SBäk e Dlor

A forum for all topics related to constructed languages
User avatar
Omzinesý
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4192
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 08:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: SBäk e Dlor

Post by Omzinesý »

I decide that verb pairs like

find - look for
see - look/watch
hear - listen

will be expressed with Antipassive.

Tlee bek ka.
'I'm looking for you.'

Tlee bék ka.
'I found you.'


I also decided that 'acorn' will be lâm e krom 'egg of tree'.
My meta-thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5760
User avatar
Omzinesý
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4192
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 08:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: SBäk e Dlor

Post by Omzinesý »

Omzinesý wrote: 04 Mar 2023 19:50 Verb morphology

This post will not be the final or complete description.

Dnor morphology is extremely simple. The root is CV(C) and all but one prefixes are CV-. The Middle voice prefix is just s-. Compounding does not happen and all verbs have thus just one root.

The verb template is

-4/-3 Middle voice /Applicative (Their order can vary, so they can both appear in the same slots.)
-2 Instrumental causative
-1 Associated motion
0 The root

I think I have to reconsider the order of the prefixes. Now that I have both stressed "verby" field prefixes and unstressed "nouny" field prefixes (earlier caller instrumental prefixes), I have to decide if both appear in the same slot, which should be the first one to be able to be unstressed, or in tow distinct slots.


I also decided that nel will be 'to like', and its middle voice form snel will be 'to want', i.e. to 'to like as your own'.
My meta-thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5760
User avatar
Omzinesý
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4192
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 08:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: SBäk e Dlor

Post by Omzinesý »

I should go to motion verbs.
Something preliminary:

Dlor motion verbs code very much.

Applicative prepositions do not affect them. They are used like applicatives are used with any verb.

Associated motion prefixes behave differently with motion verbs.
While jo- usually means 'to came and V', with motion verbs, it means 'to come V-ing'. Most motion verbs do not code goal without it.

Field prefixes express manner of motion. ba-V 'to verb with a vehicle'.
My meta-thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5760
User avatar
Omzinesý
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4192
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 08:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: SBäk e Dlor

Post by Omzinesý »

I got stuck with word 'jump' in Cat and fish story.
Most of verb derivation is based on body parts in Dlor. It could well be something like 'leg-jump' but the root would still be the same.
'Leg-fly' maybe?
My meta-thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5760
User avatar
Omzinesý
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4192
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 08:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: SBäk e Dlor

Post by Omzinesý »

How to derives verbs 'to be hungry' from 'to eat'? 'to mind-eat' maybe?
My meta-thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5760
User avatar
thethief3
sinic
sinic
Posts: 263
Joined: 15 Dec 2019 10:39

Re: SBäk e Dlor

Post by thethief3 »

Omzinesý wrote: 26 Feb 2024 20:16 How to derives verbs 'to be hungry' from 'to eat'? 'to mind-eat' maybe?
want+eat seems good
User avatar
Omzinesý
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4192
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 08:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: SBäk e Dlor

Post by Omzinesý »

thethief3 wrote: 27 Feb 2024 03:01
Omzinesý wrote: 26 Feb 2024 20:16 How to derives verbs 'to be hungry' from 'to eat'? 'to mind-eat' maybe?
want+eat seems good
'want to eat' is a bit different. And verbs (or basically anything) cannot be compounded in Dlor.
My meta-thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5760
User avatar
Omzinesý
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4192
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 08:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: SBäk e Dlor

Post by Omzinesý »

I started translating the Machiavelli quote (''Men desire novelty to such an extent that those who are doing well wish for change as much as those who are doing badly.') and found that I have no way to say 'novelty'. Ra jén 'COMPL is.new' would translate 'Men desire that they are new'.
My meta-thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5760
User avatar
Omzinesý
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4192
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 08:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: SBäk e Dlor

Post by Omzinesý »

Motion verbs

Kâj 'to go' (on the ground)
Sab 'to fly'
Bées 'to swim'
Mût 'to go fast'
Bïr 'to go slowly'
Nub 'to follow'

The typical lexical prefixes that can be attached to them are:
ba- 'by a vehicle'
tlu- 'by foot'

Directional prefixes are also often attached to them. Without them, they mean 'to go about', 'to swim about' ...
Jo- 'to arrive'
Be- 'to leave'

Tlee jo-ba-nub lu s-lûrud.
SG1 ARRIVE-VEHICLE-move.fast at DEF-towm.
'I drove to the town fast.'
Edit: I'm stillthinking if the directional prefixes should have varians coding if you arrive to the deictic center or somewhere else.
My meta-thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5760
User avatar
Omzinesý
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4192
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 08:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: SBäk e Dlor

Post by Omzinesý »

Omzinesý wrote: 04 Mar 2024 12:49 I started translating the Machiavelli quote (''Men desire novelty to such an extent that those who are doing well wish for change as much as those who are doing badly.') and found that I have no way to say 'novelty'. Ra jén 'COMPL is.new' would translate 'Men desire that they are new'.
I decided that ra is the normal complementizer and sra is a kind of nominalizer. Clause-externally sra behaves like a noun. It can take prepositions and follow the verb. Ra cannot do that. A subordinate clause starting with ra has the same subject as the head clause unless another subject NP is present. The subject of sra can be generic, thus sra jén can be translated 'novelty'.

Etymologically s- is the third person personal / demonstrative pronoun.
My meta-thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5760
User avatar
Omzinesý
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4192
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 08:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: SBäk e Dlor

Post by Omzinesý »

ATM my LaTex document of Dlor grammar has 33 subordinate conjunctions. One dimension is role: complement/relative, adverbial, some kind of contrast. The second one is tense: simultaneous, anterior, posterior. The third one is mood: factual, non-factual, counterfactual.

A natural system is not that symmetric. I should probably drop some of them and make some of them compositional.
My meta-thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5760
User avatar
Omzinesý
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4192
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 08:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: SBäk e Dlor

Post by Omzinesý »

Omzinesý wrote: 15 Feb 2024 10:07
Omzinesý wrote: 04 Mar 2023 19:50 Verb morphology

This post will not be the final or complete description.

Dnor morphology is extremely simple. The root is CV(C) and all but one prefixes are CV-. The Middle voice prefix is just s-. Compounding does not happen and all verbs have thus just one root.

The verb template is

-4/-3 Middle voice /Applicative (Their order can vary, so they can both appear in the same slots.)
-2 Instrumental causative
-1 Associated motion
0 The root

I think I have to reconsider the order of the prefixes. Now that I have both stressed "verby" field prefixes and unstressed "nouny" field prefixes (earlier caller instrumental prefixes), I have to decide if both appear in the same slot, which should be the first one to be able to be unstressed, or in tow distinct slots.
It must be horrible to try to follow my messy thread.

So verbs have three syllabic prefixes (and the non-syllabic middle voice prefix).
- lexical prefix
- applicative/nominalizer
- directional prefix

Lexical prefixes and applicatives can be added to nominal stems to derive verbs too. (Technically, they could be homonymic prefixes.)



Stress lies on the first syllable that can have it.

Because the lexical prefix (usually deriving from a body part) is the only one that can and cannot have a stress (with a semantic distinction), it should be the first prefix.

I think the morphemic order can well be
-3 lexical prefixe (body part)
-2 directional
-1 applicative
0 root

If an applicative prefix is used as a derivational prefix (deriving verbs from nouns) a new applicative cannot be added.
If a lexical prefix is used as a derivational prefix (deriving verbs from nouns) a new lexical prefix can be added. The derivational prefix precedes the other prefixes.

Bo-ku-ses
HAND-MOUTH-bread
'to eat bread with hands'

Ku derives a verb from the noun 'to eat N'. Only bo is a real lexical instrumental prefix here.
My meta-thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5760
Visions1
greek
greek
Posts: 691
Joined: 27 Jul 2021 08:05

Re: SBäk e Dlor

Post by Visions1 »

Maybe reorganize what you have and compile it into a PDF? That would make for not only organization, but the beginnings of a proper ref. grammar.
User avatar
Omzinesý
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4192
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 08:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: SBäk e Dlor

Post by Omzinesý »

Visions1 wrote: 09 Apr 2024 05:57 Maybe reorganize what you have and compile it into a PDF? That would make for not only organization, but the beginnings of a proper ref. grammar.
I do have one but, you know, you don't write it from the beginning to the end. There are many holes too. It's far from publishable.
My meta-thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5760
Visions1
greek
greek
Posts: 691
Joined: 27 Jul 2021 08:05

Re: SBäk e Dlor

Post by Visions1 »

It doesn't need to publishable - is anything we make here? So long as it doesn't dampen you from posting and explaining this to us on the forum, it might be able to help.
User avatar
Omzinesý
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4192
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 08:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: SBäk e Dlor

Post by Omzinesý »

Maybe Dlor does not need a distinct prefix for body parts as instruments and objects.

If the object is the subject's own body part, adding a middlevoice marker is enough.
But if it is the object's body part?
My meta-thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5760
User avatar
Omzinesý
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4192
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 08:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: SBäk e Dlor

Post by Omzinesý »

sek 'to be dead'

ssek 'to die' (middle voice makes statives inchoatives)

bosek 'to kill with hands' (an instrumental prefix adds a causative meaning to an (unaccusative) intransitive verb)

bossek 'one's hand becomes paralyzed' (adding an instrumental prefix to a middle voice form expresses the body part that undergoes the change of state)

sbosek 'to kill oneself with hands', 'to get killed with hands'


nëer 'to bake, to massage'
böneer 'to bake/massage with hands'
snëer 'to get baked/massaged'
mösneer 'one's body/back gets massaged'

In principle, mösneer cannot be transitivized, but adding an adjunct agent does not differ much from the normal transitive construction.
Mösneer na tlee. 'I'm massaging his/her body/back.'
My meta-thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5760
User avatar
Omzinesý
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4192
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 08:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: SBäk e Dlor

Post by Omzinesý »

Maybe I could solve the problem of relative clauses with absolute constructions. Everything can be a relative clause.
Edit: At least "although" could be an absolute construction.
"I'll go to the dance cource despite of my mother who doesn't like it."
My meta-thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5760
User avatar
Omzinesý
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4192
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 08:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: SBäk e Dlor

Post by Omzinesý »

This idea of mine could suit Dlor too.
Omzinesý wrote: 21 May 2024 23:08 Compounding
Any two nouminal roots can be compounded. The first one is the modifying root and the second one is the head. The first root loses its coda, and there might be some simplification of the vowel too, some vowel harmony(?). Compounds are thus so reduced that they are usually quite lexicalized semantically.
Dlor is right-branching (head root - modifying root) but it could actually be the head root that gets reduced.

These very reduced heads of compounds remind me of Finnish and Swedis suffix -is that shortens compounds.

Swedis
dag-hem -> dag-is
day-home -> day-IS
'kindergarten'

Lexical roots have pitch registers. Dlor words have just one such syllable per word. Maybe I need to return thinking about coalesce of pitch registers. The last discussion on the topic: https://cbbforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=327128#p327128

I think Dlor verbs are super interesting but its nouns have been quite boring. This might be the idea that makes them work.
My meta-thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5760
User avatar
Omzinesý
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4192
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 08:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: SBäk e Dlor

Post by Omzinesý »

I developed complex rules for tone mergers in compounds. I think I'll simplify them.

The new rules:
1) If both roots have the same tone, that tone appears on the compound word.
2) If one of the roots has the neutral tone, the other tone appears on the compound.
3) If both roots have a marked tone (high, creaky, breathy), the tone of the second root (the modifier) will appear on the compound and the other one is omitted.
My meta-thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5760
Post Reply