Travis B. wrote: ↑Fri Nov 05, 2021 7:55 pmPronouns
There is the following set of pronouns; note that 3rd person pronouns mark both gender, unlike normal nouns, and deixis:
Sg.
Pl.
1st (excl.)
tɕʰə́
dʷa
1st (incl.)
n/a
jə
2nd
qʰa
ɣʷɨn
3rd (A, prox.)
ɕáː
ɸá
3rd (A, dist.)
bʷəmʲ
wáːkʼ
3rd (B, prox.)
dzʷɨ
tʰə́ɲ
3rd (B, dist.)
xáːrʲ
ʎɨ
3rd (C, prox.)
βáːnʷ
sə́rʷ
3rd (C, dist.)
zʷɨβ
pʰáː
3rd (D, prox.)
ɕadʷ
máːç
3rd (D, dist.)
láː
fʲa
3rd (E, prox.)
ɟá
ɡáːχ
3rd (E, dist.)
nɨɲ
bə
Possessive versions of these are formed by the reduction of the genitive case marker -wə which is merged into the pronominal stem. These are placed before the possessed NP. Note that these are commonly used to express alienable possession, where the possessor is placed before a possessive pronoun which agrees with it which is placed before the possessee, as opposed to inalienable possession and compounding which are expressed with the genitive case. Note that when an NP is possessed by another NP, proximal forms of the below are used.
Sg.
Pl.
1st (excl.)
tɕʰə́w
dʷaw
1st (incl.)
n/a
jəw
2nd
qʰaw
ɣʷɨnʷ
3rd (A, prox.)
ɕáːw
ɸáw
3rd (A, dist.)
bʷəmʷ
wáːkʷʼ
3rd (B, prox.)
dzʷɨw
tʰə́nʷ
3rd (B, dist.)
xáːrʷ
ʎɨw
3rd (C, prox.)
βáːnʷ
sə́rʷ
3rd (C, dist.)
zʷɨβʷ
pʰáːw
3rd (D, prox.)
ɕadʷ
máːxʷ
3rd (D, dist.)
láːw
fʲaw
3rd (E, prox.)
ɟáw
ɡáːχʷ
3rd (E, dist.)
nɨnʷ
bəw
Last edited by Travis B. on Mon Mar 21, 2022 4:27 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Considering the obviously non-ideal nature of the Håmwo Väh orthography, I still wanted to marginally mark pitch accent somehow. The means I have come up with doing so are to mark accented open syllables except for those whose vowels are /aː/ followed in the same word by consonants by doubling the following consonant. (Yes, this makes geminates ambiguous orthographically, but geminates are not that common in practice and the orthography is plenty ambiguous to begin with.)
Another orthographic change: as [aː] ⟨á⟩ tends to hide the quality of adjacent consonants, it will be separated from adjacent palatalized consonants by an unpronounced ⟨i⟩ and from adjacent labialized consonants by an unpronounced ⟨u⟩. Likewise, labialized consonants adjacent to [æ] ⟨ä⟩ are separated from it by an unpronounced ⟨u⟩ and palatalized consonants adjacent to [ɑ ɤ ɯ] ⟨â ô û⟩ are separated from them by unpronounced ⟨i⟩.
Travis B. wrote: ↑Fri Nov 05, 2021 11:47 pmRelative Clauses
The standard kind of relative clause is one where S or A are relativized by a simple gap strategy. In this case, the relative clause is simply placed directly before the qualified NP, with the verb complex last in the relative clause. Note that for intransitive relative clauses, fluid-S-ness is still expressed by whether the verb in the relative clause agrees with the relativized noun using absolutive or ergative agreement.
However, what about relative clauses where other positions are relativized? In these cases the relative clause is placed directly before the qualified NP, but the relativized position is expressed with a relative pronoun, which consists of a proximal 3rd person demonstrative with an affix attached directly after it:
Relativizer
-ʎə
This gives the following:
Sg.
Pl.
A
ɕáː-ʎə
ɸá-ʎə
B
dzʷɨ-ʎə
tʰə́ɲ-ʎə
C
βáːn-ʎə
sə́rʷ-ʎə
D
ɕadʷ-ʎə
máːç-ʎə
E
ɟá-ʎə
ɡáːχ-ʎə
I've decided to revamp these. For starters, the relativizer marking is absorbed by the pronominal stem, resulting in:
Sg.
Pl.
A
ɕáːʎ
ɸáʎ
B
dzʷɨʎ
tʰə́ɲ
C
βáːɲ
sə́rʲ
D
ɕadʲ
máːç
E
ɟáʎ
ɡáːç
Secondarily there is a series of relativized possessors, derived from the genitive being attached to the relativizer, which is then partially absorbed into the pronominal step:
Note that these relativized possessors are used for inalienable possession. Alienable relativized possessors are formed by combining a relatived pronoun with an agreeing pronominal possesive particle, for example:
I am reworking alienable possession. I am making alienable possession an postclitic akin to the genitive case marker, but which agrees with the possessor in gender and number. This clitic is derived from reduced person pronouns combined with genitive case markers.
Travis B. wrote: ↑Tue Mar 29, 2022 1:25 pm
Note that these relativized possessors are used for inalienable possession. Alienable relativized possessors are formed by combining a relatived pronoun with an agreeing pronominal possesive particle, for example:
I have decided to make some more changes, specifically that coda /w/ is elided and this elision is marked orthographically. After /aː/ /w/ is lost altogether. Otherwise /w/ is marked solely by the coloring of the preceding vowel, i.e. with <å o u ä ö ü>.
A new aspect of Håmwo Väh is regressive palatalization and labialization spreading. When two vowels are separated by no consonant or by a single non-palatalized, non-labialized consonant, both the palatalization and the labialization of the following vowel spread to the preceding vowel. This can take place multiple times in a row from right to left.
I have decided to add conditional and subjunctive moods to Håmwo Väh. Normally the apodosis of a conditional sentence is in conditional mood unless it is a command or request, where then it is in imperative mood, and is preceded by the protasis of a conditional sentence, which may be in either subjunctive or indicative mood depending on whether it is counterfactual or not.
The verbal affixes for conditional and subjunctive moods are as follows:
Conditional
-(a)m
Subjunctive
-χɨ
The subjunctive mood is also used to express things such as third-person wishes and subordinate clauses which are not necessarily factual.
Håmwo Väh has two evidentials, direct and indirect, which are only marked in indicative mood. Direct is used for things personally experienced or observed, indirect is used for everything else, even things one is certain of. Note that the future tense is always used with the indirect, as one has not experienced or observed it yet.
Direct
-(ɨ)tʰ
Indirect
-(a)n
(Do not confuse these with direct and inverse with regard to direct/inverse verbs!)
Last edited by Travis B. on Mon Jul 25, 2022 2:04 pm, edited 2 times in total.
This applicative applies to all kinds of oblique arguments, whose nature is usually implicit from the verb stem in question or from directional markings on the verb.
The example above could be rewritten:
Mats'hat nuġhat lâq vänhan sûxxâje ñottavëhavämät.
[matsʼxatʰ nuɣʷxatʰ lɑqʰ vʲænxan sɯꜜχɑje ŋʷoꜜtʰaβəxaβæmʲætʰ]
/matsʼ-xa-tʰ nɨɣʷ-xa-tʰ laqʰ vʲan-xa-n sɨ́χa-jə ŋʷə́tʰa-βə-xa-βa-mʲa-tʰ/ be.quick-3.SG.C-DIR be.brown-3.SG.C-DIR fox.C laxy-3.SG.C-IND dog.C=ADE jump-APPL-3.SG.C-3.SG.C-OVER-DIR The quick brown (as I saw) fox jumps (as I saw) over the lazy (as I inferred) dog.
Okay, I am going to make a far-ranging change to Håmwo Väh...
Words are organized into trochees, aside from unstressed initial syllables, with accented syllables always forming the heavy syllable of a trochee. Note that unaccented words are treated here as if their accent was on their initial syllable, even though no pitch accent is applied.
Intervocalic consonants between the heavy and light syllables of trochees undergo the following lenition:
/nʷ n ɲ/ > 0 with nasalization of the preceding and following vowels.
/pʷʰ pʰ pʲʰ tʷʰ tʰ tsʷʰ tsʰ tɕʰ cʰ kʷʰ kʰ qʷʰ qʰ/ > [bʷ b bʲ dʷ d dzʷ dz dʑ ɟ ɡʷ ɡ ʁʷ ʁ]
/bʷ b bʲ dʷ d dzʷ dz dʑ ɟ ɡʷ ɡ/ > [βʷ β vʲ ðʷ ð zʷ z ʑ ʝ ɣʷ ɣ]
/ɸʷ ɸ fʲ sʷ s ɕ ç xʷ x χʷ χ/ > [βʷ β vʲ zʷ z ʑ ʝ ɣʷ ɣ ʁʷ ʁ]
/βʷ β vʲ ʝ ɣʷ ɣ ʁʷ ʁ/ > 0
This does not affect phonemes' effect on adjacent vowels, aside from that lenited nasals nasalize adjacent vowels.
The realized phones are marked orthographically rather than phonemes being marked. Note that orthographically lenited nasals are marked with <n>. Doubling consonants after accented syllables is not marked.
Note that orthographically [ðʷ ð] are marked together with <Ð~ð>.
Last edited by Travis B. on Tue Jul 26, 2022 8:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Of course, this raises the question of... what about all the resulting hiatuses?
This is by forming diphthongs and long vowels! That then raises the question about what about the fronting/labialization/backing of the original two vowels. This is resolved by taking, first, the backing (from uvular consonants) of the two vowels into question, favoring backing over non-backing; then, second, the fronting (from palatalized consonants) of the two vowels into question, favoring fronting over non-fronting; then, third, the labialization and, if not fronted, backing (from labialized consonants) of the two vowels into question, favoring labialization/backing over non-labialization/non-backing. All resulting diphthongs are falling diphthongs. A key exception is that if the preceding vowel is /aː/ it does not undergo fronting, backing, or labialization even though the offglide will. After this, all closing diphthongs resulting are merged into having [i̯ ɨ̯ ɯ̯ u̯], and all opening diphthongs resulting are merged into having [æ̯ a̯ ɑ̯ ɒ̯]. All diphthongs are long; no overlong diphthongs are permitted.
This of course gives the following diphthongs: /æi̯ æy̯ aɨ̯ ɑɯ̯ ɒu̯ ai̯ ay̯ aɯ̯ au̯ e̯i øy̯ əɨ̯ ɤɯ̯ ou̯ iæ̯ yæ̯ ɨa̯ ɯɑ̯ uɒ̯ eæ̯ øæ̯ əa̯ ɤɑ̯ oɒ̯/. These are written as if they were adjacent vowels, i.e. <äi äü ay âû åu ai aü aû au ei öü ëy ôû ou iä üä ya ûâ uå eä öä ëa ôâ oå> except if nasalized, where then they are written split up with <n> in between..
Long vowels are formed if two vowels of the same height are adjacent. Note that /aː/ merges with any other vowel to form [aː]. Orthographically long vowels are marked by doubling vowels except in the case of [aː] from /aː/, which is marked with <á>, and unless if nasalized, where then they are written split up with <n> in the middle.
I have decided to revisit Håmwo Väh, and have decided that its secondary diphthong count is far too large. Instead of having /æi̯ æy̯ aɨ̯ ɑɯ̯ ɒu̯ ai̯ ay̯ aɯ̯ au̯ e̯i øy̯ əɨ̯ ɤɯ̯ ou̯ iæ̯ yæ̯ ɨa̯ ɯɑ̯ uɒ̯ eæ̯ øæ̯ əa̯ ɤɑ̯ oɒ̯/ it will have just /æi̯ aɨ̯ ɑɯ̯ ɒu̯ ei̯ øy̯ əɨ̯ ɤɯ̯ ou̯ iæ̯ yæ̯ ɨa̯ ɯɑ̯ uɒ̯ eæ̯ øæ̯ əa̯ ɤɑ̯ oɑ̯/, written <äi ay âû åu ei öü ëy ôû ou iä üä ya ûâ uå eä öä ëa ôâ oå>.
And now that I am revisiting it, I have decided to make some significant changes. The first change is that I am ripping out the oblique case system and leaving the noun case system at:
agentive
-na
patientive
-jə
dative/benefactive
-rʲɨ
genitive
-ɣa
adverbial
-χɨa
Of course, this raises the question of what will replace it, and that is adverbial clauses in, well, adverbial case; the adverbial case ending /-χɨa/ is derived from the fusion of the nominalizer /-χɨ/ and the genitive case ending /-ɣa/. Note that such adverbial clauses are reduced in that they do not take direct/indirect marking but rather inherit directness/indirectness from their parent clause and do not have agents of their own (they do not have agent marking). Furthermore, locative verbs now use the genitive case in a locative fashion, and this extends to when these are used in an adverbial fashion. Also note that directional marking is used heavily in adverbial clauses with locative verbs.
