Clause Reform: Difference between revisions

(2 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown)

Line 7:

* What are the semantics of an underfilled verb?

Toaq's official answer to the first question is that clauses are greedy; they eat up as many arguments and adjuncts as they can get. However, experience with Toaq Delta leads me to believe that greediness impedes the language's usability. Because subordinate clauses look just like non-subordinate clauses, the grammar presents learners with a beautifully simple lie: that you can underfill any clause and include trailing adjuncts in any clause. Being perceptive loglangers, most will come to realize that the "real" grammar, the one that enforces greediness, looks more complicated~~, but this gap between the real grammar and the intuitive grammar that works 98% of the time is fairly large~~. ~~Greediness~~ becomes something you watch out for, not quite something you internalize.

Toaq's official answer to the first question is that clauses are greedy; they eat up as many arguments and adjuncts as they can get. However, experience with Toaq Delta leads me to believe that greediness impedes the language's usability. Because subordinate clauses look just like non-subordinate clauses, the grammar presents learners with a beautifully simple lie: that you can underfill any clause and include trailing adjuncts in any clause. Being perceptive loglangers, most will come to realize that the "real" grammar, the one that enforces greediness, looks more complicated. But greediness becomes something you watch out for, not quite something you internalize.

The theory behind this proposal (and likewise the [[Subclause Reform]]) is that giving up a little bit of convenience in order to simplify the grammar can be a very worthwhile tradeoff. This was what happened with [[auto-hóa]], for instance: for all the tinkering that was done, it turned out that a little bit of verbosity was what gave us the most intuitive and usable grammar.

Line 49:

{{Example|He teaca júna jí, ꝡä bu sula kı̣udua báq tue po jíadaq.|The fact scares me that matters of the future can never be known.}}{{Example|Táosıo, lä seraq nhâna kú râo núaq já, bï chı duı hıam jí hóq.|I think the plan to attack them at night is too dangerous.}}{{Example|Jôı tú faq mabala, ë dea nháo láqbıo, nä jeaq rueqmoe jí.|With each horrible striking of the bell, I grew more tense.}}

Finally, another possible antecedent for any relative clause, content clause, or event accessor clause is the ~~word~~ {{T|có}}. This word is essentially a lightweight placeholder for content to come at the end of the post-field, much like the 'it' in English "'''It''' delights me '''that''' they tried". The semantics of {{T|có}} are probably like {{T|sá raı}}, but with low scope.

Finally, another possible antecedent for any relative clause, content clause, or event accessor clause is the correlative pronoun {{T|có}}. This word is essentially a lightweight placeholder for content to come at the end of the post-field, much like the 'it' in English "'''It''' delights me '''that''' they tried". The semantics of {{T|có}} are probably like {{T|sá raı}}, but with low scope.

{{Example|Jaıca có jí, ꝡä leo nháo hú.|It delights me that they tried it.}}{{Example|Kaq jí có, ë marao súq.|I saw you dance.}}{{Example|Cho jí có, ꝡë bo jí hóa.|I like that which I have. (?)}}

{{Example|Jaıca có jí, ꝡä leo nháo hú.|It delights me that they tried it.}}{{Example|Kaq jí có, ë marao súq.|I saw you dance.}}{{Example|Cho jí có, ꝡë bo jí hóa.|I like that which I have. (?)}}{{Example|Zao jí sá chateı cô, lä tao já ní.|I know of a way to do this.}}

Whenever {{T|có}} is used as the object of a verb, it may be covert. This is how the subordinators {{T|ꝡä}}, {{T|lä}}, etc. come to still appear as if they have no antecedent most of the time.

~~When~~ {{T|có}} is used as the object of a ~~preposition or the final verbal argument of a clause~~, it may be covert. This is how the subordinators {{T|ꝡä}}, {{T|lä}}, etc. come to still appear as if they have no antecedent most of the time.

{{Example|Bu dua áma, ꝡä gáma nä hıa gáma…|We don't know what the camel is up to…}}{{Example|Tua jí, ꝡä naı ceo sho bua súq ní, ꝡë daqbuaı bue kú hóa jí.|I cause you to now begin to inhabit this place, which has long been my home.}}{{Example|Tıshue jí ní chôe, ë rıu'aona súq jí nha.|I'll stay here until you come back to me.}}{{Example|Ma zao súq sá chateı, lä tao já ní?|Do you know of a way to do this?}}

{{Example|Bu dua áma, ꝡä gáma nä hıa gáma…|We don't know what the camel is up to…}}{{Example|Tua jí, ꝡä naı ceo sho bua súq ní, ꝡë daqbuaı bue kú hóa jí.|I cause you to now begin to inhabit this place, which has long been my home.}}{{Example|Tıshue jí ní chôe, ë rıu'aona súq jí nha.|I'll stay here until you come back to me.}}

== An alternative ==

Line 59:

Line 58:

Center-embedded clauses cannot have trailing adjuncts, and so we give up the [[Embedding Property]]. They are generated on the right periphery of clausal arguments. (I.e. in {{T|sá poq po kúe, ꝡë hao hóa}}, the relative clause is neither a constituent of the {{T|poq}} DP nor the {{T|kúe}} DP, but rather something that sits off to the side, as if it has undergone a minimal amount of extraposition.) The word {{T|có}} must be overt whenever it follows a center-embedded clause, almost as if it's a terminator. This is necessary in order to disambiguate between {{T|Aojaı póq, ꝡë cho hó sío, có, ꝡä hao júna, ꝡä luq tú}} and {{T|Aojaı póq, ꝡë cho hó sío, ꝡä hao júna, có, ꝡä luq tú}}.

== See also ==

* [https://robin.town/blog/sa-ea-buriaq Sa ea burıaq], also by [[User:Loekıa|Loekıa]], which incorporates ideas from Clause Reform into a more sweeping vision of Toaq

@@ Line 7: / Line 7: @@
 * What are the semantics of an underfilled verb?
-Toaq's official answer to the first question is that clauses are greedy; they eat up as many arguments and adjuncts as they can get. However, experience with Toaq Delta leads me to believe that greediness impedes the language's usability. Because subordinate clauses look just like non-subordinate clauses, the grammar presents learners with a beautifully simple lie: that you can underfill any clause and include trailing adjuncts in any clause. Being perceptive loglangers, most will come to realize that the "real" grammar, the one that enforces greediness, looks more complicated, but this gap between the real grammar and the intuitive grammar that works 98% of the time is fairly large. Greediness becomes something you watch out for, not quite something you internalize.
+Toaq's official answer to the first question is that clauses are greedy; they eat up as many arguments and adjuncts as they can get. However, experience with Toaq Delta leads me to believe that greediness impedes the language's usability. Because subordinate clauses look just like non-subordinate clauses, the grammar presents learners with a beautifully simple lie: that you can underfill any clause and include trailing adjuncts in any clause. Being perceptive loglangers, most will come to realize that the "real" grammar, the one that enforces greediness, looks more complicated. But greediness becomes something you watch out for, not quite something you internalize.
 The theory behind this proposal (and likewise the [[Subclause Reform]]) is that giving up a little bit of convenience in order to simplify the grammar can be a very worthwhile tradeoff. This was what happened with [[auto-hóa]], for instance: for all the tinkering that was done, it turned out that a little bit of verbosity was what gave us the most intuitive and usable grammar.
@@ Line 49: / Line 49: @@
 {{Example|He teaca júna jí, ꝡä bu sula kı̣udua báq tue po jíadaq.|The fact scares me that matters of the future can never be known.}}{{Example|Táosıo, lä seraq nhâna kú râo núaq já, bï chı duı hıam jí hóq.|I think the plan to attack them at night is too dangerous.}}{{Example|Jôı tú faq mabala, ë dea nháo láqbıo, nä jeaq rueqmoe jí.|With each horrible striking of the bell, I grew more tense.}}
-Finally, another possible antecedent for any relative clause, content clause, or event accessor clause is the word {{T|có}}. This word is essentially a lightweight placeholder for content to come at the end of the post-field, much like the 'it' in English "'''It''' delights me '''that''' they tried". The semantics of {{T|có}} are probably like {{T|sá raı}}, but with low scope.
+Finally, another possible antecedent for any relative clause, content clause, or event accessor clause is the correlative pronoun {{T|có}}. This word is essentially a lightweight placeholder for content to come at the end of the post-field, much like the 'it' in English "'''It''' delights me '''that''' they tried". The semantics of {{T|có}} are probably like {{T|sá raı}}, but with low scope.
-{{Example|Jaıca có jí, ꝡä leo nháo hú.|It delights me that they tried it.}}{{Example|Kaq jí có, ë marao súq.|I saw you dance.}}{{Example|Cho jí có, ꝡë bo jí hóa.|I like that which I have. (?)}}
+{{Example|Jaıca có jí, ꝡä leo nháo hú.|It delights me that they tried it.}}{{Example|Kaq jí có, ë marao súq.|I saw you dance.}}{{Example|Cho jí có, ꝡë bo jí hóa.|I like that which I have. (?)}}{{Example|Zao jí sá chateı cô, lä tao já ní.|I know of a way to do this.}}
+Whenever {{T|có}} is used as the object of a verb, it may be covert. This is how the subordinators {{T|ꝡä}}, {{T|lä}}, etc. come to still appear as if they have no antecedent most of the time.
-When {{T|có}} is used as the object of a preposition or the final verbal argument of a clause, it may be covert. This is how the subordinators {{T|ꝡä}}, {{T|lä}}, etc. come to still appear as if they have no antecedent most of the time.
+{{Example|Bu dua áma, ꝡä gáma nä hıa gáma…|We don't know what the camel is up to…}}{{Example|Tua jí, ꝡä naı ceo sho bua súq ní, ꝡë daqbuaı bue kú hóa jí.|I cause you to now begin to inhabit this place, which has long been my home.}}{{Example|Tıshue jí ní chôe, ë rıu'aona súq jí nha.|I'll stay here until you come back to me.}}{{Example|Ma zao súq sá chateı, lä tao já ní?|Do you know of a way to do this?}}
-{{Example|Bu dua áma, ꝡä gáma nä hıa gáma…|We don't know what the camel is up to…}}{{Example|Tua jí, ꝡä naı ceo sho bua súq ní, ꝡë daqbuaı bue kú hóa jí.|I cause you to now begin to inhabit this place, which has long been my home.}}{{Example|Tıshue jí ní chôe, ë rıu'aona súq jí nha.|I'll stay here until you come back to me.}}
 == An alternative ==
@@ Line 59: / Line 58: @@
 Center-embedded clauses cannot have trailing adjuncts, and so we give up the [[Embedding Property]]. They are generated on the right periphery of clausal arguments. (I.e. in {{T|sá poq po kúe, ꝡë hao hóa}}, the relative clause is neither a constituent of the {{T|poq}} DP nor the {{T|kúe}} DP, but rather something that sits off to the side, as if it has undergone a minimal amount of extraposition.) The word {{T|có}} must be overt whenever it follows a center-embedded clause, almost as if it's a terminator. This is necessary in order to disambiguate between {{T|Aojaı póq, ꝡë cho hó sío, có, ꝡä hao júna, ꝡä luq tú}} and {{T|Aojaı póq, ꝡë cho hó sío, ꝡä hao júna, có, ꝡä luq tú}}.
+== See also ==
+* [https://robin.town/blog/sa-ea-buriaq Sa ea burıaq], also by [[User:Loekıa|Loekıa]], which incorporates ideas from Clause Reform into a more sweeping vision of Toaq