Page 1 of 2
Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
Posted: Thu Apr 14, 2022 9:28 am
by Jonlang
I came up with an idea, which is undoubtedly not my idea at all, for making the verb to be a little less boring for one of my conlangs. Basically, I was thinking of using two different types of to be which I have dubbed predicative and existential. The former is used only for applying attributes (whether real, or not) to the subject (e.g. John is old, Mary is young, the dog is brown, the ball is round, etc.) but the latter is used when talking about existence (e.g. 'I am at home', 'she is away with friends', 'the dog is lonely', 'I think, therefore I am', etc).
So I really want to know:
1. Does this seem naturalistic? (Personally, I don't see why not.) If so, should I tweak it to make it more naturalistic?
2. Whether my descriptors predicative and existential are most suitable, or whether one or both should be labelled 'copula'.
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
Posted: Thu Apr 14, 2022 10:11 am
by Travis B.
Jonlang wrote: ↑Thu Apr 14, 2022 9:28 am
I came up with an idea, which is undoubtedly
not my idea at all, for making the verb
to be a little less boring for one of my conlangs. Basically, I was thinking of using two different types of
to be which I have dubbed
predicative and
existential. The former is used only for applying attributes (whether real, or not) to the subject (e.g. John is old, Mary is young, the dog is brown, the ball is round, etc.) but the latter is used when talking about existence (e.g. 'I am at home', 'she is away with friends', 'the dog is lonely', 'I think, therefore I am', etc).
So I really want to know:
1. Does this seem naturalistic? (Personally, I don't see why not.) If so, should I tweak it to make it more naturalistic?
2. Whether my descriptors
predicative and
existential are most suitable, or whether one or both should be labelled 'copula'.
This is perfectly natural. I tend to take a different route, and because in many of my languages adjectives are just stative verbs, the attributive case is simply using said stative verbs with NP's directly, leaving the existential case and the
equality case (for expressing equality between two different NP's, as in "the dog is a golden retriever"), for which I normally have separate verbs.
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
Posted: Thu Apr 14, 2022 10:29 am
by Vardelm
This is basically Spanish ser vs estar, no?
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
Posted: Thu Apr 14, 2022 10:48 am
by Jonlang
Vardelm wrote: ↑Thu Apr 14, 2022 10:29 am
This is basically Spanish
ser vs
estar, no?
No idea, I've never had the slightest bit of interest in Spanish.
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
Posted: Thu Apr 14, 2022 11:23 am
by linguistcat
Jonlang wrote: ↑Thu Apr 14, 2022 10:48 am
Vardelm wrote: ↑Thu Apr 14, 2022 10:29 am
This is basically Spanish
ser vs
estar, no?
No idea, I've never had the slightest bit of interest in Spanish.
Also like Japanese da (formal: desu) vs aru (formal: arimasu) or iru (formal: imasu). Da and desu are used with adjectives or equating nouns (I am a teacher. = Watashi wa sensei desu.). Whereas aru and arimasu, and iru and imasu, are used for something - or someone - existing in a place, though these can also extend to having something (I have money (Lit: For me, money exists) = Watashi wa okane ga arimasu.)
The split between aru and iru is based on animacy, which you wouldn't need to include in your conlang.
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
Posted: Thu Apr 14, 2022 1:13 pm
by alice
Vardelm wrote: ↑Thu Apr 14, 2022 10:29 am
This is basically Spanish
ser vs
estar, no?
Or for that matter Irish
is vs
tá. A lot of my conlangs have this.
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
Posted: Thu Apr 14, 2022 1:14 pm
by Creyeditor
Papua Indonesian is similar in that it has existential copula ada but no real predicative copula. The existential copula is usually not used for locations though.
Ada orang di depan pintu.
EXIST person at front door.
There is someone at the door.
Sa di rumah.
1SG at home
I am at home.
Anjing sendiri.
dog lonely
The dog is lonely.
Bola bulat.
ball round
The ball is round.
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
Posted: Thu Apr 14, 2022 1:18 pm
by quinterbeck
Except for 'I think, therefore I am', in which the 'am' does signify existence, your examples for the 'existential to be' are all best described as states IMO. You could distinguish more finely - 'at home' and 'away' are states of location, while 'lonely' is a state of emotion.
I attempted to do this for Leima - a lot of the main verbs take certain functions of the copula:
equality - em
attributes - ad
lasting states - wain
transitory states - non
location - rug (also houh, orya, yoer)
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
Posted: Thu Apr 14, 2022 2:19 pm
by Vardelm
Vardelm wrote: ↑Thu Apr 14, 2022 10:29 am
This is basically Spanish
ser vs
estar, no?
linguistcat wrote: ↑Thu Apr 14, 2022 11:23 am
Also like Japanese da (formal: desu) vs aru (formal: arimasu) or iru (formal: imasu).
alice wrote: ↑Thu Apr 14, 2022 1:13 pm
Or for that matter Irish
is vs
tá. A lot of my conlangs have this.
Well, since that was correct (and I wasn't too sure!), then yeah, as Travis B. said, it's very natural. I just decided to do this in Yokai during the past week while figuring out how I wanted to handle copular, adjectival, and existential sentences sentences in all 4 of my conlangs.
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
Posted: Thu Apr 14, 2022 2:49 pm
by fusijui
Just off the top of my head, Tibetan has this, modern Chinese as well. Nothing exceptional, ISTM. Though maybe I'm misunderstanding the distinction between the two you're actually making, and interpolating my own ideas. Anyway, go for it!
[Edit: maybe 'equative' (equatative?) or something along those lines would be less ambiguous/misleading than 'predicative'?]
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
Posted: Thu Apr 14, 2022 2:57 pm
by vegfarandi
I suggest this recent paper,
Nonverbal Clause Constructions by Martin Haspelmath, which goes into all the permutations of clauses often constructed with copula verbs. What you're proposing is fairly common and covered in the paper a long with a whole host of other constructions.
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
Posted: Thu Apr 14, 2022 4:12 pm
by Vardelm
vegfarandi wrote: ↑Thu Apr 14, 2022 2:57 pm
I suggest this recent paper,
Nonverbal Clause Constructions by Martin Haspelmath, which goes into all the permutations of clauses often constructed with copula verbs. What you're proposing is fairly common and covered in the paper a long with a whole host of other constructions.
This paper looks
excellent! I have referred to other sources, but this looks better. Thanks for sharing.
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
Posted: Fri Apr 15, 2022 7:58 am
by Raphael
I'm not sure I understand the difference between "is" in "the dog is brown" and "is" in "the dog is lonely". How is the latter more about existence than the former?
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
Posted: Fri Apr 15, 2022 8:15 am
by Vardelm
Raphael wrote: ↑Fri Apr 15, 2022 7:58 am
I'm not sure I understand the difference between "is" in "the dog is brown" and "is" in "the dog is lonely". How is the latter more about existence than the former?
Said dog is permanently brown (via fur color) but temporarily lonely.
If you used a stative (non-existential) copula with "brown", then you might have a blond dog that wallowed in mud or something.
EDIT:
I got that wrong in terms of permanence. Essential copulas are permanent, describing the "essence" of something, while existential are temporary states.
| Type | Usage | Spanish | Tibetan |
| essential | permanent | ser | red, red-bzhag, yin |
| existential | temporary | estar | yod-red, dug, yod |
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
Posted: Fri Apr 15, 2022 8:20 am
by Raphael
Ah, thank you.
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
Posted: Fri Apr 15, 2022 3:03 pm
by quinterbeck
Vardelm wrote: ↑Fri Apr 15, 2022 8:15 am
I got that wrong in terms of permanence. Essential copulas are permanent, describing the "essence" of something, while existential are temporary states.
Is that an established use of the term
existential? It seems quite odd to me, as the typical definition of the word is
relating to existence or being alive. The main kind of linguistic thing I am used to seeing described as
existential is the assertion of something's existence, e.g. "There is a horse in the field."
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
Posted: Fri Apr 15, 2022 3:16 pm
by Travis B.
quinterbeck wrote: ↑Fri Apr 15, 2022 3:03 pm
Vardelm wrote: ↑Fri Apr 15, 2022 8:15 am
I got that wrong in terms of permanence. Essential copulas are permanent, describing the "essence" of something, while existential are temporary states.
Is that an established use of the term
existential? It seems quite odd to me, as the typical definition of the word is
relating to existence or being alive. The main kind of linguistic thing I am used to seeing described as
existential is the assertion of something's existence, e.g. "There is a horse in the field."
I had the same exact thought here.
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
Posted: Fri Apr 15, 2022 3:22 pm
by alice
For what it's worth, ser and estar derive from the latin for "sit" and "stand" respectively.
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
Posted: Fri Apr 15, 2022 7:59 pm
by Vardelm
quinterbeck wrote: ↑Fri Apr 15, 2022 3:03 pm
Is that an established use of the term
existential? It seems quite odd to me, as the typical definition of the word is
relating to existence or being alive. The main kind of linguistic thing I am used to seeing described as
existential is the assertion of something's existence, e.g. "There is a horse in the field."
I ... think so? I've seen them used in a few places for different languages, especially Tibetan. However, I haven't done any sort of organized search for multiple academic references.
Re: Two forms of 'to be' - predicative vs. existential?
Posted: Fri Apr 15, 2022 9:39 pm
by zompist
My Googling wasn't entirely satisfactory, but I've looked at a bunch of pages on Spanish, and though some describe ser as essential, none describe estar as existential-- but a page on Tibetan does use those terms. A couple of the pages on Spanish are Aristotelian and say "accidental"!
I've seen "existential" used mostly for expressions like "There are two problems".