[YG Conlang Archives] > [ceqli group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
Rex May - Baloo wrote: > > on 3/18/02 12:54 PM, Mike Wright at darwin@hidden.email wrote: > > > Rex May - Baloo wrote: > >> > >> Okay, the way I see it, Ceqli needs four particles: > >> > >> 1. To become (Esperanto ig^i) > >> 2. To cause (Esperanto igi) > >> 3. To cease being (the opposite of #1) > >> 4. To cause to cease (opposite of #2) > >> > >> Now, originally I had ho meaning become: > >> > >> Go ho dorm. I go to sleep, fall asleep. > >> Go dormho. I go to sleep. > >> > >> And kaw meaning cause. > >> > >> Go kaw zi dorm. I cause you to sleep, put you to sleep. > >> Go dormkaw zi. I put you to sleep. > >> > >> They can be used as suffixes, Esperanto style, or as words in their own > >> right, a la English and Mandarin. I believe, tho, that when used as > >> suffixes, the resulting compound will again form a pseudo-morpheme. > > > > I don't see the point of such suffixes. I would hold off on adding > > complications to the syntax just on the off chance that they may > > become useful. Why not wait until the need becomes obvious, then deal > > with it? > > Maybe not all of them, but the Esperanto 'cause' word, -ig, is very useful > in that language. It also has meaning as an independent word meaning > 'cause,' but mostly appears as a suffix. > > > > And why suffixes rather than prefixes? When does the logic of Ceqli > > syntax demand a suffix, and when does it demand a prefix? > > In this case, I think it's the head-last rule. I sleep-cause you. > Sleep-cause is a kind of causing, not a kind of sleeping. > > One thing I think is important is color words. I redden. I blacken the > wall. I whiten the screen. Etc. And I'm just prejudiced in favor of > compound words, I guess. > > Does mandarin have a pattern of any kind here? Nothing neat. There's the "change of status <le>" (which is one aspect of what Li and Thompson call CRS - "currently relevant state"), which could be used with the second column, and <rang4>, the auxiliary verb for "make, cause; allow". > I sleep. I go to sleep. I put him to sleep. > I'm red. I turn red. I make him red. > I sit. I sit down. I sit him down. > > In Esperanto, I think, all these take the ig and ig^ suffixes. [...] > > Another approach might be to create compound verbs like "kawbuji" for > > "kill", "hobuji" for "die", "kawbudorm" for "wake up" (transitive) and > > "hobudorm" for "wake up" (intransitive). > > I would be happy with these, tho I think they should be bujikaw, bujiho, > budormkaw, budormho. If "dormkaw" is "cause (someone) to sleep", then "budorm-kaw" would be "cause (someone) to not sleep", while "bu-dormkaw" would be "not cause (someone) to sleep". I suppose it could be made clear in writing, but I'm having trouble trying to distinguish them in speech--/'bu dorm kaw/ vs. /'bu 'dorm kaw/. So, for "un-", it seems that something other than "bu" is required. How about "di", from English "de-"? That could be combined with simple verbs (including stative verbs) and also with causative compounds: dorm - sleep didorm - wake up (intransitive) dormkaw - put to sleep didormkaw - wake up (transitive) I can even imagine "dikaw" for "revert". -- Mike Wright http://www.CoastalFog.net ____________________________________________________________ "The difference between theory and practice is that, in theory, there is no difference between theory and practice; in practice, however, there is." -- Anonymous