Jump to content

Mö: Difference between revisions

100 bytes removed ,  16:22, 30 November 2023
Fixes, simplifications
(crummy article about the ꝡá)
 
(Fixes, simplifications)
Line 3: Line 3:
== The problem ==
== The problem ==


The existing problem is with adverbials, namely the fact that it’s tempting to have the cake and eat it too when it comes to choosing between two parses of an adverbial at the end of a sentence:
Given an adverbial in a complex sentence like {{t|Ruaq nháo ꝡä ruqshua <u>râo níchaq</u>}}, should we treat it as belonging to the subclause or the root clause?


{| class=wikitable
{{Example|Ruaq nháo, <u>ꝡä ruqshua râo níchaq</u>|‘They stated <u>that it rained today</u>.(Behavior Ⓐ)}}
! colspan=2 | Given an adverbial in a complex sentence like:
{{Example|<u>Ruaq nháo,</u> ꝡä ruqshua, <u>râo níchaq</u>|‘<u>They stated today</u> that it rained.’ (Behavior Ⓑ)}}
| colspan=2 | {{t|Ruaq nháo, ꝡä ruqshua râo níchaq}}
|-
| colspan=4 style="text-align: center;" | should ꝡe…
|-
! Ⓐ
! treat it as belonging to the subclause
| {{t|Ruaq nháo, <u>ꝡä ruqshua râo níchaq</u>}}
| ‘They stated <u>that it rained today</u>’
|-
! Ⓑ
! treat it as belonging to the root clause
| {{t|<u>Ruaq nháo,</u> ꝡä ruqshua, <u>râo níchaq</u>}}
| ‘<u>They stated today</u> that it rained’
|}


Behavior Ⓑ is useful in that one may always add details to the outer sentence in afterthought – details such as when somebody said something, as in the example – whereas behavior Ⓐ is more consistent but doesn’t offer behavior Ⓐ’s convenience.
Behavior Ⓑ is useful in that one may always add details to the outer sentence in afterthought – details such as when somebody said something, as in the example – whereas behavior Ⓐ is more consistent, if we think of it as wrapping the simpler sentence {{t|Ruqshua râo níchaq}}.


[[Hoemaı]] has also stated<ref>https://discord.com/channels/311223912044167168/646607726817968138/1088465798047207496 {{Transcript|<poem>
[[Hoemaı]] has also stated<ref>https://discord.com/channels/311223912044167168/646607726817968138/1088465798047207496 {{Transcript|<poem>
Line 32: Line 18:


== The solution: two kinds of {{class|ꝡa}} ==
== The solution: two kinds of {{class|ꝡa}} ==
Toaq has a tendency to branch heavily to the right, so why not allow the rightmost branch special rights? Enter {{t|ꝡá}}. Under the proposal, {{t|ꝡä}} would not capture clause-final adverbials (and would require beforethought rephrasing, as in {{t|ꝡä râo níchaq nä ruqshua}}), whereas {{t|ꝡá}} would, except that its allowable placement would be confined in that it can only appear as the final element in a sentence (save for the [[speech act]] particle).
Toaq has a tendency to branch heavily to the right, so why not allow the rightmost branch special rights? Enter {{t|ꝡá}}. Under the proposal, {{t|ꝡä}} would not capture clause-final adverbials, whereas {{t|ꝡá}} would, but can only appear as the final element in a sentence (save for the [[speech act]] particle).
 
In other words, {{t|ꝡä}} makes "smaller" clauses that can't have trailing adverbials, whereas {{t|ꝡá}} opens a "bigger" clause that can never be closed.


{| class=wikitable
{| class=wikitable
Line 41: Line 29:
! ‘how much’
! ‘how much’
|-
|-
! Non-adverbial-hoisting (Ⓐ)
! Pandora's clause Ⓐ
| {{t|ꝡá}}
| {{t|má}}
| {{t|tío}}
|-
! Small clause Ⓑ
| {{t|ꝡä}}
| {{t|ꝡä}}
| {{t|mä}}
| {{t|mä}}
| {{t|tïo}}
| {{t|tïo}}
|-
! Adverbial-hoisting (Ⓑ)
| {{t|ꝡá}}
| {{t|má}}
| {{t|tío}}
|}
|}
Both particles still allow for fronted adverbials or pre-subject adverbials, as in {{t|ꝡä/ꝡá râo níchaq nä ruqshua}} or {{t|ꝡä/ꝡá tao râo níchaq jí ní}}.


In this model, {{class|ꝡá}} acts like indirect speech: any clause of any type, so long as it’s placed as the final phrase in the entire sentence, may be wrapped in a {{t|ꝡá}} and should behave as expected.
In this model, {{class|ꝡá}} acts like indirect speech: any clause of any type, so long as it’s placed as the final phrase in the entire sentence, may be wrapped in a {{t|ꝡá}} and should behave as expected.