[YG Conlang Archives] > [ceqli group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
on 4/3/04 1:37 PM, HandyDad at lsulky@hidden.email wrote: > Rex, how are you handling modals: 'I ought to do...', 'I would > do...', 'I would rather not do...', 'I could do...'? Similar to > auxiliary verbs? ---K > I haven't done a whole lot of thinking about this in general. What we have so far: dwa = must vol = want fo = need ker = like pluker = rather, prefer fey = can, be able Go dwa/vol/fo/ker/pluker/fey (ke) kam. I must, etc. work the 'ke' being optional Now, I don't know about conditionals. Will they work with the connectives? Go fu ja hivabu zi fu kun go. I will go if you accompany me. (It's in the future, so it's not counterfactual) Go ja hivabu zi kun go. I would go if you accompany me. (In the present, so we know I'm -not- going, hence it's counterfactual, hence the 'Would') Am I making sense? Maybe we need to look at it another way. In the possible situation that you accompany me, I will go. If you will accompany me, I will go. Go ja hivabu zi kun go. In the known situation that you accompany me, I will go. If you accompany me (and you are doing so) I will go. Go ja cefaco zi kun go. (I go (next sentence causes first) you accompany me) In the counterfactual situation that you accompany me, I would go. If you were accompanying me, I would go. Go ja hivabu zi kun go hi co buhay. I will go if you accompany me (and the latter is not the case). Other ways I see of expressing things: plubon ke zi kam vokun go. You'd better work with me. It's better that you work with me. Fo ke ze kam vokun go. It's necessary that you work with me. Again, any sense being made here? -- Rex F. May (Baloo) Daily cartoon at: http://www.cnsnews.com/cartoon/baloo.asp Buy my book at: http://www.kiva.net/~jonabook/book-GesundheitDummy.htm