456 lines
22 KiB
Org Mode
456 lines
22 KiB
Org Mode
#+setupfile: ../headers
|
||
|
||
* Grammar
|
||
** Word Structure :noexport:
|
||
** Word Classes
|
||
*** Nouns :noexport:
|
||
# - What are the distributional properties of nouns?
|
||
# - What are the structural properties of nouns?
|
||
# - What are the major formally distinct subcategories of nouns?
|
||
# - What is the basic structure of the noun word (for polysynthetic
|
||
# languages) and/or noun phrases (for more isolating languages)?
|
||
|
||
**** Countables and Uncountables :noexport:
|
||
**** Proper Nouns :noexport:
|
||
*** Pronouns and Anaphoric Clitics :noexport:
|
||
# - Does the language have free pronouns and/or anaphoric clitics?
|
||
# (These are distinct from grammatical agreement.)
|
||
# - Give a chart of the free pronouns and/or anaphoric clitics.
|
||
**** Personal Pronouns
|
||
**** Demonstrative Pronouns
|
||
**** Possessive Pronouns
|
||
*** Verbs :noexport:
|
||
# - What are the distributional properties of verbs?
|
||
# - What are the structural properties of verbs?
|
||
# - What are the major subclasses of verbs?
|
||
# - Describe the order of various verbal operators within the verbal
|
||
# - word or verb phrase.
|
||
# - Give charts of th
|
||
# - tense/aspect/mode, etc. Indicate major allomorphic variants.
|
||
# - Are directional and/or locational notions expressed in the verb or
|
||
# - verb phrase at all?
|
||
# - Is this operation obligatory, i.e. does one member of the
|
||
# paradigm have to occur in every finite verb or verb phrase?
|
||
# - Is it productiv
|
||
# verb stems, and does it have the same meaning with each one?
|
||
# (Nothing is fully productive, but some operations are more
|
||
# productive than others.)
|
||
# - Is this operation primarily coded morphologically, analytically,
|
||
# or lexically? Are there any exceptions to the general case?
|
||
# - Where in the verb phrase or verbal word is this operation likely
|
||
# to appear? Can it occur in more than one place?
|
||
**** Verbal Structure
|
||
**** Verbal Derivations
|
||
**** Verbal Inflexions
|
||
*** Modifiers
|
||
# - If you posit a morphosyntactic category of adjectives, give
|
||
# evidence for not grouping theseforms with the verbs or nouns. What
|
||
# characterizes a form as being an adjective in this language?
|
||
# - How can you characterize semantically the class of concepts coded
|
||
# by this formal category?
|
||
# - Do adjectives agr
|
||
# noun class)?
|
||
# - What kind of syst
|
||
# - How high can a fluent native speaker count without resorting
|
||
# either to words from another language or to a generic word like
|
||
# /many/? Exemplify the system up to this point.
|
||
# - Do numerals agree with their head nouns (number, case, noun
|
||
# class, ...)?
|
||
**** Descriptive Adjectives :noexport:
|
||
**** Non-Numeral Quantifiers :noexport:
|
||
**** Numerals
|
||
|
||
*** Adverbs :noexport:
|
||
# - What characterikes a form as being an adverb in this language? If
|
||
# you posit a distinct class of adverbs, argue for why these forms
|
||
# should not be treated as nouns, verbs, or adjectives.
|
||
# - For each kind of adverb listed in this section, list a few members
|
||
# of the type, and specify whether there are any restrictions
|
||
# relavite to that type, e.g. where they can come in a clause, any
|
||
# morphemes common to the type, etc.
|
||
# - Are any of these classes of adverbs related to older
|
||
# complement-taking (matrix) verbs?
|
||
*** Adpositions :noexport:
|
||
*** Grammatical Particules :noexport:
|
||
** Constituants Order Typology :noexport:
|
||
*** Constituants Order in Main Clauses
|
||
# - What is the neutral order of free elements in the unit?
|
||
# - Are there variations?
|
||
# - How do the variant orders function?
|
||
# - Specific to the main clause constituent order: What is the
|
||
# pragmatically neutral order of constituents (A/S, P, and V) in
|
||
# basic clauses of the language?
|
||
*** Constituants Order in Nominal Clauses
|
||
# - Describe the order(s) of elements in the noun phrase.
|
||
*** Constituants Order in Verbal Clauses
|
||
# - Where do auxliari
|
||
# verb?
|
||
# - Where do verb-phrase adverbs occur with respect to the verb and
|
||
# auxiliaries?
|
||
*** Adpositional Phrases
|
||
# - Is the language dominantly prepositional or post-positional? Give
|
||
# examples.
|
||
# - Do many adpositions come from nouns or verbs?
|
||
*** Comparatives
|
||
# - Does the language have one or more grammaticalized comparative
|
||
# constructions? If so, what is the order of the standard, the
|
||
# marker and the quality by which an item is compared to the
|
||
# standard?
|
||
*** Questions
|
||
# - In yes/no questions, if there is a question particle, where does
|
||
# it occur?
|
||
# - In information qu
|
||
** Structure of a Nominal Group
|
||
*** Composed Words :noexport:
|
||
# - Is there noun-noun compounding that results in a noun (e.g.
|
||
# /windshield/)?
|
||
# - How do you know it is compounding?
|
||
# - Is there noun-verb (or verb-noun) compounding that results in a
|
||
# noun (e.g. /pickpocket/, /scarecrow/)?
|
||
# - Are these process
|
||
# can-opener)? How common is compounding?
|
||
*** Denominalization :noexport:
|
||
# - Are there any processes (productive or not) that form a verb from
|
||
# a noun?
|
||
# - An adjective from a noun?
|
||
# - An adverb from a noun?
|
||
*** Numbers :noexport:
|
||
# - Is number express
|
||
# - Is the distinction between singular and non-singular obligatory,
|
||
# optional, or completely absent in the noun phrase?
|
||
# - If number marking is “optional”, when does it tend to occur, and
|
||
# when does it tend not to occur?
|
||
# - If number marking is obligatory, is number overtly expressed for
|
||
# all noun phrases or only some subclasses of noun phrases, such as
|
||
# animate?
|
||
# - What non-singular distinctions are there?
|
||
*** Grammatical Case
|
||
# - Do nouns exhibit morphological case?
|
||
# - If so, what are the cases? (The functions of the cases will be
|
||
# elaborated in lat
|
||
**** Cases in Modern Eittlandic
|
||
Although seldom visible, as described in [[file:./syntax.md#case-marking][Case Marking]], cases still
|
||
remain part of the Eittlandic grammar, expressed through its syntax
|
||
rather than explicit marking on its nouns and adjectives. Four
|
||
different grammatical cases exist in this language: the *nominative*,
|
||
*accusative*, *genitive*, and *dative* case.
|
||
- The *nominative* case represents the subject of a sentence, that is,
|
||
the subject of intransitive clauses and the agent of transitive
|
||
clauses. As we’ll see below, it is morphologically marked only in
|
||
dialects other than Standard Eittlandic, and only if the word is a
|
||
strong masculine word.
|
||
- On the other hand *accusative*, like Old Norse, usually marks the
|
||
object of a verb, but it can also express time-related ideas such as
|
||
a duration in time, or after some prepositions. It is also the
|
||
default case when a noun has no clear status in a clause, and it can
|
||
as such serve as a vocative.
|
||
- *Dative* usually marks indirect objects of verbs in Old Norse, though
|
||
it can also often mark direct objects depending on the verb used.
|
||
|
||
**** Case Marking
|
||
Although present in Early Old Norse, the use of grammatical cases has
|
||
been on the decline since the Great Vowel Shift (see [[file:phonology.md#great-vowel-shift][Phonology: Great
|
||
Vowel Shift]]). Due to the general loss of word-final short vowels and
|
||
to regularization of its nouns, Eittlandic lost almost all of weak
|
||
nouns’ inflexions and a good amount in its strong nouns’ inflexions.
|
||
On top of this, the root of most nouns got regularized, getting rid of
|
||
former umlauts. Hence, while in Old Norse one might find the table
|
||
below presented in Cleasby and Vigfusson (1874), Modern Eittlandic is
|
||
simplified to the table following it.
|
||
|
||
#+name: tbl:old-norse-noun-inflexions
|
||
#+caption: 1st declension of strong nouns and declensions of masculine weak nouns in Old Norse
|
||
| / | <r> | | | | |
|
||
| | | Strong Masculine | Strong Feminine | Strong Neuter | Weak Masculine |
|
||
|---+------------+------------------+-----------------+---------------+----------------|
|
||
| | Sing. Nom. | heim-r | tíð | skip | tím-i |
|
||
| | Acc. | heim | tíð | skip | tím-a |
|
||
| | Gen. | heim-s | tíð-ar | skip-s | tím-a |
|
||
| | Dat. | heim-i | tíð | skip-i | tím-a |
|
||
| | Plur. Nom. | heim-ar | tíð-ir | skip | tím-ar |
|
||
| | Acc. | heim-a | tíð-ir | skip | tím-a |
|
||
| | Gen. | heim-a | tíð-a | skip-a | tím-a |
|
||
| | Dat. | heim-um | tíð-um | skip-um | tím-um |
|
||
|
||
#+name: tbl:eittlandic-example-noun-inflexions
|
||
#+caption: Declensions for strong and weak nouns in Modern Eittlandic
|
||
| / | <r> | | | |
|
||
| | | Strong Common | Strong Neuter | Weak Nouns |
|
||
|---+------------+---------------+---------------+------------|
|
||
| | Sing. Nom. | heim-r | skip | tím |
|
||
| | Acc. | heim | skip | tím |
|
||
| | Gen. | heim-ar | skip-s | tím-s |
|
||
| | Dat. | heim | skip | tím |
|
||
| | Plur. Nom. | heim-r | skip | tím-r |
|
||
| | Acc. | heim | skip | tím |
|
||
| | Gen. | heim-ar | skip-s | tím-s |
|
||
| | Dat. | heim-um | skip-um | tím-um |
|
||
|
||
As you can see, a good amount of declensions disappeared from nouns,
|
||
with only four marked cases for strong common nouns and two for strong
|
||
neuter and weak nouns. The declension system completely merged weak
|
||
nouns which are no longer distinguished by gender. Strong masculine
|
||
and strong feminine also got merged into strong common.
|
||
|
||
Declensions are no longer productive in almost all Modern Eittlandic
|
||
dialects. They are still mostly used in formal and written speech, but
|
||
they are less and less used in less formal circumstances and in oral
|
||
speech. The Royal Academy for Literature, which authored Standard
|
||
Eittlandic, even recommends not using grammatical cases when using
|
||
this dialect as they are reduntand with other syntactic strategies.
|
||
While the recommendation is mostly followed, speakers still tend to
|
||
use the singular genetive declension oraly. Younger folks at the time
|
||
of writing even tend to regularize it as /-ar/ for strong neuter and
|
||
weak nouns.
|
||
|
||
One exception to declensions no longer being productive is in and
|
||
around the Hylfjaltr Kingdom exclave in southern Eittland where
|
||
speakers of its local dialect tend instead to favor strong nouns for
|
||
newer terms. Hence, while most dialects agree on “internet” (pl.nom
|
||
/internetr/, pl.dat /internetum/) being a weak noun, this dialect treats
|
||
it as either a strong feminine (sg.gen /internetar/, pl.nom&acc
|
||
/internetr/, pl.dat /internetum/) or a strong neuter (sg.gen /internets/,
|
||
pl.dat /internetum/) --- the difference is due to subdivisions in said
|
||
dialect, mainly between rural and urban areas favoring the former and
|
||
the latter respectively.
|
||
|
||
There are some regular exceptions to the declension system. The first
|
||
one, inherited from Old Norse, is the /-r/ suffix becoming /-n/ or /-l/ when
|
||
a noun ends with an «n» or an «l» respectively, hence the table below
|
||
showing the declensions of strong masculine /himn/ (/heaven/) and strong
|
||
feminine /hafn/ (/harbour/, /haven/).
|
||
#+name: tbl:irregular-noun-declensions
|
||
| <r> | | |
|
||
| | himn | hafn |
|
||
|------------+--------+--------|
|
||
| Sing. Nom. | himnn | hafnn |
|
||
| Acc. | himn | hafn |
|
||
| Gen. | himnar | hafnar |
|
||
| Dat. | himn | hafn |
|
||
| Plur. Nom. | himnn | hafnn |
|
||
| Acc. | himn | hafn |
|
||
| Gen. | himnar | hafnar |
|
||
| Dat. | himnum | hafnum |
|
||
|
||
During the last five centuries, the root of the word got regularized
|
||
so that only one or two forms are allowed. Due to umlaut or ablaut, it
|
||
is possible the main vowel of a word changes between its singular and
|
||
plural form, even sometimes affecting its dative form. These changes
|
||
are due to old vowels long gone since --- with most even gone by the
|
||
time of Old Norse. These changes mainly remains in a few common words.
|
||
The table below gives some examples of such irregularities. These
|
||
words are marked as irregular in the dictionary.
|
||
#+name: tbl:irregularities-root-nouns
|
||
| <r> | | | | |
|
||
| | kettle (m.) | foot (m.) | book (f.) | water (n.) |
|
||
|------------+-------------+-----------+-----------+------------|
|
||
| Sing. Nom. | ketll | fótr | bók | vatn |
|
||
| Gen. | ketl | fót | bók | vatn |
|
||
| Acc. | ketlar | fótar | bókar | vatn |
|
||
| Dat. | ketl | fót | bók | vatn |
|
||
| Plur. Nom. | katll | fœtr | bœkr | vótnn |
|
||
| Acc. | katl | fœt | bœkr | vótn |
|
||
| Gen. | katl | fœt | bœk | vótn |
|
||
| Dat. | katlum | fótum | bókum | vótnum |
|
||
|
||
*** Articles and Demonstratives
|
||
# - Do noun phrases have articles?
|
||
# - If so, are they obligatory or optional, and under what
|
||
# circumstances do they occur?
|
||
# - Are they separate words, or bound morphemes?
|
||
# - Is there a class of classes of demonstratives as distinct from
|
||
# articles?
|
||
# - How many degrees of distance are there in the system of
|
||
# demontsratives?
|
||
# - Are there other distinctions beside distances?
|
||
|
||
When the noun of a nominal group is not a mass noun or a proper noun,
|
||
an article must accompany it, except for indefinite plural nouns.
|
||
|
||
**** Indefinite Article
|
||
The indefinite article is /einn/, the same term as /one/ in Eittlandic. It
|
||
agrees in declension with its noun, though it is to be noted its
|
||
declension is irregular, as seen in table below. Similarly, other
|
||
numerals have declensions as discussed in [[file:word-structure-and-classes.md#numerals][Word Classes: Numerals]].
|
||
#+name: tbl:declension-einn
|
||
| | Masculine | Feminine | Neuter |
|
||
|------+-----------+----------+--------|
|
||
| Nom. | einn | ein | eit |
|
||
| Acc. | ein | ein | eit |
|
||
| Dat. | ein | einn | eits |
|
||
| Gen. | einn | ein | eit |
|
||
|
||
**** Definite articles
|
||
As in other scandinavian languages, definite articles in Eittlandic
|
||
act as suffixes to the noun and fully replace its declension as it has
|
||
case marking itself. The full declension table of definite articles
|
||
can be found in the table below. As we can see, the definite articles
|
||
underwent an important regularization as well as merging strong neuter
|
||
and weak nouns together.
|
||
#+name: tbl:definite-articles
|
||
| / | <r> | | |
|
||
| | | Strong Common | Strong Neuter and Weak Nouns |
|
||
|---+------------+---------------+------------------------------|
|
||
| | Sing. Nom. | -(i)nn | -(i)t |
|
||
| | Acc. | -(i)n | -(i)t |
|
||
| | Gen. | -(i)ns | -(i)ts |
|
||
| | Dat. | -(i)n | -(i)t |
|
||
| | Plur. Nom. | -(i)nn | -(i)tr |
|
||
| | Acc. | -(i)n | -(i)t |
|
||
| | Gen. | -(i)n | -(i)t |
|
||
| | Dat. | -(i)num | -(i)tum |
|
||
|
||
The initial /i/ is only used when using the definite articles as a
|
||
suffix would cause a consonant cluster forbidden by Eittlandic
|
||
phonology, otherwise it is omitted. An example of the former case is
|
||
with /vatn/ (/water/) which becomes /vatnits/ when in its definite singular
|
||
genitive form, while /øy/ (/island/) becomes /øyns/ in the same form. Like
|
||
the indefinite article, the suffix agrees in gender, agreeing either
|
||
with strong masculine or feminine words (or as established before,
|
||
strong common) or with strong neuter and weak nouns.
|
||
|
||
The use of definite articles with nouns is further discussed in
|
||
[[file:./syntax.md#definiteness][Definiteness]].
|
||
|
||
*** Definiteness
|
||
Definiteness in Eittlandic serves multiple purposes. Its most obvious
|
||
one is to distinguish between an indefinite and a definite entity, as
|
||
in English /a dog/ or /the dog/, respectively /einn hundr/ and /hundinn/, as
|
||
discussed in [[file:./syntax.md#articles-and-demonstratives][Articles and Demonstratives]].
|
||
|
||
However, definiteness is also necessary with suffixed possessives and
|
||
demonstrative.
|
||
|
||
*** Possessives
|
||
# - How are possessors expressed in the noun phrase?
|
||
# - Do nouns agree with their possessors? Do possessors agree with
|
||
# possessed nouns? Neither, or both?
|
||
# - Is there a distinction between alienable and inalienable
|
||
# possesson?
|
||
# - Are there other types of possession?
|
||
# - When the possessor is a full noun, where does it usually come with
|
||
# respect to the possessed noun?
|
||
*** Gender
|
||
# - Is there a noun class system?
|
||
# - What are the classes and how are they manifested in the noun
|
||
# phrase?
|
||
# - What dimension of reality is most central to the noun class system
|
||
# (e.g. animacy, shape, function, etc.)? What other dimensions are
|
||
# relevant?
|
||
# - Do the classifiers occur with numerals? Adjectives? Verbs?
|
||
# - What is their function in these contexts?
|
||
Eittlandic inherited from Old Norse a gender system divided into three
|
||
genders: male, female, and neuter. Although the number of elements
|
||
marking it declined during its evolution, Eittlandic still marks
|
||
gender in its strong nouns, adjectives, pronouns, and to a certain
|
||
degree in its articles. However, as mentioned in [[file:./syntax.md#case-marking][Case Marking]], case
|
||
marking and by extensions gender marking is slowly disappearing in
|
||
Modern Eittlandic nouns and adjectives.
|
||
|
||
Due to the presence of declensions with strong nouns and adjectives,
|
||
its pronouns, and to a certain degree different articles, it can still
|
||
be said Eittlandic is a gendered language, although it doesn’t hold
|
||
much importance in its grammar anymore. Since strong nouns aren’t
|
||
productive anymore and weak nouns lost all obvious gender differences,
|
||
we can even consider gender as not productive anymore in Eittlandic
|
||
and bound to eventually disappear. In fact, the loss of gender is even
|
||
stronger in Standard Eittlandic due to the theoretical absence of
|
||
declensions in this dialect.
|
||
|
||
In case a strong noun is used with a strong adjective, both will agree
|
||
in number and gender.
|
||
|
||
+ Examples:
|
||
- hvítr hund
|
||
|
||
white.m.sg.acc dog.m.sg.acc
|
||
|
||
white dog
|
||
- langir tungir
|
||
|
||
long.f.pl.acc tongues.f.pl.acc
|
||
|
||
long tongues
|
||
|
||
*** Diminution and Augmentation :noexport:
|
||
# - Does the language employ diminutive and/or augmentative operators
|
||
# in the noun or noun phrase?
|
||
# - Questions to answ
|
||
# - Is this operation obligatory, i.e. does one member of the
|
||
# paradigm have to occur in every full noun phrase?
|
||
# - Is it productiv
|
||
# full noun phras
|
||
# one? (Nothing is fully productive, but some operations are more
|
||
# so than others.)
|
||
# - Is this operation primarily expressed lexically,
|
||
# morphologically, or analytically?
|
||
# - Where in the noun phrase is this operation likely to be located?
|
||
# - Can it occur in more than one place?
|
||
|
||
** Predicates and Linked Constructions :noexport:
|
||
*** Nominal Predicates
|
||
# - How are proper inclusion and equative predicates formed?
|
||
# - What restrictions are there, if any, on the TAM marking of such
|
||
# clauses?
|
||
*** Adjective Predicates
|
||
# - How are predicate adjective formed? (Include a separate section on
|
||
# predicate adjectives only if they are structurally distinct from
|
||
# predicate nominals.)
|
||
*** Locative Predicat
|
||
# - How are locational clauses (or predicate locatives) formed?
|
||
*** Existential Predicates
|
||
# - How are existential clauses formed? (Give examples in different
|
||
# tense/aspects, especially if there is significant variation.)
|
||
# - How are negative
|
||
# - Are there extended uses of existential morphology? (Provide
|
||
# pointers to other relevant sections of the grammar.)
|
||
*** Possessive Clauses
|
||
# - How are possessiv
|
||
** Verbal Groups Structure :noexport:
|
||
** Intransitive Clauses :noexport:
|
||
** Ditransitive Clauses :noexport:
|
||
** Dependent Type Clauses :noexport:
|
||
*** Non-Finite
|
||
*** Semi-Finite
|
||
*** Finite
|
||
** Grammatical Relationship :noexport:
|
||
# Examplify some simple intransitive, transitive, and ditransitive
|
||
# clauses. Three-argument clauses may not unequivocally exist.
|
||
# - What are the grammatical erlations of this language? Give
|
||
# morphosyntactic evidence for each one that you propose.
|
||
# - Subject?
|
||
# - Ergative?
|
||
# - Absolutive?
|
||
# - Direct object?
|
||
# - Indirect object?
|
||
# There are basically four possible sources of evidence for
|
||
# grammatical relations:
|
||
# - morphological case on NPs
|
||
# - person marking on verbs
|
||
# - constituent ord
|
||
# - some pragmatic hierarchy
|
||
# - Is the system of grammatical relations in basic (affirmative,
|
||
# declarative) clauses organized according to a
|
||
# nominative/accusative, ergative/absolutive, tripartite, or some
|
||
# other system?
|
||
# - Is there a split system for organizing grammatical relations? If
|
||
# so, what determin
|
||
# - Is there split instransitivity? If so, what semantic or
|
||
# discourse/pragmatic factor conditions the split?
|
||
# - Does the system for pronouns and/or person marking on verbs
|
||
# operate on the same basis as that of full NPs?
|
||
# - Are there different grammatical-relation systems depending on
|
||
# the clause type (e.g. main vs. dependent clauses, affirmative
|
||
# vs. negative clauses)?
|
||
# - Are there different grammatical-relation assignment systems
|
||
# depending on th
|
||
# - Are there any syntactic processes (e.g. conjunction reduction,
|
||
# relativization) that operate on an ergative/absolutive basis?
|
||
** Constructions Link :noexport:
|
||
** Valence Increase :noexport:
|
||
*** Causative
|
||
*** Applicative
|
||
*** Dative Shift
|
||
*** Dative Interest
|
||
*** External Possession
|