|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| '''Resumptive pronoun ellipsis'''<ref group=note>I vacillated between different formulations of the title of this article, but in the end decided that this is the most ‘correct’ version (while also being vaguely friendly). ~uakci</ref>, also known as '''auto-{{t|hóa}}''' (or '''{{t|hóa}}-elision''') relates to the appearance of relative clauses which do not use {{t|hóa}} or any other pronoun to refer to their heads, such as the relative clause in {{t|sa pỏq nïe kúa}}. A resumptive pronoun ellipsis rule is a rule which assigns meanings to these otherwise meaningless clauses, usually by specifying a spot where a covert {{t|hóa}} appears automatically. | | {{DISPLAYTITLE:Auto-{{t|hóa}}}} |
| | '''Auto-{{t|hóa}}''' (or '''{{t|hóa}} elision''') is a hypothetical rule in which {{t|hóa}} or any other [[anaphoric pronoun]] in general may be omitted from a relative clause in certain circumstances, such as in in {{t|sa pỏq nïe kúa}}. An auto-{{t|hóa}} rule is a rule which assigns meanings to these otherwise meaningless clauses, usually by specifying a spot where a covert {{t|hóa}} appears automatically. |
|
| |
|
| == Scary English words == | | == The battle of auto-{{t|hóa}} == |
|
| |
|
| * '''[[wikipedia:Ellipsis|Ellipsis]]''' (think of the ellipsis symbol, …) is the act of omitting part of a phrase, or a whole phrase, with the expectation that pragmatics and context will convey the missing phrase. Some kinds of ellipsis are solidifed into grammatical rules: ''She went to the store but I didn’t'' (…go to the store). (Note that another analysis of this kind of ellipsis interprets ''didn’t'' as a so-called [[wikipedia:pro-verb|pro-verb]] – like a pronoun but for verb phrases. This interpretation is outside of the purview of this article.)
| | : '''TODO:''' This section is useless information for the everyday Toaqist. Summarize. |
| * '''[[wikipedia:Elision|Elision]]''' technically refers to the act of removing single or multiple sounds (for example, ''it would'' /ɪt ˈwʊd/ → ''it’d'' /ɪtəd/ → /ɪd/), but in loglang communities, the term has taken on the meaning of ''the disposure of unneeded particles'' (such as Lojban’s elision of terminators – kinds of closing bracket particles – which allows one to say ''lo jbobau cu xamgu'' rather than ''lo jbobau ku cu xamgu vau iau'').
| |
| * Broadly speaking, a '''[[wikipedia:relative clause|relative clause]]''' is a dependent clause which introduces additional information about another entity – for example, in ''he was the person I wanted to find'', ''I wanted to find'' is a relative clause of ''the person'' (it describes what kind of person). In this scenario, ''the person'' is termed the '''head''' or the '''antecedent''' of the relative clause.
| |
| * A '''resumptive pronoun''' is one which refers to the antecedent. Such are hard to find in English, but they appear on occasion: ''a child who knows I love them'' (''them'' = ''a child''. Also note that ''a child'' is implicitly the subject of the resumptive clause – the one who knows). All Toaq resumptive clauses are formulated in a way that makes the resumptive pronoun {{t|hóa}} easy to use – for example, ‘a child who is big’ = {{t|deo säo <u>hóa</u>}} (literally ''child such that <u>it</u> is big''). Other pronouns may be used as antecedents since the [[antecedent pronoun]]s update: {{t|deo säo <u>hó</u>}}, where {{t|hó}} is the animate pronoun (he/she/they/it, for humans and animals performing roles thereof).
| |
| * Consequently, '''resumptive pronoun ellipsis''' occurs when {{t|hóa}} is omitted for one reason or another.
| |
| | |
| == The battle of auto-{{t|hóa}} ==
| |
|
| |
|
| Right after an avant-garde rap performance by [[nuogaı]], fagri/Hoaqgıo [https://discord.com/channels/311223912044167168/311223912044167168/673588772117413940 posted] a taxonomy of viable {{t|hóa}} elision proposals. They are enumerated as follows: | | Right after an avant-garde rap performance by [[nuogaı]], fagri/Hoaqgıo [https://discord.com/channels/311223912044167168/311223912044167168/673588772117413940 posted] a taxonomy of viable {{t|hóa}} elision proposals. They are enumerated as follows: |