Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
I came up with an idea, which is undoubtedly not my idea at all, for making the verb to be a little less boring for one of my conlangs. Basically, I was thinking of using two different types of to be which I have dubbed predicative and existential. The former is used only for applying attributes (whether real, or not) to the subject (e.g. John is old, Mary is young, the dog is brown, the ball is round, etc.) but the latter is used when talking about existence (e.g. 'I am at home', 'she is away with friends', 'the dog is lonely', 'I think, therefore I am', etc).
So I really want to know:
1. Does this seem naturalistic? (Personally, I don't see why not.) If so, should I tweak it to make it more naturalistic?
2. Whether my descriptors predicative and existential are most suitable, or whether one or both should be labelled 'copula'.
So I really want to know:
1. Does this seem naturalistic? (Personally, I don't see why not.) If so, should I tweak it to make it more naturalistic?
2. Whether my descriptors predicative and existential are most suitable, or whether one or both should be labelled 'copula'.
Twitter won't let me access my @Jonlang_ account, so I've moved to Mastodon: @jonlang@mastodon.social
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
This is perfectly natural. I tend to take a different route, and because in many of my languages adjectives are just stative verbs, the attributive case is simply using said stative verbs with NP's directly, leaving the existential case and the equality case (for expressing equality between two different NP's, as in "the dog is a golden retriever"), for which I normally have separate verbs.Jonlang wrote: ↑Thu Apr 14, 2022 9:28 am I came up with an idea, which is undoubtedly not my idea at all, for making the verb to be a little less boring for one of my conlangs. Basically, I was thinking of using two different types of to be which I have dubbed predicative and existential. The former is used only for applying attributes (whether real, or not) to the subject (e.g. John is old, Mary is young, the dog is brown, the ball is round, etc.) but the latter is used when talking about existence (e.g. 'I am at home', 'she is away with friends', 'the dog is lonely', 'I think, therefore I am', etc).
So I really want to know:
1. Does this seem naturalistic? (Personally, I don't see why not.) If so, should I tweak it to make it more naturalistic?
2. Whether my descriptors predicative and existential are most suitable, or whether one or both should be labelled 'copula'.
Last edited by Travis B. on Thu Apr 14, 2022 2:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Yaaludinuya siima d'at yiseka ha wohadetafa gaare.
Ennadinut'a gaare d'ate ha eetatadi siiman.
T'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa.
Ennadinut'a gaare d'ate ha eetatadi siiman.
T'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa.
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
This is basically Spanish ser vs estar, no?
Vardelm's Scratchpad Table of Contents (Dwarven, Devani, Jin, & Yokai)
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
No idea, I've never had the slightest bit of interest in Spanish.
Twitter won't let me access my @Jonlang_ account, so I've moved to Mastodon: @jonlang@mastodon.social
- linguistcat
- Posts: 420
- Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2018 12:17 pm
- Location: Utah, USA
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
Also like Japanese da (formal: desu) vs aru (formal: arimasu) or iru (formal: imasu). Da and desu are used with adjectives or equating nouns (I am a teacher. = Watashi wa sensei desu.). Whereas aru and arimasu, and iru and imasu, are used for something - or someone - existing in a place, though these can also extend to having something (I have money (Lit: For me, money exists) = Watashi wa okane ga arimasu.)
The split between aru and iru is based on animacy, which you wouldn't need to include in your conlang.
A cat and a linguist.
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
Or for that matter Irish is vs tá. A lot of my conlangs have this.
Self-referential signatures are for people too boring to come up with more interesting alternatives.
-
- Posts: 236
- Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2020 9:15 am
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
Papua Indonesian is similar in that it has existential copula ada but no real predicative copula. The existential copula is usually not used for locations though.
Ada orang di depan pintu.
EXIST person at front door.
There is someone at the door.
Sa di rumah.
1SG at home
I am at home.
Anjing sendiri.
dog lonely
The dog is lonely.
Bola bulat.
ball round
The ball is round.
Ada orang di depan pintu.
EXIST person at front door.
There is someone at the door.
Sa di rumah.
1SG at home
I am at home.
Anjing sendiri.
dog lonely
The dog is lonely.
Bola bulat.
ball round
The ball is round.
- quinterbeck
- Posts: 381
- Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2018 12:19 pm
- Location: UK
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
Except for 'I think, therefore I am', in which the 'am' does signify existence, your examples for the 'existential to be' are all best described as states IMO. You could distinguish more finely - 'at home' and 'away' are states of location, while 'lonely' is a state of emotion.
I attempted to do this for Leima - a lot of the main verbs take certain functions of the copula:
equality - em
attributes - ad
lasting states - wain
transitory states - non
location - rug (also houh, orya, yoer)
I attempted to do this for Leima - a lot of the main verbs take certain functions of the copula:
equality - em
attributes - ad
lasting states - wain
transitory states - non
location - rug (also houh, orya, yoer)
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
linguistcat wrote: ↑Thu Apr 14, 2022 11:23 am Also like Japanese da (formal: desu) vs aru (formal: arimasu) or iru (formal: imasu).
Well, since that was correct (and I wasn't too sure!), then yeah, as Travis B. said, it's very natural. I just decided to do this in Yokai during the past week while figuring out how I wanted to handle copular, adjectival, and existential sentences sentences in all 4 of my conlangs.
Vardelm's Scratchpad Table of Contents (Dwarven, Devani, Jin, & Yokai)
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
Just off the top of my head, Tibetan has this, modern Chinese as well. Nothing exceptional, ISTM. Though maybe I'm misunderstanding the distinction between the two you're actually making, and interpolating my own ideas. Anyway, go for it!
[Edit: maybe 'equative' (equatative?) or something along those lines would be less ambiguous/misleading than 'predicative'?]
[Edit: maybe 'equative' (equatative?) or something along those lines would be less ambiguous/misleading than 'predicative'?]
-
- Posts: 332
- Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2018 9:52 am
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
I suggest this recent paper, Nonverbal Clause Constructions by Martin Haspelmath, which goes into all the permutations of clauses often constructed with copula verbs. What you're proposing is fairly common and covered in the paper a long with a whole host of other constructions.
Duriac Thread | he/him
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
This paper looks excellent! I have referred to other sources, but this looks better. Thanks for sharing.vegfarandi wrote: ↑Thu Apr 14, 2022 2:57 pm I suggest this recent paper, Nonverbal Clause Constructions by Martin Haspelmath, which goes into all the permutations of clauses often constructed with copula verbs. What you're proposing is fairly common and covered in the paper a long with a whole host of other constructions.
Vardelm's Scratchpad Table of Contents (Dwarven, Devani, Jin, & Yokai)
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
I'm not sure I understand the difference between "is" in "the dog is brown" and "is" in "the dog is lonely". How is the latter more about existence than the former?
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
Said dog is permanently brown (via fur color) but temporarily lonely.
EDIT:
I got that wrong in terms of permanence. Essential copulas are permanent, describing the "essence" of something, while existential are temporary states.
Type | Usage | Spanish | Tibetan |
essential | permanent | ser | red, red-bzhag, yin |
existential | temporary | estar | yod-red, dug, yod |
Last edited by Vardelm on Fri Apr 15, 2022 8:26 am, edited 2 times in total.
Vardelm's Scratchpad Table of Contents (Dwarven, Devani, Jin, & Yokai)
- quinterbeck
- Posts: 381
- Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2018 12:19 pm
- Location: UK
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
Is that an established use of the term existential? It seems quite odd to me, as the typical definition of the word is relating to existence or being alive. The main kind of linguistic thing I am used to seeing described as existential is the assertion of something's existence, e.g. "There is a horse in the field."
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
I had the same exact thought here.quinterbeck wrote: ↑Fri Apr 15, 2022 3:03 pmIs that an established use of the term existential? It seems quite odd to me, as the typical definition of the word is relating to existence or being alive. The main kind of linguistic thing I am used to seeing described as existential is the assertion of something's existence, e.g. "There is a horse in the field."
Yaaludinuya siima d'at yiseka ha wohadetafa gaare.
Ennadinut'a gaare d'ate ha eetatadi siiman.
T'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa.
Ennadinut'a gaare d'ate ha eetatadi siiman.
T'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa.
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
For what it's worth, ser and estar derive from the latin for "sit" and "stand" respectively.
Self-referential signatures are for people too boring to come up with more interesting alternatives.
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
I ... think so? I've seen them used in a few places for different languages, especially Tibetan. However, I haven't done any sort of organized search for multiple academic references.quinterbeck wrote: ↑Fri Apr 15, 2022 3:03 pm Is that an established use of the term existential? It seems quite odd to me, as the typical definition of the word is relating to existence or being alive. The main kind of linguistic thing I am used to seeing described as existential is the assertion of something's existence, e.g. "There is a horse in the field."
Vardelm's Scratchpad Table of Contents (Dwarven, Devani, Jin, & Yokai)
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 2682
- Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2018 5:46 am
- Location: Right here, probably
- Contact:
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
My Googling wasn't entirely satisfactory, but I've looked at a bunch of pages on Spanish, and though some describe ser as essential, none describe estar as existential-- but a page on Tibetan does use those terms. A couple of the pages on Spanish are Aristotelian and say "accidental"!
I've seen "existential" used mostly for expressions like "There are two problems".
I've seen "existential" used mostly for expressions like "There are two problems".