Langs and Conlangs

Continuing from previously, the last batch of sentences in Runulodu Yere.

Tabuninda indaya rinive, samas rinirinive.

Cottontail’s children laughed, they mocked him.

Here are two uses of =vi OUT. The first was seen before, an emitting of noise, in this case laughter. The second, with an attained destination is used to convey covering the destination with a substance (the subject). This usage is then applied metaphorically to mockery. It is also used for cursing and blessing.

Nurunen Peyaŋina, naŋakadu dimidimi sarana.

Coyote started to move with anger, he started to chase after them.

A basic usage of =du: the goal or not yet attained destination.

Nadu sapenda pezes sara.

Since he failed to get them, he left.

This is one clause, with an embedded clause marked with =nda. Here =pe is probably negating =ra GO or even =ka TOUCH.

Saya ŋuyanda sama talile duruno hame.

He made new eyes out of sap.

The main verb is =me IN, used to convey making the subject, or rather the coming into being of the subject. The subject is his two new eyes. Note that the adjective comes between the possessor and the body part. The thing the subject is made out of or made from is marked with =nda as the source.

The word ŋuya is borrowed from Dirk.

Alas ŋuyago Peya durunuseye kodu.

And so Coyote’s eyes are like sap (yellowish) now.

And the end of the story continues into the present. The conjunction kodu is ko= (like in koyo, earlier) and =du: ‘for this’.

Next text is the South Wind and the Sun

Continuing from previously, the next batch of sentences in Runulodu Yere.

Peyas koyo yeredo kuŋino.

Coyote desired to play this game.

In addition to sensory experience, COME is also used for certain mental and emotional experiences as well, such as kuŋi ‘desire’. The intention of the desire is marked with =du.

Zeye luvunen sadurunuse.

His eyes were dark and shiny.

Shiny is composed of the noun luvu ‘reflected light’ and the comitative =nen. And, here is a dual of ‘eye’, for emphasis.

Sakemeya sataronda sadurunora, udures halo.

He took his two eyes from his face with his fingers and tossed them up into the air.

This is the equivalent of the first two clauses of sentence #9, but with a singular rather than a plural possessor throughout. Also, dual items take singular reference on the verb, hence ha= to refer to the pair of eyes rather than e=.

Sekotas hatato.

They stopped on a sekota tree.

Saya ranarana sekoteŋe, sadurunu atada hape baŋibaŋi.

He shook the sekota tree, but his eyes did not come down.

An example of vowel decay in the verb of the first clause, a more literal translation of which is ‘he made the sekota tree be shaking’. And another example of =pe FAIL as the negative of =ta this time. Since that information is lost, the directional adverb atada is used. The equivalent for =lo is oloyo.

The word sekota is borrowed from Dirk.

This next text is a translation of Dirk Elzinga’s version of the Eye-Juggler, with words borrowed from his language.

Text: Runulodu Yere

Text and Translation

Peya runus Tabuninda indanda yereno. Nakemeya nataronda nadurondara, udures elo, eta aŋaka, narunukavas rusurusu eka. Peyas koyo yeredo kuŋino. Zeye luvunen sadurunuse. Sakemeya sataronda sadurunora, udures halo. Sekotas hatato. Saya ranarana sekoteŋe, sadurunu atada hape baŋibaŋi. Tabuninda indaya rinive, samas rinirinive. Nurunen Peyaŋina, naŋakadu sama dimidimi sarana. Nadu sapenda pezes sara. Saya ŋuyanda sama talile duruno hame. Alas ŋuyago Peya durunuseye kodu.

Coyote saw Cottontail’s children’s game. They took their two eyes from their faces with their fingers and tossed them up into the air, and then they (the eyes) came down, and they caught them again and again in their eye sockets. Coyote desired to play this game. His eyes were dark and shiny. He took his two eyes from his face with his fingers and tossed them up into the air. They stopped on a sekota tree. He shook the sekota tree, but his eyes did not come down. Cottontail’s children laughed, they mocked him. Coyote started to move with anger, he started to chase after them. Since he failed to get them, he left. He made new eyes out of sap. And so Coyote’s eyes are like sap (yellowish) now.

Interlinear and Explanation

Peya runus Tabuninda indanda yereno.

Coyote saw Cottontail’s children’s game.

Here is the inalienable possession construction for the possessor::body part, and the alienable possession construction to convey kinship, and the standard way to convey experiencing by seeing using COME with an eye as the attained destination.

The names Peya and Tabuni are borrowed from Dirk.

Nakemeya nataronda nadurondara, udures elo, eta aŋaka, narunukavas rusurusu eka.

They took their two eyes from their faces with their fingers and tossed them up into the air, and then they (the eyes) came down, and they caught them again and again in their eye sockets.

I mentioned in the short grammar sketch that “number is obligatory only in pronouns and rational animate nouns. All other nouns are neutral in regards to number and can be read as either singular or plural.” There are four exceptions: inanimate nouns that can show number. They are all body parts. They are: runu ‘eye’, sara ‘ear’, kasa ‘hand’, and bana ‘foot’. They have dual forms: duruno (actually durunu with vowel decay), sazara, kagasa, bavana, formed by partial reduplication. They also have plural of the dual forms: duronda, sazanda, kaganda, bavanda. The dual is used when needing to reference the parts as pairs and the plural of the dual is used to reference multiple pairs. The singular is used as the attained destination of an experience, even when the possessor is plural. All three forms appear in this story.

Continuing from previously, the final two sentences in Soronen Kidi.

Liya kidenda soronda likehes piŋiranda ebeves sama dimidimi ira.

Because the rock’s words put pain in my belly, I threw it into the sea.

This sentence consists of a single clause starting with a rational animate agent, then an embedded clause with multiple uses of =nda. The embedded clause is kidenda soronda likehes piŋira ‘the rock’s words put pain in my belly’. The first=nda, on rock, marks alienable possession, so ‘the words of the rock’. The second=nda marks an inanimate cause or agent, ‘the words of the rock cause…’. My belly (likehe, actually li=kahi with vowel decay) is the attained destination of the subject, piŋi ‘pain’. And the verb is ra GO, so ‘the words of the rock cause pain to be put into my belly’. And all that is suffixed with another =nda to indicate the origin of the action of the main verb.

This is followed by the attained destination ‘into the sea’ and then the main subject and verb: sama dimidimi ira. Ignoring dimidimi for the moment, this is sama ira, indicating a third person singular rational animate (the rock) acting non-volitionally, in this case being acted upon by the =ya argument. Dimidimi is an adverb conveying the use of force. Adverbs come right before a verb, between the subject and the verb, and thus trigger the use of a pronoun for the verb to attach to. Without the adverb, this would still be sama ira due to the non-volitionality. The equivalent volitional phrase would be sara (sa=ra) and with the adverb sama dimidimi sara. I have no doubt that there are some speakers who would shorten that to sama dimidimera.

Zovalas lirunos kidi venala sapeye.

I never saw the rock at any time again.

In the final sentence, we start with another time phrase, this time the indefinite ‘some time’. This is followed by another attained destination: ‘my eye’. Using an eye as an attained destination is the standard way to convey experiencing by seeing. The scene is usually the subject of =no COME. Here it is the subject of =pe FAIL, as the scene has failed to come to the eye. Furthermore, =pe is followed by continuative aspect marker =yi indicating an ongoing situation. This sentence also contains another adverb venala ‘never’ as indicated by its position between the subject kidi and the verb with repeated pronominal subject sapeye. Without the adverb, this would be kidipeyi.

Next text will be the Eye-Juggler, Dirk Elzinga’s version mostly.

Continuing from previously, the next two sentences in Soronen Kidi.

Kidido keŋive, “Zodu diya lidu libanaraza seŋipe?”

I asked the rock, “Why did you fail to warn me about my foot’s going?”

In this sentence we have a question with a question word, zodu, a combination of the inanimate singular relative clause pronoun zo= wearing its other hat as a general indefinite pronoun and the goal marker =du. Indefinite zo= is the basis of a number of question words. The noun seŋi ‘warning’ is considered speech, and so we have a speech-emitter ‘you’, an audience ‘me’, and then =za to mark indirect speech, which can be anything from an indirect quotation to the bare subject or topic of the speech. Finally, rather than the usual =vi OUT for speech, we have =pe FAIL, as the speech presumably failed to be emitted.

Kideya rusuve, “Ŋeya piŋividu soronen kidi liŋi.”

The rock replied, “I am a talking rock who causes pain.”

For the reply, more direct speech. The first phrase is an embedded clause marked by =du. Here =du marks an intent, a metaphorical goal. The noun piŋi ‘pain’ is abstract enough to be emitted. Otherwise sensations, physical and mental, tend to use =me IN or =no COME as their main verb. Using =me or =no here would imply that the rock was feeling pain rather than causing pain.

Note also that the animate singular relative clause pronoun is used here in what is not an actual relative clause. These pronouns are also used for indefinite reference and questions. I go back and forth on whether this should be the first person pronoun instead.

Continuing from previously, the next two sentences in Soronen Kidi.

Likasaya soronen ŋeŋihe kidilo, sadu sorove, “U! Soronen kidi diŋi?”

I with my hand picked up the rock that could talk, and said to it, “Hey, are you a talking rock?”

The first clause in the second sentence starts out with another example of body part metonomy and with =ya, which only ever attaches to a rational agent. The subject of the first clause is our rock, modified by a relative clause. This is the same relative clause as in the first sentence. It is still potentially a talking rock. It’s identity has not yet been confirmed.

The second clause is an example of speech, using the verb most often used with speech, namely =vi OUT. This is because speech is considered to be sound, and sound is generally emitted by something. The emitter, when indicated, is marked by =ya, because speech is a characteristic of rational animates. The audience is marked with =du, for a goal or not yet attained destination. One doesn’t assume that one’s words have reached a destination.

The third clause is the direct speech. Direct speech is indicated with intonation and a juxtaposition of clauses. The speech starts with the attention-getting interjection u! and continues with a question of identity. Here we lose the relative clause and ask directly if the rock is word-having.

Kideya evi, “La! Soronen kidi liŋi!”

The rock said, “Yes! I am a talking rock!”

And the rock says yes! Identity confirmed. The inanimate plural pronoun refers to speech in general.

Soronen Kidi

Here is the full text of the Talking Rock story, plus an interlinear of the first sentence and an explanation of all that is going on. More sentences will appear in upcoming posts.

Text and Translation

Tili lonos kini ŋamaza lireye, soronen ŋeŋihe kides libana ikanda liye irato baŋibaŋi. Likasaya soronen ŋeŋihe kidilo, sadu sorove, “U! Soronen kidi diŋi?” Kideya evi, “La! Soronen kidi liŋi!” Kidido keŋive, “Zodu diya lidu libanaraza seŋipe?” Kideya rusuve, “Ŋeya piŋividu soronen kidi liŋi.” Liya kidenda soronda likehes piŋiranda ebeves sama dimidimi ira. Zovalas lirunos kidi venala sapeye.

Yesterday, I was going along the shoulder of the land, when I had to stop from coming into contact with my foot against a rock that could talk. I with my hand picked up the rock that could talk, and said to it, “Hey, are you a talking rock?” The rock said, “Yes! I am a talking rock!” I asked the rock, “Why did you fail to warn me about my foot’s going?” The rock replied, “I am a talking rock who causes pain.” Because the rock’s words put pain in my belly, I threw it into the sea. I never saw the rock at any time again.

Interlinear and Explanation

Tili lonos kini ŋamaza lireye, soronen ŋeŋihe kides libana ikanda liye irato baŋibaŋi.

Yesterday, I was going along the shoulder of the land, when I had to stop from coming into contact with my foot against a rock that could talk.

Taken in order, the first clause starts with a time period marked with locative =s. The locative is used for attained destinations, locations, and time periods.

The next phrase in the clause uses =za to mark an area, the land’s shoulder, a whole::part noun phrase showing an inalienable possession construct. This is the standard construction for inalienable possession: the whole followed by the possessed part. Inalienable possession is only used for parts of wholes and metaphorical parts of wholes and not for kinship. The shoulder of the land would be the part of the land that gently slopes into not-land, i.e. sea, so the beach.

The final phrase is the subject pronoun, the verbal motion partical, and an aspectual continuative particle all glommed together to make one phonological word showing vowel decay li=ra=yi -> lireye. The continuative is used here to set the scene for the next clause.

The second clause starts with a locative phrase modified by a relative clause. This is the most common type of relative clause, one where the modified noun is the subject of the relative clause. The otherwise inanimate rock uses the animate relative pronoun because of the potentiality (marked on the verb with =hi) of talking. Talking makes a thing a rational animate. Talking here is indicated with soro=nen, word=COM or ‘word-having’. This is a use of =nen for turning a noun into an adjective indicating an attribute. Note the vowel decay.

The next part of the second clause is an embedded clause marked with =nda. The primary use of this particle is to mark a point of origin. The use in this case is to mark a cause or reason, an origin of the action in the main clause. The embedded clause libana ika is using body part metonomy, where a possessed body part stands in for the rational animate possessor. This causes the body part to act like a rational animate, taking rational animate agreement. But, the subject on the verb is the third person animate used for non-volitional action. So the embedded clause is conveying that the reason for the main clause is the non-volitional contact of my foot on a location: the rock that can potentially talk.

The main part of the second clause is the first person singular subject repeated as a third person animate subject, conveying additional non-volitionality. This is attached to the verb ra GO and the aspectual particle =to for stopping. The clause ends with the conjunction baŋibaŋi conveying an unexpected situation.

Phonology

	labial	dental	alveolar	palatal	velar
nasal stops	m	n			ŋ
oral stops, voiceless	p	t			k
oral stops, voiced	b	d			g
fricatives, voiceless			s		h
fricatives, voiced	v		z
rhotics		r
laterals			l
glides				y

All of the consonants can occur initially and medially. Only /n/ and /s/ can occur finally. Consonant clusters allowed medially are /mb/, /nd/, and /ŋg/.

There are five vowels: /ieaou/.

Syllables are generally (C)V, with occasional CVC if the final C is /n/ or /s/. (C)VCCV is allowed with the medial CC being either /mb/, /nd/, or /ŋg/.

Stress is on the first syllable and then every other syllable. It is never on the final syllable. Thus words with an odd number of syllables end in two unstressed syllables. Vowels will change in this environment.

Phonological words have a minimum of two syllables.

Consonant Dissimilation

Some words are partial reduplications of other words. The initial syllable only is reduplicated. If the word begins with a vowel, the first vowel and consonant pair is reduplicated. This triggers consonant dissimilation. If the first consonant of the word is voiceless, then the second voiceless stop or fricative /ptsk/ become the voiced equivalent /bdzg/. Voiceless /h/ does not dissimilate. If the first consonant is already voiced then /bdzg/ become /vrsh/. So, /s/ becomes /z/, and /z/ becomes /s/. Likewise, /l/ becomes /y/ and /y/ becomes /l/. Furthermore, /d/ becomes /r/ and /r/ becomes /d/ with the further development of metathesis so that a word with the pattern rVdVX becomes dVrVX. This metathesis only occurs with /r/ -> /d/. The nasals /m/ and /ŋ/ both dissimilate to /n/. /n/ does not dissimilate.

Some examples:

• Adjective basa ‘bad’ -> Noun bavasa ‘badness’
• Adjective poto ‘sick’ -> Noun poboto ‘sickness’
• Noun runu ‘eye’ -> Dual noun duruno ‘pair of eyes’
• Noun tutu ‘lesson’ -> Noun tuduto ‘learning’
• Noun uri ‘wind’ -> Noun udure ‘air’
• Adjective zeye ‘dark’ -> Noun zeseye ‘darkness’

Vowel Decay

Unstressed vowels are subject to vowel decay. This primarily affects the high vowels /i/ and /u/. /iu/ will lower to /eo/ before a consonant cluster and before a final /s/. They will also decay if they are the final vowel in the two unstressed syllable sequence that occurs at the end of words of three or some other odd number of syllables. Hence duruno above rather than the expected durunu. And tuduto and udure. This decay does not happen if the word is augmented by a particle in some way so that the affected syllable is no longer unstressed or no longer the second unstressed vowel. So sama yanu duruno ‘his wide eyes’, but sadurunu ‘his eyes’.

A second type of vowel decay affecting /i/, /u/, and /a/ happens only when the vowels are in a sequence of unstressed syllables. XCiCa becomes XCeCa and XCuCa becomes XCoCa. Furthermore XCaCi becomes XCeCe and XCaCu becomes XCoCo.