There are 15 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1.1. Re: copula
From: John Erickson
1.2. Re: copula
From: R A Brown
1.3. Return to FairyLang (was: copula) - Longish
From: R A Brown
2a. Re: Dscript for conlangers
From: J. 'Mach' Wust
2b. Re: Dscript for conlangers
From: Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets
2c. Re: Dscript for conlangers
From: Shreyas Sampat
2d. Re: Dscript for conlangers
From: BPJ
3.1. Re: Tense Marking Nouns in FairyLang
From: Garth Wallace
3.2. Re: Tense Marking Nouns in FairyLang
From: Roman Rausch
4a. 3rd person pronouns
From: neo gu
4b. Re: 3rd person pronouns
From: Alex Fink
5a. Re: skyrim's dragon language
From: Ben Scerri
5b. Re: skyrim's dragon language
From: Madeline Palmer
5c. Re: skyrim's dragon language
From: Patrick Dunn
5d. Re: skyrim's dragon language
From: Patrick Dunn
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1.1. Re: copula
Posted by: "John Erickson" john.erickson.so...@gmail.com
Date: Mon Jul 23, 2012 9:59 am ((PDT))
If I'm understanding correctly, it's not that there's anything fundamentally
unsound about the structure of my examples, but that my use of terminology is
inaccurate/confusing. Is that correct? I'm relatively new to conlanging and I'm
still learning the terminology.
Would it be better if I used the term predicate i stead of direct object in
instances like my previous examples?
To answer the question of what makes "ni" a verb and not a particle... On one
hand, it acts like other verbs, including accepting mood marking, and it can be
used by itself in sentences like "the cat is brown" or "I am a man." On the
other hand, I've already established (though I haven't mentioned it here) that
"ni" can be and usually is dropped in those kinds of sentences. So I guess you
could say it's somewhere in between.
There is a passive voice in FairyLang, but now that I think about it, I can't
imagine any passive sentences with "ni" as the sole verb that would make any
sense.
Messages in this topic (33)
________________________________________________________________________
1.2. Re: copula
Posted by: "R A Brown" r...@carolandray.plus.com
Date: Mon Jul 23, 2012 11:48 am ((PDT))
On 23/07/2012 08:31, Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets wrote:
> On 22 July 2012 23:03, R A Brown wrote
>>
>> Larry Trask defines the copula as "[a] semantically
>> empty formative, most often a verb, which in some
>> languages serves to link a subject NP to a predicate
>> which either is identified with the subject or
>> characterizes the subject; an example is English _be_
>> in _Lisa is a translator_ and _She is my closest
>> friend._
>>
>> I fail to see how something that is semantically empty
>> is going to have a direct object!
>>
> To me "linking a subject to a predicate to either
> identify or characterise the subject" is hardly
> semantically empty, but we might have a different
> definition of semantics.
It was the late Larry Trask who said it was a "semantically
empty formative", not me. Altho I do not, of course, regard
Larry Trask as infallible, I do rate him highly as a (now
sadly dead) professional linguist and authority. I would
not lightly disregard him.
But the mere fact that not all languages even need a copula
or use an _affix_ as a copula does suggest even to an
amateur like myself that the copula is not carrying much
weight semantically.
I think it is also worth reading chapter 6 of Thomas
Payne's "Describing Morphosyntax." I think his linguistic
expertise is greater than either yours or mine.
[snip]
>>
>> No, Arabic doesn't. Just because a noun is given an
>> ending which is labeled "accusative" it doesn't make it
>> the direct object. All it tells us is that one use of
>> the Classical Arabic 'accusative' is to denote the
>> complement of the copula.
>>
>>
> Sorry, but I fail to understand that reasoning. Because
> you've *decided* (for whatever reason) that the
> complement of a copula can never be called a direct
> object, if in a certain language it happens to be marked
> like direct objects, it means that mark covers more than
> just direct objects? To me that's backwards reasoning,
> and trying to force facts to fit the theory rather than
> the other way round.
No. Because an indefinite direct object in Turkish is
expressed by the _nominative_ case, the same was as
subjects, whether definite or indefinite, it does not make
an indefinite direct object the subject.
Nor have "I" decided any such thing as you imply. I made no
decision about what constitutes a direct object. Let me
quote again from Trask: "The grammatical relation borne by
the second argument of a transitive verb, most typically
expressing a patient which undergoes the action of the verb
.... Direct objects are typically distinguished ... by the
ability to become subject of a corresponding passive."
The only decision I've made is to go along with established
definitions; and on researching the so-called accusative
case in Arabic I find:
Accusative case (al-manṣūb المنصوب)
- The subject of an equational (non-verbal) sentence, if it
is initiated with إن 'inna, or one of her sisters. These
particles are subordinating conjunctions which require that
the subject of the subordinate (complement) clause be in the
accusative case.
- The predicate of كان / يكون kāna/yakūnu "be" and its
sisters (there are 13 of these verbs[1]). Hence, البنت جميلة
al-bintu ǧamīlatun "the girl is beautiful" but البنت كانت
جميلة al-bintu kānat ǧamīlatan "the girl was beautiful"
(note that "beautiful" is spelled the same way in both cases).
[Interestingly in the present, when the verb is not used,
the prdicate/complement is nominative]
- Both the subject and the predicate of ظن ẓanna and its
sisters in an equational clause.
- As the complement of verbs of "seeming".
- The object of a transitive verb
- Most adverbs.
- Semi-prepositions.
- Internal object/cognate accusative structure
- The accusative of specification (at-tamyīz, التمييز).
- The accusative of purpose (al-mafʿūl li-ʾaǧlih-i, المفعول
لأجله).
- The circumstantial accusative (al-ḥāl, الحال).
- Objects of (kam, كم) "how much/many".
- Cardinal and ordinal numbers from 11, and 13-19
- Counted nouns of numbers 11–99
- Exclamation of astonishment. i.e.: mā ʾaǧmalahā!, !ما
أجملها "Oh, how beautiful she is!"
- Vocative first term of construct. يا ماهر yā Māhir-i! "Oh,
Maher!"
- Nouns following exceptive particles in non-negative sentences.
- The noun following the absolute, or categorical, negation
لا lā "No".
A little more widely, methinks, than just denoting direct
objects or, indeed, the Latin accusative.
> Call me an empiricist if you want, but I like to start
> from the facts, and adapt the theory to them, rather
> than the other way round.
Sorry - I deeply resent your implication here.
If you care to read back through my postings over the last
sixteen years you will find my approach is empirical and
that I like to start with facts!
Indeed, this has been one of the sources of the several
disagreements I've had with And over the years. But he and
I can still maintain respect for one another.
[snip]
>
>> Just because the cases of Classical Arabic are given
>> the same names as traditional cases of Greek & Latin
>> does not mean that they are being used identically.
>> Indeed, the Arabic accusative has a far wider range of
>> use than that case normally has in IE langs.
>>
>>
> True. Exactly my point.
No - you are arguing that because kāna is followed by the
accusative case, then it is a transitive verb. You appear
not to be allowing for a different use of the accusative.
>> When I was at school it was drilled into us in English
>> grammar lessons "By their deeds shall ye know them."
>> That is the _function_ of a word in a sentence is more
>> important than their appearance.
>>
> Except one thing: how do you recognise the function of a
> word in the sentence if not by their appearance? (and by
> that I mean not only form, but also position)
Exactly the point that was drilled into us was that
_appearances can be deceptive_. We were forced to analyze
and see what words are doing. That, of course, is what
Thomas Payne is trying to show in the book I referred to above.
> I don't believe there is a set of universal well-defined
> and punctual "functions" that just happen to be mapped
> differently by different languages. I believe that each
> language has its own set of functions, that needn't
> neatly map to the functions used by another language.
No one said anything mapped neatly.
>> Also, there's the small matter that the direct object
>> of a verb shifts to the subject when the verb is
>> passive. E.g.
>>
>> Tom chased the mouse (active). The mouse was chased
>> [by Tom] (passive).
>>
>> It doesn't exactly work with "to be": Tom is a cat
>> (active) *A cat is been by Tom (passive)
>>
> Not in English no,
Nor in french, Dutch, German, Latin, Greek, Swahili, etc.
> so in this case you're right that English makes a
> distinction between a direct object and the complement
> of a copula. Thanks for pointing that out, I missed it
> indeed.
Not only English.
> I don't know, however, whether in Arabic _kaana_ can be
> passivised or not.
I suspect not.
[snip]
> case). And _atom_ maps neatly with the transitive verbs
> here, in that its subject can be in the nominative or the
> instrumental, indicating volition or lack of it. In Moten
> the copula is just another transitive verb, so I have no
> qualms in calling its complement a direct object.
As it has been observed before, anything is possible in a
Conlang - and I do *not* mean that in a pejorative way. One
reason people construct languages is to test out possible
constructions which apparently do not occur in n natlangs to
see if they are possibles and, perhaps, get some insight
into why they do not seem to occur.
[snip]
>
> And just to make things clear, Ray: what's your problem
> with me lately? First you insult me by calling me a
> "philistine" on the list! (I dropped out of that thread
> then and there. If you cannot discuss without insults,
> you've lost the argument for me, and whatever you say
> afterwards becomes meaningless to me),
Touché.
But to set the record straight: I did not personally call
you personally a "philistine" - you are taking me out of
context. The philistine remark was in reply to Adam Walker's
observation "Finally, Christophe almost made me want to cry."
It would have thought it was fairly clear that both Adam and
I were dismayed by your email.
I just recorded my reaction. If you cannot see the
difference the between my recording my gut reaction on
reading something and actually calling you a name, then I am
sorry.
> and now I feel clear irritation from your part in your
> reply! What have I done to deserve such a treatment?!
I'm sorry you found clear irritation in my reply. I have
re-read it and, quite honestly, do not understand why you
think so.
As this debate seems to have become personal
I think it is better ended.
--
Ray
==================================
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
==================================
Frustra fit per plura quod potest
fieri per pauciora.
[William of Ockham]
Messages in this topic (33)
________________________________________________________________________
1.3. Return to FairyLang (was: copula) - Longish
Posted by: "R A Brown" r...@carolandray.plus.com
Date: Mon Jul 23, 2012 1:05 pm ((PDT))
On 23/07/2012 17:59, John Erickson wrote:
> If I'm understanding correctly, it's not that there's
> anything fundamentally unsound about the structure of my
> examples, but that my use of terminology is
> inaccurate/confusing. Is that correct?
Well, yes & no - as I'll try to explain below.
[snip]
> To answer the question of what makes "ni" a verb and not
> a particle... On one hand, it acts like other verbs,
> including accepting mood marking,
Right - not sure if I recall mood marking.
> and it can be used by
> itself in sentences like "the cat is brown" or "I am a
> man." On the other hand, I've already established (though
> I haven't mentioned it here) that "ni" can be and usually
> is dropped in those kinds of sentences. So I guess you
> could say it's somewhere in between.
that sounds familiar from natlangs ;)
> There is a passive voice in FairyLang, but now that I
> think about it, I can't imagine any passive sentences
> with "ni" as the sole verb that would make any sense.
I agree.
=========================================================
On 23/07/2012 14:51, John Erickson wrote:
ME:
>> I've already commented on direct-object in this usage.
>> Also the present perfect does not have the same meaning
>> as the past perfective.
>
> Then I'm not exactly sure what you're asking. "The king
> burped," looks like a simple past tense statement to me,
> which is covered by, "Burp king(past)." It's not quite
> the same thing as a past perfective,
It is. But I'll discuss mention 'perfective' below.
[snip]
DUSTFINGER:
>> Is it not possible for "Burp king(past)" to be
>> confused for "The former king burps"?
>
> Not if FairyLang, because tense marking on nouns is
> never used that way.
Quite right! In natlangs where a noun may have past tense
the indeed King.PAST might mean a former king. But John has
quite clearly stated that the tense affixes of FairyLang
denote the time of the noun.
In the case of the subject it sets the time frame for the
whole sentence. In the case of other elements in the
sentence the time is relative to that of the sentence.
========================================================
OK.
FIRST SOME GENERAL STUFF.
I think the main problem is that we're not really dealing
with _aspect_ in its strict sense in FairyLang, but rather
with _relative time reference_ which often gets confused
with aspect.
Languages in which aspect plays an important part, notably
the Slav languages & modern Greek, the main difference is
between Imperfective & Perfective. The Perfect aspects
deals with a situation in its entirety without regard to its
internal workings; the Imperfective pays attention to the
internal structure of the situation.
Thus the English simple past is, in fact a past perfective.
Two things to be careful about:
1. Perfect and perfective do _not_ mean the same thing.
this is a common cause of confusion.
2. The traditional labeling of "tenses", especially in Latin
and modern western European languages do not always
correspond to strict tense-aspect. Indeed, aspect is not
properly distinguished from tense in these languages.
In Comrie's book on aspect he uses lower case for words like
perfect, perfective etc when using them in a strict
linguistic sense, but initial upper case when talking about
the traditional labeling of a form in a particular language;
thus "The King burped" is Simple Past in English bur
expresses past perfective. This is useful distinction, but
clearly one that is nor practical on a list for many
reasons. But I don't think it need worry us.
I notice that in:
http://fairylang.livejournal.com/42276.html
you state "Tense marking on direct objects is relative to
the subject and indicates aspect (perfect, imperfect,
predictive/intentional)."
I agree one hundred percent as far as 'and' - but IMO the
reference to aspect is misleading. It clearly doesn't define
aspect as we find it, e.g. in the Slav languages.
What have is, as I noted above, _relative time reference_. I
think I may have been guilty in making misleading statements
on this in the past. Having read Comrie, I am a wiser
person ;)
I think I would reword it thus:
"Tense marking on direct objects indicates time reference
relative to the subject. This allows for aspectual concepts
such perfect, progressive and prospective to be expressed."
The examples are good.
I like:
http://fairylang.livejournal.com/42616.html
But:
On 22/07/2012 18:36, John Erickson wrote:
[snip]
> I have a way of dealing with that (let me know if you
> think it's plausible/workable).
>
> When you have a clause with no direct object, the aspect
> is assumed to be imperfect or else implied by context. If
> you need to specify otherwise, you use the verb "ni" (to
> be) and the gerund of the original verb becomes the
> direct object.
I don't like that. One reason has already been discussed.
The other is that I think you are confusing _participle_ and
_gerund_. The both end in -ing in modern English; in Old
English they were distinct, but have now become confused.
In the sentence "John is smoking", "smoking" is a a
participle; it works rather like an adjective and describes
John. In the sentence "Smoking is bad for you", "smoking"
is a gerund; it is a noun denoting the act of smoking and is
the subject of the sentence.
Now in Welsh, unmarked sentences must begin with the verb.
If we want to focus on something we may shift it to the
front of the sentence. So what if we want to focus the verb?
Welsh uses the 'verbnoun' (i.e. gerund) with the verb "to
do" as the main verb. I think we will get a more
satisfactory solution if the same sort of thing were adopted
in the FairyLang, e.g. (I'll use English)
eat mouse.PRES
the mouse eats
do mouse.PRES eating.PAST
The mouse has eaten [and is now full]
do mouse.PAST eating.PRES
The mouse was eating
(In the past the mouse was present in the act of eating)
"To do" is a transitive verb and the gerunds really are
direct objects.
> Similarly, when you have a sentence with no subject, the
> tense is assumed to be present or else implied by
> context, but if you need to specify, you can to the same
> thing, using the gerund as the subject.
>
> Isan a napysh Eat dir-obj cheese The cheese is being
> eaten
>
> Ni wisannyia napysh Is eating(past) cheese The cheese
> was being eaten
In fact you're giving passives!
There seem to be two weakness here. In the first sentence
it is necessary to have a special marker for the
direct-object (accepting, for the sake of argument) that it
is) so that it is not mistaken for the subject. In the
second, "cheese" is of course the direct object of the
gerund "eating".
In modern colloquial Welsh they use the verb "to get,
receive" in such sentences, e.g.
receive cheese.PRES eating.PRES
The cheese is being eaten
receive cheese.PRES eating.PAST
The cheese has been eaten.
(Of course the cheese is now present in the gut of the eater!)
receive cheese.PAST eating.PRES
The cheese was being eaten
Just ideas.
With what information I have at the moment, I think I'd be
tempted to ditch _ni_ and just have, e.g.
mouse.PRES fat
The mouse is fat
But I don't know what you have in mind for 'mood'.
Last, but by no means least, I note you wrote: "I'm
relatively new to conlanging and I'm still learning the
terminology." I must say that I admire your enterprise in
branching into new territory. I find what you are doing
quite interesting, and I like your web pages.
Keep at it ;)
--
Ray
==================================
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
==================================
Nid rhy hen neb i ddysgu.
There's none too old to learn.
[WELSH PROVERB]
Messages in this topic (33)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2a. Re: Dscript for conlangers
Posted by: "J. 'Mach' Wust" j_mach_w...@yahoo.com
Date: Mon Jul 23, 2012 10:09 am ((PDT))
On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 17:33:40 +0200, Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets wrote:
>I used to be a fountain pen fanatic. But I got fed up having to replace the
>tip every couple of months. Being left-handed, I never quite managed to
>find a position where the tip of the pen fell naturally on the paper, and
>as a result pen tips kept wearing out faster than usual. Ballpoints at
>least don't have that issue. Not to mention all that ink that my skin must
>have absorbed during that time :P .
Did you never write in columns from the top to the bottom? With the left hand,
this would allow for natural pen movements. I do this quite often. Of course,
being right-handed, I get mirrored script.
--
grüess
mach
Messages in this topic (21)
________________________________________________________________________
2b. Re: Dscript for conlangers
Posted by: "Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets" tsela...@gmail.com
Date: Mon Jul 23, 2012 11:10 am ((PDT))
On 23 July 2012 19:09, J. 'Mach' Wust <j_mach_w...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Did you never write in columns from the top to the bottom? With the left
> hand, this would allow for natural pen movements. I do this quite often. Of
> course, being right-handed, I get mirrored script.
>
>
No. I never understood how someone could write with the paper turned 90
degrees. In any case, I can't do it.
I did it try for a while when I was learning calligraphy (well, not writing
vertically, but at an angle of at least 45 degrees), but it never felt
natural, and somehow I got both neck and wrist pain doing it. It's one of
the reasons I stopped learning calligraphy altogether. I just never could
find a natural position where I could write naturally without smearing the
ink with my hand.
--
Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets.
http://christophoronomicon.blogspot.com/
http://www.christophoronomicon.nl/
Messages in this topic (21)
________________________________________________________________________
2c. Re: Dscript for conlangers
Posted by: "Shreyas Sampat" ssam...@gmail.com
Date: Mon Jul 23, 2012 12:54 pm ((PDT))
> I did it try for a while when I was learning calligraphy (well, not writing
> vertically, but at an angle of at least 45 degrees), but it never felt
> natural, and somehow I got both neck and wrist pain doing it. It's one of
> the reasons I stopped learning calligraphy altogether. I just never could
> find a natural position where I could write naturally without smearing the
> ink with my hand.
It took a long time for me, but eventually I found that smearing
wasn't a problem for me if I simply extended the pen/cil a little
farther forward rather than holding it choked up close to the tip, the
way I was taught. It naturally keeps my hand about an inch away from
whatever I'm writing, so it's easier to see and write cleanly, without
having to rotate the paper or anything.
I haven't come up with a lefty solution for angled-nib calligraphy, though.
Messages in this topic (21)
________________________________________________________________________
2d. Re: Dscript for conlangers
Posted by: "BPJ" b...@melroch.se
Date: Mon Jul 23, 2012 1:35 pm ((PDT))
On 2012-07-23 21:44, Shreyas Sampat wrote:
> I haven't come up with a lefty solution for angled-nib calligraphy, though.
The traditional method is to use an obliquely cut nib.
Messages in this topic (21)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3.1. Re: Tense Marking Nouns in FairyLang
Posted by: "Garth Wallace" gwa...@gmail.com
Date: Mon Jul 23, 2012 11:36 am ((PDT))
On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 10:36 AM, John Erickson
<john.erickson.so...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>Indeed, Comrie's observations also raise a question about
> John's Fairylang. he stated that "marking on a direct
> object is relative to the subject and indicates aspect
> (perfect, imperfect, predictive/intentional)". Does that
> mean that aspect cannot be marked for intransitive verbs?
>
> I have a way of dealing with that (let me know if you think it's
> plausible/workable).
>
> When you have a clause with no direct object, the aspect is assumed to be
> imperfect or else implied by context. If you need to specify otherwise, you
> use the verb "ni" (to be) and the gerund of the original verb becomes the
> direct object.
>
> Isan dasu
> Eat mouse
> The mouse eats
>
> Ni dasu wisannyia
> Is mouse eating(past)
> The mouse has been eating
>
> Similarly, when you have a sentence with no subject, the tense is assumed to
> be present or else implied by context, but if you need to specify, you can to
> the same thing, using the gerund as the subject.
>
> Isan a napysh
> Eat dir-obj cheese
> The cheese is being eaten
>
> Ni wisannyia napysh
> Is eating(past) cheese
> The cheese was being eaten
Another possible solution is to make all verbs syntactically
transitive, but semantically intransitive verbs take a dummy object.
Messages in this topic (33)
________________________________________________________________________
3.2. Re: Tense Marking Nouns in FairyLang
Posted by: "Roman Rausch" ara...@mail.ru
Date: Mon Jul 23, 2012 2:52 pm ((PDT))
>Basically it goes like this: Tense marking on a subject is relative to the
>speaker and indicates the overall tense of the sentence, marking on a
>direct object is relative to the subject and indicates aspect (perfect,
>imperfect, predictive/intentional). And I've just added a third tier, that
>some indirect objects can also be marked for tense, which is relative to
>the thing being modified.
I have aspect marking on nouns in my proto-language: The direct object of a
transitive verb and the subject of an intransitive verb could be marked for
durative/imperfective aspect. This went its different ways in the daughter
languages: In Talmit, it created states as a new part of speech, in Kymna
secondary case endings of affectedness. I don't know how understandable this
is, but here you go:
http://www.sindanoorie.net/glp/historical006.html
And it seems natural to me, too. I imagine it may have originated as a modal
particle expressing empathy for the patient, something like:
'The teacher was scolding the poor student'
teacher-NOM student-ACC-MOD scold-PAST
-> teacher-NOM student-ACC.IPF scold-PAST
'The poor girl was weeping'
girl-NOM-MOD weep-PST
-> girl-NOM.IPF weep-PST
While the perfective was correlated with detachment or effortlessness:
'Veni, vidi, vici'
come-PST see-PST conquer-PST
-> come-PST.PF see-PST.PF conquer-PST:PF
But marking regular tense on nouns seems unnatural to me: Cognitively, a noun
is what remains relatively stable in time while states and actions end sooner
or later. 'The king stay the king', as they said in 'The Wire', while events
like burping are short by nature. But still, there is a huge grey area to play
with: Professions need to be acquired, opinions can change, things are expected
to grow and decay, and so on. So to me, it would be interesting to see a more
differentiated approach rather than just pulling the tense slot from verbs to
nouns.
Messages in this topic (33)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
4a. 3rd person pronouns
Posted by: "neo gu" qiihos...@gmail.com
Date: Mon Jul 23, 2012 1:33 pm ((PDT))
In my latest sketch, I'm using index pronouns/determiners. The way they work is
they're first used as determiners modifying specific indefinite phrases, then
as pronouns referring to the same entity. Example:
cu vida bo doagu. ba blanka. "I saw a dog. It was white."
The index b- is assigned to the dog. So far so good.
The problem is that sometimes definite references to entities occur without a
preceding indefinite introduction, so there's no way to refer to them using
indexes. Example:
"I went to a restaurant. The waiter didn't speak English. / What did he speak?"
Do I need to have conventional 3rd person pronouns as well, or is there some
other solution? I thought of one but it's sort of clumsy.
Messages in this topic (2)
________________________________________________________________________
4b. Re: 3rd person pronouns
Posted by: "Alex Fink" 000...@gmail.com
Date: Mon Jul 23, 2012 2:00 pm ((PDT))
On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 16:33:14 -0400, neo gu <qiihos...@gmail.com> wrote:
>In my latest sketch, I'm using index pronouns/determiners. The way they work
>is they're first used as determiners modifying specific indefinite phrases,
>then as pronouns referring to the same entity. Example:
>
>cu vida bo doagu. ba blanka. "I saw a dog. It was white."
>
>The index b- is assigned to the dog. So far so good.
>
>The problem is that sometimes definite references to entities occur without a
>preceding indefinite introduction, so there's no way to refer to them using
>indexes. Example:
>
>"I went to a restaurant. The waiter didn't speak English. / What did he speak?"
>
>Do I need to have conventional 3rd person pronouns as well, or is there some
>other solution? I thought of one but it's sort of clumsy.
What shape does a definite noun phrase have? When do definite noun phrases
come up? Does it make sense to give definiteness markers the same
index-defining behaviour as indefiniteness markers?
UNLWS has a similar feature: the preferred coreference strategy is to draw a
line connecting to the place of first mention of the referent; there _are_
pronouns but the choice of one over these lines is motivated by layout as
opposed to syntax proper. But UNLWS has no definite category. For these
definite referents without an earlier coreferring phrase, UNLWS will
- use no article (for globally unique things, or near enough: "the sun", "the
president", ...)
- use a deictic expression (for things foregrounded by extra-conversational
happenings)
- make a relation explicit (for cases like yours)
Your example in UNLWS would probably be "I went to a restaurant. [A] waiter
_at it_ didn't speak English."; or, if it was written with forethought, just "I
was served at a restaurant by a waiter who ..."
Alex
Messages in this topic (2)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
5a. Re: skyrim's dragon language
Posted by: "Ben Scerri" psykieki...@gmail.com
Date: Mon Jul 23, 2012 3:58 pm ((PDT))
That was indeed the case, however that book, _Bible of the Deep Ones_, is
gibberish in English, and was said by Bethesda to be random gibberish made
to look good. The transcription is below, if anyone wants to attempt to
find some reason to it :P
so cxiumonataj kunvenauw, sed nature ankoix pri aliaj aktuasoj aktivecauw
so societo. Ne malofte enahkstas krome plej diversaspekta materialo eduka
oix distra.
So interreta Kvako (retletera kaj verjheauw) ahkstas unufsonke alternativaj
kanasouw por distribui so enhavon so papera Kva! Kvak!. Sed alifsonke so
enhavauw so diversaj verjheauw antoixvible ne povas kaj ecx ne vus cxiam
ahksti centprocente so sama. En malvaste cirkusonta paperfolio ekzemple
ebsos publikigi ilustrajxauwn, kiuj pro kopirajtaj kiasouw ne ahkstas
uzebsoj en so interreto. Alifsonke so masoltaj kostauw reta distribuo
forigas so spacajn limigauwn kaj permahksas pli ampleksan enhavon, por ne
paroli pri gxishora aktualeco.
Tiuj cirkonstancauw rahkspeguligxos en so aspekto so Kvakoa, kiu ja cetere
servos ankoix kiel gxeneraso retejo so ranetauw.
On 24 July 2012 00:25, Nikolay Ivankov <lukevil...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 4:22 PM, Nikolay Ivankov <lukevil...@gmail.com
> >wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 4:07 PM, Alex Fink <000...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 01:02:41 -0400, George Corley <gacor...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >My understanding is that the Dragon language is largely a relex of
> >> English
> >> >-- and intentionally so in order to allow players to easily decipher
> it.
> >>
> >> It looks to me like the "Song of the Dragonborn" will have been first
> >> composed in English and then this Dragon language constructed so that no
> >> changes to the metrical / musical / ... arrangement were necessary. So
> not
> >> only is it a relex, but with only one pair of exceptions in line 2 every
> >> word has the same _syllable count_ as its English equivalent, and the
> >> line-final rhymes (and their absence at "kings" / "unbound"!) were
> >> preserved as well.
> >>
> >> Alex
> >>
> >
> > But really, this is STILL BETTER then, say, Oblivion, with daedric
> > alphabet being just English with "whimsicated" characters, and the
> language
> > was just plain English. I'm not that pretty sure in that, but it may be
> > easily proven: in one of the villages (a tavern right in the middle of
> the
> > forest somewhere no the Nord-East from the capital, led by a middle-aged
> > redguard couple) there was a whole book written in Daedric, and I'm
> pretty
> > sure it was just plain English. So the current stage in Skyrim is
> > definitely a progress.
> >
>
> Sorry, North-West, AFAIR.
>
Messages in this topic (12)
________________________________________________________________________
5b. Re: skyrim's dragon language
Posted by: "Madeline Palmer" mad9l...@gmail.com
Date: Mon Jul 23, 2012 4:24 pm ((PDT))
Hey guys,
This is my first reply to this list although I've been reading your
discussions for some time.
I don't know anything about video games in general or Skyrim in
particular but I am aware of the existence of the Skyrim dragon language.
I'm not going to bash it or make fun of it, I think that (from what little
I know of it) is a perfectly fine conlang for the purposes which it is used
for, i.e. for a video game. It needs to be relatively simple and
understandable for the average person if they're interested and was
probably not designed by a linguist.
The only problem I have with it is the phonetic system is basically a *
human* one. It includes /b/, /d/ and /f/ as well as other bilabial and
dental sounds which the articulatory system of another species (for
instance one with a forked tongue or no lips to speak of) might not be able
to create such as in words as *denek *'soil,' *brod *'clan' and
*tafiir *'thief' (examples
are from http://elderscrolls.wikia.com/wiki/Dragon_Language).
This isn't really a "problem," as I said before it's perfectly fine for
what it was meant for and for the average person wanting to learn a conlang
it is usually better not to include a large array of strange, rare or
"inhuman" sounds. It isn't bad, it's just designed for a limited
application and yes, is definitely a work in progress.
I have thought a great deal about draconic languages over the years so
the moment I found out about the Skyrim language, these thoughts popped
into my head. Currently www.Fiatlingua.org <http://www.fiatlingua.org/> is
publishing a dragon language I have been working on for a while which is a
little bit more developed and which--I feel--might be a little bit more
representative of what a draconic language would sound like but also has
some interesting grammatical concepts and worldviews which an extremely
long-lived, predatory species might function in. Its being published in
sections beginning with last February's posting under the name *Srínawésin:
The Language of the Kindred* and you're more then welcome to check it out.
I'd love to hear what you might think about it!
Messages in this topic (12)
________________________________________________________________________
5c. Re: skyrim's dragon language
Posted by: "Patrick Dunn" pwd...@gmail.com
Date: Mon Jul 23, 2012 4:25 pm ((PDT))
It's not gibberish at all: it's Esperanto.
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 5:58 PM, Ben Scerri <psykieki...@gmail.com> wrote:
> That was indeed the case, however that book, _Bible of the Deep Ones_, is
> gibberish in English, and was said by Bethesda to be random gibberish made
> to look good. The transcription is below, if anyone wants to attempt to
> find some reason to it :P
>
> so cxiumonataj kunvenauw, sed nature ankoix pri aliaj aktuasoj aktivecauw
> so societo. Ne malofte enahkstas krome plej diversaspekta materialo eduka
> oix distra.
>
> So interreta Kvako (retletera kaj verjheauw) ahkstas unufsonke alternativaj
> kanasouw por distribui so enhavon so papera Kva! Kvak!. Sed alifsonke so
> enhavauw so diversaj verjheauw antoixvible ne povas kaj ecx ne vus cxiam
> ahksti centprocente so sama. En malvaste cirkusonta paperfolio ekzemple
> ebsos publikigi ilustrajxauwn, kiuj pro kopirajtaj kiasouw ne ahkstas
> uzebsoj en so interreto. Alifsonke so masoltaj kostauw reta distribuo
> forigas so spacajn limigauwn kaj permahksas pli ampleksan enhavon, por ne
> paroli pri gxishora aktualeco.
>
> Tiuj cirkonstancauw rahkspeguligxos en so aspekto so Kvakoa, kiu ja cetere
> servos ankoix kiel gxeneraso retejo so ranetauw.
>
> On 24 July 2012 00:25, Nikolay Ivankov <lukevil...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 4:22 PM, Nikolay Ivankov <lukevil...@gmail.com
> > >wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 4:07 PM, Alex Fink <000...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 01:02:41 -0400, George Corley <gacor...@gmail.com
> >
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >My understanding is that the Dragon language is largely a relex of
> > >> English
> > >> >-- and intentionally so in order to allow players to easily decipher
> > it.
> > >>
> > >> It looks to me like the "Song of the Dragonborn" will have been first
> > >> composed in English and then this Dragon language constructed so that
> no
> > >> changes to the metrical / musical / ... arrangement were necessary.
> So
> > not
> > >> only is it a relex, but with only one pair of exceptions in line 2
> every
> > >> word has the same _syllable count_ as its English equivalent, and the
> > >> line-final rhymes (and their absence at "kings" / "unbound"!) were
> > >> preserved as well.
> > >>
> > >> Alex
> > >>
> > >
> > > But really, this is STILL BETTER then, say, Oblivion, with daedric
> > > alphabet being just English with "whimsicated" characters, and the
> > language
> > > was just plain English. I'm not that pretty sure in that, but it may be
> > > easily proven: in one of the villages (a tavern right in the middle of
> > the
> > > forest somewhere no the Nord-East from the capital, led by a
> middle-aged
> > > redguard couple) there was a whole book written in Daedric, and I'm
> > pretty
> > > sure it was just plain English. So the current stage in Skyrim is
> > > definitely a progress.
> > >
> >
> > Sorry, North-West, AFAIR.
> >
>
--
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>.
Messages in this topic (12)
________________________________________________________________________
5d. Re: skyrim's dragon language
Posted by: "Patrick Dunn" pwd...@gmail.com
Date: Mon Jul 23, 2012 4:27 pm ((PDT))
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 6:14 PM, Madeline Palmer <mad9l...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey guys,
> This is my first reply to this list although I've been reading your
> discussions for some time.
> I don't know anything about video games in general or Skyrim in
> particular but I am aware of the existence of the Skyrim dragon language.
> I'm not going to bash it or make fun of it, I think that (from what little
> I know of it) is a perfectly fine conlang for the purposes which it is used
> for, i.e. for a video game. It needs to be relatively simple and
> understandable for the average person if they're interested and was
> probably not designed by a linguist.
> The only problem I have with it is the phonetic system is basically a *
> human* one. It includes /b/, /d/ and /f/ as well as other bilabial and
> dental sounds which the articulatory system of another species (for
> instance one with a forked tongue or no lips to speak of) might not be able
> to create such as in words as *denek *'soil,' *brod *'clan' and
> *tafiir *'thief' (examples
> are from http://elderscrolls.wikia.com/wiki/Dragon_Language).
> This isn't really a "problem," as I said before it's perfectly fine for
> what it was meant for and for the average person wanting to learn a conlang
> it is usually better not to include a large array of strange, rare or
> "inhuman" sounds. It isn't bad, it's just designed for a limited
> application and yes, is definitely a work in progress.
> I have thought a great deal about draconic languages over the years so
> the moment I found out about the Skyrim language, these thoughts popped
> into my head. Currently www.Fiatlingua.org <http://www.fiatlingua.org/>
> is
> publishing a dragon language I have been working on for a while which is a
> little bit more developed and which--I feel--might be a little bit more
> representative of what a draconic language would sound like but also has
> some interesting grammatical concepts and worldviews which an extremely
> long-lived, predatory species might function in. Its being published in
> sections beginning with last February's posting under the name *Srínawésin:
> The Language of the Kindred* and you're more then welcome to check it out.
> I'd love to hear what you might think about it!
>
What I think of it is that it is awesome beyond belief. One of my top all
time favorite conlangs, up there with Teonaht for coolness.
Thanks for working on it.
--Patrick
--
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>.
Messages in this topic (12)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/
<*> Your email settings:
Digest Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
conlang-nor...@yahoogroups.com
conlang-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
conlang-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
