Short questions for the Omni-kan project

[Qwynegold]

I decided to create a thread just for asking people short questions while I'm working on my auxlang Omni-kan.

And here comes my first question. I decided to make almost all words gender neutral. There are suffixes you can use to mark something as male or female, if you really need to. I decided to make the female suffix -ma (from Burmese -má). But it's difficult to find a natlang morphemes for male derivation. It seems like many languages don't have one, because men are seen as the norm. I want something that's a whole syllable (so not -o from Spanish). I thought about English -man (as in mailman, policeman, Englishman), but it's too similar to -ma. Then I decided to borrow Burmese -thà, which turns out as -fa. But I'm not satisfied with that either. -fa is not recognizable as being the same morpheme as -thà. And it's still ripe for mishearing, with f and m both being labials. So I wonder if anyone knows of other natlang suffixes used for male derivation. I would like it to come from one of the below languages, but I may consider other languages as well.

Akan
Ancient Greek
Bambara
Bengali
Burmese
English
Filipino
French
Fula
German
Hausa
Hindustani
Hungarian
Italian
Japanese
Javanese
Kazakh
Korean
Latin
Malay
Mandarin
Marathi
Modern Standard Arabic
Oromo
Persian
Portuguese
Punjabi
Russian
Sanskrit
Spanish
Swahili
Tamil
Telugu
Thai
Turkish
Uzbek
Vietnamese
Yoruba

Some examples of how this suffix would be used:

More: show

hamsare - spouse | hamsare-fa - husband
mau - cat | mau-fa - tomcat
Nihog-ren - Japanese person | Nihog-ren-fa - Japanese man
peca - child | peca-fa - boy
(possibly o - 3SG | o-fa - he)

[Emily]

i'm not seeing any masculinizing suffixes poking around through the languages you listed; the closest i found was nouns that have other meanings that default into masculine gender in gendered languages (e.g. -eur in french, -inho in portuguese). my suggestion would be -vir or -wir from latin vir "man"

[Qwynegold]

How did you go about doing that? I've been trying to look this up in some languages I suspected might have a masculine suffix, but it's a lot of hard work and I haven't gotten any results. And I can't tell if it's because they lack such a suffix, or because it just wasn't described in the source. Thanks for the suggestion though, I'll have a look at that Latin word.

Right now I'm trying to write about the word lo which means "like". Here are some examples of how it's used:

1)
door go to [tube shape like] hallway
The door leads to [a tube shaped] hallway.

2)
country COP [mountain like]
The country is [mountaineous].

3)
3SG think cilantro taste [soap like]
He thinks cilantro tastes [like soap].

4)
3SG think cilantro [soap like] taste
He thinks cilantro tastes [like soap].

This word is basically an adjectivized/adverbalizer, but it can also make whole phrases. In these examples I've marked the adjective/adverbial phrases with [ ], and the word they are modifying has been underlined. But in sentences 3 and 4 I'm a little unsure, is it "taste" that's being modified? Can one say that sentence 3 has a predicative adverbial phrase? Also, is it correct to say that the verb in 3 is transitive and in 4 intransitive? This language has SVO order and almost always modifier-head order, so in 3 I think we have a verb complement, while in 4 we only have an attributive adverbial phrase.

[Nortaneous]

i'm not seeing any masculinizing suffixes poking around through the languages you listed; the closest i found was nouns that have other meanings that default into masculine gender in gendered languages (e.g. -eur in french, -inho in portuguese). my suggestion would be -vir or -wir from latin vir "man"

consult 4chan - "-bro", "-brah", "-fag" etc.

[Qwynegold]

consult 4chan - "-bro", "-brah", "-fag" etc.

[bradrn]

Quite a few languages of the Sepik region have a gender system where masculine is the marked term: Tayap has masculine ergative clitic =ŋi, Manambu has masculine marker -d, Buna has adjective concord markers -gwe (masculine singular) and -ʔe (masculine plural).

[Travis B.]

Even consider Standard German - the only gender where the nominative is distinguished from the accusative is the masculine.

[Qwynegold]

Hmm, okay but I'm looking for more like derivational morphemes.

[Qwynegold]

Among the languages in the list in the first post, do you know any that has a word for "think" with these senses:
1) have thoughts
2) have an opinion

But not these:
3) believe smth
4) intend to do

[Qwynegold]

*sigh* I'm working on the word "smell" right now, and it's difficult because Google Translate and Wiktionary don't give clear enough definitions. Take the following Arabic word: شم. Does it mean "to sense with one's nose" or "to give off an odour" or both? What about the following Persian words: بوییدن and بو کردن?

[Qwynegold]

Oh, and does anyone have any suggestions on how one should borrow verbs from Swahili? Because the Swahili verb is quite complicated, with all kinds of obligatory affixes. Should I borrow the infinitive forms or just the verb root or what?

[Vijay]

Among the languages in the list in the first post, do you know any that has a word for "think" with these senses:
1) have thoughts
2) have an opinion

But not these:
3) believe smth
4) intend to do

Wait, what do you mean by "believe smth"? Like...isn't having an opinion believing something?

In Malayalam, you would use വിചാരിക്കുക [ʋiˈd͡ʒaːɾikʲuga] to mean have thoughts, or maybe pondering. You would use തോന്നുക [ˈt̪oːn̪n̪uga] for feelings, like 'I think he's a dickhead'. 'Believe' is usually വിശ്വസിക്കുക [ʋiˈɕʋəsikʲuga]. 'Intend to do' is usually expressed in a format more like 'I have a desire to...'.

[Qwynegold]

Wait, what do you mean by "believe smth"? Like...isn't having an opinion believing something?

As in "I think it's going to rain tomorrow".

In Malayalam, you would use വിചാരിക്കുക [ʋiˈd͡ʒaːɾikʲuga] to mean have thoughts, or maybe pondering. You would use തോന്നുക [ˈt̪oːn̪n̪uga] for feelings, like 'I think he's a dickhead'. 'Believe' is usually വിശ്വസിക്കുക [ʋiˈɕʋəsikʲuga]. 'Intend to do' is usually expressed in a format more like 'I have a desire to...'.

Hmm. Do you know if Tamil or Telugu have similar distinctions?

[Vijay]

Wait, what do you mean by "believe smth"? Like...isn't having an opinion believing something?

As in "I think it's going to rain tomorrow".

Oh, okay. Then you'd say തോന്നുക.

Hmm. Do you know if Tamil or Telugu have similar distinctions?

I don't know much Telugu, I'm afraid, but I think at least Tamil has the same distinctions. IIUC they say நினைக்க ninaikka as a Pure Dravidian counterpart to our evil Sanskrit-laden (partial) loanword വിചാരിക്കുക. തോന്നുക is Dravidian, so they instead say tōṉṟu in Tamil.

Btw I forgot to attempt an answer to your other questions!

*sigh* I'm working on the word "smell" right now, and it's difficult because Google Translate and Wiktionary don't give clear enough definitions. Take the following Arabic word: شم. Does it mean "to sense with one's nose" or "to give off an odour" or both? What about the following Persian words: بوییدن and بو کردن?

Wiktionary also says they all mean things like 'to aoperceive through the nose', though, so I'm pretty sure they all mean 'to sense with one's nose'. I'm not sure intransitive smell is even a thing outside Europe. In Malayalam, for instance, you wouldn't say that something "smelled"; you'd have to say that it "had a smell."

Oh, and does anyone have any suggestions on how one should borrow verbs from Swahili? Because the Swahili verb is quite complicated, with all kinds of obligatory affixes. Should I borrow the infinitive forms or just the verb root or what?

Just the root. After all, that's where Jenga comes from!

[Qwynegold]

I don't know much Telugu, I'm afraid, but I think at least Tamil has the same distinctions. IIUC they say நினைக்க ninaikka as a Pure Dravidian counterpart to our evil Sanskrit-laden (partial) loanword വിചാരിക്കുക. തോന്നുക is Dravidian, so they instead say tōṉṟu in Tamil.

Ah, thank you!

*sigh* I'm working on the word "smell" right now, and it's difficult because Google Translate and Wiktionary don't give clear enough definitions. Take the following Arabic word: شم. Does it mean "to sense with one's nose" or "to give off an odour" or both? What about the following Persian words: بوییدن and بو کردن?

Wiktionary also says they all mean things like 'to aoperceive through the nose', though, so I'm pretty sure they all mean 'to sense with one's nose'.

Huh, I was pretty sure the definitions were less helpful than that when I checked those words on Wiktionary. Oh well, I'll check them again later. I'm on my phone right now, so I'm not even gonna attempt to highlight and copy words in the Arabic script.

I'm not sure intransitive smell is even a thing outside Europe. In Malayalam, for instance, you wouldn't say that something "smelled"; you'd have to say that it "had a smell."

Huh, that's fascinating. I had no idea.

Oh, and does anyone have any suggestions on how one should borrow verbs from Swahili? Because the Swahili verb is quite complicated, with all kinds of obligatory affixes. Should I borrow the infinitive forms or just the verb root or what?

Just the root. After all, that's where Jenga comes from!

Oh, I thought it was bad to take just the root without the obligatory affixes. But OK. I didn't know that's where "Jenga" came from either.

Thanks for the answers. I think I'll get some progress done now.

[Qwynegold]

Right now I'm struggling with this sentence:

I wish one could turn back the clock.
1SG wish INDEF.PRON can back way turn clock
Mi tamana wan pisa poste mici puru saha

In Omni-kan adverbs are supposed to come before the verb, so if "back way"* is an adverb, it should come before "turn", but probably not before "can"? But what if it's a complement?

I really struggle with syntax, and complements are something I understand barely at all. Wikipedia says that a complement "is necessary to complete the meaning of a given expression". Well, "I wish one could turn the clock" is a functional sentence (though with a different meaning), so is it not a complement?

Also, complements are supposed to take the object place in Omni-kan, but in this sentence there is already an object (clock), so I don't know what to do.

I know no one can tell me how to construct my conlang, but I just wanted to see if anyone has anything at all to say about this. Maybe that would nudge me to make a decision about this.

*There are many multiword phrases like this that I've classified as adverbs.

[Vardelm]

I ain't syntax expert no, but I'll offer some thoughts.

I wish one could turn back the clock.
1SG wish INDEF.PRON can back way turn clock
Mi tamana wan pisa poste mici puru saha

Yeah, looks like you have a complement since this would (I assume) be an incomplete sentence:

I wish
1SG wish
Mi tamana

So this would be the complement:

one could turn back the clock.
INDEF.PRON can back way turn clock
wan pisa poste mici puru saha

Yes?

---

For clarity, is this a correct gloss?

I wish one could turn back the clock. Mi 1SG tamana wish wan INDEF.PRON pisa can poste back mici way puru turn saha clock

---

I find any time I work on syntax, I have to start with stupidly easy sentences & work my way up from there. Assuming the above gloss is correct, let's try that here.

Is this correct?

One turns/turned the clock. (I don't know about your TAM marking.) wan INDEF.PRON puru turn saha clock

In Omni-kan adverbs are supposed to come before the verb, so if "back way"* is an adverb, it should come before "turn"...

Since that's the case, let's add that into the above sentence.

One can/could turn back the clock. wan INDEF.PRON poste back mici way puru turn saha clock

So far so good, I think. Seems easy & straightforward.

---

Let's look at "can" now. This is a little trickier, being unfamiliar with the language. Is pisa "can" a modal particle or a modal verb meaning "to be able"? For now, I'll assume it can be a full verb itself, so we have:

I can. / I am able. Mi 1SG pisa can

Maybe that's correct; maybe it's not. It depends on whether the verb pisa "to be able" requires a complement here or not. When it does take a complement, I assume the complement will follow that verb.

I can (something). Mi 1SG pisa can X (insert complement here)

Let's add this complement.

turn the clock puru turn saha clock

Take that entire phrase and substitute it into X in the sentence above.

I can (turn the clock). Mi 1SG pisa can puru turn saha clock

Next we add the adverb back in. Note, I think the adverb would go before the verb in the complement phrase since it's a part of that, not the main verb.

turn back the clock poste back mici way puru turn saha clock

Take that entire phrase and again substitute it into X in the sentence above.

I can (turn back the clock). Mi 1SG pisa can poste back mici way puru turn saha clock

Note that poste mici puru saha "turn back the clock" is a subject complement here since it is describing the subject: mi "I". This might be part of what's tripping you up:

Also, complements are supposed to take the object place in Omni-kan

Does that mean that subject complements are not allowed in Omni-kan? That is, you are not allowed to use a complement to describe the subject? I doubt that, but maybe there are languages that work this way.

I think maybe you meant that complements (considering the whole phrase as 1 unit) are placed in the location/slot where objects would go in transitive sentences. Assuming SVO word order, that's pretty much what we see in the above examples.

---

Let's get back to your initial example. Start here:

I wish. Mi 1SG tamana wish

As before, maybe tamana "wish" is required to take a complement or not. Obviously, it's allowed since you posted the original example. So:

I wish (something). Mi 1SG tamana wish X (insert complement here)

That "something" is going to be one of the examples above (except "I" changed to "one"):

One can (turn back the clock). wan INDEF.PRON pisa can poste back mici way puru turn saha clock

Once again, substitute that whole sentence into the "something" above:

I wish (One can (turn back the clock)). Mi 1SG tamana wish wan INDEF.PRON pisa can poste back mici way puru turn saha clock

There ya go. That's your original sentence re-constructed. It makes sense. To me, it's easier to understand when you think of it as basically a complement clause embedded within another complement clause. When you start simple & build up with straight substitutions, I feel like you can follow the logic & make sure everything works together.

---

If pisa "can" is a particle or auxiliary verb that changes the modality of its main verb, then I think you could choose its syntactic rules. Is it required to be right next to the main verb, or does it just come before the entire verb phrase including complements? If it's right next to the main verb, then you can get this order:

I can turn the clock. Mi 1SG pisa can puru turn saha clock

Keeping the requirement to be right next to the main verb, we add the adverb:

I can turn back the clock. Mi 1SG poste back mici way pisa can puru turn saha clock

And finally, place that type of structure into your original example:

I wish (One can turn back the clock). Mi 1SG tamana wish wan INDEF.PRON poste back mici way pisa can puru turn saha clock

In that case, since pisa "can" is not a full verb, you only have 1 complement instead of a 2nd complement embedded in the 1st.

---

WHEW!!! Does that make sense? Those syntactically more experted people can correct anything above, but this is the way I would think about it.


BTW, this is the 1st I've been able to really absorb & think about a conlang post in a while, so my brain might be recovering from my final semester. YAY!

[bradrn]

Amazing explanation! I’ve rarely seen such a clear linguistic exposition.

One very important thing I would add is that languages very often have multiple complement types. For instance, the English sentence I wish [one was able [to turn back the clock]] has two different complement types: One was able to turn back the clock has the internal structure of a sentence, and could be used as a main clause, whereas to turn back the clock uses a different form lacking a subject, and thus cannot be used as a main clause. (I’ve seen the two types called balanced and deranked respectively, though I’m not sure how widely-used the terminology is.) In a language without deranked complement clauses — or in one where they are used in different places than English — that sentence might be rendered I wish one was able one turns back the clock. Also in many languages it is possible to delete the subject of a complement clause if equal to another argument (equi-NP deletion): I wish one was able turns back the clock. It’s worth thinking about exactly how many types of complement clauses Omni-Kan has, and what the semantic and syntactic distinctions are between them.

Also, complements are supposed to take the object place in Omni-kan

Does that mean that subject complements are not allowed in Omni-kan? That is, you are not allowed to use a complement to describe the subject? I doubt that, but maybe there are languages that work this way.

Attested in Tariana, White Hmong and Panare. Even English doesn’t like subject complement clauses: we prefer it is possible that he is alive rather than that he is alive is possible.

EDIT: See clarification in subsequent post.

[Imralu]

So I wonder if anyone knows of other natlang suffixes used for male derivation. I would like it to come from one of the below languages, but I may consider other languages as well.

German has -rich. It's not terribly common and mainly used just for a few animals.

I wish one could turn back the clock. Mi 1SG tamana wish wan INDEF.PRON pisa can poste back mici way puru turn saha clock

Damn, nice formatting. I will have to remember this.

[Qwynegold]

one could turn back the clock.
INDEF.PRON can back way turn clock
wan pisa poste mici puru saha

Yes?

Ah, I see. I had been thinking of only poste mici (back way) as the complement, and saha (clock) as a separate object.

I wish one could turn back the clock. Mi 1SG tamana wish wan INDEF.PRON pisa can poste back mici way puru turn saha clock

Yeah, that's correct.

One turns/turned the clock. (I don't know about your TAM marking.) wan INDEF.PRON puru turn saha clock

Yeah. There is no tense, and in this sentence there's no aspect that needs marking. Mood I haven't worked on much.

Let's look at "can" now. This is a little trickier, being unfamiliar with the language. Is pisa "can" a modal particle or a modal verb meaning "to be able"?

The latter. It has meanings 1) be able to, 2) know how to do, 3) be possible that smth may happen, 4) have permission to do smth.

Next we add the adverb back in. Note, I think the adverb would go before the verb in the complement phrase since it's a part of that, not the main verb.

turn back the clock poste back mici way puru turn saha clock

Ah yeah, that makes sense.

Note that poste mici puru saha "turn back the clock" is a subject complement here since it is describing the subject: mi "I". This might be part of what's tripping you up:

Aha. I had to reread that part in the WP article, because that's something I hadn't understood at all. So a subject complement is something that the subject is and becomes, while an object complement is something that the object becomes. And the complement co-occurs with the subject or object. This article only mentions subject/object complements that are predicative though. Are there other kinds of subject/object complement? (Disregarding what is says under the heading "As arguments", because there complement is just synonymous with argument.)

Also, complements are supposed to take the object place in Omni-kan

Does that mean that subject complements are not allowed in Omni-kan? That is, you are not allowed to use a complement to describe the subject? I doubt that, but maybe there are languages that work this way.

I guess they are allowed; I just didn't know what subject complements where. I've always been thinking of subject complements as just the objects of copulas (even though I know copulas are supposed to be intransitive).

WHEW!!! Does that make sense? Those syntactically more experted people can correct anything above, but this is the way I would think about it.

Yes, thanks for the pedagogical explanations. (Btw, I don't think there are much more "syntactically experted people".)

BTW, this is the 1st I've been able to really absorb & think about a conlang post in a while, so my brain might be recovering from my final semester. YAY!

Ah, you've been working on a big thesis until now? Congratulations! It must be a big relief to have that over with.