Summary
Language heavily peeled down.
- Lexical binary animacy ~ active-stative language.
- Strict OVS order.
- Adjectives are verbs.
- No cases but verbs that function similarly.
- No articles.
- No proper copula.
- No number except a collective suffix.
- Three-way "temporodeixis" encoding both temporal and spatial deixis in one (neutral, proximal and distal). Pronouns only make the distinction in third person
and there only proximal vs. distal is contrasted; lack of pronoun is taken to be neutral. - Person is not obligatory but can be expressed enclitically or with full pronouns for emphasis.
- Morphological distinction (marked on verb) between transitive/intransitive, relative/non-relative, telic/atelic and volitional/non-volitional.
- Possessive marker on possessum. Possessor unmarked.
- Light noun-incorporation with special forms for some incorporated nouns?
- Some nouns like 'hand' are inalienable and always marked possessive when not incorporated.
- Flexible interrogative and negative markers — the latter can even form negative pronouns.
Examples
Strict OVS and explicit transitivity means word order changes for passives
{apple throw-TR man}
'the man threw an apple'
{throw-TR man}
'the man threw it'
{man throw-TR}
"(someone) threw the man"
= 'the man was thrown'
Subject pronouns can only be phrase-final enclitics or full pronouns for emphasis
{throw-TR=INT=2}
'did you throw it?'
{throw-TR=INT 2}
'did you throw it?'
Note that as the language is pro-drop, context can suffice and any pronoun can be dropped:
{throw-TR=INT}
'did (you*) throw it?'
* Or someone else, depending on context.
Lack of case and conjunctions introduce "case-like verbs" used by chaining phrases together with nothing in between
The strict OVS order disambiguates object from subject.
{apple throw-TR man} (and*) {sea face(-TR**)}
"the man threw an apple facing the sea"
= 'the man threw an apple into the sea'
* There is no word here, but just to make the gloss clearer.
** Not sure if these words should take the transitive marker.
There will be at least locative "occupy", lative "face", instrumental "use" and elative opposite of "face".
Possession marked on possessum. Possessor follows unmarked. Enclitic pronouns may be used
{apple-POSS man}
'the man's apple'
{apple-POSS=1}
'my apple'
{apple-POSS 1}
'my apple'
Lack of copula means these may also mean 'it is my apple', 'I have an apple' and the like.
Relativisation using a suffix
{{apple throw-TR-REL} man}
'the man who threw an apple'
{apple-POSS {throw-TR-REL man}}
"the apple of the man who threw it"
= 'the apple that was thrown by the man'
Negative pronouns:
{NEG=1}
'it wasn't me'
Generally happily derivational language with a bunch of suffixes, some with particular meanings in certain contexts
{throw-POT man}
'the man can throw'
'the man is good at throwing'
Throw in itself is actually the causative of 'fly', so the true gloss of the previous sentences would actually be this:
{apple fly-CAUS-TR man}
"the man made the apple fly (through the air)"
= 'the man threw the apple'
The relative suffix doubles as an agent marker:
{throw-REL}
= "it is the one who throws"
'thrower*'
* Perhaps 'pitcher' in a baseball game?
Volition marked
There is a suffix to mark non-volition (unmarked verbs are volitional by default). Thus we can make the throwing accidental:
{apple throw-TR-NVL* man}
'the man dropped the apple (by accident)'
* Might make these morphemes come in the opposite order. Not sure yet.
No number except a collective suffix
{water/sea}
'the sea*'
* Also a given name.
{water/sea-COLL}
'the waters*'
* A placename.
Lexical animacy
Nouns are inherently animate or inanimate. Apple is inanimate. Man is animate. Inanimates can never be subjects of transitive verbs. Thus word order becomes freer for inanimates:
{apple eat-TR} and {eat-TR apple} both mean '(someone) ate an apple' or 'an apple was eaten'.
This does not work for animates, where word order is strict.
Adjectives as verbs
Adjectives are intransitive verbs.
{red-NTR apple}
'the apple is red'
{red-NTR man}
'the man is red'
No difference between animates or inanimates here as you can see. Relativisation may also be used:
{red-NTR-REL apple}
'the red apple'
'the apple which is red'
Telicity also marked morphologically
{apple eat-TR-ATL}
'was eating the apple'
{apple eat-TR-TL}
'ate the apple'
AND MORE STUFF PROBABLY BUT YES.