III. Adjective rules
Adjectives are attached to the nouns/pronouns they modify. (Don't ask me about noun-phrases just yet...)
All adjectives conveniently end in -fai. Note that -fai is NOT a particle marker in the sense that I've defined a "particle marker" so far; rather, it's just a unique characteristic of adjectives that they all end with this sound.
-fai CAN be used *like* a particle marker, however, to turn nouns (or pronouns, or even verbs and adverbs) into adjectives. Adding that ending is quite like adding -ish or -ful or -ly to a noun in English to transform it into an adjective.
IV. Adverb rules
Adverbs attach to the verb being modified. They also have a unqiue ending, -kyþ. Adjectives etc. can be made into adverbs by adding -kyþ like a particle marker, following the same rules outline above for adjectives.
It's important to note here, though, that many "common" adjectives are NOT made into adverbs in this fashion. Words like quickly, slowly, etc. have their own distinct forms (see the example vocabulary below). However, this system exists to allow the language to expand, stretch, and grow. Put in nerd terms, this simple feature (adding a non-particle-marker as an ending) enhances the productivity of the language.
Here are some basic practice words:
Adjectives:
quick/fast --> aurfai
slow --> luiffai
good --> vleufai
bad --> fedoufai
straight --> wisufai
crooked -->juiðofai
careful/cautious --> tyreifai
Adverbs:
quickly --> aurukyþ*
slowly --> lofkyþ*
good/well --> vloukyþ*
badly/poorly --> fedokyþ*
straightly --> wisufaikyþ
crookedly --> juðofaikyþ
carefully/cautiously --> tyreifaikyþ
* Denotes "irregular" adverbs; that is, adverbs not formed by adding -kyþ to existing adjectives; that is, adverbs with their own unique and distinct forms.
As always, some sample sentences to play with:
Mehrila zhehanach-aurukyþ gebtiashter Joneði.
Mehri-la zhe-hanach-aurukyþ gebti-ashter John-eði.
"Mary-she RECENT.PAST.cook-quickly vegetable.OBJ.PL John.INDIR."
Mary quickly cooked vegetables for John.
Kenan shraenirier treþekt-tyreifaikyþ eddeashter-juiðofai.
Kenan shra-en-irier tre-þekt-tyreifai-kyþ edde-ashter-juiðofai.
"ThePL Dog.SUB-PL.LOC-DIST DIST.FUTURE.eat-careful.ADVB cat.OBJ.PL-crooked."
Those dogs there will carefully eat crooked cats. (Or, Those there dogs will eat crooked cats with caution.)
Note in the above sentence that the so-called "distant future" tense of the verb can also be used when making "generalizations" about a subject's behavior. Also, remember there is no neuter pronoun in Draddrikan, so the subject shra simple goes without. However, there is a definite article in Draddrikan, so this sentence clearly identifies some particular dogs who will eat cats—dogs that are further marked by a locative particle roughly corresponding to English "there"—which dogs would be determined by context.
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Continued Grammatical Expansion
Hi,
Okay, so I've continued to expand the grammatical elements of this language. Mainly, I keep adding particle markers. The newest ones are these.
Basic location marker (singular/plural):
"at" --> -emdi/-emdier
invitational verb marker:
"let's" --> -udi
Here are a couple more example sentences to show how they might work, using vocab and grammar that can be found in previous posts. These sentences are transcribed thus:
Straight Draddrikan
Draddrikan, broken into morphemes
"Literal English" (i.e. "word-for-word")
Smooth English
Nen breavreðudi crikemdi.
Nen bre-avreð-udi crik-emdi.
"We-two will.sleep.let's bed.at."
Let's go to bed.
Datepasht hanacharadaa taeði.
Datep-asht hanach-aradaa ta-eði.
"Meat.dir cook.imp I.indir."
Cook me meat. (Or, Cook meat for me.)
Sentences are becoming somewhat more complex, but not huge yet. Obviously, the language is impoverished currently by the lack of adjectives and adverbs. Those will be the next undertaking, in a near future post.
Okay, so I've continued to expand the grammatical elements of this language. Mainly, I keep adding particle markers. The newest ones are these.
Basic location marker (singular/plural):
"at" --> -emdi/-emdier
invitational verb marker:
"let's" --> -udi
Here are a couple more example sentences to show how they might work, using vocab and grammar that can be found in previous posts. These sentences are transcribed thus:
Straight Draddrikan
Draddrikan, broken into morphemes
"Literal English" (i.e. "word-for-word")
Smooth English
Nen breavreðudi crikemdi.
Nen bre-avreð-udi crik-emdi.
"We-two will.sleep.let's bed.at."
Let's go to bed.
Datepasht hanacharadaa taeði.
Datep-asht hanach-aradaa ta-eði.
"Meat.dir cook.imp I.indir."
Cook me meat. (Or, Cook meat for me.)
Sentences are becoming somewhat more complex, but not huge yet. Obviously, the language is impoverished currently by the lack of adjectives and adverbs. Those will be the next undertaking, in a near future post.
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Grammatical words: short update
I've added some grammar pieces to what's already been laid out. Continuing to improve meaning and elegance of structure. :)
Definite Article
Only one definite article with a sing. and plural form. Would variously mean "the, this, that, those, these," etc., depending on context.
kena/kenan
Conjunctions
Only two, so far. Perhaps more as needed.
and --> vanna
with --> ghinna
Particle Marker
One new one to add to the list, for the indirect object.
-eði/-eðier
Let's try another sentence, using some of the vocabulary from my last post, to illustrate.
John put on pants and a shirt.
Jonna clepfashter vanna fletashter zheplerm naeði.
"Jon-he pants and shirt dressed him[self]."
Notice the following points: since pants and shirt are both objects of the verb, they both get the appropriate plural marker. Also, Draddrikan only has the verb "[to] dress", which corresponds rougly to English's "put on." Moreover, the verb is not reflexive in the way English is; the pronoun "he" appears both as the subject and again later as the indirect object of the verb, and in its second appearance receives the appropriate particle marker.
Now where getting somewhere! Having fun!
Definite Article
Only one definite article with a sing. and plural form. Would variously mean "the, this, that, those, these," etc., depending on context.
kena/kenan
Conjunctions
Only two, so far. Perhaps more as needed.
and --> vanna
with --> ghinna
Particle Marker
One new one to add to the list, for the indirect object.
-eði/-eðier
Let's try another sentence, using some of the vocabulary from my last post, to illustrate.
John put on pants and a shirt.
Jonna clepfashter vanna fletashter zheplerm naeði.
"Jon-he pants and shirt dressed him[self]."
Notice the following points: since pants and shirt are both objects of the verb, they both get the appropriate plural marker. Also, Draddrikan only has the verb "[to] dress", which corresponds rougly to English's "put on." Moreover, the verb is not reflexive in the way English is; the pronoun "he" appears both as the subject and again later as the indirect object of the verb, and in its second appearance receives the appropriate particle marker.
Now where getting somewhere! Having fun!
A Vocabulary!
Here, just for fun and to tide you (or myself?) over for a couple days, is a short vocabulary I've put together of some common nouns. Obviously this is nowhere near a complete list; these are just a handful of words I invented :) so I can start the business of refining grammar. If grammar is a mortal that holds the structure together, the vocabulary is the bricks of that structure. And if the mortal needs experimented upon, I need bricks to use in the meantime.
Vocabulary pt. 1: Nouns
English --> Draddrikan
dog --> shra
cat --> edde
field --> nän
street --> lurl
man --> tok
boy --> tukka (also "child")
woman --> atok
girl --> etl
house --> ker
car --> mör
table --> liria
chair --> dru
meat --> datep
vegetable --> gebti (in general, not a specific vegetable)
bed --> crik
floor --> jeltad
shirt --> flet
pants --> clepf
(a) drink --> wug
food --> yusht
bird --> metch
city --> stom
(a) dress --> shen
clock --> kardy
lamp --> fahn
window --> artwe
Obviously, these are all tangible objects, mostly things you'll encounter around the house. I haven't started on abstract nouns ("time," "justice," etc.) yet. Also, note these are all singular forms.
Vocabulary pt. 2: Verbs
English infinitive, sans "to" --> Draddrikan verb stem
plow --> cripa
work --> dra
eat --> þekt
drink --> mæna
dress --> plerm (in these sense of "put clothing on")
sing --> lammer
laugh --> bremi
sleep --> avreð
run --> drad
walk --> orble
cook --> hanach
write --> emret
read --> limmer
dance --> lug
talk --> bagha
Again, a very short list, comprised of some very common daily activities. Adequate to work with, though, for grammar-tweaking purposes.
Vocabulary pt. 1: Nouns
English --> Draddrikan
dog --> shra
cat --> edde
field --> nän
street --> lurl
man --> tok
boy --> tukka (also "child")
woman --> atok
girl --> etl
house --> ker
car --> mör
table --> liria
chair --> dru
meat --> datep
vegetable --> gebti (in general, not a specific vegetable)
bed --> crik
floor --> jeltad
shirt --> flet
pants --> clepf
(a) drink --> wug
food --> yusht
bird --> metch
city --> stom
(a) dress --> shen
clock --> kardy
lamp --> fahn
window --> artwe
Obviously, these are all tangible objects, mostly things you'll encounter around the house. I haven't started on abstract nouns ("time," "justice," etc.) yet. Also, note these are all singular forms.
Vocabulary pt. 2: Verbs
English infinitive, sans "to" --> Draddrikan verb stem
plow --> cripa
work --> dra
eat --> þekt
drink --> mæna
dress --> plerm (in these sense of "put clothing on")
sing --> lammer
laugh --> bremi
sleep --> avreð
run --> drad
walk --> orble
cook --> hanach
write --> emret
read --> limmer
dance --> lug
talk --> bagha
Again, a very short list, comprised of some very common daily activities. Adequate to work with, though, for grammar-tweaking purposes.
Interior Dissonance
Well, I keep running into a sort of mental block as I go about the construction of this fantasy language.
As I review some of the sample sentences I posted in my last blog, I hear two conflicting voices in my head. One says something like, "you can just drop an bunch of nouns together in any old order you want! That makes no sense!" The other voice replies, "Why couldn't you? Assuming that, in fact, they're not in 'any old order' but rather their order—along with particle markers—lends meaning to the sentence?"
In short, my own predilection to "think" in terms of grammar that I already know (to wit: English grammar) is playing some games with my mind. Especially when I try to conceive how a more complex sentence would translate in Draddrikan. Take, for example, something like this:
John, the short-tempered, stout-hearted blacksmith, left his usual occupation of ironworking in order to plow Mary the schoolteacher's field—the one where she grows cucumbers and okra, the primary vegetables used when making her famous pickles, which are quickly becoming well-loved in these parts, having won the blue ribbon at last year's county fair pickle-contest.
Obviously, that is a cumbersome monster of a sentence—albeit perfectly "legal" and more-or-less intelligible. Certainly, though, it could be broken down into smaller pieces. But then, wouldn't it lose some of its punch and zazz?
But that's getting off topic. The main point would be, how to keep track of all the particle markers that might be necessary in a sentence like this to relate subjects and objects (direct and indirect), as well as the adjectives and adverbs along with the nouns or pronouns or verbs they modify?
Problems to be worked out. Luckily, there's no ETA on this project; I'll play around for a while in my hand notebook (it's easier to think these things through when I can scribble and cross out) and see what comes.
As I review some of the sample sentences I posted in my last blog, I hear two conflicting voices in my head. One says something like, "you can just drop an bunch of nouns together in any old order you want! That makes no sense!" The other voice replies, "Why couldn't you? Assuming that, in fact, they're not in 'any old order' but rather their order—along with particle markers—lends meaning to the sentence?"
In short, my own predilection to "think" in terms of grammar that I already know (to wit: English grammar) is playing some games with my mind. Especially when I try to conceive how a more complex sentence would translate in Draddrikan. Take, for example, something like this:
John, the short-tempered, stout-hearted blacksmith, left his usual occupation of ironworking in order to plow Mary the schoolteacher's field—the one where she grows cucumbers and okra, the primary vegetables used when making her famous pickles, which are quickly becoming well-loved in these parts, having won the blue ribbon at last year's county fair pickle-contest.
Obviously, that is a cumbersome monster of a sentence—albeit perfectly "legal" and more-or-less intelligible. Certainly, though, it could be broken down into smaller pieces. But then, wouldn't it lose some of its punch and zazz?
But that's getting off topic. The main point would be, how to keep track of all the particle markers that might be necessary in a sentence like this to relate subjects and objects (direct and indirect), as well as the adjectives and adverbs along with the nouns or pronouns or verbs they modify?
Problems to be worked out. Luckily, there's no ETA on this project; I'll play around for a while in my hand notebook (it's easier to think these things through when I can scribble and cross out) and see what comes.
Friday, May 08, 2009
Grammar, a revision
Hi!
Here is a brief revision to some of the grammar rules I laid out in my last post, as well as some expansion on the grammatical rules.
First: I think I'll can the whole "case-endings" idea. as various linguists, teachers, etc., have pointed out, the idea of "cases" is taken from Latin. Which doesn't make them bad (not by a long shot), but it's ridiculous and silly (and occasionally pointless and futile) to try and force a non-Latin language—with its own internal logic and grammar—into Latin semantic categories.
So why not let a language organize itself, around its own semantic categories and epsitemological distinctions? (This is what is known, in the social sciences, as the "Right to Self-Determination".)
Rather than try to use the old case system, I'll be introducing a system of affixes (mostly suffixes) that I prefer to call "particle markers". Some of them may overlap with Latin's case system, some of them won't. These particles will denote not only "case" but other relationship between words in a sentence as well.
That having been said, I've got my notebook handy today, so I will record a bunch of pronouns I've come up with, along with a couple of particle markers I have for verb tenses, and also some particle markers for nouns. I only wish there was a way to lay this out on a chart—I find a chart so much easier to comprehend, compared to long lists.
Pronouns:
English --> masculine/feminine
I --> ta/ta
you singular --> net/let
you plural ("y'all") --> netan/letan
we two --> nen/len
we all --> nenan/lenan
he --> na/(blank)
she --> (blank)/la
[no neuter "it"]
they --> nana/lala
NOTE: There is no neuter pronoun; unsexed objects use masculine he or they form. When using a plural form in which males and females are both present, the masculine form is used—just like Spanish. :)
Verb tenses: particle markers
distant past --> je-
near past --> zhe-
[no present affix]
near future --> bre-
distant future --> tre-
progressive ("ing") --> -ars
perfect --> -ara
imperative ("must") --> -aradaa
NOTE: The last three are called participles, in English. In Draddrikan, you can create any tense/form by adding the appropriate affix to the verb stem.
Nouns: particle markers
what is marked --> singular/plural
subject --> (blank)/-en
object --> -asht/-ashter
possesive --> -da/-daater
close proximity location --> -ent/-ender
dist. prox. location --> -iri/-irier
close temporal location --> -elta/-elder
dist. temporal location --> -ænt/-ænder
NOTE: Obviously, this is a far-from-complete list of possible (and plausible!) particle markers. This is just a quickie, so to speak, to lay out the most basic framework required for constructing basic sentences.
SENTENCES:
Fun! Let's try out a few basic sentences. Please note that basic sentence form is Subject-Object-Verb in Draddrikan. Let's take an example using the following words:
[to] plow --> cripa (stem form)
field --> nän
John --> Jon
Mary --> Merhi
week --> riuk
He plowed the field. (recently)
Na nänasht zhecripa.
John plowed the field. (a while ago)
Jonna nänasht jecripa.
NOTE: Even though a "proper" subject is used, the he pronoun is attached to John's name to help clarify.
John is plowing Mary's field.
Jonna nänasht-Merhida cripaars.
Here, note that the possesor noun is attached, like a suffix, to the object noun—that is, the noun being possessed. The verb, too, receives a participle marking, indicating (what we call in English) the "present progressive" form of the verb.
John will have plowed Mary's field next week.
Jonna nänasht-Mehrida trecripaara riukænt.
"John field-Mary's will-have-plow-ed week-(distant)."
Here, week receives a temporal marker, since it indicates the time when the action will happen. Notice, too, the verb stem cripa receives both a future-tense prefix AND a participle suffix. Finally, this is not an "exact" translation of the English; as the language currently exists, there is no particle marker that corresponds directly to our word next. To a native speaker, it would simply be assumed that the action being described will happen some time off; the hearer of the above sentence would know from cultural norms and the context of the conversation that "next week" was simply implied.
I should probably mention that I really like archaic letters, like æ, Þ/þ, and Ð/ð, that you find in Old and Middle English texts. So I will be re-introducing them into Draddrikan. Why? Because I can.
That's all for now. More in a few days.
Here is a brief revision to some of the grammar rules I laid out in my last post, as well as some expansion on the grammatical rules.
First: I think I'll can the whole "case-endings" idea. as various linguists, teachers, etc., have pointed out, the idea of "cases" is taken from Latin. Which doesn't make them bad (not by a long shot), but it's ridiculous and silly (and occasionally pointless and futile) to try and force a non-Latin language—with its own internal logic and grammar—into Latin semantic categories.
So why not let a language organize itself, around its own semantic categories and epsitemological distinctions? (This is what is known, in the social sciences, as the "Right to Self-Determination".)
Rather than try to use the old case system, I'll be introducing a system of affixes (mostly suffixes) that I prefer to call "particle markers". Some of them may overlap with Latin's case system, some of them won't. These particles will denote not only "case" but other relationship between words in a sentence as well.
That having been said, I've got my notebook handy today, so I will record a bunch of pronouns I've come up with, along with a couple of particle markers I have for verb tenses, and also some particle markers for nouns. I only wish there was a way to lay this out on a chart—I find a chart so much easier to comprehend, compared to long lists.
Pronouns:
English --> masculine/feminine
I --> ta/ta
you singular --> net/let
you plural ("y'all") --> netan/letan
we two --> nen/len
we all --> nenan/lenan
he --> na/(blank)
she --> (blank)/la
[no neuter "it"]
they --> nana/lala
NOTE: There is no neuter pronoun; unsexed objects use masculine he or they form. When using a plural form in which males and females are both present, the masculine form is used—just like Spanish. :)
Verb tenses: particle markers
distant past --> je-
near past --> zhe-
[no present affix]
near future --> bre-
distant future --> tre-
progressive ("ing") --> -ars
perfect --> -ara
imperative ("must") --> -aradaa
NOTE: The last three are called participles, in English. In Draddrikan, you can create any tense/form by adding the appropriate affix to the verb stem.
Nouns: particle markers
what is marked --> singular/plural
subject --> (blank)/-en
object --> -asht/-ashter
possesive --> -da/-daater
close proximity location --> -ent/-ender
dist. prox. location --> -iri/-irier
close temporal location --> -elta/-elder
dist. temporal location --> -ænt/-ænder
NOTE: Obviously, this is a far-from-complete list of possible (and plausible!) particle markers. This is just a quickie, so to speak, to lay out the most basic framework required for constructing basic sentences.
SENTENCES:
Fun! Let's try out a few basic sentences. Please note that basic sentence form is Subject-Object-Verb in Draddrikan. Let's take an example using the following words:
[to] plow --> cripa (stem form)
field --> nän
John --> Jon
Mary --> Merhi
week --> riuk
He plowed the field. (recently)
Na nänasht zhecripa.
John plowed the field. (a while ago)
Jonna nänasht jecripa.
NOTE: Even though a "proper" subject is used, the he pronoun is attached to John's name to help clarify.
John is plowing Mary's field.
Jonna nänasht-Merhida cripaars.
Here, note that the possesor noun is attached, like a suffix, to the object noun—that is, the noun being possessed. The verb, too, receives a participle marking, indicating (what we call in English) the "present progressive" form of the verb.
John will have plowed Mary's field next week.
Jonna nänasht-Mehrida trecripaara riukænt.
"John field-Mary's will-have-plow-ed week-(distant)."
Here, week receives a temporal marker, since it indicates the time when the action will happen. Notice, too, the verb stem cripa receives both a future-tense prefix AND a participle suffix. Finally, this is not an "exact" translation of the English; as the language currently exists, there is no particle marker that corresponds directly to our word next. To a native speaker, it would simply be assumed that the action being described will happen some time off; the hearer of the above sentence would know from cultural norms and the context of the conversation that "next week" was simply implied.
I should probably mention that I really like archaic letters, like æ, Þ/þ, and Ð/ð, that you find in Old and Middle English texts. So I will be re-introducing them into Draddrikan. Why? Because I can.
That's all for now. More in a few days.
Tuesday, May 05, 2009
Grammar: Rough Sketch (I)
Here is a rudimentary (VERY rudimentary) introduction to my new language, tenatively called "Draddrikan", and its grammar. Sadly, I don't have handy my notebook in which I laid out some of the details, such as the actual prefixes and suffixes for verbs and nouns, so those will have to wait for a later post. :(
So... Ideas behind this language: to make a mild-to-moderately agglutinative language. Verbs in particular agglutinate; however, like English, they have a simplistic conjugational system which relies on nouns and/or pronouns to indicate subject. Nouns agglutinate with case endings based, loosely, on OE case system (locative cases are my own invention). Endings also can be used to transform various words from one part of speech into another (such as a noun into an adjective, verb into an adverb, etc.)
Part I: Grammar
A. Verbs. Prefixes and suffixes attached to verb stems indicate tense and form. There are not different conjugations based on verbs' subject(s); as a result, nouns of pronouns “must” (Ha Ha!) be used for comprehensibility. There are five "tenses" in this language: distant past, recent past, present, near future, and distance future. For fantasy purposes, I may even introduce two more tenses, cosmological/mythical in use: "once upon a time" past, and "happily ever after" future. Common forms exist: simple, progressive, perfect, as well as imperative, interrogative, and probably some others I still need to add. Note: simple present tense has NO prefixes or suffixes. The infinitive/stem form is the same for present simple, much like Japanese.
B. Nouns. Nouns have a basic case system with six forms (nominative, accusative, genitive, dative, and two different locative for "near" and "distant"); cases are all suffixes. Absent gender system for nouns: all proper nouns are “neuter” in that case endings, etc. don’t change. (Put another way: no yucky declensions.) Verbs, adjectives, adverbs, etc. can be made nouns by attachment of a special nominalizer suffix. NOTE: nominative case, like simple present verb tense, has no suffix—just the noun in its purest form.
C. Articles. Only one definite article, no indefinite article. This article would thus variously be translated as "the," "this," "that," depending on context. It also has a plural form.
D. Pronouns. Pronouns have singular and plural forms, as well as masculine and feminine. No neuter pronoun ("it"), however. There are two first-person plural forms: one indicating just two people ("me and you") as well as many people ("we all"). Second person also has singular and plural forms.
E. Prepositions. Few (none?) prepositions, as some of their functions are fulfilled by case endings.
F & G. Adjective and Adverbs. Adjectives and adverbs rules were laid out in rough form, but as I mentioned above, I don't have that notebook handy as I write this.
H. Conjugations. Haven't been addressed yet.
Part II: Vocabulary. Not there quite yet.
Obviously, a lot of work needs to be done. This is still very much a rough draft; "proto-Draddrikan" if you like. I am sure I've left a lot out grammatically; I haven't even begun to consider phonology, and have really only scratched the surface when it comes to morphology. I have started a haphazard lexicon, though; maybe I'll include that in a near-future post.
Comments are welcome! I appreciate feedback.
So... Ideas behind this language: to make a mild-to-moderately agglutinative language. Verbs in particular agglutinate; however, like English, they have a simplistic conjugational system which relies on nouns and/or pronouns to indicate subject. Nouns agglutinate with case endings based, loosely, on OE case system (locative cases are my own invention). Endings also can be used to transform various words from one part of speech into another (such as a noun into an adjective, verb into an adverb, etc.)
Part I: Grammar
A. Verbs. Prefixes and suffixes attached to verb stems indicate tense and form. There are not different conjugations based on verbs' subject(s); as a result, nouns of pronouns “must” (Ha Ha!) be used for comprehensibility. There are five "tenses" in this language: distant past, recent past, present, near future, and distance future. For fantasy purposes, I may even introduce two more tenses, cosmological/mythical in use: "once upon a time" past, and "happily ever after" future. Common forms exist: simple, progressive, perfect, as well as imperative, interrogative, and probably some others I still need to add. Note: simple present tense has NO prefixes or suffixes. The infinitive/stem form is the same for present simple, much like Japanese.
B. Nouns. Nouns have a basic case system with six forms (nominative, accusative, genitive, dative, and two different locative for "near" and "distant"); cases are all suffixes. Absent gender system for nouns: all proper nouns are “neuter” in that case endings, etc. don’t change. (Put another way: no yucky declensions.) Verbs, adjectives, adverbs, etc. can be made nouns by attachment of a special nominalizer suffix. NOTE: nominative case, like simple present verb tense, has no suffix—just the noun in its purest form.
C. Articles. Only one definite article, no indefinite article. This article would thus variously be translated as "the," "this," "that," depending on context. It also has a plural form.
D. Pronouns. Pronouns have singular and plural forms, as well as masculine and feminine. No neuter pronoun ("it"), however. There are two first-person plural forms: one indicating just two people ("me and you") as well as many people ("we all"). Second person also has singular and plural forms.
E. Prepositions. Few (none?) prepositions, as some of their functions are fulfilled by case endings.
F & G. Adjective and Adverbs. Adjectives and adverbs rules were laid out in rough form, but as I mentioned above, I don't have that notebook handy as I write this.
H. Conjugations. Haven't been addressed yet.
Part II: Vocabulary. Not there quite yet.
Obviously, a lot of work needs to be done. This is still very much a rough draft; "proto-Draddrikan" if you like. I am sure I've left a lot out grammatically; I haven't even begun to consider phonology, and have really only scratched the surface when it comes to morphology. I have started a haphazard lexicon, though; maybe I'll include that in a near-future post.
Comments are welcome! I appreciate feedback.
H.o.S. Revived!
Hi all!
The House of Sanchez is back online!
After a three-year hiatus, I'm back to start posting again, unleashing my thoughts on a largely uninterested Internetal hoi poloi.
Specifically, I want to change the focus of this blog towards my Constructed Language ("conglang") project. For those who don't know, I've always been interested in languages, and recently I've started taking a few shorts steps towards constructing my own fantasy lanaguage.
Why do it?
Well, why not? There are many reasons for constructing an artificial language. Many have tried to create "user-friendly" artificial languages that are easy to learn, in order to facilitate international commerce and diplomacy. Fiction writers may create one to help "fill out" the realms of their invented universe. Linguistics and grammarians might design a language to sharpen their academic skills in this area. And—if you're a nerd like me, at least—you'll do it because it's FUN!
So anyone who happens to read this, look forward to (ir)regular updates as I embark on a pointless, but fascinating, journey. Cheers!
The House of Sanchez is back online!
After a three-year hiatus, I'm back to start posting again, unleashing my thoughts on a largely uninterested Internetal hoi poloi.
Specifically, I want to change the focus of this blog towards my Constructed Language ("conglang") project. For those who don't know, I've always been interested in languages, and recently I've started taking a few shorts steps towards constructing my own fantasy lanaguage.
Why do it?
Well, why not? There are many reasons for constructing an artificial language. Many have tried to create "user-friendly" artificial languages that are easy to learn, in order to facilitate international commerce and diplomacy. Fiction writers may create one to help "fill out" the realms of their invented universe. Linguistics and grammarians might design a language to sharpen their academic skills in this area. And—if you're a nerd like me, at least—you'll do it because it's FUN!
So anyone who happens to read this, look forward to (ir)regular updates as I embark on a pointless, but fascinating, journey. Cheers!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)