[YG Conlang Archives] > [romanceconlang group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
--- Jan van Steenbergen <ijzeren_jan@hidden.email>
wrote:
> > Kerno, too, has its share of inherited -e
> > words - but it has far more that have
> > migrated due to analogy.
>
> Interesting. Could you give some examples?
Well, largely any word in -ès or -èz. Felèz,
tristèz, esarckès, doulcès, difautès, morantès,
Joanès and of course, diès. By analogy, we find
oddities like carres, dondones, contemtes, ec.
which are really partial -o stems mostly that
have partially lost the old -os termination (-os
> -es) but haven't been assimilated into one of
the consonant declensions. Others are consonant
stems that have acquired an extraneous -e-. Note
the lack of an accent in the latter cases. Most
such -ès words answer to -ness words in English
and are historically descended from -icia or
something like that; those in -es can be old -o
stems, consonant stems or words that vacillate
between two or more declensions. Names in -ès are
thought to be old genitives of some sort (like
Jones). Diès is the only inherited -e stem I know
of. Seriès and speciès are learned borrowings
(ypesis, kind sort or genre, is the natural
evolution).
S PL
NOM la diès y ziès
OBL lâ dié y ziès
NOM la felèz y velèz
OBL lâ felé y velèz
Ypesis is an -s stem, which is different from the
-e stems only in the OBL singular:
NOM l' ypesis ils ypesis
OBL l' ypesis ils ypesis
Don't confuse this with l' ypès, which is bishop,
and is a partial -o stem:
NOM l' ypès ils epispeg
OBL l' epispegge ils yppises
Ipesdigoel, by the way, means "episcopal".
> Actually, the Polish conjunctive (or
> subjunctive, is there any difference?)
> used to have more tenses as well. But other
> forms are completely obsolete, and
> in Wenedyk I have neglected them.
Tsk tsk! Any good grammar will be replete with
obsolescent and curious paradigms! ;)
> I would be interested to have a look at that.
OK! I'll send it separate.
> > Why not use the old perfect infinitive
> (-isse).
>
> I thought about that. The result wouldn't be
> too bad, I think: just removing
> the "v" and adding a "normal" infinitive
> ending:
> amavisse > amaszer
> audivisse > udzieszer
> rexisse > rzegszer
> (In Wenedyk, the e- and i-conjugations have
> merged into one).
>
> The problem remains, that you get two
> completely different sets of endings for
> the same tense,
And? ;)
> which in fact would mean that
> you still have one verb with two
> endings instead of two verbs. But perhaps I'll
> develop a dialect with this
> feature. I have been thinking much about
> dialects lately, anyway.
Excellent!
> > Latin has present and future imperative.
>
> Like in "memento mori", right? Was that form
> still in use during the period of Vulgar
> Latin/Early Romance?
Probably not. This didn't stop British bards from
incorporating archaic and foreign grammatical
features into their elevated prose language. Some
of those elements have survived in modern speech,
which a wonder and no mistake!
Padraic.
=====
Passe lê tempeor po rizer; passe lê tempeor pois Ddé.
-- per tradicièn Niponor
.