Zompist Bboard Again

Yes and No

To form a yes/no question in Malayalam, all you have to do is to replace the [ u ] or [ɯ] at the end of the verb at the end of the sentence with [oː] (in a more formal register, you can simply add -[ʋoː]), add -[oː] if the verb ends in a consonant, or add -[joː] if the verb ends in [ i ]. For example:

[n̪iː ˈpoːn̪n̪oː]? 'Are you going?'
[n̪iː ˈn̪oːkijoː]? 'Did you look?'
[n̪iː ˈpoːwmoː]? 'Will you go?'

To answer such a question in the affirmative ('yes'), you simply repeat the verb without the interrogative suffix, e.g.

[n̪iː ˈpoːn̪n̪oː]? 'Are you going?'
[ˈpoːn̪n̪u]. 'Yes.'

However, if the main verb in the question is the copula, e.g.:

[məleˈjaːɭijaːɳoː]? 'Are (you) Malayalee?'

Then the way you would say 'yes' would be [əˈd̪e].

The typical way of saying 'no' in Malayalam is [ˈjilla]. This also means 'there isn't' or 'there aren't'. However, the equivalent of 'am not', 'aren't', or 'isn't' in Malayalam is [ˈəlla]. The past tense form of both of these is formed by elongating the last vowel and adding [jɾun̪n̪u], i.e. [jilˈlaːjɾun̪n̪u], [əlˈlaːjɾun̪n̪u]. The future tense form is just the past tense form with /ikkum/ instead of /un̪n̪u/: [jilˈlaːjɾikʲum], [əˈlaːjɾikʲum].

Note that [aːj] in all verb forms is often pronounced just [aː].

[ˈjilla] is also the verbal suffix normally used to form the negative form of a verb. For example, 'I am not going' in Malayalam would be [ɲaːn ˈpoːn̪n̪illa]. Some speakers, at least, build the negative form of a verb with the future definite suffix by deleting -[um] at the end of the verb and replacing it with [uːlla].

Both [ˈjilla] and [ˈəlla] can be turned into tag questions by replacing the last vowel with [eː]. [jilˈleː] means 'isn't there?', 'aren't there?', or 'didn't I/you/he/she/it/we/they/y'all?' and can be used as a suffix just like the declarative form [ˈjilla]. [əlˈleː] means 'am I not?', 'are you not?', etc.

A Nominal Suffix and a Verbal Suffix

I know this is a pretty random combination of suffixes to talk about in the same post, but there's so little to say about them that I figured I might as well just cover them both together. (Also, I think if we cover these two suffixes, then I can post a movie clip where the only thing I haven't covered in this thread so far is the vocabulary words ).

The first suffix is -/aʈʈe/ and is roughly equivalent to 'may...!' This is often used in expressions of farewell, e.g. [ˈaːʈe] or [ˈaːʈɯ] literally means 'may it be!' but is often used to mean just 'goodbye'. [ʋəˈɾəʈe] literally means 'may (I?) come!', [ˈpoːʈe] means 'may ___ go!', and [jiˈɾikʲəʈe] means 'may ___ sit/remain!' but all of these are just other ways of saying 'goodbye' as well. [ˈn̪oːkəʈe] means 'let me take a look!'.

The second is -[um], which we use mainly to conjoin two nouns by attaching it to both of them, e.g. [ˈboːbɛnum ˈmoːɭijum] 'Boban and Molly'. It can also be used to mean 'even'; another way of expressing this is with -[poːlum], which is a combination of this suffix and the suffix -[poːl] 'like', used to express similarity. It can be added to the citation form of the verb and followed by a form of the verb [ˈt͡ʃejjuga] 'to do' (can't think of any specific examples off the top of my head, but I think I'll edit this post to add some once I find some again).

It may also be used in the equivalent to the construction 'some X or other', i.e. [ʋəlˈləʋəɾum] means 'someone (or other)'; compare [əˈʋər] 'they (that person)'.

Sample movie clip: Chemmeen

This is a short scene from the 1965 Malayalam movie Chemmeen, perhaps the most famous Malayalam movie there is. It is dramatic but has very few words in it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mNttdaO5Cs.

The movie is about a young lady from a fishing community named Karuthamma. She has a boyfriend named Pareekutty. Some additional background information on the scene (a few spoilers included): Some of the vocabulary words used in this scene have already been covered in previous posts in this thread: [ʋəɭˈɭət̪ile miːn] means 'the fish in the boat', and [ʋəlˈləʋəɾum] means 'someone (or other)'.

The new vocabulary in this scene is as follows:
[jelˈlaːm] 'all (of something), everything'
[ˈmiɳɖuga] 'to speak' (almost always used in a negative sense, e.g. [miɳˈɖuːlla] 'won't speak'. Here, [miɳˈɖuːlleː] means 'won't you talk to me?')
[ɲaːn ˈpoːʈe] essentially means 'I'll get going' in this context.
[ˈkaːɳuga] 'to see'
[oː] is an informal version of [uʋˈʋɯ], which simply means 'yes'. It seems to be used more by poorer or lower-caste people.
[jiʃˈʈəm] is a Sanskrit loanword we use to express what we like. [jenˈnoːɖ iʃʈəˈmaːɳoː] means 'do you like me?' or, in this case, 'do you love me?'.
[ˈmaːt̪rəm] 'only, just, exclusively'

Translation:
Pareekutty: Karuthamma...Aren't all the fish in the boat for me?...Won't you talk to me?
Karuthamma: I'll get going. Someone will see us.
P: Karuthamma?
K: Yeah?
P: Do you love me?
K: Yes.
P: Only me?
K: Yes...I'll get going.
P: Karuthamma.
K: No. I'll get going.

Complementizer Phrases

In Malayalam, the way you turn a sentence into a complementizer phrase within a noun phrase, e.g. 'The man is going to the market' -> 'the man who's going to the market...' is by changing the final verb and putting the head of the NP directly after it, but only if the verb is an affirmative (i.e. not negative) verb. For example, recall that [ˈpoːgun̪n̪u] means 'am/are/is going'. If you want to say 'the man who is going', you simply change the final vowel to [a] and then add [ˈmənʃɛn], the word for '(the) man': [ˈpoːgun̪n̪a ˈmənʃɛn] 'the man who is going'. If the verb ends in a consonant, then simply add -[a] to the end. In poetry at least (and perhaps in some variety/ies of Malayalam), [ˈpoːgum] can be used in the same contexts (I'm not sure whether the meaning is exactly the same as [ˈpoːgun̪n̪a] or not since its usage is not clearly restricted to things that will take place in the future).

If the verb is a negative verb, e.g. [ˈpoːgun̪n̪illa] 'am/are/is not going', then you change it by replacing the suffixes on the verb with -[aːt̪a], or simply -[aː] in poetry. [poːˈgaːt̪a ˈmənʃɛn] or [ˈpwaːt̪a ˈmənʃɛn] could mean 'the man who doesn't go' or 'the man who isn't going'. In poetry, at least, you might see [poːˈgaː ˈmənʃɛn] with the same meaning. If the verb is a negative verb but in past tense, you can simple replace the last [a] with -[aːt̪a], e.g. [poːjilˈlaːt̪a ˈmənʃɛn] 'the man who didn't go'. [ˈkaːɳuga] means 'to see' in Malayalam, so [kaːˈɳaː] and [kaːˈɳaːt̪a] mean 'invisible' (i.e. not seen, not being seen, and not to be seen).

Now, how do you say something like 'that which goes'? Well, remember that [əˈd̪ɯ] in Malayalam means 'that'? You just add that a suffix instead of -[a], -[aː] or -[aːt̪a]. 'That which goes' would be [ˈpoːgun̪n̪əd̪ɯ]. 'That which is invisible' would be [kaːˈɳaːt̪əd̪ɯ].

The equivalent to 'that' in phrases like "I said that..." or "I think that..." in Malayalam is [ˈen̪n̪ɯ], or just [n̪n̪ɯ] after the informal copula [aː]. For example, [ɲaːn ˈn̪inde bʱərt̪aːˈʋaːɳen̪n̪ɯ pəˈrejɯ] means 'say that I'm your husband!'.

More on Verbs: 'To Give' and the Perfect

In Malayalam, there are two verbs that both mean 'to give'; the difference between them is the person of the indirect object. If the indirect object is not in third person, we use [t̪əˈɾiga]. If it is, we instead use [koˈɖukɯga]. Thus, [t̪əˈɾiga] means 'to give me/you/us(/y'all)' whereas [koˈɖukɯga] means 'to give him/her/it/them'. Both of these are also used in compound or serial verb constructions to indicate the indirect object. For example, [pəˈrɛɲɯ goˈɖɯ] means 'tell him!'.

If you want to talk about one thing happening after another, one way to do it is by adding the suffix -[iʈɯ] to the verb expressing the thing that happened first. For example, [ˈpoːjʈɯ ˈʋən̪n̪u] means 'returned', literally 'went and came'. The past tense form can also be used in a manner similar to a past participle unless perhaps it ends in -[ u ], in which case that [ u ] will most likely be changed to -[ɯ] (not all speakers do this in all contexts; in formal contexts, they are especially unlikely to do this).

'After' in Malayalam is expressed by the word [kəˈɻiɲiʈɯ], where [kəˈɻijuga] literally means 'to (be) finish(ed), end'. 'After I went' would be [ɲaːn poːj kəˈɻiɲiʈɯ]. The perfect tense is expressed by using this -[iʈɯ] suffix and then adding -[ɔɳɖɯ] (or -[uɳɖɯ]), e.g. [t͡ʃejˈd̪iʈɔɳɖɯ] 'have/has done'.

This is a terrible movie about a woman named Prabha Narendran, her boyfriend named Prem Krishnan, and her husband named Narendran Panicker(?) who she ran away from because he's very abusive for no apparent reason (I just can't get over the apparent lack of motive). Here, Prabha and Prem just bought her dad a birthday gift in a touristy mountain resort town with lots of Westerners when suddenly, Narendran shows up out of nowhere:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mElb6E1_tho&t=5509s

The part of the movie in question is from 1:31:55 to 1:33:18. Prabha and Narendran at least are from the Nair caste. They are first cousins who grew up together because he had no surviving relatives, and he has abused her since childhood. When they got married, she took as her last name not his last name but rather his first name per Nair tradition, hence "Prabha Narendran."

Of course, much of the dialogue here is in English. The words we have already covered in this dialogue are [ˈɛnde] 'my', [ˈaːɾɯ] 'who', -[ˈaːɳɯ] 'am/are/is', [jiˈd̪ɯ] 'this', [ˈen̪n̪ɯ] 'that (after a quote)', [ɲaːn] 'I', [ˈn̪ɪnde] 'your', and, in this lesson, [koˈɖukɯga] 'to give him/her/it/them'. We've also seen the verb [pəˈrejuga] 'to say'. The new vocabulary here is as follows:

[kaj] 'hand'
-[iːn̪n̪ɯ] is short for -[iln̪in̪n̪ɯ], a postposition (+ case marker) meaning 'from' (literally 'having stood in')
[ʋiˈɖuga] 'to let go'
[ʋiˈɕʋaːsəm] 'belief'
[ʋiˈɕʋaːsəm ˈaːʋuga] 'to believe'
[bʱərˈt̪aːʋɯ] (more likely to be pronounced more like [pʰərt̪aːˈʋɯ]) 'husband'
[kuːʈɯˈgaːɾɛn] 'male friend (boyfriend?)'
[t͡ʃʰi]! or [t͡ʃʰe]! - an interjection that's not so polite Can mean anything from "tut, tut!" to "goddammit!"

[eˈɖi] is an informal term, typically used to address a woman or girl who you are implying is somehow lower than or equivalent to you in social status. The equivalent more commonly used to address a man or boy is [eˈɖa]. The word pronounced [pərɛˈɲowɯɖɯ] in this clip is [pəˈrɛɲɯ goˈɖɯ], i.e. 'tell him' (in this case, the indirect object is male ). [ˈaːn̪n̪illa] means [ˈaːgun̪n̪illa], literally 'isn't becoming'.

So here's the dialogue:

Narendran: Good evening, Mrs. Prabha Narendran.
Prabha: [ˈjɛnde kajˈjiːn̪n̪ɯ ʋiˈɖu]...[ˈjɛnde kajˈjiːn̪n̪ɯ ʋiˈɖaːnaː pəˈrəɲəd̪ɯ]! 'Let go of my hand...I said let go of my hand!'
Narendran: Okay, okay, okay, okay! Hallo, Prem...Prem Krishnan. I am Narendran, and this is Mrs. Prabha Narendran. (forced laugh)
Prem: [ˈaːɾaːɳɯ prəˈbeː jiˈd̪ɯ]? 'Who is this, Prabha?'
Narendran: Mmm? [pərɛˈɲowɯɖɯ]. [ɲaːn pəˈrɛɲiʈɯ ʋiˈɕʋaːsəm ˈaːn̪n̪illa]; [pərɛˈɲowɯɖɯ]...[ɲaːn ˈn̪inde pʰərt̪aːˈʋaːɳen̪n̪ɯ pəreˈjaːn]! 'Tell him. He doesn't believe me once I say it; tell him...say that I'm your husband!'
(Dramatic pause)
Narendran: [ˈn̪inde kuːʈɯˈgaːɾɛnoːɖɯ pəˈrejəɖi ɲaːn ˈn̪inde pʰərt̪aːˈʋaːɳen̪n̪ɯ]...[t͡ʃʰi pəˈrejəɖi]! 'Tell your boyfriend that I'm your husband...Tell him, dammit!'
Prem: You...dirty...maale swiiine! Prabha! C'mon!

Vijay, wanted to thank you for writing rules for how to form the past. I was honestly convinced it was 100% irregular.

I've always found the nom./dat. switching in verbs neat. Definitely a reminder that languages conceive of "case" very differently.

Vijay wrote: ↑Tue Mar 23, 2021 2:07 am Complementizer Phrases

In Malayalam, the way you turn a sentence into a complementizer phrase within a noun phrase, e.g. 'The man is going to the market' -> 'the man who's going to the market...' is by changing the final verb and putting the head of the NP directly after it, but only if the verb is an affirmative (i.e. not negative) verb. For example, recall that [ˈpoːgun̪n̪u] means 'am/are/is going'. If you want to say 'the man who is going', you simply change the final vowel to [a] and then add [ˈmənʃɛn], the word for '(the) man': [ˈpoːgun̪n̪a ˈmənʃɛn] 'the man who is going'. If the verb ends in a consonant, then simply add -[a] to the end. In poetry at least (and perhaps in some variety/ies of Malayalam), [ˈpoːgum] can be used in the same contexts (I'm not sure whether the meaning is exactly the same as [ˈpoːgun̪n̪a] or not since its usage is not clearly restricted to things that will take place in the future).

If the verb is a negative verb, e.g. [ˈpoːgun̪n̪illa] 'am/are/is not going', then you change it by replacing the suffixes on the verb with -[aːt̪a], or simply -[aː] in poetry. [poːˈgaːt̪a ˈmənʃɛn] or [ˈpwaːt̪a ˈmənʃɛn] could mean 'the man who doesn't go' or 'the man who isn't going'. In poetry, at least, you might see [poːˈgaː ˈmənʃɛn] with the same meaning. If the verb is a negative verb but in past tense, you can simple replace the last [a] with -[aːt̪a], e.g. [poːjilˈlaːt̪a ˈmənʃɛn] 'the man who didn't go'. [ˈkaːɳuga] means 'to see' in Malayalam, so [kaːˈɳaː] and [kaːˈɳaːt̪a] mean 'invisible' (i.e. not seen, not being seen, and not to be seen).

Now, how do you say something like 'that which goes'? Well, remember that [əˈd̪ɯ] in Malayalam means 'that'? You just add that a suffix instead of -[a], -[aː] or -[aːt̪a]. 'That which goes' would be [ˈpoːgun̪n̪əd̪ɯ]. 'That which is invisible' would be [kaːˈɳaːt̪əd̪ɯ].

The equivalent to 'that' in phrases like "I said that..." or "I think that..." in Malayalam is [ˈen̪n̪ɯ], or just [n̪n̪ɯ] after the informal copula [aː]. For example, [ɲaːn ˈn̪inde bʱərt̪aːˈʋaːɳen̪n̪ɯ pəˈrejɯ] means 'say that I'm your husband!'.

This is super cool. Does this contrast with other nominalized forms of verbs?

Atom wrote: ↑Sat Apr 03, 2021 6:45 pmVijay, wanted to thank you for writing rules for how to form the past. I was honestly convinced it was 100% irregular.

That Malayalam grammar (in Malayalam) in my room sure has paid off! I didn't realize it was so regular until I looked through it, either.

I've always found the nom./dat. switching in verbs neat. Definitely a reminder that languages conceive of "case" very differently.

It can be hard to wrap your head around.

vegfarandi wrote: ↑Mon Apr 05, 2021 9:53 amThis is super cool. Does this contrast with other nominalized forms of verbs?

I'm sorry, but once again, I'm not quite sure I understand what you mean. I have noticed that you often get forms ending in -[əd̪ɯ] following the noun they modify, e.g. [miːn ʋəruˈt̪əd̪ɯ] 'fried fish' (literally 'fish' + 'that which [unspecified subject] fried').

Serial Verbs

Serial verb constructions are common enough in Malayalam that some verbs have effectively been grammaticalized as postpositions, suffixes, or clitics of some kind. My attempt to define what I mean by "serial verb constructions" is chains of verbs with all but the last verb always being in past tense (they could perhaps be considered past participles). I briefly mentioned that the verbs [t̪əˈɾiga] and [koˈɖukɯga] can be used in such constructions because [koˈɖukɯga] indicates that the recipient is in third person and [t̪əˈɾiga] indicates that it isn't.

There can also be other words in between the verbs. Here's an example sentence from my grandfather's war memoirs where he's describing the Japanese air-bombing Rangoon (Yangon) before taking over it: [pajˈlɛtɯgəɭ ˈaːʈe ɕət̪ruˈʋaːʈe mit̪rəˈmaːʈe aː uˈjəɾət̪iln̪in̪n̪um t̪iɾit͡ʃəriˈjaːd̪e t̪əŋəɭɖe pəkət̪ɔɳˈɖaːjɾun̪n̪a boːmbɯgəɭɛlˈlaːm ˈt̪uːt̪ɯ peˈruki ˈt̪aːɻe kəˈɭəɲɯ ˈd̪uːɾe pəˈrən̪n̪ɯ boːj] 'The pilots, for
their part, who couldn't tell friend from foe at that height, gathered up every one of the bombs they had
in stock, dropped them, and flew off into the distance'.

Apart from [ˈaːʈe] and [ɔɳˈɖaːjɾun̪n̪a], there are a bunch of other verb forms in this sentence that are either combined with each other or already made up of two verbs: [t̪iɾit͡ʃəriˈjaːd̪e] 'unable to distinguish', [ˈt̪uːt̪ɯ] 'having swept', [peˈruki] 'having gathered', [kəˈɭəɲɯ] 'having discarded', [pəˈrən̪n̪ɯ] 'having flown', and [poːj] 'went'.

[t̪iˈɾijuga] is an intransitive verb meaning 'to turn around'. It can also mean 'to figure out, understand, make out, tell', e.g. [n̪iː pəˈrejun̪n̪əd̪ eˈnikʲɯ t̪iˈɾijun̪n̪illa] 'I can't tell what you're saying'. [t̪iˈɾikʲuga] can be either transitive or intransitive and also means 'to turn around'. It's used a lot in serial verb constructions, like in the word [t̪iɾit͡ʃəriˈjaːd̪e]. [t̪iˈɾit͡ʃɯ] can apparently mean 'clearly', and it can also mean 'back' or 'backwards'; perhaps this is why [t̪iˈɾit͡ʃərijuga] means 'to recognize, distinguish' (to know clearly?). There's a joke from an old cartoon where a brother and sister use this ambiguity to their advantage when their dad tells them to read out their grades from their report card while he's looking for his glasses. They hesitate, so what he tells them to do is [t̪iɾit͡ʃəˈŋoːʈɯ ʋaːjˈkʲaːn], with the intended meaning 'to read clearly', but they intentionally reinterpret this as 'to read backwards' and read e.g. 19 as 91.

Some of the basic verbs we've seen before are also commonly used in grammatical constructions. For example, [jiˈɾikʲuga] 'to sit' and [ˈnikʲuga] 'to stand, wait' are both often used in imperfective aspect verb forms (a little more on this later in this post), e.g. [pəˈrɛɲɯ ˈn̪in̪n̪u], [pərejugeˈjaːjɾun̪n̪u], [pəreˈjaːjɾun̪n̪u], and [pəˈrɛɲiɾun̪n̪u] are all valid equivalents of 'was saying' ([pəreˈjaːjɾun̪n̪u] is the one I would personally be most likely to use, but [pəˈrɛɲiɾun̪n̪u] is also very common, perhaps even more common than [pəreˈjaːjɾun̪n̪u] for most speakers. [pəˈrɛɲɯ ˈn̪in̪n̪u] seems to be a bit less common. [pərejugeˈjaːjɾun̪n̪u] is just how [pəreˈjaːjɾun̪n̪u] would be pronounced in careful speech). [jiˈɾikʲuga] can also be used to form the perfect, so [pəˈrɛɲiɾun̪n̪u] can also mean 'had said'. Another way of saying 'had said' would be [pərɛˈɲaːjɾun̪n̪u], which I think is more commonly used in my family, though probably some other speakers would use [pəˈrɛɲiɾun̪n̪u] more often.

[ˈpoːʋuga] 'to go' and [ʋəˈɾiga] 'to come' are also used often in SVCs; in fact, they can even be used together! For example, 'to return' in Malayalam is [ˈpoːjʈɯ ʋəˈɾiga], literally 'to come having gone'. I've also seen the phrase [ʋɛˈɾum poːwm] 'come(s) and go(es), will come and go' before.
[ˈpoːʋuga] is also used after a verb to indicate regret or to indicate that something happened by accident (Indo-Aryan languages seem to do pretty much the same thing with their own equivalents of 'to go'), e.g.
[məˈrən̪n̪ɯ ˈpoːʋuga] 'to forget (unintentionally)', [ajˈjoː], [ɲaːn kəˈd̪əg əɖɛˈkʲaːn məˈrən̪n̪ɯ poːj]! 'oops! I forgot to close the door!'. [ʋəˈɾiga] can be used in a similar way, to indicate that something ended up happening, e.g. [əŋɛˈnaːj ʋɛˈɾun̪n̪u] 'am/are/is turning out (to be) that way'. It might even be possible to use [ˈpoːʋuga] in exactly the same way, but I'm not sure.

Another important verb is [ˈkoɭɭuga], literally meaning 'to fit' but also perhaps 'to take'. This can be used literally but is much more commonly used in a more figurative sense and probably even more commonly in SVCs. [koɭˈɭaːm] in Malayalam is commonly used as a (I guess somewhat informal) interjection meaning something like 'good!', 'nice!', or 'cool!'. I already mentioned the past participle in earlier lessons as part of the instrumental case suffix: [ˈkoɳɖɯ]; I think I pointed out that it might even make more sense to reanalyze this not as a case suffix but rather as a postposition. [ˈkoɳɖɯ] can mean 'having fit' but also something more like 'having taken', and so it's frequently used in the constructions [ˈkoɳɖɯ ʋəˈɾiga] 'to bring' and [ˈkoɳɖɯ ˈpoːʋuga] 'to take away'. The first line in the first movie clip I posted in this thread is [enˈneː n̪d̪eː koɳɖɯˈʋaːt̪e], [ˈɖæːɖi]? i.e. [jenˈne jen̪ˈd̪eː ˈkoɳɖɯ poːˈgaːt̪əd̪ɯ], [ˈɖæːɖi]? 'Daddy, why don't you take me (away) with you?'. You can even say [jeɖɯˈt̪oːɳɖɯ ʋəˈɾiga] (i.e. [jeˈɖut̪ɯ ˈkoɳɖɯ ʋəˈɾiga]) for 'to bring' and [eɖɯˈt̪oːɳɖɯ ˈpoːʋuga] for 'to take away', where [eˈɖukuga] means 'to take, carry' (these are both very common expressions).

The last verb I'll cover here is [ˈʋɛkʲuga] 'to put, place', which can be used in the phrases [ˈkoɳɖɯ ˈʋɛkʲuga] or [jeˈɖut̪ɯ ˈʋɛkʲuga], or possibly [jeɖɯˈt̪oːɳɖɯ ˈʋɛkʲuga], all meaning 'to put away'. The past participle [ˈʋɛt͡ʃɯ] is also used in a way similar to the instrumental use of [ˈkoɳɖɯ] but seems to be used more commonly in this sense than [ˈkoɳɖɯ] is, e.g. [əˈd̪umʋɛt͡ʃ ˈen̪d̪ɯ ʋeːˈɳeː t͡ʃejˈjaːm] 'you can do anything with it/that!'.

If and When

There are two forms for verbs in the conditional mood, i.e. there are two ways to form verbs to express 'if'. One is by taking a past tense verb, deleting the final vowel, and adding -[aːl]. Such forms do not necessarily imply that something happened in the past. The other is by taking a past or present progressive verb form, deleting the final vowel, and adding -[eŋgil]. I personally prefer to use -[aːl] when possible since I find it more commonly used. However, -[aːl] cannot be used with the equivalent of modal verbs in Malayalam, i.e. with 'can', 'want', etc. The only exception I can think of this is the serial verb construction [ˈʋeːɳɖi ʋən̪ˈn̪aːl] meaning something like 'if [subject] end(s) up wanting'.

The equivalent of the relative pronoun 'when' in Malayalam is the suffix -/poːɭ/ (compare [iˈpoːɭ] 'now', [əˈpoːɭ] 'then', [eˈpoːɭ] 'when?'), always attached to the verb at the end of the clause. After definite future forms, it surfaces as -[boːɭ]. It cannot be used after past or present tense forms until the final vowel in these forms is deleted and replaced with [a], at which point it surfaces as -[poːɭ]. Colloquially, people often use -/pam/ instead of -/poːɭ/ or simply delete the last consonant, resulting in [poː] or [boː].

Let's revisit the first movie clip I posted in this thread: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYjnpFxQ4DU. Here are the new vocabulary words plus some words we've already seen in at least one other form:

Recall [ˈn̪oːkuga] 'to look' and [n̪əˈɖəkuga] 'to walk'.
[woːwmˈboː] = [poːgumˈboːɭ], i.e. 'when we go (generic subject implied here)'
[ˈpaːɖɪlla] - something like 'can't'
[otˈtɛkʲɯ] - alone
[aːʋilˈleː] - won't...be? [giːd̪uˈmoːɭɛ ottɛkʲaːʋilˈleː]? = [giːd̪uˈmoːɭ ottɛkʲaːʋilˈleː] 'won't I (literally "daughter Geethu") be alone?'
[ʋaˈlʲeːt͡ʃɛn] = [ʋɛˈlʲət͡ʃɛn] - father's older brother, at least in Geethu's family
[əˈpət͡ʃi] - father's older sister, at least in Geethu's family
[oˈke] (here just [ke]) - and all, and such, all/both of them
[ˈpeːɖi] - fear; [jeˈnikʲɯ peːɖiˈjaː] - I'm scared
[n̪aːɭ] - literally 'day', but here, just the surface pronunciation in this context for:
[ˈn̪aːɭe] - tomorrow
[ˈgɔɳɖɯ ʋəˈɾeːɳɖeː] = [ˈkɔɳɖɯ ʋəˈɾeːɳɖəd̪ɯ] 'that (I) should bring (you)'
[ˈpinne] - then, well, so (then), next, afterwards
[haj]! - not a term I see very often but obviously meant to call attention here
[ɕuˈɕu]! - psst!
[d̪eː] - from [iˈd̪eː], a term usually said at the beginning of a sentence in a rising tone meaning something like 'you know...' but here, it's just another interjection intended to call the cop's attention
[ʔɛn̪ˈd̪a], [mɔˈɭɛː] = [jen̪ˈd̪aː], [moːˈɭeː]? - literally 'what is (it), daughter?'
[ˈon̪n̪ɯ] - literally 'one' but more often used to mean something more like 'just'
[t̪ɔˈrəkuga] - to open
[t̪ɔrən̪ʲeɾuˈʋoː] = [t̪ɔrən̪n̪ɯ t̪ɛɾuˈmoː] - will you open it for me?
[ˈn̪əlla] - good
[ˈt̪ənne] - literally 'self', often used to emphasize a point; [ɲaːˈnaː] 'it's me', [ɲaːn̪d̪ənneˈjaː] 'it's (none other than) me (myself)!'
[t͡ʃɛˈrʊpəm] - youth
[piːˈtiː juˈʃaːwnɔɭɭa ˈbʱaːʋəm] = P. T. Usha [aːˈgaːnɔɭɭa ˈbʱaːʋəm] - literally 'the emotion to become P. T. Usha'
[əˈnusəɾəɳe jəˈt͡ʃəɖəkə̃w ilˈlaː] = [əˈnusəɾəɳejum əˈt͡ʃəɖəkəʋum ilˈlaːd̪e]
[əˈnusəɾəɳa] - obedience
[əˈt͡ʃəɖəkəm] - manners
[mənsiˈlaːʋuga] - to understand, etymologically from [məˈnəssil ˈaːʋuga] 'to get (intransitive) into the mind'
[kɔˈrɛt͡ʃɯ] - a little
[ˈn̪eːɾə̃ʷ] = phonetic realization here of [ˈn̪eːɾəm] 'time, usually more than a day'
[ˈəjɖe] = [əˈʋiɖe] i.e. 'there'
[kəɭiˈt͡ʃɔːʈɛ] or [kəɭiˈt͡ʃoːʈe] - perhaps a slightly gentler version of [kəˈɭikʲɛʈe] 'may I play?'
[poˈrət̪ɯ] - outside
[kəˈɭi] - game, playing
[t̪əlˈkaːləm] - for now, presently, at present
[kuʈiˈkaːləm] - childhood. [kuʈiˈkaːlət̪ɯ] = [kuʈiˈkaːlət̪il] 'in childhood', i.e. when I was a child (in this context)
[guˈɳəm] - benefit

And here's the actual dialogue:

Geethu: [enˈneː n̪d̪eː koɳɖɯˈʋaːt̪e], [ˈɖæːɖi]?
'Daddy, why don't you take me (away) with you?'
Jayarajan: [əjˈjoː], [ˈkɔːɳfərənsɪnɯ woːwmˈboː kuˈʈigəɭe kɔɳɖɯwoˈwaːn ˈpaːɖɪlla], [mɔːˈɭeː]!
'Oh my, dear! We can't take kids when we go to the conference, right?'
G: [əˈpo giːd̪uˈmoːɭɛ ottɛkʲaːʋɪlˈleː]?
'Then won't I be by myself?'
J: [ʋaˈlʲeːt͡ʃɛnʊm əpəˈt͡ʃiːke jɨlˈleː ˈmoːɭe n̪oːˈkaːn]?
'Aren't your uncle and aunt here to look after you, dear?'
G: [ˈʋeːɳɖa]. [ˈɖæːɖi jilleŋˈgiː jeˈnikʲɯ peːɖiˈjaː].
'No. I'm scared if you aren't here.'
J: (snorts/chuckles) [ˈɖæːɖi n̪aːɭ ˈiŋɯ ʋəɾɨlˈleː moːˈɭeː]? [ʋəˈɾʊmbɔ̃ moːɭkɛn̪ˈd̪aː ˈgɔɳɖɯ ʋəˈɾeːɳɖeː]? [tɛˈɖi ˈbejər], [miˈki maːws], [ɖoˈɳaːɭ ɖək], [ɛ̤]?
'Won't Daddy be back here tomorrow? What do you want me to bring you when I come back? A teddy bear, Micky Mouse, Donald Duck, huh?'
G: [liˈtil ˈpoːɳi], [ˈpɭuːʈoː], [ˈpəppi], [ˈpinne]...[aː]! [kɪs miː]!
(My) Little Pony, Pluto, a puppy, and also...oh, yeah, kiss me!
(...)
[haj]! [ɕuˈɕu]! [heː], [poːˈliːseː]!
'Hey! Pssst! Oh, Mister Policemaaan!'
Cop: [ʔɛn̪ˈd̪a], [mɔˈɭɛː]?
'What is it, dear?'
G: [jiː ˈgeːjton̪n̪ɯ t̪ɔrən̪ʲeɾuˈʋoː]?
'Just open this gate for me!'
C: [jɛn̪d̪ɨˈna t̪ɔrəkun̪ˈn̪eː]?
'Why should I open it?'
G: [t̪ɔrəˈkaːm bəˈrɛɲu].
'She told me to.'
C: [ˈaːɾɯ bəˈrɛɲu]?
'Who did?'
G: [ˈgiːd̪u]. [pliːs], [ˈn̪əlla poːˈliːsəlleː]?
'Geethu. Please? Aren't you a nice policeman?'
C: [a]! [aːˈɾa moːˈɭe ˈgiːd̪u]?
'Okay!...Who's Geethu, dear?'
G: [ɲaːn̪d̪ənneˈjaː], [ahhaha]!
'It's me, haha!'
C: [ɛː]?!
'Huh?!'
Bhaskara Pillai: [ɛŋoːˈʈaː n̪iː ˈjoːɖun̪n̪ɯ]? [ˈit̪re t͡ʃɛˈrʊpət̪ɪle piːˈtiː juˈʃaːwnɔɭɭa ˈbʱaːʋəm]? [kəˈmɔːɳ], [go]! [ˈhaːha]...[ˈaːha]!
'Where're you running off to? Trying to become P. T. Usha at such a young age? Come on, go!'
(mutters to self)
[əˈnusəɾəɳe jəˈt͡ʃəɖəkə̃w ilˈlaː n̪əɖəˈkaːn n̪iː ˈjipəm ˈn̪inde jəmˈmeːɖe ˈʋiːʈiləlla]! [mənsɪlaːˈjoː]?
'You aren't at your mom's house now to run around like a disobedient girl without manners! Understand?'
G: [m̩], [m̩ kɔˈrɛt͡ʃɯ ˈn̪eːɾə̃ʷ ˈəjɖe poːj kəɭiˈt͡ʃɔːʈɛ]?
'Uh, um, can I go play over there for a little bit?'
B: [poˈrət̪ɯ ˈpoːjoɭɭa kəˈɭi t̪əlˈkaːləm ˈʋeːɳɖa]. [ˈjɛnde kuʈiˈkaːlət̪ɯ ɲaːn id̪ɯˈboːle poˈrət̪u poːj kəˈɭit͡ʃiʈilla]! [əˈd̪inde guɳəˈmaːj enikʲɯ].
'Don't go outside and play for now! I hadn't gone outside and played like this when I was a kid. It was good I didn't.'

Vijay wrote: ↑Tue Apr 27, 2021 9:25 pm Serial Verbs

(Sorry for the delay in replying for this, I haven’t had much time recently.)

Overall, this is really interesting! I have a fondness for SVCs, but I know very little about how they work in Dravidian (other than the fact of their existence).

I do however have one problem with this:

My attempt to define what I mean by "serial verb constructions" is chains of verbs with all but the last verb always being in past tense (they could perhaps be considered past participles).

I’m… not sure these are actually SVCs? There’s lots of arguments about what the term actually means, but even in the broadest definitions a key requirement is always the ’absence of [a] linking element/connector’ (Unterladstetter 2020), or at least that any linker present is restricted to SVCs and SVCs only. So, unless there’s something special about this particular past tense marker, I suspect these may just be ordinary participles.

That being said, I have seen SVCs in Dravidian before; here’s two (Aikhenvald 2006):

cel-v-ēm

go-FUT-1PL

all-ēm  (old Tamiḻ)

not.become-1PL

We will not go.

vā-n-a

come-NPST-1PL.EXC

sū-n̩-ap  (Koṇḍa)

see-NPST-1PL.EXC

We will come and see.

[pajˈlɛtɯgəɭ ˈaːʈe ɕət̪ruˈʋaːʈe mit̪rəˈmaːʈe aː uˈjəɾət̪iln̪in̪n̪um t̪iɾit͡ʃəriˈjaːd̪e t̪əŋəɭɖe pəkət̪ɔɳˈɖaːjɾun̪n̪a boːmbɯgəɭɛlˈlaːm ˈt̪uːt̪ɯ peˈruki ˈt̪aːɻe kəˈɭəɲɯ ˈd̪uːɾe pəˈrən̪n̪ɯ boːj] 'The pilots, for
their part, who couldn't tell friend from foe at that height, gathered up every one of the bombs they had
in stock, dropped them, and flew off into the distance'.

Could we have a gloss of this please?

bradrn wrote: ↑Tue May 11, 2021 2:08 amI’m… not sure these are actually SVCs? There’s lots of arguments about what the term actually means, but even in the broadest definitions a key requirement is always the ’absence of [a] linking element/connector’ (Unterladstetter 2020), or at least that any linker present is restricted to SVCs and SVCs only. So, unless there’s something special about this particular past tense marker, I suspect these may just be ordinary participles.

Well, you see, I don't think we really have past participles per se, just past tense verbs. Call them whatever you like, though.

[pajˈlɛtɯgəɭ ˈaːʈe ɕət̪ruˈʋaːʈe mit̪rəˈmaːʈe aː uˈjəɾət̪iln̪in̪n̪um t̪iɾit͡ʃəriˈjaːd̪e t̪əŋəɭɖe pəkət̪ɔɳˈɖaːjɾun̪n̪a boːmbɯgəɭɛlˈlaːm ˈt̪uːt̪ɯ peˈruki ˈt̪aːɻe kəˈɭəɲɯ ˈd̪uːɾe pəˈrən̪n̪ɯ boːj] 'The pilots, for
their part, who couldn't tell friend from foe at that height, gathered up every one of the bombs they had
in stock, dropped them, and flew off into the distance'.

Could we have a gloss of this please?

(English loanwords italicized)

pilot-kaɭ

pilot-PL

aːk-aʈʈe

become-OPT(?)

ɕat̪ru

enemy

aːk-aʈʈe

become-OPT(?)

mit̪ram

friend

aːk-aʈʈe

become-OPT(?)

aː

that

uyaram-il-nin̪n̪um

height-LOC-ABL

t̪iri-t͡ʃ-ari-aːt̪e

turn-CAUS.PST-know-COMP.NEG

t̪an-kaɭ-uʈe

self-PL-GEN

pakkam-t̪u

vicinity-LOC

uɳʈ-aːji-iɾi-un̪n̪u-a

COP.EXISTENTIAL-become.PST-sit-IPFV-COMP

bomb-kaɭ

bomb-PL

ellaːm

all

t̪uː-t̪t̪u

sweep-PST

perukk-i

gather-PST

t̪aːɻe

down

kaɭa-ɲu

discard-PST

d̪uːɾe

far

parakk-n̪n̪u

fly-PST

poː-i

go-PST

[pajˈlɛtɯgəɭ ˈaːʈe] 'the pilots, for their part' (literally 'the pilots, let it be' > 'never mind the pilots' > 'as for the pilots/the pilots, for their part')
[ɕət̪ruˈʋaːʈe mit̪rəˈmaːʈe] 'whether friend or foe' ('let them be foe, let them be friend')
[aː uˈjəɾət̪iln̪in̪n̪um] 'from that height'
[t̪iɾit͡ʃəriˈjaːd̪e] 'unable to recognize'

Vijay wrote: ↑Tue May 11, 2021 9:22 am (English loanwords italicized)

pilot-kaɭ

pilot-PL

aːk-aʈʈe

become-OPT(?)

ɕat̪ru

enemy

aːk-aʈʈe

become-OPT(?)

mit̪ram

friend

aːk-aʈʈe

become-OPT(?)

aː

that

uyaram-il-nin̪n̪um

height-LOC-ABL

t̪iri-t͡ʃ-ari-aːt̪e

turn-CAUS.PST-know-COMP.NEG

t̪an-kaɭ-uʈe

self-PL-GEN

pakkam-t̪u

vicinity-LOC

uɳʈ-aːji-iɾi-un̪n̪u-a

COP.EXISTENTIAL-become.PST-sit-IPFV-COMP

bomb-kaɭ

bomb-PL

ellaːm

all

t̪uː-t̪t̪u

sweep-PST

perukk-i

gather-PST

t̪aːɻe

down

kaɭa-ɲu

discard-PST

d̪uːɾe

far

parakk-n̪n̪u

fly-PST

poː-i

go-PST

[pajˈlɛtɯgəɭ ˈaːʈe] 'the pilots, for their part' (literally 'the pilots, let it be' > 'never mind the pilots' > 'as for the pilots/the pilots, for their part')
[ɕət̪ruˈʋaːʈe mit̪rəˈmaːʈe] 'whether friend or foe' ('let them be foe, let them be friend')
[aː uˈjəɾət̪iln̪in̪n̪um] 'from that height'
[t̪iɾit͡ʃəriˈjaːd̪e] 'unable to recognize'

Hmm, interesting. In this sentence I can see at least three constructions:

1. t̪iri-t͡ʃ-ari-aːt̪e and uɳʈ-aːji-iɾi-un̪n̪u-a have two verbs squooshed together into one word, which is a common form of verb serialisation in more agglutinating languages. But I’d say that giving this the title of ‘serialisation’ would depend on how grammaticalised and productive this strategy is, as well as on which material can intervene between the verbs.
2. The string of verbs at the end of the sentence certainly looks very SVC-like, and there’s little reason to call it anything else, except for the fact that it uses what would be very atypical marking for an SVC.
3. At the beginning of the sentence, pilot-kaɭ aːk-aʈʈe etc. doesn’t look at all SVC-like to me; I suggest that it’s just an adverbial clause.

On the other hand, I found an interesting article by Jayaseelan on ‘The Serial Verb Construction in Malayalam’ (paywalled, sorry, but it’s on Sci-Hub). I haven’t read it in full, but I think he suggests that the ‘past tense’ on SVCs is a different and more specialised marker than the ordinary ‘past tense’ making (2) real SVCs; furthermore he suggests (1) is simply a lexicalised outcome of (2). I’m not sure what he thinks of (3). You may find it interesting to read through this article — I can’t properly assess it, given that I know nothing about Malayalam.

Also, tangentially: you must do a post on Malayalam morphophonology sometime! Some of the changes look quite extreme: aːk-aʈʈe → [ˈaːʈe], t̪an-kaɭ-uʈe → [t̪əŋəɭɖe] etc.

bradrn wrote: ↑Tue May 11, 2021 10:06 amt̪iri-t͡ʃ-ari-aːt̪e and uɳʈ-aːji-iɾi-un̪n̪u-a have two verbs squooshed together into one word, which is a common form of verb serialisation in more agglutinating languages. But I’d say that giving this the title of ‘serialisation’ would depend on how grammaticalised and productive this strategy is, as well as on which material can intervene between the verbs.

The second one isn't a SVC; [ˈaːjɾun̪n̪u] just means 'was', and /uɳʈaːjiɾun̪n̪u/ [ɔɳˈɖaːjɾun̪n̪u] means 'there was'. This is simply how the past tense of /uɳʈu/ [ˈɔɳɖɯ] is formed. /iɾun̪n̪u/ in modern Malayalam actually means 'sat' but is also used in imperfective verb forms (past progressive, future progressive, and one form of the present progressive though not the only one). /iɾu/ in Tamil is apparently the copula. In Malayalam, /iɾu/ is not a word at all; instead, we have /iɾikku/ with the causative suffix -ikk(u?) added. /iɾikkuka/ [jiˈɾikʲuga] means 'to sit'; /iɾikku/ [jiˈɾikʲɯ] means 'have a seat!'.

At the beginning of the sentence, pilot-kaɭ aːk-aʈʈe etc. doesn’t look at all SVC-like to me; I suggest that it’s just an adverbial clause.

No, I agree, that's not an SVC. There's only one verb in it!
EDIT: It's not even an adverbial clause. It's literally 'pilots, may they be' -> 'never mind the pilots'/'as for the pilots...'.

On the other hand, I found an interesting article by Jayaseelan on ‘The Serial Verb Construction in Malayalam’ (paywalled, sorry, but it’s on Sci-Hub). I haven’t read it in full, but I think he suggests that the ‘past tense’ on SVCs is a different and more specialised marker than the ordinary ‘past tense’ making (2) real SVCs; furthermore he suggests (1) is simply a lexicalised outcome of (2). I’m not sure what he thinks of (3). You may find it interesting to read through this article — I can’t properly assess it, given that I know nothing about Malayalam.

I used to think Malayalam had past participles myself, but I'm increasingly convinced it doesn't and these are just ordinary past tense verbs, particularly due to the indifference I have observed from native speakers regarding the pronunciation of the final vowel in these verb forms.

Also, tangentially: you must do a post on Malayalam morphophonology sometime! Some of the changes look quite extreme: aːk-aʈʈe → [ˈaːʈe]

This isn't morphophonology; this is just straight-up phonology, and that was one of the first posts in this thread. Singleton stops are voiced between voiced segments, and geminate ones usually surface as singleton voiceless stops. [k] is often elided. [ˈaːgəʈe] would be a perfectly acceptable pronunciation as far as native speakers in general are concerned, but I've never heard anyone say that.

t̪an-kaɭ-uʈe → [t̪əŋəɭɖe]

This one is a bit more complicated; [t̪əŋəɭuɖe] is a perfectly valid pronunciation as well, just not how it's usually pronounced. [t̪əŋəɖe] may be an even more common pronunciation than [t̪əŋəɭɖe]. The /nk/ > [ŋ] thing is just a historical sound change, and the /ʈ/ > [ɖ] is voicing again.

Emphasis and Vocative Case

In Malayalam, there are a few ways that we can emphasize something. Some of these usages are all too easily confused with vocative case. In this post, I'll talk about both emphasis and vocative case; hopefully, this will help you see how they can interact in Malayalam.

In the last lesson, I wrote the following:

[ˈt̪ənne] - literally 'self', often used to emphasize a point; [ɲaːˈnaː] 'it's me', [ɲaːn̪d̪ənneˈjaː] 'it's (none other than) me (myself)!'

So this is one way of emphasizing something in Malayalam. It's usually used after a noun or pronoun. Other Indian languages half a very similar particle or adverb as well, and the usage of [ˈt̪ənne] is more or less equivalent to the Indian English use of the word only ("Where did you learn swimming, Rita?" "Why, in the water only!").

Now, in Malayalam, if you want to call out to someone who is physically close to you, and their name ends in -[ i ], then you may elongate the vowel (although I don't think this is actually necessary), e.g. [səɾəsʋəˈd̪iː] 'Saraswati!'. If their name ends in -[ɛn], as lots of traditional South Indian men's names do, then you replace this with -[aː], e.g. [ərˈd͡ʒuɳɛn n̪əˈɖən̪n̪u] 'Arjuna(n) walked' but [ərd͡ʒuˈɳaː] 'Arjuna(n)!' However, disyllabic names that end in -[ɛn] appear to be an exception; AFAICT, the rule for those is to simply add -[aː] to the end of the name without deleting anything, e.g. [ˈmoːhɛn n̪əˈɖən̪n̪u] 'Mohan walked' but [moːhɛˈnaː] 'Mohan!'.

But what if you wanted to call out to someone who was located further away from you? Then you just add -[eː] to the end of their name, e.g. [ərd͡ʒuɳɛˈneː] 'Arjuna(n)!!' ([ərd͡ʒuˈɳeː] may also exist with the same meaning; I'm not sure, though, because I can't remember a specific time I ever heard something like this). This isn't just a vocative suffix, though; it's a sort of generic emphatic suffix, e.g. [əˈʋər ˈpəɳɖɯ poːj] 'they left a long time ago', [əˈʋər pəɳˈɖeː poːj] 'they left a long time ago!', [jeˈnikʲ oˈɾu ˈkaːɾjəm pəˈrejeɳəm] 'I have something to say', [jeˈnikʲ oˈɾu ˈkaːɾjəm pəˈrejeɳəˈmeː]/[jeˈnikʲ oˈɾu ˈkaːɾjəm pəˈrejeˈɳeː] 'oh, there's something I just gotta tell you/have to say!'. It can also be used as a focus marker or to draw attention to something, e.g. [aː t͡ʃəkeˈjeː]...[n̪iː jeˈɖut̪ɯ kəˈɭa]! 'You know that jackfruit (you had sitting around)? (You) take it and throw it away!'.

-[eː] is also used to emphasize verbs. If you take a verb stem and replace the final vowel with -[uː] and also use the suffix -[eː] on another nominal argument, the meaning is often similar to the use of 'only' in (non-Indian) English. For example, in one of his jokes, the late Malayalee comedian VKN wrote a story where he's exaggerating about a very fancy girl he was apparently in love with as a teen: [ˈkoːɳʋendil pəˈɖikʲun̪n̪a kuʈijaːɳen̪ˈn̪eː t̪oːn̪ˈn̪uː]. [jiŋgɭiːˈʃeː pəreˈjuː]. [sigɛɾɛtˈteː vəliˈkʲuː]. [skoːˈt͡ʃeː kəɻiˈkʲuː]. 'You'd think she was none other than a kid studying at a convent. All she spoke was English. All she smoke was cigarettes [whereas most people smoke beedis]. All she consumed was Scotch.' Another way you can say something like 'all she smoke was cigarettes' is [sigɛɾɛtˈteː vəlikʲejoɭˈɭuː] ~ [sigɛɾɛtˈteː vəlikʲugejoɭˈɭuː]. [oɭˈɭuː] can also be used with bare nominals as well as with the adverb [ˈmaːt̪rəm], which also means 'only', but only after -[eː] is attached to these words. By default, [oɭˈɭuː] in such a context means 'there is only', though in some contexts, it may make better sense to just translate it as 'only'.

There is another suffix that is even more emphatic than -[eː], and that is -[oː] ~ [joː]. [ərd͡ʒuɳɛˈnoː] or [ərd͡ʒuˈɳoː] are even more emphatic than [ərd͡ʒuɳɛˈneː]/[ərd͡ʒuˈɳeː]. It can also be used at least with imperative forms of some verbs, e.g. [ʋaː] 'come (here)!' vs. [ʋaːˈjoː] 'hey! Come on out already!!'.

Yet another morpheme similar to these emphatic suffixes is [əlˈloː]. On first glance, it looks similar to [əlˈleː] 'am I not?/aren't...?/isn't...?' but in fact often means something more like 'of course', e.g.

[əmeːɾikəˈkaːɾɛnaːɳoː]? 'Are you American?'
[aːɳəlˈloː]! 'Of course I am!'

[ʋəɾuməlˈloː] could mean 'of course I'll come!', or it could mean 'we know you'll be there'. It's something like a suffix that indicates that you're very confident about what you're saying.

Having + Imperatives

Long post this time!!

For whatever reason, I never got around to talking about how to talk about having something in Malayalam. Well, in Malayalam, the way you generally do this in present tense at least is by putting the possessor in dative case and using the verb [ˈoɳɖɯ] 'there is/are'. For example, 'I have a cat' would be [jeˈnikʲ oˈɾu ˈpuːt͡ʃejoɳɖɯ]. You can also use this with abstract nouns, e.g. to discuss feelings; to say 'I am hungry', you would most likely say [jeˈnikʲɯ ʋɛˈɕəkun̪n̪u], but you could instead say [jeˈnikʲɯ ʋɛˈɕəpoɳɖu], literally 'I have hunger', or [jeˈnikʲoɾu ʋɛˈɕəpoɳɖu], literally 'I have a hunger'. For other tenses, you would simply use the appropriate verb form, i.e. [oɳˈɖaːjɾun̪n̪u] for past tense and [oɳˈɖaːjɾikʲum] for future tense.

If you want to say that you have something in your possession, e.g. 'I have a cat in my possession', and you're speaking formally, you could say [ˈjende ˈkajʋəɕəmoɾu ˈpuːt͡ʃejoɳɖɯ]. Informally, at least in my variety of Malayalam, you could simply say [jenˈdeːloɾu ˈpuːt͡ʃejoɳɖɯ]. Both constructions put the possessor in genitive case and then add something on the end, presumably indicating a location; [kaj] means 'hand', and [ʋəɕəm] means 'side'.

If you want to use the existential verb in a complementizer phrase, e.g. 'the cat that I have in my possession', you use -[oɭɭa] (i.e. 'that there is/are') instead of [ˈoɳɖɯ]: [ˈjende ˈkajʋəɕəmɔɭɭa ˈpuːt͡ʃa].

---

I also never really talked about imperatives. You use different forms depending on politeness level. The shortest form is also the most informal, typically used with animals and when being harsh or at least emphatic with children. There's a slightly longer form for some verbs that is also slightly less informal. If you delete the -[ʋuga] or -[uga] from the citation form (if the verb does not end in -[ʋuga], then delete the -[uga] at the end), then for most verbs, you will get the shortest form; for at least the most common verbs whose citation forms are more than three syllables long (usually four syllables long), you will get the slightly longer form. If the verb ends in -[əɾiga], you will get the shortest form by replacing that with [aː]. The shortest imperative form of common four-syllable (or longer?) verbs is just the first two syllables of the verb, e.g. [pəˈrejuga] 'to say, tell', [pəˈrejɯ] 'say it!', [pəˈra] 'say it, goddammit!!'.

To obtain a gentler though still somewhat informal imperative mood form, replace the -[ɯ] at the end of the more informal imperative mood form with [uː], i.e. elongate the final vowel, e.g. [pəreˈjuː] 'say it!'. If the citation form of the verb ends in -[iga], replace this suffix with [uː] instead, e.g. [ʋəˈɾuː] ~ [ʋɛˈɾuː] 'come!'.

There is an archaic way of forming plural imperatives that involves suffixing -[in], but I see it rarely enough that I'm not entirely sure how it works.

For a relatively neutral imperative mood form, take the past tense form of the verb, and replace the last vowel with [oː], e.g. [pərɛˈɲoː] 'okay, say it!'. This is identical to the interrogative past tense form (i.e. past tense form + interrogative suffix).

For a gentler variation of this last form, add -[ɭuː] to the end, e.g. [pərɛɲoːˈɭuː] 'go ahead and say it!' This is actually short for the past tense form (past participle?) of the verb (in this case [pəˈrɛɲɯ] 'having said') + [koɭˈɭuː] 'fit!'.

To form a polite imperative, you combine the past tense/participial form with [ˈaːʈe], e.g. [pərɛˈɲaːʈe] 'please say it!'.

There is a similar construction used as a relatively gentle way to ask permission; it involves combining the same verb form but with [ˈoːʈe] (rather than [ˈaːʈe]), e.g. [ɲaːn pərɛˈɲoːʈe] 'can/may I please (go ahead and) say it?'.

---

Here's a news report that uses some of the structures we've seen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LT2Mj7dlGw. Reporters talk much faster than normal in Malayalam; my dad seems to believe they do this due to the pressure to read all the news on a tight schedule!

[ˈkaːɻt͡ʃa] - sight (plural [ˈkaːɻt͡ʃəgəɭ])
[ˈkeːɾəɭəm] - Kerala (duh!)
[ˈaːd̪jəm] - first (adjective form [ˈaːd̪jət̪e]; [ˈaːd̪jə] is another form used exclusively in formal language but (otherwise) semantically equivalent to [ˈaːd̪jət̪e])
[siˈnima] - movie, cinema (adjective form [siniˈmaː])
[puˈnəɾɯ] - again (formal word)
[d͡ʒɛˈnikʲuga] - to be born
[puˈnərd͡ʒɛnikʲuga] - to be reborn
[məleˈjaːɭə] - Malayalee; adjectival form of [məleˈjaːɭəm] 'Malayalam'
[piˈd̪aːʋɯ] - father (formal Sanskrit loanword)
(accusative) + [kuˈrit͡ʃɯ] - about
[səmʋiˈd̪ʱaːnəm ˈt͡ʃejjuga] - to direct
[kəˈɖəkuga] - to cross
[kəˈɖən̪n̪ɯ ʋəˈɾiga] - to cross over here, to come (over here)
[oˈɾukuga] - to set up, make ready, prepare
[n̪aːʈɯˈgaːr] - locals
[kəˈɾa] - riverbank, side of a boundary
[ˈt͡ʃit̪rəm] - image, picture, movie
[t͡ʃəˈlənəd͡ʒit̪rəm] - movie ([t͡ʃəˈlənəm] means 'motion', so this is a formal term calqued from motion picture)
[ʋiˈgəd̪a] - lost (apparently enough of an obscure and formal word to not even be listed in my dictionary )
[kuˈmaːɾɛn] - young man
[t̪əˈla] - head
[ˈst̪ʰaːnəm] - place
[t̪ələˈst̪ʰaːnəm] - capital
[t͡ʃəˈɾit̪rəm] - history
[ˈbʱaːgəm] - part
[prəˈd̪ərɕɛnəm] - exhibition, display, screening
[ˈaːjiɾəm] - (one) thousand
[t̪oɭˈɭaːjiɾəm] - 900 (i.e. 1000 - 100)
[muˈpəd̪ɯ] - 30
[ˈaːjiɾət̪i t̪oɭˈɭaːjiɾət̪i muˈpəd̪ɯ] - 1,930 or 1930
[jiˈɾubəd̪ɯ] - 20
[ˈmuːn̪n̪ɯ] - 3
[jiɾubət̪iˈmuːn̪n̪ɯ] - 23
[səŋˈgərʃəm] - conflict
[kəˈlaːɕikʲuga] - to end, conclude
[juˈʋəd̪i] - young woman (formal Sanskrit loanword, (partially) cognate with young)
[ˈn̪aːjiga] - heroine
[ˈpeːɾɯ] - name
[səmʋiˈdʱaːjəgɛn] - director
[ʋəˈɾe] - same as [ˈpoːlum] in this particular context, i.e. 'even'
[mərˈd̪ɛnəm ˈeːruga] - to be injured, tortured, harassed
[ˈɾəŋgəm] - scene
[əˈʋəd̪əɾipikʲuga] - to present, submit, introduce
[ˈɾuːbəm] - form
[ˈt͡ʃoːd̪ikʲuga] - to ask
[kəˈla] - art; [kəlaːsəmʋiˈd̪ʱaːjəgɛn] - art director
[ˈpust̪əgəm] - book
[t͡ʃəɾit̪rəˈgaːɾɛn] - historian
[ˈoːrma] - memory
[ˈoːrməɣuɖe] - [ˈoːrməgəɭuɖe], i.e. 'of memories'
[səˈhaːjəm] - help, assistance, aid
[puˈd̪ija] - new
[n̪irˈmaːɳəm] - construction, production
[ˈɾeːkʰa] - line, record
[ˈɾeːkʰəd͡ʒit̪rəm] - picture? Diagram? Not clear to me what meaning was intended here
[ˈt̪oːn̪n̪um] - literally 'will feel'; here, the intended meaning is probably 'must be wondering'
[oɾuˈʋaːɖɯ] - a lot (of)
[aːɭˈkaːɾɛn] - another way of saying (male) [aːɭ], i.e. 'person (man)'
[ˈoːla] - palm leaf
[ˈn̪əmməɖək] - probably a slip of the tongue for [ˈn̪əmmuɖe] 'our (inclusive)'
[əˈrubəd̪ɯ] - 60
[ˈgaːləgəʈəm] - [ˈkaːləgʱəʈəm]; I'm guessing the intended meaning here is 'decade'
[əˈrubəd̪ɯ ˈgaːləgəʈəŋəɭ] - the (19)60s (presumably)
[ˈmeːjuga] - to thatch the roof
[ˈmeːŋi] = [ˈmeːɲi]
[ˈpəʈʃe] - but
[t͡ʃeˈla] - some, a few
[koˈrət͡ʃɯ] - a little, a few
[korət͡ʃɯˈguːɖə] = [korət͡ʃɯˈguːɖi] i.e. a little more
[pəˈɻəkəm] - oldness
[ˈt͡ʃelluga] - to arrive, go, leave
[pəˈɻəkəm ˈt͡ʃen̪n̪a] - old
[ʈrɯˈʋaːɳɖrət̪ekurt͡ʃ] - [ʈrɯˈʋaːɳɖrət̪ekurit͡ʃɯ], i.e. about Trivandrum (a.k.a. Thiruvananthapuram)
[əˈrijuga] - to know
[əriˈjaːʋun̪n̪a aːɭˈkaːɾɯ] - people who know
[əriˈjaːʋun̪n̪a aːɭˈkaːɾumaːjʈɯ] - with people who know
consult [iˈpəm] - literally consult + 'now', but intended meaning was presumably 'when I consulted'
[ʔekskrɯːɻʃjəˈʋaːjʈuɭɭa] - unclear what Suresh Kollam was trying to say here, presumably trying but failing to come up with a comprehensible English word (perhaps confusing excruciating and explosive or something) but intending to say something more like 'corrosive'
[ˈsaːnəm] - [ˈsaːd̪ʱɛnəm], 'thing'
[ˈkət̪uga] - to burn (intransitive)
[pəˈnəmbɯ] - bamboo mat, rattan
[niˈjet̪ra] - [jiˈni ˈjet̪ra], i.e. 'now' + 'how many'
[peːr] - literally 'name' but also used as a numerical classifier meaning 'people'
[iɾiˈkʲaːm] - can sit
[ˈkot͡ʃu] - small
[jiˈni ˈjet̪ra peːr iɾikʲaːʋun̪n̪əd̪uˈmaːja oˈɾu ˈkot͡ʃu ˈt̪jeːʈər] - a small theater where how many people can sit now?
[ˈoke] - and such
[koˈre] - some, quite a few
[uˈbəgəɾəɳəm] - tool, appliance, piece of equipment
[uˈbəgəɾəŋəɭɯ] = [uˈbəgəɾəɳəŋəɭ], i.e. equipment
[ˈjin̪n̪ɯ] - today
[jin̪ˈn̪ət̪e] - today's, e.g. [jin̪ˈn̪ət̪e] VJT Hall 'today's VJT Hall; the VJT Hall today'
[səˈmiːbəm] - vicinity
[ˈʋeːʃəm] - role, costume
[əˈɳijuga] - to wear
[ˈʋeːʃəm əˈɳijuga] - to play or take on a role
[baːləˈd̪aːɾəm] - child (movie) star (calque on English)
[əˈɖəkəm] - the whole
[ʋənˈt̪aːɾan̪iɾa] - range of big stars
[n̪iˈɾəkuga] - (literally) to stand in a row (here probably 'are lined up')

Reporter: Location [ˈkaːɻt͡ʃəgəɭaːɳɯ]. [ˈkeːɾəɭət̪ile ˈaːd̪jət̪e siniˈmaː t̪iˈjeːʈreː], Capitol Theatre, [punərd͡ʒɛnikʲugeˈjaːɳɯ]. [məleˈjaːɭə siniˈmaː piˈd̪aːʋɯ] J. C. Daniel-[ine kuˈrit͡ʃɯ kəˈməl səmʋiˈd̪ʱaːnəm t͡ʃejˈjun̪n̪a] Celluloid [ˈen̪n̪a sinimejiˈlaːɳɯ ˈʔaːd̪jə t̪iˈjeːʈərum kəˈɖən̪n̪ɯ ʋɛˈɾun̪n̪əd̪ɯ]. [t̪iˈɾuʋənən̪d̪əbuɾəm ˈpaːɭejət̪e] University Hostel-[iˈlaːɳɯ] theatre [oˈɾukijəd̪ɯ].
'(This) is Location Sights(?). The first movie theater in Kerala, Capitol Theatre, is being reborn. The first theater is coming into the movie Celluloid, directed by Kamal, about J. C. Daniel, the father of Malayalam cinema (literally 'it's into the movie...that the first theater is coming'). The theater was set up at the University Hostel in Palayam, Thiruvanathapuram.'

Announcer: [n̪aːʈɯˈgaːɾeː ʋəˈɾuʋin]! [məleˈjaːɭəkəɾejile ˈjaːd̪jət̪e t͡ʃəˈlənəd͡ʒit̪rəm], [ʋigəd̪əguˈmaːɾɛn], "The Lost Child," [ʋəˈɾuʋin], [ˈkaːɳuʋin]!
'Come, locals! Come see the first movie in Kerala, Vigathakumaran (The Lost Child)!'

Reporter: [t̪ələˈst̪ʰaːnət̪e] Capitol Theatre [məleˈjaːɭə siniˈmaː t͡ʃəˈɾit̪rət̪inded̪ənne ˈbʱaːgəmaːɳɯ]. [jiʋiɖeˈjaːjɾun̪n̪u məleˈjaːɭət̪ile ʔaːd̪jəd͡ʒit̪rəm ʋigəd̪əguˈmaːɾɛnde ʔaːd̪ja prəˈd̪ərɕɛnəm], [ˈʔaːjiɾət̪i t̪oɭˈɭaːjiɾət̪i muˈpəd̪ɯ] October [ʔiɾubət̪iˈmuːn̪n̪inɯ]. [ˈʔaːd̪jə prəˈd̪ərɕɛnəmd̪ənne səŋgərʃət̪iˈlaːɳɯ kəˈlaːɕit͡ʃəd̪ɯ]. [dəˈɭit̪̚ juˈʋəd̪i ˈroːsije ˈn̪aːjige ˈjaːkijəd̪inde ˈpeːɾil səmʋiˈdʱaːjəgɛn] J. C. Daniel-[inɯˈʋəɾe mərˈd̪ɛnəm ˈeːtu]. [ʔaː ɾəŋgəŋəˈɭaːɳɯ kəˈməl puˈnəɾəʋəd̪əɾipikʲun̪n̪əd̪ɯ]. Capitol Theatre [ʔiː ˈɾuːbət̪il aːjɾun̪ˈn̪oːn̪n̪ɯ t͡ʃoːd̪iˈt͡ʃaːl kəlaːsəmʋiˈd̪ʱaːjəgɛn suˈreːʃ ˈkolləm pəˈrejun̪n̪əd̪ɯ], [ˈʔiŋɛne], [t͡ʃəˈɾit̪rəbust̪əgəŋəɭuɖejum t͡ʃəɾit̪rəgaːɾɛnˈmaːɾuɖejm ˈoːrməɣuɖe səhaːjəˈt̪oːɖejuɭɭa ʔoˈɾu puˈd̪ija n̪irˈmaːɳəm].
'The Capitol Theatre in the capital is a part of the history of Malayalam cinema itself. On October 23, 1930, the first screening of the first Malayalam movie, Vigathakumaran, was here. It was in conflict that the very first screening ended. Even the director, J. C. Daniel, was injured for ('in the name of') making young Dalit lady Rosy the heroine. It is these scenes that Kamal is presenting again. To the question of whether this was what Capitol Theatre was like ('if (you) ask whether Capitol Theatre was in this form'), art director Suresh Kollam says that this is ('this is how') a new production with the help of the memories of history books and historians.'

Suresh Kollam: Capitol Theatre-[ine kuˈrit͡ʃiʈa oˈɾu ɾeːkʰəˈboːlum ˈilla]. [ˈʔaːrkum iˈd̪inekurit͡ʃ oˈɾu ɾeːkʰəd͡ʒit̪rəmˈboːlum ˈilla]. [ʔid̪eŋɛˈnaːjɾun̪n̪en̪n̪um ˈt̪oːn̪n̪um]. [oɾuˈʋaːɖ aːɭˈkaːr pəˈrejum], [ˈoːləgoɳ]--[ˈoːlə]...[goɳɖ], [əˈd̪e], [ˈn̪əmməɖək oˈɾu wəˈrubəd̪ɯ ˈgaːləgəʈəŋəɭoɭɭa t̪iˈjeːʈərilaːn̪n̪ɯ d̪əˈnneːjm meːŋijəˈd̪aːjɾun̪n̪u ˈpəʈʃe t͡ʃeˈla aːɭˈkaːɾɯ], [korət͡ʃɯˈguːɖə pəˈɻəkəm ˈt͡ʃen̪n̪a ʈrɯˈʋaːɳɖrət̪ekurt͡ʃ əriˈjaːʋun̪n̪a aːɭˈkaːɾumaːjʈɯ] consult [iˈpəm əˈʋər pəˈrejun̪n̪əd̪ɯ ˈʃiːtaːɳen̪n̪um iː fiˈlim ˈbʱajŋgəɾə ʔekskrɯːɻʃjəˈʋaːjʈuɭɭa ˈsaːnəm aːjəˈd̪oːɳɖɯ], [ˈkət̪i poːˈʋaːn] chance [ˈoɳɖɯ]. [əˈŋene ˈʃiːtaːɳ iˈd̪ɯ ˈmeːŋi ˈn̪in̪n̪um], side [iˈŋene pəˈnəmbɯgoɳɖuɭɭəd̪um niˈjet̪ra peːr iɾikʲaːʋun̪n̪əd̪uˈmaːja oˈɾu ˈkot͡ʃu ˈt̪jeːʈəraːɳ en̪ˈn̪oke]. [əˈŋene koˈre uˈbəgəɾəŋəɭɯ kiˈʈiːɾun̪n̪u].
'There isn't even a record of Capitol Theatre. No one even has a picture(?) of it. You must be wondering how this could be. A lot of people say that it was a ('was in a') theater whose roof was thatched wi-with...palm leaves...palm leaves, yeah, in the ('our') 60s, but when I consulted some people, people who are a little older and know about Trivandrum, they said ('say') it is (with a) sheet (that the roof was thatched) and that this film had a chance of burning because it was really corrosive. So (they say) that it's (with) a sheet that it was thatched, it was a small theater like this, with bamboo mats, where (they had to figure out) how many people could sit now, and so on. It got some equipment that way.'

Reporter: [jin̪ˈn̪ət̪e] VJT Hall-[inde səmiːbəˈt̪ajɾun̪n̪u] Capitol Theatre. [prɯt̪ʰʋiˈɾaːd͡ʒaːɳɯ] J. C. Daniel-[inde ˈʋeːʃəm əˈɳijun̪n̪əd̪ɯ]. [baːləˈd̪aːɾəm bʱəʋən̪ˈd̪aːɳɯ ʋigəd̪əguˈmaːɾɛnde ˈʋeːʃət̪il]. Mamta Mohandas [əˈɖəkəmoɭɭa ʋənˈt̪aːɾan̪iɾad̪ənne] Celluloid-[il n̪iˈɾəkun̪n̪u]...Asianet News, Thiruvananthapuram.
'Capitol Theatre was next to today's VJT Hall. Prithviraj is the one in the role of J. C. Daniel. Child star Bhavanth is in the role of Vigathakumaran. Mamta Mohandas, the whole range of big stars itself is lined up in Celluloid...Asianet News, Thiruvananthapuram.'

…wow. When I heard people saying earlier that Malayalam people speak fast, I scoffed — ‘nonsense, they surely can’t speak faster than Israelis’. I now stand corrected. Even after listening at half speed and analysing it on Praat, I cannot figure out how it is possible to understand Malayalam speech. I can only assume that one somehow gets used to it.

One question: it seems to my non-Malayalam ear that phonemes very frequently get dropped in long words after stress? e.g. [t͡ʃəˈɾit̪rəbust̪əgəŋəɭuɖejum] at 50.9 s sounds more like [ˈt͡ʃeɾɨtəbuˌstaigəɭəɖɪm]. I can easily understand my English-trained ear mishearing the vowels and stress, and turning e.g. [t̪r] into [t], but it seems unlikely (though entirely possible) that I’m deleting whole syllables.

(Also, it sounds like there’s a great many more vowel allophones than you’ve transcribed, though as I said that’s much less mysterious.)

Yeah, I think it does take getting used to. When I was younger and went to India with my mom, she'd take me to visit all kinds of relatives. By the time we got back to my grandma's house (where we were staying), I'd be exhausted and feel like doing nothing other than watching TV. Fortunately, because it was India, TV was somewhat interesting as it was in at least six different languages: English, Hindi, Malayalam, Tamil, Kannada, and Telugu. I kept switching channels to see what I could understand in each language, but even Malayalam was so hard with news reports like this, so I ended up just watching Cartoon Network India instead. It might actually be interesting to see to what extent native speakers can understand news reports like this, especially given the ongoing language shift towards English at least among the growing middle class/nouveau riche.

And yeah, the vowel allophony gets a little tricky when it comes to /a/; I think it's often phonetically realized as [e] or [ɛ] before /ɾ/, but it's kind of hard to tell. Also, sometimes, I might think the speaker is pronouncing vowels when they aren't. Stress is also very tricky (I'm starting to think maybe Malayalam is like French and doesn't really have stress or whatever), so e.g. what I transcribed as [t͡ʃəˈɾit̪rəbust̪əgəŋəɭuɖejum] may have actually been something more like [ˈt͡ʃeɾɨt̪rəbuˌst̪əɣəŋɭ̩ɖejm].

EDIT: Oh, and of course, context clues help a lot - acoustic context, discourse context, and just knowing what kinds of things people tend to say in news reports about movies. It also probably helps that I've pretty much seen this movie before.

The Future Tense and Epistemic Mood(?)

I just recently realized that I never wrote a lesson talking about how to discuss things that will happen in the future in Malayalam! I did briefly mention it in my introduction to verbs but then didn't explain it any further, so now, I think I'll try to explain it in some more detail.

As I said back then, the suffix for the definite future is -[um]. If you say [ɲaːn ˈpoːgum] 'I will go', for example, you're implying that there is no doubt that you will go. You will stake your life on what you just said, that sort of thing.

If you want to ask someone whether they (or someone else) will do something, the most common way to do this is probably to use -[um] followed by the interrogative suffix -[oː], e.g. [n̪iː poːguˈmoː] ~ [n̪iː poːwˈmoː] 'will you go?'.

More likely, you want to leave a little room for doubt as to whether you'll do something instead of making such a strong commitment. In that case, you use the suffix -[aːm], which I think expresses epistemic mood or something similar rather than simply future tense. [ɲaːn poːˈgaːm] also means 'I will go', but if you say that, this time, you're leaving more room for doubt. Will you really go? Maybe not! Maybe you've made plans to go somewhere, but something could always change at the last minute. You never know...right? This also means that if someone asks you a question with -[um], the verb in your response may very well end in -[aːm] instead.

Incidentally, I often here this particular verb [poːˈgaːm] contracted to something more like just [paːm].

Now, you can also use a dative-case subject here and say, "[jeˈnikʲɯ poːˈgaːm]" or "[jeˈnikʲɯ paːm]." This would mean 'I can go'. Another way to say this would be [jeˈnikʲɯ poːˈgaːn ˈsaːd̪ʱikʲum] or perhaps something like [jeˈnikʲɯ pʷaːn ˈsaːd̪ʱikʲum]. [ˈsaːd̪ʱikʲuga] is a Sanskrit loanword meaning 'to be able'.

If you want to ask someone whether they can do something, the most common way to do this is probably to use -[aːm] followed by -[oː], e.g. [n̪i'nəkɯ poːˈgaːmoː] or [n̪i'nəkɯ ˈpaːmoː] 'can you go?'.

If you're implying that you'll do something as a favor to someone else or in order to lessen their burden, you would use a verb form that's basically the past tense + [koɭˈɭaːm], e.g. [ɲaːn poʲkʲoːˈɭaːm] ~ [ɲaːn pokoːˈɭaːm] 'I'll go ahead and go, I'll save you the trouble and leave', [ɲaːn t͡ʃejd̪oːˈɭaːm] 'I'll go ahead and do it, I'll do it for you'.

[kəˈɻijuga], [kəˈɻikʲuga], [kəˈɻuguga], [kəˈɻɛkʲuga], and related verbs

These are four verbs that all sound similar but have very different meanings. The last post inspired me to start talking about these particular verbs. The first one, [kəˈɻijuga], can be used in the same way as [ˈsaːd̪ʱikʲuga], i.e. in the sense of 'to be able'; it's just the Dravidian equivalent of [ˈsaːd̪ʱikʲuga].

However, [kəˈɻijuga] can also be used to mean 'to be done, finish (doing something)'. It is thus most often used in the past tense, i.e. [kəˈɻiɲu] 'am/are/is done, finished' (but also 'was able to'). [kəˈɻijuga] can be used in a vague sense to talk about an action being completed, but there is another verb that can be used to talk unambiguously about an action being completed, and that is [ˈt̪iːrkuga] 'to completely finish, end (something)', the transitive form of [ˈt̪iːɾuga] 'to be finished/completed, be over/gone/depleted'. The past tense of [ˈt̪iːrkuga] is [ˈt̪iːrt̪u] 'finished, ended (something)', and the past tense of [ˈt̪iːɾuga] is [ˈt̪iːrn̪n̪u] 'is finished, completed, over, gone, depleted'.

[kəˈɻikʲuga], by contrast, means 'to eat a meal', i.e. to eat rice. [ˈt̪innuga] means simply 'to eat'; this could refer to eating anything, including, but by no means limited to, rice. 'They ate meat (beef, by default)' in Malayalam would be [əˈʋər ɛˈrət͡ʃi ˈt̪in̪n̪u]; however, [kəˈɻikʲuga] would not be used in this context (except perhaps disparagingly to refer to someone eating so much meat they were eating it like rice). [əˈʋər kəˈɻit͡ʃu] would mean 'they ate a meal', i.e. they ate rice, possibly (though not necessarily) with something else on the side. [ˈt͡ʃoːrɯ] means 'cooked rice', so [əˈʋər ˈt͡ʃoːrɯ ˈt̪in̪n̪u] means pretty much the same thing as [əˈʋər kəˈɻit͡ʃu].

[kəˈɻijuga] can be used after another verb, e.g. [əˈʋər kəˈɻit͡ʃɯ gəˈɻiɲu] would mean 'they're done eating (their meal)'.

[kəˈɻuguga] means 'to wash'. Another verb also meaning 'to wash' is [ˈmoːruga], but I hear this much less often than [kəˈɻuguga], and it may well have become an archaism by now. [n̪əˈmukɯ kaj kəɻuˈgaːm] means 'let's wash our hands (including you)!'. [ˈpaːt̪rəm] can refer to basically any container, so [ˈt͡ʃeːt͡ʃi ˈpaːt̪rəm kəˈɻugi kəˈɻiɲu] (usually) means 'older sister is done washing the dishes'.

Finally, [kəˈɻɛkʲuga] means 'to tire', i.e. it means the same thing as 'to get tired' but isn't a common way of saying this. The more common way to say 'to get tired' is the Sanskrit loanword [ˈʈʃiːɳikʲuga]. 'I'm tired' would typically be [jeˈnikʲɯ ˈʈʃiːɳit͡ʃu] ('I got tired'). The context that immediately comes to mind for me for the verb [kəˈɻɛkʲuga] is this song, a duet between a man and a woman, but the woman singing in this clip unfortunately probably didn't speak Malayalam at all, and I can definitely hear a non-native accent. I'm pretty sure my dad watched this movie when he was younger and confused it decades later with a completely different movie from around the same time period.

The man sings: [ˈn̪ɛːɾəm ˈpoːji], [n̪əˈɖa], [n̪əˈɖa]! 'Time's a-wasting; walk, walk!'. [ˈn̪eːɾəm] means 'time'; apparently, from what I've been told at least, it usually implies a period of time longer than a day. [poːj] means 'went', and [ˈn̪eːɾəm poːj] AFAICT is an expression meaning that time's running out. [n̪əˈɖa] means 'walk!' and is the most informal imperative form; the citation form of this verb is [n̪əˈɖəkuga].

Then the woman complains: [jen ˈkaːlɯ kəˈɻəkɯɳɯ kəˈɖa kəˈɖa]. She means [jen ˈkaːlɯ kəˈɻɛkʲɯɳɯ kəˈɖa kəˈɖa]; in my variety, it would be even more different, i.e. [jen ˈkaːlɯ kəˈɻɛkʲun̪n̪u kəˈɖa kəˈɖa] 'my legs are getting tired [kəˈɖa kəˈɖa]'. I presume [kəˈɖa kəˈɖa] is some kind of sound effect representing her tired/tiring legs (and an attempt of some sort to rhyme with "[n̪əˈɖa], [n̪əˈɖa]!") since 'shop shop' doesn't make sense in context.