A language without verbs...

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 08:15 PM
link   
Dictionary:


agreement particle, is, yes: ya
conditional particle , (sentence A, if true then, sentence B): we
imperative particle (, you should make this happen): yo
question particle, question mark (?): ye
prepositional particle, to, at, in: wa
negation particle, not, no: wo
I, me, my, myself: me
you, your, yourself: te
he, she, it, itself: le
this, that: ke
cloud, fog, mist, smoke, gas, fogginess, confusion: lon
sun, day, time: son
wind, air, breeze, airiness, space, place: lo
water, liquid, wetness: wan
stone, rock, bone, hardness, thing: la
muscle, strength, power, help, support: pa
apple, fruit, vegetable, food: ma
leaf, paper, page, card, ticket: ta
seed, origin, beginning: sen
grass, plant, herb, hair, weed, flower, expansion, growth: yen
cave, inside place, home, house, building, nest, den: ton
mouth, opening, door, portal, window, orifice: ko
tongue, language, speech, conversation: len
fire, heat: po
anus (butt), back (opposite of front, the rare-end): yan
joint, elbow, knee, connection (link, bond): kon
brain, knowledge, consciousness: ken
eye, sight, vision, view (perspective): wen
ear, audio: so
heart, core, spirit, soul: kan
hand, possession: ten
foot, journey, adventure, quest, path, way, road: pe
penis, vagina, sex, gender, intercourse, sexuality: san
man, masculinity: man
woman, femininity: pen
human, person: men
baby, child, offspring, youth, newness, smallness: yon
branch (a part of a tree), piece, part, fraction, division: to
smile, happiness, enjoyment, entertainment, goodness: pon
earth, nature, the world, ground, land: lan
skin, peel, fabric, bark (of tree), clothing: won
wave (of water), difference, modification ( a change): mo
shell, box, container, bag, sac: sa
feces, waste, garbage, pollution, insult-word: ka
wound, sore, rash, cut, pain, hurt, suffering: tan
sky, superiority, greatness, majority, formality: se
moon, star, light, brightness, cleanliness, purity: mon
parent, creator: pan


Example sentences:

te ya wen.
You are seen.

le ya wen.
(s)he is seen.

le ya wen ye.
is (s)he seen?

Notice that literally this says "he (particle) sight."

Nouns can function as adjectives too, but no verbs are used.




posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 08:55 PM
link   
Can you give us a background of this language you are talking about? In what country is this language being spoken?



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 09:17 PM
link   
reply to post by wavemaker
 


There is no background to this language and it isn't an official language of any country, but the concept is interesting nevertheless.

For example, "I see you" would be "te ya me wen", but what this really means is "you-yes-my-sight".

If you want to say "I want food", you can say "food-possession-yes-my-happiness" (maten ya mepon) which would mean something like "to have food is indeed my happiness".


This language acts strictly on an "X-yes-Y", "X-no-Y", "X-to-Y", "X-not-to-Y", basis, with possible adjectives so there is no room for verbs. Very interesting.



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 10:28 PM
link   
So how would you deal with the difference between

1. The man bit the dog
2. The dog bit the man.

3. I love
4. I am loved

Or express

"if you hadn't died, I would have made someone kill you"

Without any verbs, ie. any morpheme that semantically denotes action or state. I'm curious as to how you would do this.



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 11:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by metamagic
So how would you deal with the difference between


It can indeed be said without verbs.


Originally posted by metamagic
1. The man bit the dog
2. The dog bit the man.

3. I love
4. I am loved

Or express

[5.]"if you hadn't died, I would have made someone kill you"


1) owned-man-bite at dog.
2) owned-dog-bit at man.
3) my-love
4) my-owned-love

5) "If not-dead-you, then murderous-person with my-force at your-death."

See, it can be said.
edit on 6-4-2012 by arpgme because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 11:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by arpgme

Originally posted by metamagic
So how would you deal with the difference between


It can indeed be said without verbs.


Originally posted by metamagic
1. The man bit the dog
2. The dog bit the man.

3. I love
4. I am loved


Or express

[5.]"if you hadn't died, I would have made someone kill you"


1) owned-man-bite at dog.
2) owned-dog-bit at man.
3) my-love
4) my-owned-love

5) "If not-dead-you, then murderous-person with my-force at your-death."

See, it can be said.
edit on 6-4-2012 by arpgme because: (no reason given)


"own" is a verb. So is "bit"

You missed the point of the last one. Perhaps this will clarify it.

1. "if he hadn't died, i would have made someone kill him"
2. "if he isn't dead, then I will will make someone kill him"

Consider as well..

1. I had eaten.
2. I was eating

Actually what you are doing with the owned construction is trying to technically not use a verb by using a participle, a nominal form derived from a verb.
edit on 6-4-2012 by metamagic because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 6 2012 @ 11:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by metamagic
"own" is a verb. So is "bit"


That was a typo, I meant "bite" (noun) and "owned" (adjective). If you don't like the adjective "owned", you can use the adjective "held".


Originally posted by metamagic

1. "if he hadn't died, i would have made someone kill him"
2. "if he isn't dead, then I will will make someone kill him"

Consider as well..

1. I had eaten.
2. I was eating


Obviously without verbs, there are no verb conjugations such as "-ing", "-ed", "was", and "did"...





new topics
top topics
 
0

log in

join