A CONSTRUCTED LANGUAGE
6.0 ADDITIONAL VERBAL MORPHOLOGY
In addition to the five verbal categories shown in formative Slot VIII, as detailed in Chapter 5, there are two additional morphological categories that apply to verbal formatives — Illocution and Validation. These categories are shown by the vocalic VK affix in Slot IX. Note that in Chapter 4 above, we’ve already seen that Slot IX is used for the VC case affix for nouns. The VK affix for verbs uses the same vowel-forms as affixes as the VC case affix — the distinction as to whether an affix in Slot IX is VC or VK is determined by the syllabic stress of the word. If the word has ultimate stress (i.e., stress on the final syllable), the Slot IX value is VK ; otherwise, it is a VC case marker. Sec. 6.1 below explains the categories of Illocution and Validation, while Sec. 6.1.3 below provides the Slot IX VK affix values denoting these categories.
6.1 Illocution
and Validation
6.1.1 Illocution: Illocution refers to the type of “speech act” being made by a speaker, i.e., the purpose of the statement in terms of how the addressee is to interpret either its truth-value, or its requirements/demands upon the speaker in terms of a physical and/or psychological response. There are nine illocutions. Additionally, the first Illocution, ASSERTIVE, has eight sub-types relating to the evidentiary basis for the assertion (analyzed in Sec. 6.1.2 below under Validation).
|
ILLOCUTION |
Explanation |
|
|
ASR |
ASSERTIVE |
the statement is an assertion/proposition about the world which constitutes a truth claim |
|
DIR |
DIRECTIVE |
the statement is either an imperative command to another party to do/be something, or a “commissive” statement committing the speaker to a specific state or course of action (i.e., a vow, promise, guarantee, etc.) |
|
DEC |
DECLARATIVE |
a “performative” statement which. by its utterance/publication, creates a change of state (at least psychologically) for the addressees (i.e., a declaration, announcement, edict, etc.) |
|
IRG |
INTERROGATIVE |
a statement whose purpose is to inquire or seek information from the addressee (i.e., equivalent to an English WH-question) -- see Sec. 10.6 for further explanation on the use of IRG Illocution |
|
VER |
VERIFICATIVE |
a statement whose purpose is to seek/obtain corroboration, confirmation, or verification (i.e., equivalent to a Yes/No question) |
|
ADM |
ADMONITIVE |
a statement whose purpose is to provide advisory/admonitive information to the addressee (i.e., a warning) |
|
POT |
POTENTIATIVE |
a statement of wishing, hoping, or other unreal(ized) provenance |
|
HOR |
HORTATIVE |
a counterfactual statement indicating a desired but impossible state of affairs that cannot be realized (equivalent to English hortative constructions such as If only..., Were that..., If only it were so that... |
|
CNJ |
CONJECTURAL |
Equivalent to an English-language “if”-clause, indicating that the statement is offered as a conjectured hypothetical, ostensibly to be followed by a “then...” implicational clause. Translatable as “If (it were the case that)...” |
6.1.2 Validation: Validation refers to the evidential basis for a statement in assertive illocution. Like various Native American and other natural languages, New Ithkuil requires a speaker to grammatically indicate the evidential source for an any assertion. Note that Validation applies only to formatives with assertive illocution; it does not apply to the other eight illocutions, as they are not making a truth claim about the world. There are nine Validations: observational, recollective, purportive, reportive, unspecified, imaginary, conventional, intuitive, and inferential, explained below:
|
VALIDATION |
Explanation |
|
OBS
|
OBSERVATIONAL |
present sensory knowledge or present sensory experience: “I perceive... / I know...” |
REC
|
RECOLLECTIVE |
past sensory knowledge or past sensory experience – “I remember... / I know (from memory)...” |
PUP
|
PURPORTIVE |
knowledge from a definitive/(quasi-)verifiable 3rd party source: “I’ve read... / (an expert) has said...” |
RPR
|
REPORTIVE |
knowledge from a 3rd party: “I heard (from someone)... / someone has said...” |
USP
|
UNSPECIFIED |
[Validation deliberately unspecified] |
IMA
|
IMAGINARY |
unreal statement, not intended as true, based on whim, imagination, dream, altered mental state, etc. |
CVN
|
CONVENTIONAL |
cultural/conventional (i.e., collectively agreed-upon) knowledge: “They say... / It is said...” |
ITU
|
INTUITIVE |
intuition, hunch, subjective feeling, past experiences, etc. – “I feel... / I have a hunch... / something tells me...” |
INF
|
INFERENTIAL |
inference from evidence (or absence of alternatives), induction, extrapolation, etc. “I infer... / I reason...” |
6.1.3 Slot IX VK
Affix Values Denoting Illocution and Validation
|
Illocution |
Validation |
Meaning of Validation |
VK |
||
|
ASR |
OBS
|
OBSERVATIONAL |
present sensory knowledge or present sensory experience: “I perceive... / I know...” |
(á) |
|
REC
|
RECOLLECTIVE |
past sensory knowledge or past sensory experience – “I remember... / I know (from memory)...” |
â |
||
PUP
|
PURPORTIVE |
knowledge from a definitive/(quasi-)verifiable 3rd party source: “I’ve read... / (an expert) has said...” |
é |
||
RPR
|
REPORTIVE |
knowledge from a 3rd party: “I heard (from someone)... / someone has said...” |
í |
||
USP
|
UNSPECIFIED |
[Validation deliberately unspecified] |
êi |
||
IMA
|
IMAGINARY |
unreal statement, not intended as true, based on whim, imagination, dream, altered mental state, etc. |
ô |
||
CVN
|
CONVENTIONAL |
cultural/conventional (i.e., collectively agreed-upon) knowledge: “They say... / It is said...” |
ó |
||
ITU
|
INTUITIVE |
intuition, hunch, subjective feeling, past experiences, etc. – “I feel... / I have a hunch... / something tells me...” |
û |
||
INF
|
INFERENTIAL |
inference from evidence (or absence of alternatives), induction, extrapolation, etc. “I infer... / I reason...” |
ú |
||
|
DIR |
DIRECTIVE Illocution |
the statement is either an imperative command to another party to do/be something, or a “commissive” statement committing the speaker to a specific state or course of action (i.e., a vow, promise, guarantee, etc.) |
ái |
||
|
DEC |
DECLARATIVE Illocution |
a “performative” statement which. by its utterance/publication, creates a change of state (at least psychologically) for the addressees (i.e., a declaration, announcement, edict, etc.) |
áu |
||
|
IRG |
INTERROGATIVE Illocution |
a statement whose purpose is to inquire or seek information from the addressee (i.e., equivalent to an English WH-question) -- see Sec. 10.6 for further explanation on the use of IRG Illocution |
éi |
||
|
VER |
VERIFICATIVE Illocution |
a statement whose purpose is to seek/obtain corroboration, confirmation, or verification (i.e., equivalent to a Yes/No question) |
éu |
||
|
ADM |
ADMONITIVE Illocution |
a statement whose purpose is to provide advisory/admonitive information to the addressee (i.e., a warning) |
óu |
||
|
POT |
POTENTIATIVE Illocution |
a statement of wishing, hoping, or other unreal(ized) provenance |
ói |
||
|
HOR |
HORTATIVE Illocution |
a counterfactual statement indicating a desired but impossible state of affairs that cannot be realized (equivalent to English hortative constructions such as If only..., Were that..., If only it were so that... |
íu |
||
|
CNJ |
CONJECTURAL Illocution |
Equivalent to an English-language “if”-clause, indicating that the statement is offered as a conjectured hypothetical, ostensibly to be followed by a “then...” implicational clause. Translatable as “If (it were the case that)...” |
úi |
||
Wäšwelciçxöehâ walhaci
walhecue.
[default CA]-cpt-‘be.alive’-cos1/3-xcl1/4-sur-REC [default CA]-‘parent’s.sibling’-gid1/1-aff
[default CA]-‘parent’s.sibling’-gid1/3-cmp
‘My aunt lived longer than my uncle although neither
of them lived to old age .’
Yiţxirňiexnalté wialmya.
prx-stem2/cpt-‘evolve’-epc1/4-pze3/2-rti1/1-PUP [default CA]-n-‘flowering.plant’-thm
‘Flowering plants had not
yet developed / were yet to develop during the Cambrian geological period (but they have developed since).’
Yamţrí chwadi’a.
prx-prc-‘rain’-[default
CA]-RPR ‘outdoors’-prx-loc
‘I’m told it’s raining outside.’
Wimžiawêi ebštilu.
[default CA]-stem2/cpt-‘sexual.relations’-pmp-USP stem2-‘priest’-obj-[default CA]-ind
‘The priest finally lost his virginity.’
Wekškô wakçmi’a.
[default CA]-stem2/prc-‘monster’-IMA [default CA]-prc-‘outdoor.balcony’-loc
‘There’s a monster on the balcony.’
Iuprulövḑuadnó walxu ëivḑilamki’a lei.
stem3/cpt/neg1/4-‘descend’-dyn-asc1/6-ogc3/9-CVN [default CA]-prc-‘Sol’-ind CS-ROOT:asc1/4-fgn2/1-loc
1m-gen
‘They say down south the sun won’t set on my home town.’
Amskadwû kšivöla’i
wiorkwa.
‘necessity’-prx/n-ITU ‘clown’-n-
ctr1/6-act n-‘filial.love’-thm
‘I think even clowns need love.’
Yuçkú elari.
prx-stem3/prc-‘suffer.from.illness’-INF stem2/prc-‘child’-g-aff
‘The kids must be ill.’
Weru’i, gulái
onţläli’ö kši’ve!
‘child’-g-voc ‘ambulate’-dyn-DIR ‘automobile’-cte-abl ‘clown’-n-cor
‘Children, walk away from the clown car!’
Wimbruswiöháu!
[default CA]- stem2/cpt-‘compete.to.win’-accessor:ind-slf:ben-DEC
‘Here’s the winner! / We have a
winner!’
Arveléi iträlu’ö
kši’ţe?
‘amount.of.elapsed.time’-csv-IRG cpt-‘process.of.approaching’-cte-irl ‘clown’-mds-cor
‘How long has it been since the clowns’ arrival?’
Yuçkéu elari?
prx-stem3/prc-‘suffer.from.illness’-VER stem2/prc-‘child’-g-aff
‘Are the kids ill?’
Wušštilkřóu!
[default CA]-stem3/prc-‘SARS-CoV-2.virus’-adi1/4-ADM
‘Beware of getting Covid-19!’
Wuišštilkřói elare!
[default CA]-
stem3/prc/neg1/4-‘SARS-CoV-2.virus’-adi1/4- POT stem2/prc-‘child’-g-abs
‘I hope the children don’t get
Covid-19!’
Wušštilkříu wopňuivẓe!
[default CA]-
stem3/prc/neg1/4-‘SARS-CoV-2.virus’-adi1/4- HOR prx-stem0/prc-‘feel.malevolence/cruelty/sadism’-psa2/9 -abs
‘If only that bastard would get
Covid-19!’
Ätrulúi žu
Hakšivé-Warswi’o ä eutruloewû.
cpt-‘translative.motion’-dyn-[default CA]-CNJ 2m/det-ind concatenated:‘clown’-obj-n-cor-parent:[default CA]-prc-‘planet’-all prs
stem2/cpt/neg1/4-‘approach’-dyn-[default CA]-itc-ITU
‘If you go to the Clown Planet,
there’ll be no coming back.’
Virtually
all languages allow for sentences to be hierarchically embedded within other
sentences, a process termed subordination.
In Western languages, the embedded sentence becomes either a subordinate clause
or a relative clause, explicitly introduced by a conjunctions such as ‘that,’
‘which,’ ‘who,’ ‘where,’‘although,’‘if,’‘while,’‘whereas,’ or a preposition
followed by a conjunction, such as ‘through which,’‘by whom,’etc. In English,
such clauses can also occur as an infinitive or gerundial verb construction.
Both relative and subordinate clauses are illustrated in the following
sentences:
The dog that ate my hat belongs to
them.
I want him to stop shouting.
The committee voted to fire the superintendant.
We demand (that) you give us equal pay.
Although he’s a college graduate, he acts
like a child.
This is the slot through which the letter is
passed.
In case you’re unaware, I’ll be
leaving next month.
The boy walking toward us is my
nephew.
The New Ithkuil
equivalent to relative or subordinate clauses is known as a case-frame, or simply, frame. Conceptually, the
sentence to be embedded is simply treated as a noun participant to the main
verb of a sentence and is therefore marked for case like any other noun. For
example, take the following two sentences:
She and I were working together.
The two nations were at war.
Suppose we
want to use the second sentence to provide a temporal context for the first
sentence. In English we could do this by subordinating the second sentence to
the first using the conjunction ‘while,’ as in She and I were working together while the two nations were at war.
Alternately, we could create a relative clause by inserting a connecting
prepositional phrase, as in She and I
were working together during the time (that) the two nations were at war.
In New
Ithkuil, temporal context for a sentence may be provided by a noun in any of
the temporal cases such as the concursive
(see Sec. 4.9.1). A word such as ‘summer’ or ‘famine’ would be placed in the concursive case to create a sentence
corresponding to:
She and I were working together during the summer.
She and I were working together at the time of the famine.
Just as the
single words ‘summer’ and ‘famine’ are placed in the concursive case, so an entire sentence such as The two nations were at war can
be placed in the concursive case
to provide the temporal context for the main sentence. In other words, New Ithkuil
treats the entire subordinate sentence as a noun phrase to be declined into any
required case. That is the purpose of a frame, to place sentences into noun
cases. By doing so, New Ithkuil accomplishes the same task for which Western
languages use relative and subordinate conjunctions.
To construct
a case-frame, the second-order sentence (i.e., the sentence to be subordinated)
is placed in the main sentence at the point where a noun declined for the
required case would appear. The actual case of the second-order sentence is
indicated in the verbal formative the same way as for nominal formatives, i.e.,
via the Vc affix in Slot IX.
Additionally, the syllabic stress of the formative will change to show framed Relation, explained in the
next paragraph.
Relation is a binary
category having two values unframed and framed referring
to whether the formative is or is not in a Case-Frame. The main verbal formative of a sentence is in
unframed Relation (i.e., not in a
case-frame), marked by ultimate (final) stress, which also indicates that the
formative’s Slot IX affix is the VK affix
showing Illocution, Expectation, and Validation. Once a verbal formative is subordinated
within a case-frame, it takes framed
relation, shown by antepenultimate (third-from-last) syllabic stress, in which
case the formative’s Slot IX affix is
the VC affix showing the case of the
Case-Frame. Finally, if the formative
has penultimate (second-from-last) syllabic stress then the formative is a noun
in unframed Relation and the Slot
IX affix is the VC affix
showing Case.
|
Penultimate Stress = unframed Relation + VC |
Ultimate Stress = unframed Relation + VK |
Antepenultimate Stress = framed Relation + VC |
If the
formative does not have sufficient syllables to take antepenultimate stress,
add syllables by filling Slots II and/or Slots VIII and IX with their default
values. Note that a monosyllabic
formative (other than a concatenated formative — see Chapter 8) is considered
morphologically to have ultimate stress (i.e., it is an unframed verbal formative).
If the
case-frame is inserted at the beginning or into the middle of the main
sentence, the final word of the case-frame will usually carry a special suffix,
-n (see the TPF affix
in the Affixes document), which signifies the
end of the frame if this will help to avoid confusion as to which words in the
sentence belong inside the frame (i.e., with the secondary sentence), and which
belong to the main sentence. A case-frame requires that its verb appear as the
first element of the case frame.
In general,
the perspective of the verb in the secondary sentence operates independently
from that of the main verb, however, it is also common for the perspective of
the verb in the secondary sentence to be placed in the abstract, which has the effect of deferring all Perspective
information about the verb to the main verb, similarly to the way English
subordinate clauses using gerunds and infinitives defer all tense information
to the main verb of the sentence.
Étkwö’e wairţtuzwu welhwëubzanëi
itrulalžói ka’i wurmieli’o
wuttíhia kšiluržu.
stem2/prc/FRAMED-‘attend.scheduled.event’-PCR [default CA]-g-‘study’-accessor:ind2-ind [default CA]-stem2/prc-‘play.musical.instrument’-fea2/5-TPF1/1-stm stem2/cpt-‘approach’-obg1/1-pot pa/ben-act
[default CA]-stem3/prc-‘house’-1m/neu-prp-all
[default CA]-stem3/prc/FRAMED
-‘introduce’-rcp-APL ‘clown’-obj-[default CA]-hrc1/9-ind
‘After the students attend the
concert, they must come to my house to meet the Chief Clown.’
Generally, New Ithkuil uses the relative case and the descriptive case to form relative
clauses. Usage is shown via the examples
below. (NOTE: In the examples below, default morphological
values such as sta/bsc
Function/Specification, prc
version, asr/obs
Illocution/Validation, or default CA
are not listed in the intralinear analyses.)
1a. Weňayá kšilo
äpçólöwa lu eňtyarkena.
‘compose.in.writing’-RTR ‘clown’-STA/OBJ-ERG FRAMED:CPT-‘read’-DYN/CSV-PCS-THM 1m-IND
‘written.page’-MSC/COA-TPF/3-THM
A clown wrote the book I just finished
reading.
[More
literally: A clown wrote what I just finished reading -- a book.]
The above sentence could also be structured using a RELATIVE case-frame, however it would require a Reduplicative specialized personal-reference root (see Sec. 4.6.4) with a switch-reference affix:
1b. Weňayá kšilo
eňtyarkena äpçólö’yu lu
thaxač.
‘compose.in.writing’-RTR ‘clown’-STA/OBJ-ERG ‘written.page’-MSC/COA-TPF/3-THM FRAMED:CPT-‘read’-DYN/CSV-PCS-RLT 1m-IND
Rdp-SWR/1-THM
A clown wrote the book I just finished
reading.
The following two
sentences utilize a RELATIVE case-frame:
2a. Ẓalá li kšilenëi
máli’hu welu.
‘see’
1m/NEU-AFF
‘clown’-STA/OBJ-TPF/3-STM
FRAMED:‘talk’-RCP-FAC-RLT
‘child’-IND
‘I
see a clown (who is) talking with a child.’
2b. Erčädókh
elavöte žžjádu’u kšivëi.
‘state.of.being.corrupted’-STA/CTE-PRX-SBT/7 ‘child’-N-DCD/6-ABS FRAMED:‘feel.fascination’-STA/BSC-PRX-RLT ‘clown’-STA/OBJ-N-STM
‘Children
who like clowns have obviously been corrupted.’
The following
sentence utilizes a noun in the DESCRIPTIVE case, which operates like RELATIVE
case for adjectival clauses:
3. Erčuláfs elaţwe ainšai’dä kšivöto hlarrnëi-yúřku’u.
‘corrupt’-DYN/BSC-ATI/1 ‘child’-MDS/N-ABS NEG/4-FNC-‘be.well-behaved’-PRX-DSP ‘clown’-STA/OBJ-N-DCD/6-ERG
concat.stem:‘ocelot’-STM-FRAMED:parent.stem:‘own’-PRX-RLT
‘Ocelot-owning
clowns tend to corrupt children who are naughty.’
The following
sentence utilizes a carrier adjunct marked for RELATIVE case:
4. Yuřká
warrnenëi kšila hlu’u
Bubu.
‘own’-PRX ‘ocelot’-TPF/3-STM ‘clown’-STA/OBJ-THM CARRIER-RLT
‘Bubu’
‘The
clown owns an ocelot named Boo-boo.’
Determining the semantic role of the “head” of a relative clause depends on the structure of the sentence. In sentences such as 5a below (as well as Sentence 1a above) where the head of the clause is contained within the subordinated case-frame, the semantic role of the head of the relative clause is shown by the case of the case-frame (i.e., the case shown on the framed verb beginning the relative clause).
5a. Umňälöřdá ẓúlikti
lo kšilëi welene.
‘scream’-STA/CTE-SQC/6 FRAMED: ‘see’-DYN-TPP/4-AFF
1m-ERG ‘clown’-STM ‘child’-TPF/3-ABS
‘The child whom I made look at a clown is
now screaming.’ [more
literally: ‘Now screaming is whom I made look at a clown -- the child.’]
However, in sentence 5b below, the head of the relative clause is not contained within the case-frame, therefore its semantic role within the case-frame remains implied only, since the case-frame must be marked for RELATIVE case.
5b. Umňälá lo
welene
máli’hu kšivu.
‘scream’-STA/CTE 1m-ERG
‘child’-TPF/3-ABS
FRAMED:‘talk’-RCP-FAC-RLT
‘clown’-N-IND
‘I made the child who talks with clowns
scream.’
If necessary for disambiguation, the semantic role of the head in such a sentence can be marked using an Reduplicative Referential as shown in Sentence 5c below (as well as Sentence 1b above).
5c. Umňälá lo
welene
máli’hu thu
kšivu.
‘scream’-STA/CTE 1m-ERG
‘child’-TPF/3-ABS FRAMED:‘talk’-RCP-FAC-RLT Rdp-IND
‘clown’-N-IND
‘I made the child who talks with clowns
scream.’
Note that in cases such as Sentences 1b and 5c above where the Reduplicative Referential appears without an accompanying SWR switch-reference affix while inside a case-frame functioning as a relative clause, the Reduplicative adjunct refers to the head of the relative clause.
Unrestricted relative clauses are shown either by attaching a coordinative clause or by inserting the clause using parenthetical register (see Sec. 8.3).