with the irrealis stem and nu- prefix)
• I picture the nu- prefix as probably having been a perfect in the past..... meaning the past of the language, not the past tense
  • I need to do a bit more work on the moods, but I think for some, this "perfect" origin will feel like it makes sense

Devani Verb Template:

Prefix -3	Prefix -2	Prefix -1	ROOT	Infix / Suffix +1	Suffix +2
Irrealis Person	Mood	Past Tense	Verb Stem	Transitivity	Person Evidential Volition

Notes:

• The nu- past tense prefix sits in the -2 slot, while a part of the irrealis person marker sits in -3
• This shows why the nu- prefix might appear to be an infix at first glance
• Phonotactics may cause the prefix to just look like -n-.

Tense forms of param "to read" (3rd person only):

		Non-future	Future
Egophoric		paramiva	maprarmiva
Visual		paramam	vaprarmam
Non-visual		paramanti	vaprarmanti
Reportative		paramahe	vaprarmahe
	Past	Non-past
DIR, IND	hunpararmanti	hapararmanti
DIR, IND	hunpararmeson	hapararmeson

Examples:

mechani paramahe mechani scholar param-ahe read.RLS-VOL.REP.3P The scholar read/reads/is reading. (Someone told me so.)

mechani vaprarmahe mechani scholar v-aprarm-ahe 3P-read.IRS-VOL.REP.3P The scholar will read. (He told me he was going to.)

mechani hapararmanti mechani scholar ha-pararm-anti 3P-read.IRS-VOL.DIR.3P The scholar reads/is reading /will read. (There are more books on a table than before.)

mechani hapararmeson mechani scholar ha-pararm-eson 3P-read.IRS-VOL.DIR.3P The scholar read. (There are more books on a table than before.)

Notes:

• The future requires some amount of uncertainty & inference, so I may need to do some work on defining how that affects the visual, non-visual, direct inference, & indirect inference evidentials

EDIT: Modifed the translation on the last 2 examples. Didn't translate the tenses correctly.

[Vardelm]

Devani: Transitivity & Object Volition


I don't love the affixes I have for this topic right now. I might not even like them. However, damn the torpedoes; I'm posting this anyway.

	affix	Realis NVI	Irrealis NVI
intransitive	-	paramanti	vaprarmanti
volitional	-(u)v(u)-	paramvunti	vapravumanti
non-volitional	-(a)n(a)-	paramananti	vapranamanti
anti-volitional	-(i)đ(i)-	paramđinti	vaprađimanti

Notes:

• Examples are 3P non-visual evidential
• Stem is shown in red above
• The transitivity affix is suffixed onto the realis stem
• The transitivity affix is infixed into the irrealis stem
  • Replaces the infixed reduplication of the stressed syllable's onset consonant
• Volitional means the object is aware of & accepting of the action, or even willingly aiding it
• Non-volitional means the object is unaware of the action
• Anti-volitional means the object is aware of and is not a willing participant, perhaps actively so
• Thinking about changing the stress rules so that the stress is toward the start of the word more. This would push the irrealis infix away from the realis suffix location, making them more distinct.

EDIT: added the descriptions of voltional, non-volitional, & anti-volitional


Examples:

mechani paramam mechani scholar param-am read.RLS-VOL.VIS.3P (I saw) The scholar read/reads.

mechani paramanum mechani scholar param-anu-m read.RLS-NVO-VOL.VIS.3P kridam book (I saw) The scholar read/reads a book.

Notes:

• The non-volitional affix is used here since a book is inanimate & doesn't have volition

vi dananai hirkat vi 1P dan-an-ai see.RLS-NVO-NVO.EGO.1P hirkat thief I saw/noticed the thief (he was unaware of my perception).

vi daniđa hirkat vi 1P dan-iđ-a see.RLS-AVO-VOL.EGO.1P hirkat thief I saw the thief (he was trying to avoid being noticed).

vi danuvai hirkat vi 1P dan-uv-ai see.RLS-VOL-NVO.EGO.1P hirkat thief I noticed the thief (he was trying to be noticed: how brazen of him!!!).

hirkat the mida hanudađinis vi hirkat thief the TOP mida 3P.MSC ha-nu-dađin-is 3P-PST-see.IRS.NVO-NVO.IND.3P vi 1P As for the thief, he must have noticed me (I assume (since he is no longer here), though I was trying to not let him know I was observing him).

Notes:

• By having both subject & object volition, Devani is extremely sensitive to intentional vs unintentional behavior and the interactions that result from that relation between the subject & object.

[Vardelm]

I've done some more work on my voices for Jin. This post will contain some material rehashed from previous posts to try & make the system more coherent within 1 post.


Jin: Aktionsart, Voice, etc.


Active verbs, stative verbs, & aktionsart
I did some thinking about where the division should be between active & stative verbs. Dynamicity seemed like the way to go. "Activity" verbs (the Vendler aktionsart category) were the focus due to verbs like "to sleep" & "to rule", which didn't seem very dynamic to me. Long story short, I found a paper that addresses this topic: Differentiating eventivity and dynamicity: the Aktionsart of Davidsonian state verbs.

For convenience, I'm labeling activity verbs that are non-dynamic (govern, sleep, inhabit, etc.) as "operations" since the paper doesn't provide a label. This gives me:

Stative: states, "operations"
Active: activities, accomplishments, semelfactives, & achievements

The division between dynamic & state verbs isn't always consistent between languages, or even within a given language, so I have some flexibility either way. This gives me a good measuring stick for thinking which category a given verb should be in.



Voices
I made a bunch of changes to the voice suffixes. This was mostly to add a bit of fusion with the singulative & plurative suffixes. I also took cedh's suggestion about naming the passive as "inverse", etc. and renamed the transitive as "direct".

As before, there are 16 voices:

• active intransitive
• active direct
• active antipassive
• active passive
• active indirect
• active reflexive
• active reciprocal
• active impersonal

• stative intransitive
• stative direct
• stative antipassive
• stative passive
• stative indirect
• stative reflexive
• stative reciprocal
• stative impersonal

Notes:

• All verbs default to one of these voices. This default voice is not marked by one of the suffixes below.
• Most verbs will default to the intransitive or direct voices.
• The voices set the verb's diathesis, it's valency & required arguments, and the order of those arguments.
• Voices:
  • Intransitive = basic intransitive voice, roughly unergative for active verbs and unaccusative for stative verbs
  • Direct = basic transitive voice typical for active & stative; has the basic word orders listed in the 1st post on word order/syntax
  • Antipassive = uses only the 1st argument of the direct voice; implies the interaction of the direct voice's 2nd argument
  • Passive = uses only the 1st argument of the imdirect voice; implies the interaction of the imdirect voice's 2nd argument
  • Indirect = reverses the order of the direct voice; the "subject" or "topic" is still the 1st argument; can be seen as a "passive" voice but is fully transitive
  • Reflexive = prototypical; argument is both agent & patient
  • Reciprocal = prototypical; arguments affect each other
  • Impersonal = no mention of participants; used for weather events, activities that are taking place, perhaps gerunds

Example Default Voices:

active intransitive	aq'at "burn"
active direct	k'alis "cut"
stative intransitive	mimut "dead"
stative direct	!nlabun "know"

Voice & Article Suffixes
This updated table shows the voice suffixes, along with the suffixes for the singulative & plurative articles.

• 1st row is just the voice suffix
• 2nd row is voice + singulative
• 3rd row is voice + plurative

	Active	Stative
Intransitive	V+ja C+aj V+ji C+aji V+jama C+ajam	V+nu C+un V+ni C+uni V+numa C+unam
Direct	V+qa C+aq V+qi C+aqi V+qama C+aqam	V+nza C+anza V+nzahi C+anzahi V+nzama C+anzama
Antipassive	V+qun C+aqun V+quni C+aquni V+qunam C+aqunam	V+nzun C+anzun V+nzuni C+anzuni V+nzunam C+anzunam
Passive	V+zhis C+uzhis V+zhisi C+uzhisi V+zhisam C+uzhisam	V+mbis C+umbis V+mbisi C+umbisi V+mbisam C+umbisam
Inverse	V+zhu C+uzh V+zhi C+uzhi V+zhuma C+uzham	V+mbu C+umbu V+mbuwi C+umbuwi V+mbuma C+umbuma
Reflexive	V+qus C+aqus V+qusi C+aqusi V+qusam C+aqusam	V+nzus C+anzus V+nzusi C+anzusi V+nzusam C+anzusam
Reciprocal	V+zhal C+uzhal V+zhali C+uzhali V+zhalam C+uzhalam	V+mbal C+umbal V+mbali C+umbali V+mbalam C+umbalam
Impersonal	V+mas C+amas V+masi C+amasi V+masam C+amasam	V+lah C+alah V+lahi C+alahi V+laham C+alaham

What the voice affixes do:

• Change the verb's default voice to the voice of the suffix
  • Changes the diathesis
  • Changes the valency
  • Changes the argument order
• The "active" voice suffixes change a stative verb to active
• The "stative" voice suffixes change an active verb to stative
• Changes between active vs stative or intransitive vs. direct/antipassive/passive/indirect may add elements of causation, volition, resultatives, etc.

WIP: Will try to get tables of the example verbs in the "default voice" section written up soon-ish.

[bradrn]

Quick question: why is there an intransitive voice when you already have passive and antipassive voices? Is there any distinction between them?

[Vardelm]

Quick question: why is there an intransitive voice when you already have passive and antipassive voices? Is there any distinction between them?

Yep. They have an implication of a 2nd argument, while the intransitive does not.


EDIT:
Now that it's morning & I'm back at my PC instead of a tablet, here's a bit more:

The addition of transitivity or the implication of transitivity often adds causativity. The passive & antipassive pattern with the direct & indirect this way. Either they are all causative or they all are not. The result is that the passive & antipassive are separate from the intransitive. With that said, I think (although I don't have an example yet) that there may be some verbs that default to a direct voice (be that active or stative) and will make use of the indirect, passive, & antipassive. Technically, they might be able to make use of the intransitive. However, they will only use the passive & antipassive since the difference from the intransitive in those cases might be very slim. I remember thinking of a verb that was going to do this, but it's lost on me for now. Right now, the best example of this causativity alternation is mimut "dead".

stative intransitive	mimut "He is dead."	default voice; no suffix
active intransitive	mimutaj "He is dying"	+dynamic
active direct	mimutaq "He is killing it."	+dynamic, +causative
active antipassive	mimutaqun "He is killing (something)."	+dynamic, +causative
active passive	mimutuzhis "He is being killed (by something)."	+dynamic, +causative
active indirect	mimutuzh "He is being killed by it."	+dynamic, +causative

Those aren't full glosses, of course. Later today I may write up at least the table for mimut with the complete glosses. Need more coffee first.

[Vardelm]

Jin: Verb Voice Examples

Here's example verbs, following up from the previous post.


Mimut: "dead"

	Active	Stative
Intransitive	mimutaj qam ndaluwi mimut-aj dead-ACT.INT qam 3P.ACT.DET ndalu-wi man-the.SNG The man is dying.	Default voice (no voice suffix) mimut ja ndaluwi mimut dead ja 3P.STA.DET ndalu-wi man-the.SNG The man is dead.
Direct	mimutaqi qam ndaluwi ja untaqi mimut-aq-i dead-ACT.DIR-SNG qam 3P.ACT.DET ndalu-wi man-the.SNG ja 3P.STA.DET untaq-i camel-the.SNG The man killed the camel.
Antipassive	mimutaquni qam ndaluwi mimut-aqun-i dead-ACT.ANP-SNG qam 3P.ACT.DET ndalu-wi man-the.SNG The man is killing (something).
Passive	mimutuzhisi ja ndaluwi mimut-uzhis-i dead-ACT.PAS-SNG ja 3P.STA.DET ndalu-wi man-the.SNG The man is being killed ( by something).
Inverse	mimutuzhi ja ndaluwi qam untaqi mimut-uzh-i dead-ACT.PAS-SNG ja 3P.STA.DET ndalu-wi man-the.SNG qam 3P.ACT.DET untaq-i camel-the.SNG The man is being killed by the camel.
Reflexive	mimutaqusi qam ndaluwi mimut-aqus-i dead-ACT.REF-SNG qam 3P.ACT.DET ndalu-wi man-the.SNG The man is killing himself.
Reciprocal	mimutuzhali qam ndaluma mimut-uzhal-i dead-ACT.REC-SNG qam 3P.ACT.DET ndalu-ma man-the.PLR The men are killing each other (same time; same act).
Impersonal	mimutamasi mimut-amas-i dead-ACT.IMP-SNG There is a killing happening.	mimutalah mimut-alah dead-STA.IMP There is death/dying going on.

Notes:

• The default voice of mimut is stative-intransitive, so that form (and cell in the table) has no suffix
• Going from the default stative to active adds [+dynamic] to the meaning
• Changing from intransitive to "transitive" (direct, antipassive, passive, indirect, reflexive, & reciprocal) adds [+causative]
• The active-impersonal mimutamasi could mean "there is killing" or "there is dying"; it's not necessarily [+causative]
• The stative-impersonal mimutalah can "step in" and be used for "there is dying" since it's literal translation is "there is death".

!nlabun: "know"

	Active	Stative
Intransitive
Direct	!nlabunaq qam ndaluwi ja mic'akamas !nlabun-aq know-ACT.DIR qam 3P.ACT.DET ndalu-wi man-the.SNG ja 3P.STA.DET mic'aka-mas write-ACT.IMP "The man is learning writing."	Default voice (no voice suffix) !nlabun ja ndaluwi qam mic'akamas !nlabun know ja 3P.STA.DET ndalu-wi man-the.SNG qam 3P.ACT.DET mic'aka-mas write-ACT.IMP "The man knows writing."
Antipassive	!nlabunaqun qam ndaluwi !nlabun-aqun know-ACT.ANP qam 3P.ACT.DET ndalu-wi man-the.SNG "The man is learning (something)."	!nlabunanzun ja ndaluwi !nlabun-anzun know-STA.ANP ja 3P.STA.DET ndalu-wi man-the.SNG "The man knows (something)."
Passive	!nlabunuzhis ja mic'akamas !nlabun-uzhis know-ACT.PAS ja 3P.STA.DET mic'aka-mas write-ACT.IMP "Writing is being learned (by someone)."	!nlabunumbis qam mic'akamas !nlabun-umbis know-STA.PAS qam 3P.ACT.DET mic'aka-mas write-ACT.IMP "Writing is known (by someone)."
Indirect	!nlabunuzh ja mic'akamas qam ndaluwi !nlabun-uzh know-ACT.IND ja 3P.STA.DET mic'aka-mas write-ACT.IMP qam 3P.ACT.DET ndalu-wi man-the.SNG "Writing is being learned by the man."	!nlabunumbu qam mic'akamas ja ndaluwi !nlabun-umbu know-STA.IND qam 3P.ACT.DET mic'aka-mas write-ACT.IMP ja 3P.STA.DET ndalu-wi man-the.SNG "Writing is known by the man."

Notes:

• I'm not bothering with the reflexive, reciprocal, & impersonal on this example
• The default voice is the stative-direct
• !nlabun "know" is one of those examples that just uses the passive & antipassive for its intransitive sentences; the active-intransitive & stative-intransitive voices are not used
  • My thinking on this that you have to know *something*, and adding use of the 2 intransitive voices doesn't add much - if any - meaning that isn't covered already
  • I could maybe see the stative-intransitive being used for "knowledgeable", but I think instead a habitual form will be used for that.

k'alis: "cut"

	Active	Stative
Intransitive		k'alisun ja nsatimi k'alis-un cut-STA.INT ja 3P.STA.DET nsatim-i cloth-the.SNG The cloth is cut.
Direct	Default voice (no voice suffix) k'alis qam umbabiwi ja nsatimi k'alis-i cut-SNG qam 3P.ACT.DET umbabi-wi merchant-the.SNG ja 3P.STA.DET nsatim-i cloth-the.SNG The merchant cut the cloth.
Antipassive	k'alisanzuni qam umbabiwi k'alis-anzun-i cut-ACT.ANP-SNG qam 3P.ACT.DET umbabi-wi merchant-the.SNG The merchant is cutting (something).
Passive	k'alisuzhisi ja nsatimi k'alis-uzhis-i cut-ACT.PAS-SNG ja 3P.STA.DET nsatim-i cloth-the.SNG The cloth is being cut (by something).
Indirect	k'alisuzhi ja nsatimi qam umbabiwi k'alis-uzh-i cut-ACT.PAS-SNG ja 3P.STA.DET nsatim-i cloth-the.SNG qam 3P.ACT.DET umbabi-wi merchant-the.SNG The cloth is being cut by the merchant.

Notes:

• The default voice is the active-direct; most of it pretty simple
• The stative-intransitive here is a resultative
• I might be able to use the active-intransitive as a middle-voice, but not sure if I will or it's even needed

aq'at: "burn"

	Active	Stative
Intransitive	Default voice (no voice suffix) aq'at qam nimbani aq'at burn qam 3P.ACT.DET nimban-i house-the.SNG The house is burning.	aq'atun ja nimbani aq'at-un burn-STA.INT ja 3P.STA.DET nimban-i house-the.SNG The house is burnt.
Direct	aq'ataq qam ndaluwi ja nimbani aq'at-aq burn-ACT.DIR qam 3P.ACT.DET ndalu-wi man-the.SNG ja 3P.STA.DET nimban-i house-the.SNG The man is burning the house.
Antipassive	aq'ataqun qam ndaluwi ja nimbani aq'at-aqun burn-ACT.ANP qam 3P.ACT.DET ndalu-wi man-the.SNG The man is burning (something).
Passive	aq'atuzhis ja nimbani aq'at-uzhis burn-ACT.PAS ja 3P.STA.DET nimban-i house-the.SNG The house is being burned (by someone/something)
Indirect	aq'atuzh ja nimbani qam ndaluwi aq'at-uzh burn-ACT.IND ja 3P.STA.DET nimban-i house-the.SNG qam 3P.ACT.DET ndalu-wi man-the.SNG The house is being burned by the man.

Notes:

• The default voice is the active-intransitive
• The stative-intransitive here is -again - a resultative
• The direct/antipassive/passive/indirect voices add causativity

[Vardelm]

Mostly shameless bump since the example verbs w/ voices are now fully added.

I think I'll end up modifying the voice affixes again, though. I don't love the transitive-direct -aq appearing right next to qam, as in aq'ataq qam. That's just a subjective preference of course & doesn't impact their function at all.

That basically does it for the voice & singulative/plurative suffixes. After this, we move into verbal prefixes. I haven't done much re-design there, but I know the direction I'm headed. The first bit will be mostly derivational: a causative, an inverse (as in un- in English), and probably a habitual. I think there will be others as well, but not tons. Once that is done, we take the training wheels off this thing.

[Vardelm]

Jin: Polysynthesis!!!

Here's the next big step for Jin: I'm making it polysynthetic! This is a very new direction. Earlier this year, as I worked on Dwarvish & Devani, I felt like something was lacking in Jin. There was going to be lots of verbal affixes, but that was the extent of what made Jin interesting in terms of morphosyntax. I don't remember what triggered the thought to make it polysynthetic; it may have been another conlang here or mention of one. At some point I looked up Whimemz's old thread about polysynthesis. That made the topic much more understandable. I played around with the idea for a while and eventually decided it feels right.

I haven't worked out a lot of it. Below, I'll just provide the verb template, which is an update from what I posted on the old ZBB.


Jin Verb Template

Slot	Inflection	Translation
-13	Linker	...THAT was moving.
-12	Confirmational Negative Conditional [Past] Contingent [Future] Negative Conditional [Past] Negative Contingent [Future] Interrogative Negative Interrogative	They DID move. They did NOT move. IF they had moved… IF they will move... IF they had NOT moved… IF they will NOT move… DID they move? DID they NOT move?
-11	Hypothetical Subjunctive	They COULD/MIGHT move. They WOULD move.
-10	Immediate [NearPast, NearFut] Persistive Past Prioritive Future Prioritive Not til now So far From now on	They JUST moved. They are STILL moving. They ALREADY moved. They have NOT YET moved. They have NOT moved UNTIL NOW. They have moved SO FAR. They will move FROM NOW ON.
-9	Inchoative [Stative] Terminative [Stative] Inceptive [Active] Cessative [Active]	They ARE STARTING to (be able to) move. They HAVE STOPPED being able to move / moving. They ARE STARTING to move. They ARE NO LONGER moving.
-8	Continuous [Active] Perfect	They ARE MOVING (MAYBE NOT AT THIS MOMENT). They (have) moved.
-7	Venitive Andative Venitive 2nd Person Andative 2nd Person Venitive 1st Person Andative 1st Person	They are COMING. They are GOING. They are COMING (towards addressee). They are GOING (away from addressee). They are COMING (towards speaker). They are GOING (away from speaker).
-6	Incorporated manner adverb	*
-5	Incorporated oblique phrase	*
-4	Incorporated noun	*
-3	Habitual	They move (habitually).
-2	Causative	They were MADE TO BE moving.
-1	Intensive Attenuative Reversive	They DROVE (towards something). They MOSEYED (towards something). They IDLED.
ROOT	Distant Past Near Past Present / Imperative Near Future Distant Future	They moved / were moving. They moved / were moving. They move / are moving. / MOVE! They will move / be moving. They will move / be moving.
+1	Voice active vs stative intransitive direct, indirect passive, antipassive reflexive, reciprocal impersonal	*
+2	Singulative / Plurative (Specific / Definite)	*

Notes:

Linker:
I've covered the "linker" preposition already. Technically, it may be more of a clitic, and isn't really "verb inflection" so much as a syntactic tool. Stil, it's included here for completeness.

Voice & Singulative/Plurative:
Also extensively covered in the posts so far (obviously).

Verb Root Tenses:
The verb root will inflect for tense.... sort of. Actually, the entire verb will inflect for tense via suprasegmentals. I just list that here since the root will change as well as the affixes.

Habitual, Causative, Intensive, Attenuative, & Reversive:
The -1, -2, & -3 slots (prefixes) are more derivational than inflection. There may end up being more of these in the future. Because they are more derivational, they are closer to the verb root than the incorporated elements.

Incorporated Noun:
One of the verb's main arguments - the active or stative argument - can be incorporated here. Nothing super novel, I don't think. It will be for backgrounding purposes, like noun incorporation often is. This backgrounding will sometimes be done simply if the verb subject (the non-incorporated argument) will be very "heavy"; that is, have a lot of description, adjunct phrases, etc. The verb will use the voice suffix that specifies ONLY the non-incorporated argument. I have at least some idea of what the rules will be, but I need to organize my thoughts, write them down, etc.

Incorporated Oblique Phrase:
Some polysynthetic langs allow instruments & the like to be incorporated, and at least some of them (Mohawk I believe) even mark these nouns with something like case to indicate their role. I plan to do similar, but the role will be indicated by an incorporated (serial?) verb such as "use". I see the likelyhood of use decreasing if there is a main argument noun incorporated (see above). I also see a generic/class noun being used in some situations and then the more specific noun used in a regular adjunct to the verb as well. This would be similar to the "I fish-bought some salmon" type of example you see in these languages, but it would be for obliques and not main arguments.

Incorporated manner adverb:
Current thought is that this would be adverbs like quickly, suddenly, etc., and not then, next, etc.

[Vardelm]

Jin: Incorporation

As mentioned in the last post, Jin now has incorporation as one of its features. I'm going to start documenting that, but it's going to be mostly on the morphological level, with a bit of syntax. I don't yet have the morphology defined to give good examples w/ backgrounding, so that'll have to hold off.

So far, there are 5 types of incorporation, and I'll cover these in separate posts.

• argument
• genitive
• adjunct
• adjunct antecedant
• adverb

General notes:

• Most of these would be "noun" incorporation in other languages. Since the line between verbs & nouns in Jin is thin to non-existent, I've opted for other labels based more on the syntactic role
• All of these are incorporated in a "prefix" position before the verb root.
• If the incorporated word ends in a consonant, an epenthetic vowel is added, which is the same as the 1st vowel of the following stem.
• "Derivational" prefixes and perhaps the voice suffixes can be a part of the incorporated word (not sure yet on the voice suffixes)
• Like incorporation in many languages, the incorporated word is non-definite & non-specific, at least in form. Thus, the singulative & plurative suffixes are never used.
• A main function of incorporation will be backgrounding. I have a sketchy idea in my head that I might be able to use this for miratives, but we'll see.
• Jin will use incorporation a lot as a tool to reduce the number of arguments, adjuncts, etc. Because of this focus on simplifying sentences, words that are subordinate to a determiner pronoun will not be incorporated into other words subordinate to the same pronoun. Words for "black dog" would be separate, for example. I may write a separate post about this.

Argument Incorporation

Argument incorporation is the most straightforward type of incorporation in Jin, and correlates to noun incorporation of objects in other languages. "Argument" incorporation specifically refers to the active or stative arguments of a verb as marked by pronouns like qasim/qam and jida/ja.

Notes:

• Incorporated arguments can be either active or stative (These correlate roughly to agent & patient, and I think most real languages tend to incorporate only or mostly patients, but I'm not sure on that.)
• Incorporated arguments are always from the second argument of a transitive verb
• When an argument is incorporated, leaving just 1 argument, the transitivity of the main verb is reduced and the voice suffix changes accordingly

Active Direct > Active Antipassive

Non-incorporated	!ñcadahi qam untaqi ja shipalahi !ñcada-hi bite-SNG qam 3P.DET untaq-i camel-the.SNG ja 3P.DET shipala-hi servant-the.SNG The camel bit the servant.
Incorporated	shipala!ñcadaquni qam untaqi shipala-!ñcada-quni servant-bite-ANP.SNG qam 3P.DET untaq-i camel-the.SNG The camel servant-bit.

Notes:

• The active direct voice has Verb-Active-Stative order, so it's the stative argument that can be incorporated
• The default voice of ñcada "bite" is active direct, so there's no voice suffix
• The verb voice becomes antipassive since there is only 1 argument: the active, which is the agent

Active Indirect > Active Passive

Non-incorporated	!ñcadazhi ja shipalahi qam untaqi !ñcada-zhi bite-IND.SNG ja 3P.DET shipala-hi servant-the.SNG qam 3P.DET untaq-i camel-the.SNG The servant was bitten by the camel
Incorporated	!ñcadazhisi ja shipalahi qam untaqi !ñcada-zhisi bite-PAS.SNG ja 3P.DET shipala-hi servant-the.SNG qam 3P.DET untaq-i camel-the.SNG The servant was camel-bitten.

Notes:

• The active indirect voice has Verb-Stative-Active order, so it's the active argument that can be incorporated (since it's the 2nd argument)
• The indirect voice is basically a passive voice, but transitive (as described in previous posts)
• I don't know if languages use noun incorporation with passivization, but it doesn't seem like a stretch here
• The verb voice becomes passive since there is only 1 argument: the stative, which is the patient subject

Stative verbs might use incorporation less than active. Still need think more about them. These examples are probably not great, but should give the gist of my current view.


Stative Direct > Stative Antipassive

Non-incorporated	!nlabun ja shipalahi qam mic'akamas !nlabun know ja 3P.STA.DET shipala-hi man-the.SNG qam 3P.ACT.DET mic'aka-mas write-ACT.IMP "The servant knows writing."
Incorporated	mic'aka!nlabunanzun ja shipalahi mic'aka-!nlabun-anzun writing-know-ANP ja 3P.STA.DET shipala-hi man-the.SNG "The servant writing-knows."

Notes:

• The stative direct voice has Verb-Stative-Active order, so it's the active (2nd) argument that can be incorporated
• The default voice of !nlabun "know" is stative direct, so there's no voice suffix
• The verb voice becomes antipassive since there is only 1 argument: the stative, which is the theme/experiencer

Stative Indirect > Stative Passive

Non-incorporated	!nlabunumbu qam mic'akamas ja shipalahi !nlabun-umbu know-IND qam 3P.ACT.DET mic'aka-mas write-ACT.IMP ja 3P.STA.DET shipala-hi man-the.SNG "Writing is known by the servant."
Incorporated	shipala!nlabunumbis qam mic'akamas shipala-!nlabun-umbis servant-know-PAS qam 3P.ACT.DET mic'aka-mas write-ACT.IMP "Writing is servant-known."

Notes:

• The stative indirect voice has Verb-Active-Stative order, so it's the stative argument that can be incorporated
• The verb voice becomes passive since there is only 1 argument: the active, which is (I think) the theme, since that is the thing that is "known" in this case
• Stative indirect and passive voices may seem a bit funky with their use of active arguments, since they would usually be treated as objects in languages with nom-acc morphology, and therefor get the ACC marking unless they are the subject. Statives in Jin essentially work with backwards nom-acc marking.

[Vardelm]

Jin: Genitive Incorporation

On to the 2nd type of incorporation, which involves genitives. Some general notes:

• Genitives in Jin are formed using the "linker" clitic al- (see this post for info)
• This construction incorporates the genitive's head noun into the verb, and "promotes" the linked dependent noun into the syntactic slot previously filled by the head noun
• This is always performed on:
  • Active verbs = stative argument (jida/ja)
  • Stative verbs = active argument (qasim/qam)
• The antipassive voices result essentially looks just like argument incorporation
  • They don't have the argument used for genitive incorporation by the other voices (stative argument for active voices, active argument for stative voices)

Active Voices


Active Direct

Non-incorporated	!ñcada qam q’alabi ja g’undiwi alja ndaluwi !ñcada bite qam 3P.ACT.DET q’alab-i dog-the.SNG ja 3P.STA.DET g’undi-wi hand-the.SNG al-ja of.LNK-3P.STA.DET ndalu-wi man-the.SNG The dog bites the man's hand.
Incorporated	g’undi!ñcada qam q’alabi ja ndaluwi g’undi-!ñcada hand-bite qam 3P.ACT.DET q’alab-i dog-the.SNG ja 3P.STA.DET ndalu-wi -man-the.SNG The dog hand-bites the man.

Notes:

• Simple: the stative argument changes from genitive construction, incorporates the head g’undi, dependent ndaluwi becomes stative argument

Active Antipassive

Non-incorporated	!ñcadaqun qam q’alabi !ñcada-qun bite-ANP.ACT qam 3P.ACT.DET q’alab-i dog-the.SNG The dog bites.
Incorporated	g’undi!ñcadaqun qam q’alabi g’undi-!ñcada-qun hand-bite-ANP.ACT qam 3P.ACT.DET q’alab-i dog-the.SNG The dog hand-bites.

Notes:

• The stative argument doesn't exist, so there's no genitive to incorporate.
• This essentially functions just like argument incorporation.
• Obviously, the hand belongs to someone (or did in the past) but it's not mentioned or implied by the construction itself

Active Inverse

Non-incorporated	!ñcadazhu ja g’undiwi alja ndaluwi qam q’alabi !ñcada-zhu bite-INV.ACT ja 3P.STA.DET g’undi-wi hand-the.SNG al-ja of.LNK-3P.STA.DET ndalu-wi man-the.SNG qam 3P.ACT.DET q’alab-i dog-the.SNG The man's hand was bitten by the dog.
Incorporated	g’undi!ñcadazhu ja ndaluwi qam q’alabi g’undi-!ñcada-zhu hand-bite-INV.ACT ja 3P.STA.DET ndalu-wi man-the.SNG qam 3P.ACT.DET q’alab-i dog-the.SNG The man was hand-bitten by the dog.

Notes:

• Just like the direct voice, since this is still an active voice the head of the stative argument gets incorporated

Active Passive

Non-incorporated	!ñcadazhis ja g’undiwi alja ndaluwi !ñcada-zhis bite-PAS.ACT ja 3P.STA.DET g’undi-wi hand-the.SNG al-ja of.LNK-3P.STA.DET ndalu-wi man-the.SNG The man's hand was bitten.
Incorporated	g’undi!ñcadazhis ja ndaluwi qam q’alabi g’undi-!ñcada-zhis hand-bite-PAS.ACT ja 3P.STA.DET ndalu-wi man-the.SNG The man was hand-bitten.

Notes:

• Head of the stative argument gets incorporated
• There's no active argument, so that plays no role

Stative Voices


Stative Direct

Non-incorporated	!nlabun t'anji qam ñkusi alja ndaluwi !nlabun know t'anji 1P.SNG.STA qam 3P.ACT.DET ñkus-i face-SNG al-ja of.LNK-3P.STA.DET ndalu-wi man-the.SNG I know the man's face.
Incorporated	ñkusa!nlabun t'anji qam ndaluwi ñkusa-!nlabun face-know t'anji 1P.SNG.STA qam 3P.ACT.DET ndalu-wi man-the.SNG I face-know the man.

Notes:

• As a stative voice, the head of the active argument ñkus gets incorporated & the dependent ndaluwi becomes the stative argument

Stative Antipassive

Non-incorporated	!nlabunanzun t'anji !nlabun-anzun know-ANP.STA t'anji 1P.SNG.STA I know (something).
Incorporated	ñkusa!nlabunanzun t'anji ñkusa-!nlabun-anzun face-know-ANP.STA t'anji 1P.SNG.STA I face-know.

Notes:

• As a stative voice, the active argument gets incorporated, but this voice doesn't have one
• The result is just like argument incorporation

Stative Inverse

Non-incorporated	!nlabunumbu t'anji qam ñkusi alja ndaluwi !nlabun-umbu know-INV.STA qam 3P.ACT.DET ñkus-i face-SNG al-ja of.LNK-3P.STA.DET ndalu-wi man-the.SNG t'anji 1P.SNG.STA The man's face is known to me.
Incorporated	ñkusa!nlabunumbu t'anji qam ndaluwi ñkusa-!nlabun-umbu face-know-INV.STA qam 3P.ACT.DET ndalu-wi man-the.SNG t'anji 1P.SNG.STA The man is face-known to me.

Notes:

• The active argument head ñkusi gets incorporated & the dependent ndaluwi becomes the stative argument

Stative Passive

Non-incorporated	!nlabunumbis qam ñkusi alja ndaluwi !nlabun-umbis know-PAS.STA qam 3P.ACT.DET ñkus-i face-SNG al-ja of.LNK-3P.STA.DET ndalu-wi man-the.SNG The man's face is known.
Incorporated	ñkusa!nlabunumbis qam ndaluwi ñkusa-!nlabun-umbis face-know-PAS.STA qam 3P.ACT.DET ndalu-wi man-the.SNG The man is face-known.

Notes:

• The active argument head ñkusi gets incorporated
• There's no stative argument, so nothing to see here!

[Richard W]

As you provide morpheme-by-morpheme translations, should you be rising to the challenge of translating the passives into idiomatic English, e.g. The man was bitten in the hand, The man is known by sight? I suppose the latter might have to be weakened to The man is known by his face to cater for tactile recognition.

[Vardelm]

As you provide morpheme-by-morpheme translations, should you be rising to the challenge of translating the passives into idiomatic English, e.g. The man was bitten in the hand, The man is known by sight? I suppose the latter might have to be weakened to The man is known by his face to cater for tactile recognition.

Yeah, probably. Aporaporimos said something similar earlier in the thread. I think that's a good goal. Since I'm working things out as I write these posts, being very literal/mechanical feels helpful to keep things organized for me. Time savings is a little bit of a factor too, and I plan on changing many of the words I'm using now. I'm currently making them up as I go, so the vocabulary is in English relex territory for the moment. Unfortunately, that might make these posts a bit boring for others to read through! Developing things this way has been working for me, since the 3 languages in the thread have started to take shape over the last 5 months. It's much more progress than I had in the 12ish years I've been on the ZBB.

[masako]

It's much more progress than I had in the 12ish years I've been on the ZBB.

Same for me. And this thread is far from boring.

You had my curiosity, now you have my attention.
/meme