Béu : Chapter 4: Difference between revisions

From FrathWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary
 
(15 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
== ..... Some valency changing operations==
{{Deletion|Staigard|Well I have moved all the data somewhere else}}


THE 37 SPECIAL VERBS MUST COME BEFORE THIS.




=== ... Valency ... 2 => 1===
db-g7
 
..
 
The passive is normally formed by infixing '''-w-''' just before the final vowel. For example ...
 
'''glói''' = to see
 
'''(pás) glár gì''' = I see you
 
'''pás glár gì''' = I myself see you
 
'''(pà) gloiwar''' = I am seen
 
'''(pà) gloiwar hí gì''' = I am seen by you
 
'''pà gloiwara''' = I myself am being seen
 
'''gloiwari''' = I have been seen
 
'''gloiwaru''' = I have not yet been seen
 
'''taiku gloiwar''' = I was seen
 
'''jauku gloiwar''' = I will be seen
 
etc. etc.
 
The subject of the active clause, can be included in the passive clause as an afterthought if required. '''hí''' is a normal noun meaning "source". However it also acts as a particle which introduces the agent in a passive clause.
 
 
{| border=1
  |align=center| the infinitive
  |align=center|
  |align=center| perfect
  |align=center|
  |align=center| infinitive of passive
  |align=center|
  |align=center| perfect of passive
  |align=center|
  |align=center| passive participle
  |align=center|
  |-
  |align=center| '''kludau'''
  |align=center| to write
  |align=center| '''kludori'''
  |align=center| he has written
  |align=center| '''kludwau'''
  |align=center| to be written
  |align=center| '''kludwori'''
  |align=center| it has been written
  |align=center| '''kludwai'''
  |align=center| written
  |-
  |align=center| '''glói'''
  |align=center| to see
  |align=center| '''glori'''
  |align=center| she has seen
  |align=center| '''gloiwa'''
  |align=center| to be seen
  |align=center| '''gloiwori'''
  |align=center| she has been seen
  |align=center| '''gloiwai'''
  |align=center| seen
  |-
  |align=center| '''timpa'''
  |align=center| to hit
  |align=center| '''timpori'''
  |align=center| he has hit
  |align=center| '''timpwa'''
  |align=center| to be hit
  |align=center| '''timpwori'''
  |align=center| he has been hit
  |align=center| '''timpwai'''
  |align=center| hit
  |-
  |align=center| '''poʔau'''
  |align=center| to cook
  |align=center| '''poʔori'''
  |align=center| she has cooked
  |align=center| '''poʔawa'''
  |align=center| to be cooked
  |align=center| '''poʔawori'''
  |align=center| it has been cooked
  |align=center| '''poʔawai'''
  |align=center| cooked
  |}
 
..
 
When the final consonant is '''w y h''' or '''ʔ''' the passive is formed by suffixing '''-wa'''
 
In monosyllabic words, it is  formed by suffixing '''-wa'''.
 
Note ... when '''wa''' is added to a word ending in '''au''' or '''eu''', the final '''u''' is deleted.
 
Also note ... these operations can make consonant clusters which are not allowed in the base words. For example, in a root word '''-mpw-''' would not be allowed ( Chapter 1, Consonant clusters, Word medial)
 
..
 
=== ... Valency ... 1 => 2===
 
..
 
Now all verbs that can take an ergative argument can undergo the 2=>1 transformation.
 
There also exists in '''béu''' a 1=>2 transformation. However this transformation can only be applied to a handful of verbs. Namely ...
 
 
{| border=1
  |align=center| '''ʔoime'''
  |align=center| to be happy, happyness
  |align=center| '''ʔoimora'''
  |align=center| he is happy
  |align=center| '''ʔoimye'''
  |align=center| to make happy
  |align=center| '''ʔoimyana'''
  |align=center| pleasant
  |-
  |align=center| '''heuno'''
  |align=center| to be sad/sadness
  |align=center| '''heunora'''
  |align=center| she's sad
  |align=center| '''heunyo'''
  |align=center| to make sad
  |align=center| '''heunyana'''
  |align=center| depressing
  |-
  |align=center| '''taudu'''
  |align=center| to be annoyed
  |align=center| '''taudora'''
  |align=center| he is annoyed
  |align=center| '''tauju'''
  |align=center| to annoy
  |align=center| '''taujana'''
  |align=center| annoying
  |-
  |align=center| '''swú'''
  |align=center| to be scared, fear
  |align=center| '''swora'''
  |align=center| she is afraid
  |align=center| '''swuya'''
  |align=center| to scare
  |align=center| '''swuyana'''
  |align=center| frightening, scary
  |-
  |align=center| '''canti'''
  |align=center| to be angry, anger
  |align=center| '''cantora'''
  |align=center| he is angry
  |align=center| '''canci'''
  |align=center| to make angry
  |align=center| '''cancana'''
  |align=center| really annoying
  |-
  |align=center| '''yodi'''
  |align=center| to be horny, lust
  |align=center| '''yodora'''
  |align=center| she is horny
  |align=center| '''yoji'''
  |align=center| to make horny
  |align=center| '''yojana'''
  |align=center| sexy, hot
  |-
  |align=center| '''gái'''
  |align=center| to ache, pain
  |align=center| '''gayora'''
  |align=center| he hurts
  |align=center| '''gaya'''
  |align=center| to hurt (something)
  |align=center| '''gayana'''
  |align=center| painful <sup>*</sup>
  |-
  |align=center| '''gwibe'''
  |align=center| to be ashamed/shame/shyness
  |align=center| '''gwibora'''
  |align=center| she is ashamed/shy
  |align=center| '''gwibye'''
  |align=center| to embarrass
  |align=center| '''gwibyana'''
  |align=center| embarrassing
  |-
  |align=center| '''doimoi'''
  |align=center| to be anxious, anxiety
  |align=center| '''doimora'''
  |align=center| he is anxious
  |align=center| '''doimyoi'''
  |align=center| to cause anxiety, to make anxious
  |align=center| '''doimyana'''
  |align=center| worrying
  |-
  |align=center| '''ʔica'''
  |align=center| to be jealous, jealousy
  |align=center| '''ʔicora'''
  |align=center| she is jealous
  |align=center| '''ʔicaya'''
  |align=center| to make jealous
  |align=center| '''ʔicayana'''
  |align=center| causing jealousy
  |}
 
{| border=1
  |align=center| '''jùa'''
  |align=center| to know
  |align=center| '''jora'''
  |align=center| he knows
  |align=center| '''juya'''
  |align=center| to tell
  |align=center| '''juyoru'''
  |align=center| she will tell
  |}
..
 
The above words are all about internal feelings.
 
It is hard to say whether the active verb (the first column) or the infinitive (the second column) is the base form. I guess we can consider them equally fundamental.
 
The third column gives a transitive infinitive (derived from the column two entry by infixing a '''-y-''').
 
The fourth column gives an adjective of the transitive verb (derived from column three entry by affixing a '''-ana''' ... the active participle).
 
It can be seen that it is normally formed by infixing '''-y-'''
 
When the final consonant is '''ʔ  j  c  w''' or '''h'''  the causative is formed by suffixing '''-ya'''
 
Also in short words, it is  formed by suffixing '''-ya'''
 
Note ... when '''ya''' is added to a word ending in '''ai''' or '''oi''', the final '''i''' is deleted.
 
Note ... when '''y''' is infixed behind '''t''' and '''d''' : '''ty''' => '''c''' and '''dy''' => '''j'''
 
Note ... All the verbs above are "state verbs". When state verbs are cited, the third person - present tense - no evidential form is used. Most verbs are "action verbs". When action verbs are cited, the third person - past tense - no evidential form is used. Also note that the infinitive of these state verbs, can in all cases be translated either as a noun or the noun form of an adjective.
 
-----
 
Below is an example of this valency changing operation on an active verb.
 
'''doika''' = to walk
 
'''doikori''' = he walked
 
'''doikya''' = to run (as in "run a business")
'''doikyana''' = management
..
 
<sup>*</sup>You would describe a gallstone as '''gayana'''. However you would describe your leg as '''gaila''' (well provided you didn't have a chronic condition with your leg)
 
..
 
=== ... Concatenation of the valency changing derivations ... 1 => 2 => 1 and 2 => 1 => 2===
 
..
 
{| border=1
  |align=center| '''ʔoime'''
  |align=center| = to be happy
  |align=center| '''ʔoimye'''
  |align=center| = to make happy
  |align=center| '''ʔoimyewa'''
  |align=center| = "to be made to be happy" or, more simply "to be made happy
  |}
 
..
 
{| border=1
  |align=center| '''fàu'''
  |align=center| = to know
  |align=center| '''fa??'''
  |align=center| = to tell
  |align=center| '''fa ??'''
  |align=center| =
  |}
 
..
 
{| border=1
  |align=center| '''timpa'''
  |align=center| = to hit
  |align=center| '''timpawa'''
  |align=center| = to be hit
  |align=center| '''timpawaya'''
  |align=center| = to cause to be hit
  |}
 
..
 
Semantically '''timpa''' is direct action (from agent to patient). Whereas '''timpawaya''' is indirect, possibly involving some third party between the agent and the patient and/or allowing some time to pass, between resolving on the action and the action being done unto the patient.
 
..
 
== ..... A discussion of English participles==
 
..
 
Now English has two participles, the "active participle" and the "passive participle".
 
They appear as adjectives (of course, an adjective derived from a noun is the definition of "a participle"), however both forms also appear in verb phrases. If you are given a clause out of context it is sometimes impossible to tell if the participle is acting as an adjective or as part of a verb phrase. For example ... first the "active participle" ...
 
1) The writing man
 
2) The man is writing
 
3) The man is writing a book
 
In 1) "writing" is definitely an adjective. For instance you can substitute "green" for "writing" and the sentence makes perfect sense.
 
As for 2) ... well could be an adjective ... it passes the green-substitution-test.
 
For 3) ... No not an adjective "The man is green a book" doesn't make sense. The proper analysis of 3) is that "is writing" is a verb phrase (one that has given progressive meaning to the verb "write"). Now after we have figured this out we should have another look at 2). The proper analysis of this could be that "is writing" is a verb phrase. In fact there is no way to be sure and we would have to see the context in which 2) is embedded (and even then, there would be certain situations when either analysis could be valid. I would say that it is because of these situations in which either analysis is valid that let the original adjectival meaning spread and become a verbal meaning).
 
... now the "passive participle" ...
 
1) The broken piano
 
2) The piano is broken
 
3) The piano was broken
 
4) The piano was broken by the monkey
 
In 1) and 2)  "broken" is definitely an adjective. For instance you can substitute "green" for "broken" and the sentence makes perfect sense.
 
As for 3) ... well could be an adjective ... it passes the green-substitution-test.
 
For 4) ... No not an adjective "The piano was green by the monkey" doesn't make sense. The proper analysis of 4) is that "was broken" is a verb phrase (one that has given passive meaning to the ambitransitive verb "break"). Now after we have figured this out we should have another look at 3). The proper analysis of this could be that "was broken" is a verb phrase. In fact there is no way to be sure and we would have to see the context in which 3) is embedded  (and even then, there would be certain situations<sup>*</sup> when either analysis could be valid. I would say that it is because of these situations in which either analysis is valid that let the original adjectival meaning spread and become a verbal meaning).
 
<sup>*</sup>The five-week deadlock between striking Peugeot workers and their employer was broken yesterday when the management obtained a court order to end a 10-day sit-in at one of the two factories in eastern France, Sarah Lambert writes.
 
I would say either analysis is valid for the above sentence.
 
..
 
== ..... A bit about adverbs==
 
If an adjective comes immediately after a verb (which it normally would) it is known to be an adverb. For example '''saco''' means "slow" but if it came immediately after a verb it would be translated as "slowly". However if we add '''-we''' to it so we get the form '''sacowe''' the adverb can move around the utterance ... wherever it wants to go.
 
Now going back to the 6 "co-ordinate" particles '''koi beu fia pua ʒi gu''' in the previous section. Basically a word ending in one of these particles, is an adjective. For example ...
 
'''yiŋkia haube''' = the beautiful girls
 
'''yiŋkia nambopua''' = the girls behind the house
 
However sometimes '''nambopua''' acts as an adverb. When it does so it must come directly after the verb (that is ... we can not add '''-we''' and move it from its position immediately behind the verb, as can be done with other adjectives active as adverbs). For example ...
 
'''yiŋkia nambopua lendura''' = the girls behind the house play
 
'''yiŋkia lendura nambopua''' = the girls play behind the house
 
..
 
 
'''-we''' can also be affixed to a noun and also produce an adverb. For example ;-
 
'''deuta''' means "soldier"
 
'''deutawe''' means "in the manner of a soldier"
 
as in '''doikora deutawe''' = he walk like a soldier
 
So that is basically all there is to adverbs. In the Western linguistic tradition many other words are classified as adverbs. Words such as "often" and "tomorrow" etc. etc.
 
In the '''béu''' linguistic tradition all these words are classified as particles, a hodge podge collection of words that do not fit into the classes of noun (N), adjective (A), verb (G) or adverb.
 
..
 
== ... Parenthesis==
 
..
 
'''béu''' has two particles that indicate the start of some sort of parenthesis. In a similar way to a mathematical formula, where brackets mean that the arguments within the brackets should be evaluated first, the two '''béu''' particles indicate that the immediately following clause should be processed (by the brain) before arguments outside of the parenthesis are considered.
 
..
 
=== . '''tà''' ... the full clause particle===
 
..
 
This is basically the same as "that" in English, when "that" introduces a complement clause. For example ...
 
"He said THAT he was not feeling well"
 
Notice that "he was not feeling well" is complete in itself, it is a self-contained clause.
 
..
 
=== . '''ʔà''' ... the gap clause particle===
 
..
 
This is basically the same as "what" in English, in such sentences as ...
 
"WHAT you see is WHAT you get"<sup>*</sup>
 
Notice that "you see" and "you get" are not complete clauses, there is a "gap" in them.
 
The phase "WHAT you see", (to return to the mathematical analogy again) may be thought of as a "variable". in this case, the motivation for using a "variable", is to make the expression "general" rather than "specific". (Being general it is of course more worthy of our consideration). Other motivations for using a "variable" is that the actual argument is not known. Yet another is that even though the particular argument is known, it is really awkward to specify satisfactorily.
 
EXAMPLE
 
Another way to think about the '''ʔà''' construction, is to think of it as a "nominaliser", a particle that turns a whole clause into a noun. To use the example from just above ....
 
"see" is an intransitive verb with two arguments. To replace one of these arguments by '''ʔà''' is like defining the missing argument in terms of the rest of the clause i.e. it changes a clause into a constuction that refers to one argument of that clause.
 
=== . Gap clause particles in other languages===
 
There is no generally agreed upon term for the type of construction which I am calling "gap clause" here. Dixon calls it a "fused relative", Greenberg calls it a "headless relative clause". I don't like either term. A fused relative implies that a generic noun (i.e. "thing" or "person") somehow got fused with a relativizer. This certainly never happened although this type of clause can be rewritten as a generic noun followed by a relativizer. As for "headless" relative clause ... well I think the type of clause that we are dealing with is in fact more fundamental then a relative clause, so I would not like to define it in terms of a relative clause.
 
My thoughts on this type of clause are ...
 
Well "what" was firstly a question word. So you have expressions like "Who fed the cat"
 
Then of course it is natural to have an answer like "I don't know who fed the cat"
 
Now the above sentence is similar to "I don't know French" or "I don't know Johnny".
 
Now you see the expression "who fed the cat" fills the slot usually occupied by a noun in an "I don't know" sentences.
 
So "who fed the cat" started to be thought of as a sort of noun.
 
Now from the "know (neg)" beachhead<sup>*</sup>, the usage would have spread to "know" and also the such words that have "knowing" as an essential part of their meaning. Words such as "remember", "report"  etc. etc.
 
<sup>*</sup>I call "know (neg)" a "beachhead"<sup>**</sup>. A beachhead is a usage(and/or the act or situation behind that usage) that facilitates the meaning of a word to spread. Or the meaning of an expression to spread. A beachhead can be defined simply as an expression, but sometimes some background as to the speakers environment has to be given. For example suppose that one dialect of a language was using a word to mean "under", but this same word meant "between/among" in all other dialects. Now suppose you did some investigating and found that all other dialects of this language was spoken on the steppes and their speakers made a living by animal husbandry. However the group which diverged from the others had given up the nomadic life and settled down in a lush river valley. In this valley their main occupation was tending their fruit orchards.
 
It could be deduced that the change in meaning came about by people saying ... "Johnny is among the trees". Now as the trees were thick on the ground and had overspreading branches, this was reanalysed to mean "Johnny is under the trees". Hence I would say ...
 
The beachhead of word "x" = "between" to word "x" = "under" was the expression "among the trees" (and in this case a bit of background as to the "culture" of the speakers would be appropriate).  ...  OK ?    ...  understood ?
 
For an expressing to become a beachhead, it must, of course, be used regularly.
 
ASIDE ... I have thought about counting rosary beads as a possible beachhead that changed the meaning of "have", in Western Europe, from purely "possession" to a perfect marker. This is just (fairly ?) wild conjecture of course. (The beachhead expression being "I have x beads counted" with "counted" originally being a passive participle)
 
I am digressing here ... well to get back to "who fed the cat". We had it being considered a sort of noun. Presumably it was at one time put directly after a noun in apposition (presumably with a period of silence between the two) and qualified the noun. Then presumably they got bound closer together, the gap was lost, and this is the history of one form of relative clause in English.
 
<sup>**</sup>Actually I would have liked to use the term pivot here. However this term has already been taken.
 
From the dictionary
 
Beachhead (dictionary definition) = 1. A position on an enemy shoreline captured by troops in advance of an invading force
 
Beachhead (dictionary definition) = 2. A first achievement that opens the way for further developments.
 
-----
 
There are 4 relativizers ... '''ʔá''', '''ʔái''', '''ʔáu''' and '''ʔaja'''. (relativizer = '''ʔasemo'''-marker)
 
'''ʔasemo''' = relative clause.
 
It works in pretty much the same way as the English relative clause construction. The '''béu''' relativisers is '''ʔá'''. Though '''ʔái''', '''ʔáu''' and '''ʔaja''' also have roles as relativisers.
 
The main relativiser is '''ʔá''' and all the '''pilana''' can occur with it (well all the '''pilana''' except '''ʔe'''. '''ʔaí''' is used instead of * '''ʔaʔe''').
 
The noun that is being qualified is dropped from the relative clause, but the roll which it would play is shown by its '''pilana''' on the suffixed to the relativizer.  For example ;-
 
'''glà ʔá bwás timpori rà hauʔe''' = The woman that the man hit, is beautiful.
 
'''bwá ʔás timpori glà rà ʔaiho''' = The man that hit the woman is ugly.
 
The same thing happens with all the '''pilana'''. For example ;-
 
the basket '''ʔapi''' the cat shat was cleaned by John.
 
the wall '''ʔala''' you are sitting was built by my grandfather.
 
the woman '''ʔaye''' I told the secret, took it to her grave.
 
the town '''ʔafi''' she has come is the biggest south of the mountain.
 
the lilly pad '''ʔalya''' the frog jumped was the biggest in the pond.
 
the boat '''ʔalfe''' you have just jumped is unsound
 
'''báu ʔás timpori glá rà ʔaiho''' = The man that hit the woman is ugly.
 
* '''nambo ʔaʔe''' she lives is the biggest in town.
 
'''báu ʔaho ò''' is going to market is her husband.
 
the knife '''ʔatu''' he severed the branch is a 100 years old
 
'''báu ʔán''' dog I shot, reported me to the police = the man whose dog I shot, reported me to the police<sup>*</sup>
 
The old woman '''ʔaji''' I deliver the newspaper, has died.
 
The boy '''ʔaco''' they are all talking, has gone to New Zealand.
 
<sup>*</sup>Altho' this has the same form as all the rest, underneath there is a difference. '''n''' marks a noun as part of a noun phrase, not as to its roll in a clause.
 
---------
 
As you see in above, '''ʔa''' in the form * '''ʔaʔe''' is not allowed. Instead you must use '''ʔaí'''.
 
The use of '''ʔái''' and '''ʔàu''' as relativizers are basically the same as the use of "where" and "when" in English. These two can combine with two of the '''pilana'''.
 
'''?aifi''' = from where, whence
 
'''?aiye''' = to where, hence
 
'''?aufi''' = from when, since
 
'''?auye''' = to when, until
 
The use of '''ʔaja''' basically is a relativizer for an entire clause instead of just the noun which it follows.
 
For example ???????
 
WITH SPACE AND TIME
 
PLURAL FORM
 
..
 
=== ... the NP with the present participle core ??===
 
..
 
Now the phrase '''jono kludala toili''' is a noun phrase (NP) in which the adjective phrase (AP) qualifies the noun '''jono'''
 
(Notice that in the clause that corresponds to the above NP, '''jonos kludora toili''' (John is writing the book), '''jono''' has the ergative suffix and the 3 words can occur in any order : with the NP, '''jono''' does not take the ergative suffix and the 3 words must occur in the order shown.)
 
'''glói''' = to see
 
'''polo''' = Paul
 
'''timpa''' = to hit
 
'''jene''' = Jenny
 
'''glori polo timpala é''' = He saw paul hitting something
 
'''glori pà timpala ò''' = He saw me hitting her
 
'''glori hà (pás) timparwi ò''' = He saw that I had hit her
 
'''glori jene timpwala''' = He saw Jenny being hit
 
Now the question is where is this special NP used. Well it is used in situations where English would use a complement clause. For example with '''algo''' meaning "to think about",<sup>*</sup>
 
1) '''algara jono''' = I am thinking about John.
 
2) '''algara jono kludala toili''' = I am thinking about John writing a book.
 
Note ... According to Dixon, the standard English translation of 2) would be "I am thinking about John's writing a book" which I find quite strange even though English is my mother tongue. I have decided to call this sort of construction in '''béu''' a special kind of NP, while Dixon has called the equivalent expression in English the "-ing" type of complement clause. I think this is just a naming thing and doesn't really matter.
 
<sup>*</sup>"to think (that)" is '''alhu''' in '''béu'''. '''alhu''' also translates "to believe".
 
..
 
==Index==
 
{{Béu Index}}

Latest revision as of 00:28, 4 December 2015

Trash2.png This article has been tagged for deletion by Staigard
Reason: Well I have moved all the data somewhere else.
[ Talk ]


db-g7

Retrieved from "http://www.frathwiki.com/index.php?title=Béu_:_Chapter_4&oldid=89853"