> There is no suffix meaning "disjunct", is there?
>
There is no suffix for deictic disjuncts. As for normal
verbal
disjuncts, they can be created by using the appropriate voice
suffix.
Example:
Sya juziko ligogyose kwempu
gozwase
= The students are sad that the teacher
died.
Sya juzikombe kwempu gozwase
= It's sad
that the teacher died.
-- I still need to think about
disjuncts...
> Earlier in lesson 4 you said:=20
> Note
that we can also use "fawma" to achieve a similar result. However,
for="">> the sake of consistency, we will use the case-tag-to-verb
construction rat=
> her than "fawma" in all future exercises.=20
>
> So the example should be:=20
> Sya datwama gizwapya dweku to
pya.=20
>
I've changed it to read:
3. You
can convert a case tag to a verb by simply changing its part
of
speech to verb using the suffix
"-ma":
Zawtwama dweti giku
to fa.
Three bicycles were in
the house.
Note that we can also use "fawma" to
achieve a similar result:
Fawma dweti giku to zawtwa fa.
There were three bicycles in the house.
I'm not
really sure if there is a difference in meaning. Perhaps,
it's
just a difference in emphasis.
-- Maybe it's just a philosophic problem.
Well...
Thanks for pointing this out!
>
> Next:
Is there a particular reason why we have so many different word order=
>
s for different POSes?=20
> X cime Y: X preceding Y=20
> cima X Y:
X precedes Y=20
> ci[disjunct] X: (precedingly) X=20
>
There
is only one word order in Ladekwa. Ladekwa is perfectly
right-
branching. This means that headwords of a phrase or clause
always
precede their arguments or modifiers. This makes it easier to
parse.
You prefer subject-verb-object (SVO) word order because it's closer
to
your native language.
-- Yes, I'm used to the SVO-paradigma. I would
say "SPO"-paradigma, though. "P" stands here for "predicate". But I disagree,
that in Ladekwa there is only one paradigma. Verbs have an PSO paradigma. Case
tags have an SPO paradigma. So, for having only one paradigma, say, the
PSO one, I would suppose to say "Zawtwa fawma dweti giku to fa" = P(Zawtwa)
S(P(fawma) S(dweti giku to)) O(fa). If the paradigma were SPO strictly, I'd
expect "Dweti giku to fawma zawtwa fa".
> Lesson
4:=20
> Jako pa dicanya.=20
> I want to go.=20
>
> I
think I have asked this before (talking about Nasendi or Katanda), but,
w=
> hat is the difference between=20
> "Jako pa dicanya" and
"Jako pa dica pa"?=20
>
Either one is correct. Do you know of
any natural languages that use
the second form?
-- Aha... And, no, I don't.
>
Sentences with infinitives have an implicit recursive nature: The subject
o=
> f the want-verb is subject of the go-verb. Is this correct? Hm, but
then th=
> is example:
>
No. The infinitive suffix
simply indicates that the implied subject
appears in an outer clause.
-- What is the difference between infinitive
and middle voice then?
> Lesson 4:=20
> Bwiki pa
byubwipya gyotwa byefa.=20
> I heard the radio in front of the
building.=20
>
> I am not sure if this sentence can be
interpreted in three different ways, =
> but how do we express these
three ways in Ladekwa explicitely without being=
> too
verbose?
>
The English translation is ambiguous. It can have
two meanings:
1. I was in front of the building when I heard the
radio.
2. I heard the radio that is/was in front of the
building.
There is no ambiguity in the Ladekwa sentence. It has
meaning #1.
> * I heard the radio(, which is) in front of the building.=20
>
* I heard (from someone), that the radio is in front of the
building.=20
> * I heard the radio, so that I knew that it is in front
of the building.=20
>
Your second and third interpretations are not
valid. Your first
interpretation (which is the same as my #2) can be
obtained by using
"gyotwamu" instead of "gyotwa".
-- OK, but then my next question is, if you
like, how can we express my #2 and #3 in
Ladewka?
> Lesson 4:=20
> I wonder how we can
say, instead of:=20
>
> Did you tell some students that I changed
my car into a truck?=20
> Tayne te dwepa ligogyose to butimpa pa ti
foy?=20
>
> ... "Did you tell some students that I changed my
cars into those trucks?"=
> =20
>
Use "cawmba":
Cawmba pa liti foy libuti jasi
= I changed my cars into those
trucks.
-- Cool. It would be a helpful comment, that
the above sentence could be also expressed in this way "Tayne te dwepa
ligogyose to cawmba pa ti foy buti to?"
-- Regards,
-- Stephan
Schneider