|
|
| (147 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| == ..... The R-form of the verb==
| | {{Deletion|Staigard|Well I have moved all the data somewhere else}} |
|
| |
|
| ..
| |
|
| |
|
| Now we should introduce the active forms of the verb (also referred to as the R-form). '''béu''' has quite a comprehensive set of tense/aspect markers. The active form of the verb is built up from the infinitive form. There is only one infinitive in '''béu'''.
| | db-g7 |
| | |
| We will discuss the most-used form of the verb in this section, the R-form. But first we should introduce a new letter.
| |
| | |
| ..
| |
| | |
| [[Image:TW_191.png]]
| |
| | |
| ..
| |
| | |
| This letter has not been mentioned so far because it doesn't occur in any words as such. It only occurs in the R-form of the verb.
| |
| | |
| So if you hear "r" or see the above symbol, you know you are hearing the main verb of a clause. (definition of a clause ('''semo''') = that which has one "r" ... ??? )
| |
| | |
| O.K. ... the R-form is built up from the infinitive<sup>*</sup>.
| |
| | |
| 1) First the final vowel is deleted.
| |
| | |
| <sup>*</sup>Excepts in rare cases (see "Adjectives and how they pervade other parts of speech")
| |
| | |
| ..
| |
| | |
| === ... Slot 1 ===
| |
| | |
| ..
| |
| | |
| 2) one of the 7 vowels below is added.
| |
| | |
| [[Image:TW_109.png]]
| |
| | |
| | |
| LINGUISTIC JARGON ... In the Western linguistic tradition, these markers are said to represent "person" and "number". Person is either first, second or third person (i.e. I, you, he or she). In the béu linguistic tradition they are called '''cenʔo'''-markers. ('''cenʔo''' = musterlist, people that you know, acquaintances, protagonist, list of characters in a play)
| |
| | |
| These markers represent the subject (the person that is performing the action). Whenever possible the pronoun that represents the subject is dropped, it is not needed because we have that information inside the verb with the '''cenʔo'''-markers.
| |
| | |
| Notice that there are 2 entries that represent the 1st person plural subject (i.e. we). The top one must be used when the people performing the action included the speaker, the spoken to and possibly others. The lower one must be used when the people performing the action include the speaker, NOT the person spoken to and one or more 3rd persons.
| |
| | |
| Note that the '''ai''' form is used where in English you would use "you" or "one" (if you were a bit posh) ... as in "YOU do it like this", "ONE must do ONE'S best, mustn't ONE".
| |
| | |
| LINGUISTIC JARGON ... This pronoun is often called the "impersonal pronoun" or the "indefinite pronoun".
| |
| | |
| So we have 7 different forms for person and number.
| |
| | |
| ..
| |
| | |
| === ... Slot 2 ===
| |
| | |
| ..
| |
| | |
| 3) now one of the 16 markers shown below is added. 16 is quite a respectable number, as far as tense/aspect markers go.<sup>*</sup>
| |
| | |
| | |
| [[Image:TW_116.png]]
| |
| | |
| | |
| Now these markers represent what are called tense/aspect markers in the Western linguistic tradition. In the '''béu''' linguistic tradition, they are called '''gwomai''' or "modifications". ('''gwoma''' = to alter, to modify, to adjust, to change one attribute of something).
| |
| | |
| The table above has the '''gwoma''' arranged according to form. The two arrays below have the '''gwoma''' arranged according to meaning. The items below the solid line are the negatives of the items above. An orange background indicates the timeless tense. You can see I have one entry enclosed by brackets. That is because to give a negative present tense negative you would express it periphrastically ... you would use the tenseless negative '''-rka''' followed by the '''béu''' equivalent of "now" or "at the moment".
| |
| | |
| | |
| [[Image:TW_117.png]]
| |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| Looking at the upper table, you can see the first 3 columns differ by their vowel. These are the tenses ... '''i''' for the past, '''a''' for the present and '''u''' for the future.
| |
| | |
| '''-ri''' ... This is the plain past tense. This is most often used when somebody is telling a story (a narrative). For example "Yesterday I got up, ate my breakfast and went to school". All three verbs in this narrative use the plain past tense.
| |
| | |
| '''-ra''' ... Should only be used if the action is happening NOW. English uses "to be xxxing". For example '''doikara''' = I am walking ... ('''doika''' = to walk)
| |
| | |
| '''-ru''' ... This is the future tense.
| |
| | |
| '''-r''' ... This has no time reference. It might be used for timeless "truths" such as "the sun rises in the West" or "birds fly".
| |
| | |
| The next row has what is called the habitual aspect. English has a past habitual (i.e. I used to go to school), Often in English the plain form of the verb is used as a habitual (i.e. I drink beer). Actually in '''béu''' the pattern is broken a bit, in that '''-rna''' has NOTHING to do with the activity going on at the time of speech, it is actually a tenseless habitual. Also '''béu''' and English behave the same in the following way ... whereas by logic we should use '''doikarna''' in "I walk (to school everyday)", in fact '''doikar''' is used. '''doikarna''' would be used only if we were going on to MENTION some exception (i.e. but last tuesday Allen gave me a lift)
| |
| | |
| '''doikarna''' = "sometimes I walk, and sometimes I choose not to walk" or even "I usually walk". If you walked on every occasion that was possible, then you would use '''doikar'''
| |
| | |
| '''-rnu''' ... Now English doesn't have a future habitual. But if it did it would have a roll. For instance, suppose you have just moved to a new house and are asked "how will you get to the supermarket". In '''béu''' you would answer '''doikarnu'''.
| |
| | |
| The next row expresses the perfect tense.
| |
| | |
| While the perfect tense, logically this doesn't have that much difference from the past tense it is emphasising a state rather than an action. It represents the state at the time of speaking as the outcome of past events. We have this tense/aspect in English and it is realized as "have xxxxen". For example if you wanted to talk to John and you went to his office, his secretary might say "he has gone to lunch" (as opposed to "he went for lunch"), which emphasises the absence of John. And think about the difference in meaning between "she has fallen in love" and "she fell in love" ... the first one means "she is in love" while the second one just talks about some of her history.
| |
| | |
| Another use for this tense is to show that something has happened at least once in the past. For example "I have been to London".
| |
| | |
| Easy to translate into English ... '''doikorwi''' = He/she had walked ... '''doikorwa''' = He/she has walked ... '''doikorwu''' = He/she will have walked
| |
| | |
| The next row expresses the "not yet" tense.
| |
| | |
| Easy to translate into English ... '''doikoryi''' = He/she had not yet walked ... '''doikorya''' = He/she hasn't walked yet ... '''doikoryu''' = He/she will not have walked
| |
| | |
| Notice that the English translation, '''doikoryu''' is just the negative of '''doikorwu'''. Interesting eh ? In fact these two aspects can be in many ways regarded as the negatives of each other, although in English only the future tense gives the surface forms this way.
| |
| | |
| Which leads us on to the next row. This row gives the negatives of row 1 and row 2 (that is right, row 2 does not have its own negative).
| |
| | |
| Just as '''-rna''' does not specify the present tense but instead gives a tenseless habitual, '''-rka''' gives a tenseless negative.
| |
| | |
| Easy to translate into English ... '''doikorki''' = He/she didn't walk ... '''doikorka''' = He/she doesn't walk ... '''doikorku''' = He/she will not walk
| |
| | |
| You may have noticed that the '''béu''' letter that negates verbs is very similar to the Chinese character that negates verbs ('''bù'''). This is pure coincidence.
| |
| | |
| By the way, the '''béu''' terms for the five aspects represented by these 5 rows are ... '''baga''', '''dewe''', '''pomo''', '''fene''', and '''liʒi'''.
| |
| | |
| <sup>*</sup>But even with 16 tense/aspect markers, not EVERY situation can be exactly expressed.
| |
| | |
| For example suppose two old friends from secondary school meet up again. One is a lot more muscular than before. He could explain his new muscles by saying "I have been working out" (using the progressive plus the perfect aspects). The "have" is appropriate because we are focusing on "state" rather than "action". The "am working out" is appropriate because it takes many instances of "working out" (or working out over some period of time) to build up muscles. '''béu''' has no tense/aspect marker so appropriate.
| |
| | |
| Every language has a limited range of ways to give nuances to an action, and language "A" might have to resort to a phrase to get a subtle idea across while language "B" has an obligatory little affix on the verb to economically express the exact same idea. You could swamp a language with affixes to exactly meet every little nuance you can think of (you would have an "everything but the kitchen sink" language). However in 99% of situations the nuances would not be needed and they would just be a nuisance.
| |
| | |
| By the way, in the above example, the muscular schoolmate would use the '''r''' form of the verb plus the '''béu''' equivalent of "now", to explain his present condition. Good enough.
| |
| | |
| ..
| |
| | |
| === ... Slot 3 ===
| |
| | |
| ..
| |
| | |
| 4) and finally one of the 4 '''teŋko'''-markers shown below is added.
| |
| | |
| [[Image:TW_122.png]]
| |
| | |
| '''teŋkai''' is a verb, meaning "to prove" or "to testify" or "to give evidence" or "to demonstrate" ... '''teŋko''' is a noun derived from the above, and means "proof" or "evidence".
| |
| | |
| About a quarter of the worlds languages have, what is called "evidentiality", expressed in the verb. As evidentials don't feature in any of the languages of Europe most people have never heard of them. In a language that has "evidentials" you can say (or you must say) on what evidence you are saying what you are saying. In '''béu''' there are 4 evidential suffixes. One is what is called a zero suffix. And in meaning it gives no information whatsoever as to what evidence the statement is based.
| |
| | |
| a) '''doikori''' = He/she walked ... this is neutral. The speaker has decided not to tell on what evidence he is saying what he is saying.
| |
| | |
| b) '''doikorin''' = They say he/she walked ... It this case the speaker is asserting "he walked" because somebody (or some people) have told him so.
| |
| | |
| c) '''doikoris''' = I guess he walked ... It this case the speaker is asserting "he walked" because he worked it out somehow.
| |
| | |
| The above 2 '''tenko''' are introducing some doubt, compared to the plain unadorned form ('''doikori'''). The fourth '''tenko''' on the contrary, introduced more certainty.
| |
| | |
| d) '''doikoria''' = I saw him walk ... In this case the speaked saw the action with his own eyes. This form can also be used if the speaker witnessed the action thru' another of his senses (maybe thru' hearing for example), but in the overwhelming majority of cases where this form is used, it means "I saw it myself".
| |
| | |
| This last '''teŋko''' can only be used with one of the '''gwomai''' . It can ONLY be used with the plain passed tense form '''i'''.
| |
| | |
| An '''o''' is used to connect word final '"r" to the evidential markers "n" and "s".
| |
| | |
| ..
| |
| == ... Index==
| |
| | |
| {{Béu Index}}
| |
