Kī́rtako syntax

Main article: Kī́rtako

This page gives an extensive description of Kī́rtako syntactical features.

Main clause and word order

Kī́rtako is an almost strictly SOV (Subject-Object-Verb) language.

wī́roli sopa lī́lopɑt 
the man is seeing the dog

The quite rich case system allows every other possible word order, but most of them prove to be very marked and infrequently used. The only word order with a clear role and a frequent usage is OSV (Object-Subject-Verbs), which marks the so-called passive construct.

sopa wī́roli lī́lop
the dog is being seen by the man

The other elements in the sentence are usually placed in the order “place-manner-cause-time”, although they are basically freer than the main elements. An object in the dative case, when conveying the indirect object, tends to be placed before the direct object of the sentence.

A peculiar feature is the verbal infinitival agreement: when infinitival forms, as nominal forms of the verbs, take a direct object, are regarded as an expression of belonging, and the direct object is declined in the ablative case.

sopašu lī́lopiñɑme ʔī́sow
I am not seeing the dog.

Moreover, as it can been seen in the example above, when an infinitival form is governed by a modal verb or by the negative verb ʔī́sɑme, the infinitive is always placed before the conjugated modal form.

Nouns

The noun cluster is formed by a noun, carrying the main meaning, and by other noun-type forms, namely adjectives, which specify this meaning or add other meaning to the main noun. Inside of a noun cluster, the noun can be replaced by a pronoun.

The noun usually closes the noun cluster, being preceded by every other specifying form. Thus, other elements conveying possession and belonging are always placed before the noun, as well as every attributive adjective.

wī́rora sṓgo
the man’s house

owtušu lilā́
my hand

jṓpā́ ʔṓna 
the young woman

The role of the noun cluster in the sentence and its number are marked by case and number endings. These endings mark also other adjectival elements inside the noun cluster, resulting this in the process called nominal agreement.

Both attributive and predicative adjectives agree in case and number with the noun they specify. Other elements, which convey possession or belonging do not agree with the main nominal form.

jṓpā́li wī́roli sṓgoɣɑ ʔimḗɣɑt
the young man is going home

jonora sṓgo
our house

jṓpā́no ʔṓnano
the young women

ʔṓnano jṓpā́no (ʔɑñon)
the women are young

The agreement among nouns and adjectives is not a universal phenomenon. Indefinite adjectives, indeed, usually do not agree with the nominal form, neither in case nor in number.

The grammar role of noun clusters can be further specified by postpositions, which are placed after the cluster. Thus, it can be stated that the noun cluster can be closed by a postposition.

sṓgoɣɑ ʔū́m ʔimḗɣow
I am going inside the house

The cases

The grammatical role of the noun cluster in a sentence is conveyed by some endings. These endings are bound to grammatical cases, with usually well-defined roles.

The cases in Kī́rtako language are 9:

• Agentive
• Passive
• Ablative
• Genitive
• Dative
• Causative
• Instrumental
• Abessive
• Locative

The grammatical roles and all possible differences in usage among similar cases are enlisted below:

Agentive

The agentive case features the endings -li in the singular and -noli in the plural.

The grammatical role of this case is marking the agent of the sentence, which is the active element of the action.

sopali wī́ro lī́lopɑt
the dog is seeing the man

wī́roli sṓgoɣɑ ʔimḗɣɑt
the man is going home

This is the only grammatical role played by the agentive case. The usage of this case as an agent marker is specified will be explained in a different section below.

As a marker of an agent, namely an element able to perform an action, this case cannot be used with 2^nd class nouns, as they cannot be active agents of an action.

Passive

The passive case features the zero ending (shown with -Ø) in the singular and the ending -no in the plural. In the singular form it is the same as the basic root form of the noun.

The main role of this case is marking the patient of the sentence, which is the direct object of a transitive verb.

sopali wī́ro lī́lopɑt
the dog is seeing the man

It also marks the unactive subject of a sentence, which is the unactive element of a state or the unactive participant of an involuntary action.

wī́ro ʔaɣašī́k
the man fell

sopa kḗwon
the dog is sleeping

ʔṓna jṓpā́ (ʔɑñ)
the woman is young

The usage of this case as a patient or unactive subject marker is specified in another section below.

As the basic form of a noun, it is used as the natural vocative form.

mamu, kogiwiñer!
mom, come!

It also represents the noun in its basic quality, namely its purest semantic meaning.

Genitive

The genitive case features the endings -ra in the singular and -nora in the plural.

The grammatical role of this case is marking voluntary possession. It conveys non-intrinsic conscious possession.

phū́kara sṓgo
the person’s house (this person intentionally and consciously owns the house)

This is the only grammatical role played by the genitive case.

The difference between voluntary possession and involuntary possession or belonging, thus the different in usage between the genitive and the ablative case, will be explained in a different section below.

As a marker of voluntary possession, namely possession by an element with its own will, this case cannot be used with 2^nd class nouns, as they usually convey semantically inanimate elements.

Ablative

The ablative case features the endings -šu in the singular and -nošu in the plural.

The main role of this case is marking belonging to someone or to something.

phū́kanošu wime
the people’s world (this is an example of inverse belonging, since people actually belong to the word and not vice versa)

In a broader sense it conveys involuntary, or intrinsic possession, namely an unconscious and unintentional possession.

phū́kašu lilā́
the person’s hand (a person does not intentionally and consciously own his hand, that is an intrinsic possession)

The difference between involuntary possession or belonging and voluntary possession, thus the different in usage between the ablative and the genitive case, will be explained in a different section below.

As it conveys belonging, the ablative case also marks the noun clusters in their role as direct objects of non-finite verbal forms, namely nominal-adjectival types like the infinitive and the participles. This peculiar marking is called infinitival agreement.

wī́ro lī́lopon → wī́rošu lī́lopɑme
the man is seen → the seeing of the man → the man’s vision

wī́roli jagetu rimusɑt → jagetušu rimusī́to wī́ro
the man is tending the flock → the man tending the flock

Such role as a direct object is, thus, regarded as a belonging to the verbal form.

For this reason, the ablative case always marks the direct object of a sentence in which there is the negative verb. This verb requires an infinitival form, which introduces in turn a direct object in the ablative case.

sopa lī́lopow → sopašu lī́lopiñɑme ʔī́sow
I am seeing the dog → I am not seeing the dog

It marks, also, the motion from a place, and, with some specific verbs, origin or source.

wɑkišu kigowow
I come from the village (my journey started there)

wɑkišu hā́kigowow
I come from the village (I was born there)

Difference in usage between genitive and ablative cases

Because of the different semantic and syntactical behaviour of both intrinsically animate and inanimate nouns, there is a strong difference in usage between the genitive case and the ablative case.

The genitive case conveys a meaning of intentional possession, namely possession by elements with will and intention and consciously done (although even animals are often included in this semantic group).

phū́kara sṓgo
the person’s house → this person intentionally owns the house

The ablative case conveys a meaning of unintentional possession, namely possession by animate and inanimate elements, without any will and intention, and a meaning of intrinsic possession (as regarding, for example, to body parts), which is basically an unconscious possession, or a meaning of belonging, usually called inverse belonging.

phū́kašu lilā́
the person’s hand → this person does not intentionally or consciously own a hand; it belongs intrinsically to him/her

phū́kašu wime
the person’s world → this person does not actually own the world, he/she belongs to the world

Because of its inherent meaning, the genitive cause cannot be used with 2^nd class nouns, as they usually convey semantically inanimate elements, unable to match with the idea of a conscious or intentional possession.

Dative

The dative case features the endings -ɣɑ in the singular and -noɣɑ in the plural.

The main role of this case is marking the indirect object of the sentence, which is the recipient of the action.

phū́kali sopaɣɑ hḗmɑ kɑwokɑt
the person is giving bread to the dog

In a broader sense it conveys motion to a place.

wɑkiɣɑ ʔimḗɣow
I am going to the village

It may mark, also, the purpose or the goal of an action or a state.

owtušu mamuɣɑ kinusow
I am singing for my mother

Causative

The causative case features the endings -khu in the singular and -nokhu in the plural.

The main role of this case is marking the cause of the sentence, which is the main underlying reason of an action or a state.

phū́kali sṓgoɣɑ ʔahnokhu ʔaʔḗmiɣɑt
the person went home because of the rain

wī́roli ʔṓnakhu ʔalū́ʔḗmiɣɑt
The man walked away because of the woman

In a broader sense it also marks the efficient cause.

sasī́gino tsū́thḗkhu ʔaʔosī́pon
the plants spoiled because of the snow

This is an essential role in marking an unconscious agent, unable to display its own will and being thus intrinsically inanimate, inside of an agentive-inactive system. The supposed “agent” became thus the cause, while avoiding the role of subject of the sentence.

Some 2^nd class nouns, although semantically inanimate, are able to elicit actions or changes in other elements. However, lacking their own will, they cannot play the role of active agent of the sentence and be marked by the agentive case.

Instrumental

The instrumental case features the endings -khɑ in the singular and -nokhɑ in the plural.

The grammatical role of this case is marking the instrument through which the action is performed, or a state is in being.

phū́kali mā́so jū́wakhɑ ʔaʔilukokɑt
the person killed the mouse with a stone

It cannot convey the meaning of the complement of company.

This is a quite important role in marking an inanimate agent, unable to display its own will and even to make a motion, inside of an agentive-inactive system. The supposed “agent” became thus the instrument, while avoiding the role of subject of the sentence.

phū́ka jū́wakhɑ ʔaphū́wikon
the person was hit by/with a stone ← A stone hit the person

As a marker of inanimate instrument, used to perform an action, this case cannot be used with 1^st class nouns, as they usually convey semantically animate elements.

Abessive

The abessive case features the endings -gil in the singular and -nogil in the plural.

The main role of this case is marking the deprivation, namely the absence of the instrument through which the action is performed, or a state is being.

sopa hḗmɑgil ʔiluk
the dog will die without bread

It cannot convey the meaning of the complement of absence of company.

It may also convey the lack of an inanimate entity, whose absence is aimless to the action or the state.

phṓɣagil jageli ʔajilɑkɑt
the sheep without wool ran away

In this meaning the abessive case has a specifying role and it thus tends to be placed before the noun it specifies, similarly to other specifying elements of the noun cluster.

As a marker of inanimate instrument, used to perform an action, this case cannot be used with 1^st class nouns, as they usually convey semantically animate elements.

Locative

The locative case features the endings -tsar in the singular and -notsar in the plural.

The semantic role of this case is marking the location, namely the place where an action is performed, or a state is in being.

ʔṓnali mā́so sṓgotsar ʔalolī́pɑt
The woman saw a mouse in the house

It thus marks primarily the static location, namely the motionless position.

wɑkitsar mḗʔisow
I am in the village; I am at the village

As a marker of places, this case cannot be used with 1^st class nouns, as they usually convey semantically animate elements.

The active-stative alignment

The case system of Kī́rtako language is based on a morphological alignment called agentive-stative type (also called in Piti philological studies the agentive-passive alignment). This kind of alignment is essential different from the nominative-accusative alignment, which is widespread among most European languages, and from the even rarer ergative-absolutive alignment.

In an agentive-stative alignment the choice of the case relies on the intrinsic ability of the subject to be an active agent in the sentence or not. Unlike the ergative-absolutive alignment, subjects of an intransitive verb can also be agentive subjects, if the action is performed with a certain degree of animacy or intentionality. This usually also depends on the semantic nature of the verb itself. Let’s see two examples:

• to jump: this verb is considered as grammatically intransitive, but the described action involves an activity and a will from the subject. Thus, the alignment selects the agentive case for such subjects.
• to fall: this verb is considered as grammatically intransitive, but the described action involves no active engagement or no active will from the subject. It is more regarded as an incidental event, even if it implies some kind of motion. Thus, the alignment selects the passive case for such subjects.

The system selects only the passive case for direct objects of transitive verbs. Potential confusion is avoided, as the agentive case and the passive case cannot be selected for two kinds of elements which may be in the same sentence.

The general usage rule for these cases is:

• Subject of a transitive verb: agentive case
• Active subject of an intransitive verb: agentive case
• Inactive subject of an intransitive verb: passive case
• Direct object of a transitive verb: passive case

Examples:

sopaliAGEN wī́roPASS ñamī́kɑt
the dog is biting the man
(sopali is the subject of the transitive verb ñamī́kɑme and is declined in the agentive case, while wī́ro is the object of the verb and it is declined in the passive case)

sopaliAGEN ʔimḗɣekɑt
the dog is running away
(sopali is the subject of the intransitive verb ʔimḗɣekɑme, for which it is an active subject. As such, it intentionally and actively performs the action, and it is declined in the agentive case)

sopaPASS kḗwon
the dog is sleeping
(sopa is the subject of the intransitive verb kḗwonɑme, for which it is an unactive subject. As such, it does not intentionally and actively perform the action, and it is declined in the passive case)

The rules of this system are interlaced with the class system. 2^nd class nouns cannot be declined in the agentive case at all. Sentences in which these elements might be transitive or active subject are usually differently arrange, as such nouns cannot be in the agentive case:

the storm spoiled the harvest → the harvest spoiled because of the storm
umatsṓta kumḗkhu ʔaʔosī́p

however, some natural entities can be perceived as animate, as having their own will, like sɑño, light, pike, water, ʔako, wind, and they may optionally be regarded as 1^st class nouns. In such cases these nouns can be active subjects of transitive verbs and be declined in the agentive case.

Verbs

Among all elements of a sentence, the verb conveys the most features. Indeed, this element conveys such features like person, number, tense, aspect, and mood, as well as its own semantic meaning.

At the semantic level, the verb carries a basic meaning, which conveys an action, a situation, a feeling, or a state.

gɑgokɑme
to bring

kḗwonɑme 
to sleep

mḗʔisɑme
to be placed

thā́gɑme
to know

Each verb is formed by a root form, called verbal root, to which affixes are added, both suffixes and prefixes. By means of these affixes, verbs are conjugated, according to the verbal conjugation.

Each verbal root has a counterpart, derived by the basic root through an introflexive process of vowel switching, conveying an aspectual change.

gagok- → gogak-
to bringIMPF → to bringPRF

In terms of analysis, these are deemed as separated roots with a different aspectual value, but the same basic semantic meaning. They are called imperfective root and perfective root. Monosyllabic roots, however, do not display any aspectual counterpart. Any distinction according to tense, mood, person, and number is made through affixal endings.

Verbal aspect

Kī́rtako verbs primarily display a basic feature: the verbal aspect. They make this distinction between two aspects, called imperfective aspect and perfective aspect, by means of two different verbal roots, carrying the same semantic meaning, the imperfective root, and the perfective root.

The verbal aspect essentially describes the extension degree over time of an action or a state.

• Imperfective aspect: it marks incomplete actions, namely the incompleteness of an action or a state. It is used to mark ongoing actions or states, repeated actions or states during an extended time, or a prolonged action or state in time. It is also used to express an action or a state in themselves, without any reference to their completeness degree.

gagok-: to bring. The imperfective root conveys the action of bringing or carrying while the action itself is ongoing. It may convey the action of repetitively bringing, focusing on the repetitiveness or it may simply describe the action of bringing, without any reference to it being completed or not.

• Perfective aspect: it marks complete actions, namely the completeness of an action or a state. It is used to mark a completed and finished action or state.

gogak-: to bring. The perfective root conveys the idea of the action of bringing from the beginning to the end of the action itself, focusing on its conclusion and completeness. The different roles of the verbal aspect may vary depending on the semantic meaning of the verbal root. An action can be indeed described during its development or after its conclusion and keep its original meaning, because the single action is limited in time.

hḗmɑ ʔagagokow
I was bringing some bread / I used to bring some bread / I brought some bread (repetitively)

hḗmɑ ʔagogakow
I brought some bread (I finished the action / the bread is/was in the place where I put it)

In these examples both roots keep the same meaning of “bringing”.

Oppositely, states, conditions, and feelings tend to describe a verbal feature which has an ongoing nature, with a lengthened duration in time. Both aspects convey the same semantic meaning, but also have different semantic nuances:

sopa ʔañowekow
I loved the dog / I used to love the dog (the described condition is long-lasting)

sopa ʔañewokow
I loved the dog (the described condition is now over)

In these examples both roots have the broader meaning of “loving”. The perfective root, however, conveys a slightly changed meaning of “stopping loving”, “no more loving”.

The verbal aspect is tightly bounded with tense, as some functions of the verbal aspect cannot be expressed in certain verbal tenses.

Tense

Kī́rtako verbs can also display another feature: the tense. They make this distinction through a prefix, ʔa-, which is added to both aspectual roots. This prefix sets the action or the state in a past time, in relation to the time of the conversation, creating thus two separated tenses, called present and past tense.

gagok- → ʔagagok-
to bringPRES → to bringPAST

The form not marked by the prefix is called present, although it may also convey actions or state always happening or in the future.

The tense is tightly bounded with the verbal aspect, as some functions of the verbal aspect cannot be expressed in certain verbal tenses.

The aspect-tense system

In the verbal system the feature of aspect is inseparably bounded with the feature of tense. They are fused in an interlaced aspect-tense system which is expressed by the verbal root and the temporal prefix. This system conveys different information regarding the action or the state, which are semantically expressed by the verb.

The aspect-tense system is as follows:

	Aspect
Tense	Imperfective present	Perfective present
	Imperfective past	Perfective past

For the sake of ease in analysis, such forms are usually called verbal tenses. The main information, conveyed by the various verbal tenses is given below.

Imperfective present

The imperfective present conveys primarily ongoing actions or states, during the same moment when speech occurs.

hḗmɑ hḗmonow
I am eating bread (in this moment, ongoing action)

It can also convey habitually recurring actions or states, which are repeated on an almost regular basis, including the same moment when speech occurs.

hḗmɑ jḗsɑti hḗmonow
I eat bread every day (recurring action, present moment included)

It can, moreover, convey general truths, actions or states which are repeated on an indefinite basis, or perpetually recurring.

rū́roki kitatsar ʔū́khasɑt 
the sun shines in the sky (general truth)

With a time-referring element, like a temporal adverb, this tense can also convey future actions or state, which are set after the moment when speech occurs, ongoing or recurring in that future moment.

hḗmɑ rosɑti hḗmonow
I will be eating bread tomorrow (in that moment, the action will be occurring)

hḗmɑ phuwɑkotsar jḗsɑti hḗmonow
Next year I am going to eat bread everyday (the action is going to be repeated in future time)

Perfective present

The perfective present conveys basically complete actions or states, which are completed at the same moment when speech occurs.

hḗmɑ homḗnow
I ate/have eaten bread (at this very moment, the action is completed)

An action is, however, not usually complete at the exact moment of the present, whereas it tends to be completed in the present or in the future. Thus, this tense usually conveys actions or state that will be completed or finished in a future time after the moment when speech occurs.

hḗmɑ homḗnow
I am going to eat bread (the action is going to be completed)

Usage of inherent time-referring elements is therefore optional.

hḗmɑ phusɑti homḗnow
I am going to eat bread tomorrow (the action is going to be completed)

As the inherent reference to future time is prevailing, and despite its name of perfective “present”, usage of time-referring elements is compulsory to convey the meaning of completeness at the same moment when speech occurs.

Imperfective past

The imperfective past conveys primarily actions or states, which are set before the moment when speech occurs, ongoing or recurring in that past moment.

hḗmɑ ʔaɣḗmonow
I was eating bread (in that moment, the action was occurring)

It can also convey habitually recurring actions or states, which are repeated on an almost regular basis, but only in the past and excluding the moment when speech occurs.

hḗmɑ jḗsɑti ʔaɣḗmonow
I used to eat bread every day (the action was repeated in past time)

Perfective past

The perfective present conveys basically complete actions or states, which are completed before the moment when speech occurs.

hḗmɑ ʔaɣomḗnow
I ate bread (the action is or was completed)

Mood

Kī́rtako verbs display an additional feature: the mood, namely the way or the manner an action is performed, or a state is in being. They make this distinction through a certain number of suffixes, which are added to both aspectual roots. These suffixes create three separated moods, called indicative, subjunctive and conditional mood.

Each mood can display every possible aspectual and temporal form of the root. Usage of such forms, however, is not necessarily the same in each mood. The different usage and information conveyed by the moods are described below.

Indicative

The indicative is the main mood of Kī́rtako verbal system. It features the zero suffix ending (shown with -Ø), or, it can be said that it does not feature any suffix.

It primarily conveys a meaning of statement and certainty, regarding the referred information. At a syntactical level, it is used mostly in main clauses, as the basic form of information transfer. The usage of the verbal tenses is the same as explained in the specific section.

sṓgoɣɑ ʔimḗɣow
I am going home (imperfective present)

owtušu ʔḗtsɑ phusɑti khṓwerow
I will be listening to you voice tomorrow (imperfective present - future usage)

ʔaki thā́tsono homḗnɑt
he’s going to eat two eggs (perfective present - future usage)

khatowī́tili pā́ktā́ ʔakhatowɑt
the tailor was sewing the dress (imperfective past)

wɑkiɣɑ ʔakogiwekow
I came to the village (perfective past)

The indicative mood may also be found in sentences which do not express any certainty. In such a case, this kind of information is conveyed by other elements in the sentence.

Subjunctive

The subjunctive mood features the suffix -iñ-. It has three main functions.

It conveys, primarily, a meaning of hope and wish, usually from the speaker, regarding the referred information. The usage of the verbal tenses is the same as explained in the specific section.

sṓgoɣɑ ʔimḗɣiñow
I wish I am going home (imperfective present)

owtušu ʔḗtsɑ phusɑti khṓweriñow
if I only be listening to your voice tomorrow (imperfective present - future usage)

ʔaki thā́tsono homḗniñɑt
I wish he eats two eggs (perfective present - future usage)

khatowī́tili pā́ktā́ ʔakhatowiñɑt
I wished the tailor were sewing the dress (imperfective past)

wɑkiɣɑ ʔakogiwekiñow
if only I had come to the village (perfective past)

It also conveys a meaning of exhortation, regarding the referred information. In this meaning it is seldomly used in the past tenses. It usually expresses an exhortation only in the present and in the future.

sṓgoɣɑ ʔimḗɣiñow
I better be going home (imperfective present)

owtušu ʔḗtsɑ phusɑti khṓweriñow
I’ll better be listening to your voice tomorrow (imperfective present - future usage)

ʔaki thā́tsono homḗniñɑt
let him eat two eggs (perfective present - future usage)

Such usages, in the allowed tenses, can be semantically overlapped, as an exhortation can be interpreted as a kind of wish from the speaker for the action to be performed or the state to be in being. The context will usually clarify the function of the subjunctive forms in a sentence.

As an exhortative form, the subjunctive is used to express the imperative form, which does not exist in Kī́rtako as an independent form. Such usage is specified in another chapter below.

Moreover, the subjunctive is mostly used dependent clauses. It is widely used as a subordinating form in such clauses. In this case it is usually used without the other modal meanings, and it simply replaces the indicative form, without inferring any other additional modal meaning.

sṓgoɣɑ ʔimḗɣow → tsɑgewow hī́ɑt sṓgoɣɑ ʔimḗɣiñow
I am going home → I say I am going home (imperfective present)

Conditional

The conditional mood features the suffix -ɑts-. It has several functions. It conveys, primarily, a meaning of desire and wish, usually from the speaker, regarding the referred information. The usage of the verbal tenses is the same as explained in the specific section.

sṓgoɣɑ ʔimḗɣɑtsow
I’d like to be going home (imperfective present)

owtušu ʔḗtsɑ phusɑti khṓwerɑtsow
I’d like to hear (repeatedly) your voice tomorrow (imperfective present - future usage)

ʔaki thā́tsono homḗnɑtsɑt
I’d like to eat two eggs (perfective present - future usage)

khatowī́tili pā́ktā́ ʔakhatowɑtsɑt
I wanted the tailor to be sewing the dress (imperfective past)

wɑkiɣɑ ʔakogiwekɑtsow
I did like to come to the village (perfective past)

It also conveys a meaning of will, regarding the referred information, usually from the subject of the sentence. The usage of the verbal tenses is the same as explained in the specific section.

sṓgoɣɑ ʔimḗɣɑtsow
I want to be going home (right now) (imperfective present)

owtušu ʔḗtsɑ phusɑti khṓwerɑtsow
I want to hear (repeatedly) your voice tomorrow (imperfective present - future usage)

ʔaki thā́tsono homḗnɑtsɑt
he wants to eat two eggs (perfective present - future usage)

khatowī́tili pā́ktā́ ʔakhatowɑtsɑt
the tailor wanted to be sewing the dress (imperfective past)

wɑkiɣɑ ʔakogiwekɑtsow
I would have come to the village (perfective past)

Moreover, it conveys a meaning of potentiality, usually deemed as inherent in the action or the state themselves, regarding the referred information. The usage of the verbal tenses is the same as explained in the specific section.

sṓgoɣɑ ʔimḗɣɑtsow
I may be going home (right now) (imperfective present)

owtušu ʔḗtsɑ phusɑti khṓwerɑtsow
I may be hearing your voice tomorrow (imperfective present - future usage)

ʔahno hašī́kɑtsɑt
it might rain (perfective present - future usage)

ʔaki thā́tsono homḗnɑtsɑt
I may eat two eggs (perfective present - future usage)

khatowī́tili pā́ktā́ ʔakhatowɑtsɑt
the tailor might have been sewing the dress (imperfective past)

ʔatsḗthū́sɑtsɑt
it might have snowed (perfective past)

wɑkiɣɑ ʔakogiwekɑtsow
I might have come to the village (perfective past)

It can also convey a meaning of possibility, usually from the subject of the sentence, regarding the referred information. The usage of the verbal tenses is the same as explained in the specific section.

sṓgoɣɑ ʔimḗɣɑtsow
I could be going home (imperfective present)

owtušu ʔḗtsɑ phusɑti khṓwerɑtsow
I could be hearing your voice tomorrow (imperfective present - future usage)

ʔaki thā́tsono homḗnɑtsɑt
I could eat two eggs (perfective present - future usage)

khatowī́tili pā́ktā́ ʔakhatowɑtsɑt
the tailor could have been sewing the dress (imperfective past)

wɑkiɣɑ ʔakogiwekɑtsow
I could have come to the village (perfective past)

Such usages can be semantically overlapped, as a will can be interpreted as a kind of desire from the speaker for the action to be performed or the state to be in being. Furthermore, a possibility may be interpreted as a form of potentiality, from the subject or inherent in the action or the state. The context will usually clarify the function of the conditional forms in a sentence.

As said above, the conditional can convey a potentiality or a possibility, usually referring to a future moment in relation to the moment, we are speaking about. Thus, these forms can be used, even without any time-referring element, to express actions or states set in a future moment in relation to a past period, in both aspects.

khatowī́tili pā́ktā́ ʔakhatowɑtsɑt
the tailor would have been sewing the dress (but it wasn’t happening)

wɑkiɣɑ ʔakogiwekɑtsow
I would come to the village (but it didn’t happen)

This usage is known as “future in the past”.

Modal verbs

Some verbs can be used to conveys modal meanings, combined with other verbal forms. Such verbs are usually called modal verbs.

Modal verbs are:

• ʔī́sɑme: do not (negative verb)
• gṓtsekɑme: to be allowed to (can, may)
• phɑgesɑme: to be able to (can)
• goʔī́kɑme: to want to
• kokisɑme: to be compelled to (have to)

Other modal features are directly conveyed by the verbal roots, through the verbal moods. These features, as already explained above, are:

• Possibility, potentiality, will, desire: conditional mood
• Wish, hope: subjunctive mood

The different usage and information conveyed by the modal verbs are described below.

In the following description the adverb jṓr, necessarily, is included, as it has a modal meaning and usage. On the contrary, the negative verb ʔī́sɑme is not included, as its role and usage are extensively explained in the morphological section.

gṓtsekɑme

This verb conveys the modal meaning that the subject of the sentence is generically allowed to perform the action or to be in a certain state. Who gives permission is not relevant for the purpose of the verbal information.

Therefore, this verb conveys one of the meanings of the modal verb to can or to may.

sṓgoɣɑ ʔimḗɣiñɑme gṓtsekow
I can go home (I am allowed to go home)

The verbal form specified by the modal verb is conjugated in the nominal form called subjunctive infinitive. This form, deemed as a nominal form introduced by the modal verb, plays a similar role to that of the direct object of the sentence, but, unlike a nominal direct object, it is placed just before the modal verb.

phū́kali sṓgoɣɑ ʔimḗɣiñɑme gṓtsekɑt
the person can go home

Thus, the possible direct object of this infinitival form is deemed as a belonging to such form, and it is declined in the ablative case.

ʔṓnali hḗmɑšu hḗmoniñɑme gṓtsekɑt
the woman can eat bread

As can be seen, both 3^rd person endings can be added to the modal verb, depending on the animacy degree of the verb.

When negated, the modal verb is placed just before the negative verb.

ʔṓnali hḗmɑšu hḗmoniñɑme gṓtsekɑme ʔī́sɑt
the woman cannot eat bread

phɑgesɑme

This verb conveys the modal meaning that the subject of the sentence is generically able to perform the action or to be in a certain state. This ability may be either temporary or permanent.

Therefore, this verb conveys two of the meanings of the modal verb to can or of the modal expression to be able to.

sṓgoɣɑ ʔimḗɣiñɑme phɑgesow
I can go home (I am able now)

khatowī́tili khatowiñɑme phɑgesɑt
the tailor can sew (he learnt it, he has a permanent ability)

Such usages can be semantically overlapped, and, as in English, there is no clear distinction between a temporary or a permanent ability within the modal usage of this verb. The context will usually clarify the role of the modal verb.

The verbal form specified by the modal verb is conjugated in the nominal form called subjunctive infinitive. This form, deemed as a nominal form introduced by the modal verb, plays a similar role to that of the direct object of the sentence, but, unlike a nominal direct object, it is placed just before the modal verb.

phū́kali sṓgoɣɑ ʔimḗɣiñɑme phɑgesɑt
the person can go home

Thus, the possible direct object of this infinitival form is deemed as a belonging to such form, and it is declined in the ablative case.

ʔṓnali hḗmɑšu hḗmoniñɑme phɑgesɑt
the woman can eat bread

As can be seen, both 3^rd person endings can be added to the modal verb, depending on the animacy degree of the verb.

When negated, the modal verb is placed just before the negative verb.

ʔṓnali hḗmɑšu hḗmoniñɑme phɑgesɑme ʔī́sɑt
the woman cannot eat bread

goʔī́kɑme

This verb conveys the modal meaning that the subject of the sentence is generically willing to perform the action or to be in a certain state.

Therefore, this verb conveys one of the meanings of the modal verb to want.

sṓgoɣɑ ʔimḗɣiñɑme goʔī́kow
I want to go home (My will is to go home)

The verbal form specified by the modal verb is conjugated in the nominal form called subjunctive infinitive. This form, deemed as a nominal form introduced by the modal verb, plays a similar role to that of the direct object of the sentence, but, unlike a nominal direct object, it is placed just before the modal verb.

phū́kali sṓgoɣɑ ʔimḗɣiñɑme goʔī́kɑt
the person wants to go home

Thus, the possible direct object of this infinitival form is deemed as a belonging to such form, and it is declined in the ablative case.

ʔṓnali hḗmɑšu hḗmoniñɑme goʔī́kɑt
the woman wants eat bread

As can be seen, both 3^rd person endings can be added to the modal verb, depending on the animacy degree of the verb.

When negated, the modal verb is placed just before the negative verb.

ʔṓnali hḗmɑšu hḗmoniñɑme goʔī́kɑme ʔī́sɑt
the woman does not want to eat bread

This verb is deemed as modal, as it tends to add a modal value to other verbs. For this reason, it does not usually convey the direct wish for something, and it is not usually used with a direct object without another verbal form. This meaning is normally expressed by the verb guʔā́šɑme.

hḗmɑ guʔā́šow
I want bread

Nevertheless, it is sometimes possible to use the modal verb goʔī́kɑme as a normal transitive verb.

hḗmɑ goʔī́kow
I want bread

In such case, this usage is allowed as a second verbal form is semantically implied. It is noteworthy that, as the infinitival form is dropped, the direct object of the sentence is declined in the proper case, according to its role.

hḗmɑ(šu hḗmoniñɑme) goʔī́kow
I want (to eat) bread

kokisɑme

This verb conveys the modal meaning that the subject of the sentence is generically compelled to perform the action or to be in a certain state. The source of this obligation is not relevant for the purpose of the verbal information, but obligation is usually meant as independent from the will of the subject.

Therefore, this verb conveys one of the meanings of the modal verbs to must or to have to.

sṓgoɣɑ ʔimḗɣiñɑme kokisow
I have to go home (I am obliged to go)

Sentence construction is typically altered by this verb, as it tends to be used in the passive construct, especially in the classic period.

sṓgoɣɑ phū́kali ʔimḗɣiñɑme kokis
the person has to go home

Such usage of the passive construct for this verb, however, tends to die out in the later period, and sentences to be built with the normal syntactical construction, as required by the meaning of the sentences.

phū́kali sṓgoɣɑ ʔimḗɣiñɑme kokisɑt
the person has to go home

The verbal form specified by the modal verb is conjugated in the nominal form called subjunctive infinitive. This form, deemed as a nominal form introduced by the modal verb, plays a similar role to that of the direct object of the sentence, but, unlike a nominal direct object, it is placed just before the modal verb.

sṓgoɣɑ phū́kali ʔimḗɣiñɑme kokis
the person has to go home

Thus, the possible direct object of this infinitival form is deemed as a belonging to such form, and it is declined in the ablative case.

hḗmɑšu ʔṓnali hḗmoniñɑme kokis
the woman has to eat bread

As can be seen, both 3^rd person endings can be added to the modal verb, depending on the animacy degree of the verb.

When negated, the modal verb is placed just before the negative verb.

hḗmɑšu ʔṓnali hḗmoniñɑme kokisɑme ʔī́sɑt
the woman must not eat bread

The negative form of this verb usually conveys the obligation to not perform the action or to be in a certain state.

jṓr

This adverb conveys the modal meaning that the subject of the sentence generically needs to perform the action or to be in a certain state. This necessity is usually meant as the subject’s own one. Therefore, this verb conveys one of the meanings of the modal verbs to must or to need.

sṓgoɣɑ jṓr ʔimḗɣow
I must go home (I need to go)

This adverb is placed inside of a sentence without altering the order of the other elements. Therefore, a direct object is declined in the passive case, as for its role in the sentence, and the main verb is conjugated according to tense and mood required by the syntax of the sentence.

ʔṓnali hḗmɑ jṓr hḗmonɑt
the woman must eat bread

Likewise, the adverb does not alter the syntax of a negative sentence, being placed before the verbal cluster.

ʔṓnali hḗmɑšu jṓr hḗmonɑme ʔī́sɑt
the woman does not need to eat bread

The negative form of this adverb usually conveys the lack of need to perform the action or to be in a certain state.

Passive construct

Kī́rtako verbs do not display any morphological passive voice, either simple or compound. It is however possible to use a syntactical construction with a passive meaning, by modifying the word order from SOV to OSV. When placed in the first position, the direct object is somehow highlighted. Cases are unaltered and the agent of the sentence is still marked by the agentive case.

wī́roli ʔṓna lī́lopɑt → ʔṓna wī́roli lī́lop
the man sees the woman → the woman is seen by the man

As can be seen, the 3^rd person of the verb is systematically chosen in the short form.

When a sentence lacks an agent, the verb is usually conjugated in the 3^rd person plural short form:

wī́ro lī́lopon
they see the man → the man is seen

Reflexive construct

Kī́rtako verbs do not display any morphological passive voice or any reflexive pronouns. Verbs, which have a reflexive meaning in other languages, have different verbal root and are deemed as different verbs.

kā́kuʔɑme - gṓɣapɑme
to bend (something) - to bend (oneself)

With some verbs, however, it is possible to use to use a syntactical construction with a reflexive meaning, namely when the action is actively performed by the subject, but its result affects the subject itself. It is called reflexive construct.

In this construct, the personal pronoun, agreeing in number and person in the required case, is preceded by the adjective meʔɑ, same.

meʔɑ jo mī́woñow, meʔɑ nɑ mī́woñer... meʔɑno jono mī́woñonow...
I wash myself, you wash yourself… we wash ourselves…

In most cases personal pronouns in the passive case are used, as the pronoun is regarded as the direct object of the action of the verb; the adjective meʔɑ is declined in agreement. This construct can be used only with transitive verbs.

In the later period, in the western texts, the adjective meʔɑ can be placed after the pronominal forms.

Imperative

Kī́rtako lacks proper imperative forms. As the subjunctive mood can convey an exhortative meaning, the 2^nd person forms are used in an imperative role, in both aspects according to the aspectual nature of the action or the state.

ʔḗmiɣiñer
go!

In the negative form is primarily found, however, the imperfective aspect:

tumawiñɑme ʔī́siñer
do not drink! (both once and never)

Verb “to have”

Possession and belonging are conveyed by two different verbs, hḗʔī́ɣɑme e totirɑme. Both verbs play the role of the English verb to have. The difference in the role of the two verbal forms is essentially like the same difference in usage between the genitive case and the ablative case.

The verb totirɑme conveys an intentional possession from the possessor.

phū́kali sṓgo totirɑt
the person has (owns) a house

This kind of possession is meant as fundamentally limited in time, non-intrinsic and consciously performed by the possessor.

kojā́hukha totirow
I have a stylus

As it conveys an intentional possession, this verb is regarded as transitive: the owner is expressed in the agentive case, as an agent with a will of its own, and the owned is expressed in the passive case, as it is the direct object of the verb.

šupā́tɑliAGEN tirṓsiPASS totirɑt
the king has a palace

As a transitive verb, this verb can be used only with 1st class nouns as their subject. The verb hḗʔī́ɣɑme conveys, conversely, an unintentional possession from the possessor or the intrinsic belonging to the possessor.

phū́ka ʔaki lilā́nošu hḗʔī̀ 
a person has two hands

This kind of possession is meant as fundamentally unlimited in time, intrinsic and unconsciously performed by the possessor.

ʔḗmašu hḗʔī̀ɣow
I have a head

As it conveys an unintentional possession or a belonging, this verb is regarded as intransitive: the owner is expressed in the passive case and the owned is expressed in the ablative case, as it is deemed as a belonging to the subject. In the 3^rd person the verb usually selects the short forms.

šupā́tɑPASS ʔaki rakonošuABL hḗʔī̀
the king has two eyes

As a transitive verb, this verb can be used only with nouns of both classes as their subject. In the texts of the later period, however, this verb tends to be regarded as a transitive one, with the owner in the agentive case and the owned in the passive case, while it still selects the 3^rd person short forms.

phū́kali ʔaki lilā́no hḗʔī̀ 
a person has two hands

In such cases, also 2^nd class nouns can be declined in the agentive case. This phenomenon can be considered as part of the general confusion in case usage in the later period.

Interrogative clauses

Interrogative clauses, namely simple questions, do not display any specific feature regarding their word order. Interrogative pronouns are placed in their logical position inside the clause, and they are not moved at the beginning of the sentence:

wī́roli šɑ lī́lopɑt?
what is the man seeing?

Interrogative pronouns may be optionally fronted, but this position is deemed as strongly marked or a way to express the passive construct:

šɑ wī́roli lī́lopɑt?
the man is seeing what? / what is being seen by the man?

Clauses without any interrogative pronoun (also called “yes-no questions”) feature the interrogative particle om, which usually marks the verbal form, by being placed right before it.

wī́roli ʔṓna om lī́lopɑt?
is the man seeing the woman?

However, the particle om can be placed before any element of the clause to specify its role as the main element of the question:

wī́roli om ʔṓna lī́lopɑt?
is the woman, who is being seen by the man?

If there is a modal verb at the end of the clause, om is placed before that, after the infinitival form of the main verb:

wī́roli ʔṓna lī́lopɑme om ʔī́sɑt?
isn’t the man seeing the woman?