Imralu wrote: ↑Sun Jun 07, 2020 2:36 pm
bradrn wrote: ↑Sun Jun 07, 2020 10:30 am
Imralu wrote: ↑Sun Jun 07, 2020 10:10 am
Do you think
shouldA waitA would be a less confusing gloss?
Possibly, but then I’d just wonder what
A means. (I’m still not entirely clear on that, actually.)
Yeah, I'll explain that in anything I write. I guess I'll change my signature slightly to reflect it. It's my way of indicating the agent nount of the glossed word, so I can gloss
mwe as "can
A" rather than "entity.that.can" or making awkward things like "canner" and "shoulder" for "entity.that.can" or "entity.that.should". I think .AG is the normal way to gloss this, except I think that glosing
he as should.AG may imply that
he is an agent noun derived from some other word in Wena, when it is in fact an underived root, and what I want to do is merely indicate that the translation in the gloss should be understood as whatever agent noun we can imagine for the word "should". A superscript
A needs an explanation anyway as it's not part of the Leipzig rules, but I like that it's much more compact and makes for much more readable glosses, I think.
I forgot that you had all those abbreviations in your signature! And now that you remind me of that, I do think now that
A is a really good compromise between explicity (is that a word?) and length — my only concern was that it’s hard to understand.
I think that in general I prefer to be as explicit as possible with my glosses, even at the expense of compactness.
Interesting that you say that but then you still glossed both
ga and
nyoga as "future".
Ga is basically "entity which will be", whereas
nyoga is just the word for the future. I could also gloss
ga as "
willA".
[/quote]
That’s because I wasn’t quite sure what the difference between those two words was. But now that you explain it, I would gloss
ga future.entity and
nyoga future.
True, all the .things do get repetitive, but they also give a much better idea of what the language is really like.
Yeah, but that's why I'd rather use
E. It requires an explanation of course, but once it's there, the glosses are, I think, easier to read.
So
that’s what
E means! But what exactly is the difference between an agent and an entity?