Ilaksh: A Philosophical Design for a Hypothetical Language

	Home	4 Case Morphology	9 Syntax
	Introduction	5 Verb Morphology	10 Lexico-Semantics
	1 Phonology	6 More Verb Morphology	11 The Writing System
	2 Morpho-Phonology	7 Suffixes	12 The Number System
	3 Basic Morphology	8 Adjuncts	The Lexicon

Chapter 5: Verb Morphology

The Ilaksh verbal formative (termed “verb” in this chapter for simplicity’s sake) is the workhorse of the language, inflecting for twenty-one different morphological categories. These include the seven categories shared by all formatives and already discussed in Chapter 3: Configuration, Affiliation, Perspective, Extension, Essence, Context, and Designation. Additionally the following fourteen categories apply solely to verbs: Mood, Function, Illocution, Level, Case-Frame, Format, Modality, Valence, Validation, Phase, Sanction, Version, Aspect, and Bias. The verb can also theoretically take any number of the over 1300 suffixes available to formatives. Such suffixes are analyzed in Chapter 7.

The full structure of a Ilaksh verbal formative is in two parts, i.e., having two distinct words, these being a valence/modality adjunct and the verb itself. In simple sentences, the valence/modality adjunct may be missing. The following extreme example of a fully inflected Ilaksh verb illustrates all the morphological components of the two-word structure:

höčoum-mūi’ň   uçweu’çrunsta’ūiđxö         LISTEN

A highly stilted but approximate English translation of the above, capturing as many of the nuances of the Ilaksh phrase as possible, would be: ‘…despite presumably being on the verge, contrary to the allegation, of just so happening to want to succeed in vowing to maybe return periodically to the honorable practice of superlative architecture for others to follow by example’

Of the 14 morphological categories particular to verbal formatives, we will examine in this chapter eight of the ten which constitute part of the verbal formative itself (Mood, Case-Frame, Phase, Sanction, Version, Aspect, Illocution, and Level). The remaining categories specific to valence/modality adjuncts (Modality, Valence, Validation, and Bias) will be described in Chapter 6. Additionally, the categories of Function and Format, while displayed within the formative, are closely allied with the phenomenon of stem incorporation which is displayed within the valence/modality adjunct. Therefore, Function, Format, and stem incorporation will be discussed together in Chapter 6.

Most languages have a morphological category for verbs known as “mood,” serving to indicate specific attitudes or perspectives on the act, condition, or event, or the degree of factuality involved. Example moods common to Western languages include the indicative (factual utterances), subjunctive (showing doubt or probability, expressed by ‘may/might’ in English), imperative (indicating commands, e.g., Go now!, Sing it for us! ), conditional (expressing hypotheticals, e.g., She would travel if she could), optative (indicating wishes, hopes, expectations, e.g., I wish he’d go, I expect him to be here), and hortative (indicating exhortations, e.g., May he live 100 years! Let them see for themselves!).

We will see later in Section 5.7 that in Ilaksh the functions of certain moods in Western languages correspond not to Mood, but to the grammatical category of Illocution, specifically where Western moods function to describe types of speech acts. In Ilaksh, moods simply convey a two-fold distinction as to whether the factuality of an utterance is certain or uncertain, combined with a four-way distinction as to whether the factuality of an explicit or implicit assumption underlying the utterance (i.e., a presupposition) is true, false, unknown, or a determinant of the factuality of the utterance. This twofold by fourfold matrix renders eight moods in Ilaksh.

The eight moods are FACTUAL, SUBJUNCTIVE, ASSUMPTIVE, SPECULATIVE, COUNTERFACTIVE, HYPOTHETICAL, IMPLICATIVE, and ASCRIPTIVE. (These are the same as in Ithkuil and have the same function.) They are shown in conjunction with the morphological category of Context (see Section 3.5) by a vocalic suffix. Table 10 below shows these suffixes.

Table 10: VF-suffix Indicating 4 contexts x 8 moods

The function of the eight moods is described in the sections below.

The FACTUAL mood signifies that the factuality of the speaker’s statement is certain and that there either is no underlying presupposition to the statement, or if there is, its factuality is also certain or has no bearing on the factuality of the statement. Examples:

His kids are ill. [i.e., it is known he has kids and it is known they are ill]

We’re taking a walk later on. [i.e., it is our intention and we have the opportunity to do so]

The SUBJUNCTIVE mood indicates that the factuality of an explicit or implicit presupposition underlying the statement is certain, but the factuality of the speaker’s statement itself is questionable or uncertain, the specific nuance of factuality intended being subject to the particular Bias and Validation associated with the verb. Corresponds roughly with English ‘may,’ ‘maybe’ or ‘might,’ with the added distinction that an explicit or implicit (i.e., underlying) presupposition is true. Examples:

Maybe his kids are ill. [i.e., it is known that he has kids but it is not known whether they are ill]

We may take a walk later on. [i.e., it is known that the opportunity to do so will arise, but it is uncertain whether we will choose to]

The ASSUMPTIVE mood functions identically to the FACTUAL except that the factuality of an underlying presupposition is unknown. It therefore conveys an act, state, or event whose factuality is dependent on whether something else is factual, thus corresponding to certain usages of English ‘maybe’ and ‘will’ (where ‘will’ primarily conveys possibility, not future tense). As with all moods, the specific translation is subject to the particular Bias and Validation associated with the verb. Examples:

His kids’ll be ill OR If he has kids, they are ill. [i.e., it is unknown whether he has kids, but if he does, they are certainly ill.]

We’ll take a walk later on [i.e., if we can] OR We intend to take a walk. [i.e., but we don’t know if we’ll be able to]

The SPECULATIVE mood indicates that the factuality of both the presupposition and the statement itself are unknown. Its translation into English is dependent on the specific context, sometimes corresponding to ‘may,’ ‘maybe’ or ‘might,’ and at other times corresponding to the auxiliary ‘would.’ Compare the examples below to those above:

Maybe his kids are ill [i.e., it is unknown if he has kids but if he does, they may be ill].

We may take a walk later on [i.e., it is unknown whether we will have the opportunity to do so, and even if we do, it is uncertain whether we will choose to].

The COUNTERFACTIVE mood indicates that the factuality of the underlying presupposition is false or unreal but that the factuality of the statement would otherwise be true. It thus corresponds to the English construction of auxiliary ‘would’ or ‘would have’ in its use to show counterfactuality (i.e., what would have been if a false presupposition had been true). Again, the specific translation is subject to the particular Bias and Validation associated with the verb. Compare the examples below to those above.

His kids would be (would have been) ill [i.e., if he had kids they would be ill, but he doesn’t].

We would take (would have taken) a walk later on [i.e., it is our intention but we won’t have the opportunity].

The HYPOTHETICAL mood indicates that the factuality of the underlying presupposition is false or unreal and that the factuality of the statement itself is uncertain. It thus corresponds to the English construction of auxiliary ‘might have’ in its use to show possible counterfactuality (i.e., what might have been if a false presupposition had been true). Again, the specific translation is subject to the particular Bias and Validation associated with the verb. Compare the examples below to those above.

His kids might’ve been ill [if he had kids, but he doesn’t, so we’ll never know].

We might’ve taken a walk later on [i.e., but we won’t have the opportunity, so the decision whether to do so is moot].

The IMPLICATIVE mood indicates that the factuality of the underlying presupposition determines the factuality of the statement and that the relationship between the two need not necessarily be a direct cause-and-effect, but merely an indirect chain of events from which the speaker infers the statement from the underlying presupposition. In grammatical analysis, this is referred to as an “epistemic conditional.” Examples are shown below.

His kids are (must be) ill [i.e., as implied by some other fact such as his staying home from work].

If she wears a blue dress, we’ll be taking a walk later on OR She’s wearing a blue dress, so that means we’ll be taking a walk later on [i.e., the dress implies something has happened that we’ll make the walk a certainty].

The ASCRIPTIVE mood functions identically to the IMPLICATIVE immediately above, except that the factuality of the inference derived from the underlying presupposition is uncertain. Examples:

His kids may be ill [i.e., as implied by some other fact such as his staying home from work].

If she wears a blue dress, we might be taking a walk later on OR She’s wearing a blue dress, so that means we might be taking a walk later on [i.e., the dress implies something has happened that we’ll make the walk a possibility]. 

5.1.9 Examples of Mood in Use

The following examples compare the eight moods applied to the same sentence:

Ūalkresk  zìhh  ùdvüöl.
IFL/RSL-STA-‘inside-out’-PRX/M/CSL/UNI-(FAC)    ‘article of clothing’-OBL-DEL/M/ASO/AGG    FML-‘wife’-POS-DEL/M/CSL/UNI
His wife’s clothes are inside-out.

Uālkresko  zìhh  ùdvüöl.
IFL/RSL-STA-‘inside-out’-PRX/M/CSL/UNI-SUB    ‘article of clothing’-OBL-DEL/M/ASO/AGG    FML-‘wife’-POS-DEL/M/CSL/UNI
His wife’s clothes may be inside-out.

Uālkreskü  zìhh  ùdvüöl.
IFL/RSL-STA-‘inside-out’-PRX/M/CSL/UNI-ASM    ‘article of clothing’-OBL-DEL/M/ASO/AGG    FML-‘wife’-POS-DEL/M/CSL/UNI
If he has a wife her clothes are inside-out.

Uālkreskei  zìhh  ùdvüöl.
IFL/RSL-STA-‘inside-out’-PRX/M/CSL/UNI-SPE    ‘article of clothing’-OBL-DEL/M/ASO/AGG    FML-‘wife’-POS-DEL/M/CSL/UNI
If he has a wife her clothes may be inside-out.

Uālkreskiu  zìhh  ùdvüöl.
IFL/RSL-STA-‘inside-out’-PRX/M/CSL/UNI-HYP    ‘article of clothing’-OBL-DEL/M/ASO/AGG    FML-‘wife’-POS-DEL/M/CSL/UNI
If he were to have a wife her clothes would be inside-out.

Uālkreskau  zìhh  ùdvüöl.
IFL/RSL-STA-‘inside-out’-PRX/M/CSL/UNI-COU    ‘article of clothing’-OBL-DEL/M/ASO/AGG    FML-‘wife’-POS-DEL/M/CSL/UNI
If he were to have a wife her clothes might be inside-out.

Ualkrēskio  zìhh  ùdvüöl.
IFL/RSL-STA-‘inside-out’-PRX/M/CSL/UNI-IPL    ‘article of clothing’-OBL-DEL/M/ASO/AGG    FML-‘wife’-POS-DEL/M/CSL/UNI
His wife’s clothes must be inside-out.

Ualkrēskuo  zìhh  ùdvüöl.
IFL/RSL-STA-‘inside-out’-PRX/M/CSL/UNI-ASC    ‘article of clothing’-OBL-DEL/M/ASO/AGG    FML-‘wife’-POS-DEL/M/CSL/UNI
That means his wife’s clothes are inside-out.

 

Virtually all languages allow for sentences to be hierarchically embedded within other sentences, a process termed subordination. In Western languages, the embedded sentence becomes either a subordinate clause or a relative clause, explicitly introduced by a conjunctions such as ‘that,’ ‘which,’ ‘who,’ ‘where,’‘although,’‘if,’‘while,’‘whereas,’ or a preposition followed by a conjunction, such as ‘through which,’‘by whom,’etc. In English, such clauses can also occur as an infinitive or gerundial verb construction. Both relative and subordinate clauses are illustrated in the following sentences:

The dog that ate my hat belongs to them.
I want him to stop shouting.
The committee voted to fire the superintendant.
We demand (that) you give us equal pay.
Although he’s a college graduate, he acts like a child.
This is the slot through which the letter is passed.
In case you’re unaware, I’ll be leaving next month.
The boy walking toward us is my nephew.

The Ilaksh equivalent to relative or subordinate clauses is known as a case-frame, or simply, frame. Conceptually, the sentence to be embedded is simply treated as a noun participant to the main verb of a sentence and is therefore marked for case like any other noun. For example, take the following two sentences:

She and I were working together.
The two nations were at war.

Suppose we want to use the second sentence to provide a temporal context for the first sentence. In English we could do this by subordinating the second sentence to the first using the conjunction ‘while,’ as in She and I were working together while the two nations were at war. Alternately, we could create a relative clause by inserting a connecting prepositional phrase, as in She and I were working together during the time (that) the two nations were at war.

In Ilaksh, temporal context for a sentence may be provided by a noun in any of the temporal cases such as the CONCURSIVE (see Sec. 4.6.3). A word such as ‘summer’ or ‘famine’ would be placed in the CONCURSIVE case to create a sentence corresponding to:

She and I were working together during the summer.
She and I were working together at the time of the famine.

Just as the single words ‘summer’ and ‘famine’ are placed in the CONCURSIVE case, so an entire sentence such as The two nations were at war can be placed in the CONCURSIVE case to provide the temporal context for the main sentence. In other words, Ilaksh treats the entire subordinate sentence as a noun phrase to be declined into any required case. That is the purpose of a frame, to place sentences into noun cases. By doing so, Ilaksh accomplishes the same task for which Western languages use relative and subordinate conjunctions. In theory, any sentence can be placed into any of the 96 cases and inserted into another sentence wherever a simple noun might be placed in the sentence using that same case.

5.2.1 Relation and the Placement of Frames

To construct a case-frame, the second-order sentence (i.e., the sentence to be subordinated) is placed in the main sentence at the point where a noun declined for the required case would appear. The actual case of the second-order sentence is indicated in the verbal formative the same way as for nominal formatives, i.e., by mutation of the stem vowel into the appropriate mutation series, as described in Chapter 4 on Case. If inserted into the middle of the main sentence, the final word of the case-frame should be a noun (or a personal reference adjunct – see Sec. 8.1) and carries a special suffix, V1’ (see details in Section 7.4.13), which signifies the end of the frame if this will help to avoid confusion as to which words in the sentence belong inside the frame (i.e., with the secondary sentence), and which belong to the main sentence.

A case-frame usually has its verb appear as the first element of the case frame. This is to easily recognize the beginning of the case-frame visible via the mutation of the stem vowel to show the case (see Section 2.5 and Chapter 4). For case-frames in the OBLIQUE case where the stem vowel does not mutate, or where otherwise necessary to overtly indicate that the formative is part of a case frame, the suffix V1’ is added to the formative (details in Section 7.4.13).

In general, the perspective of the verb in the secondary sentence operates independently from that of the main verb, however, it is also common for the perspective of the verb in the secondary sentence to be placed in the ABSTRACT, which has the effect of deferring all Perspective information about the verb to the main verb, similarly to the way English subordinate clauses using gerunds and infinitives defer all tense information to the main verb of the sentence.

5.2.2 Reinterpreting the Notion of a Relative Clause

There is no direct equivalent in Ilaksh to the relative clauses of Western languages. Ilaksh treats such clauses the same as subordinate clauses using case-frames as described above. However, the manner in which this is done, while ultimately logical, is somewhat complex and confusing from a Western perspective. Therefore, to analyze how Ilaksh reinterprets Western relative clauses into subordinate case-frames will first require us to review the nature of relative clauses in Western languages such as English.

A relative clause refers to an imbedded sentence which modifies or describes a “head” noun in the main clause. There are two types of relative clauses, restricted (or dependent) and unrestricted (or independent). The two types are illustrated in the following English sentences.

RESTRICTED CLAUSE
(1) Lions that like chasing their tails can be seen at any circus.
(2) That book (that) I just finished reading was written by a priest.

UNRESTRICTED CLAUSE
(3) Lions, which like chasing their tails, can be seen at any circus.
(4) That book, which I just finished reading, was written by a priest.

In the first sentence, the clause ‘that like chasing their tails’ refers to a specific type of lion found at a circus (i.e, not all lions chase their tails). Similarly, the clause ‘(that) I just finished reading’ in the second sentence is restricted in that it is considered by the speaker as being necessary in order to identify which book is being talked about, i.e., without the clause, the listener would not know which book the speaker was referring to.

Note the difference in meaning, however, when comparing the first two sentences to the third and fourth sentences. In the third sentence, the speaker implies that all lions chase their tails regardless of whether they are in the circus. In the fourth sentence, the identity of the book is already known to the listener, and the speaker is merely providing two additional facts about it: the fact that he just finished reading it and the fact about its author. Notice that in English, an unrestricted relative clause is set off in writing by commas and cannot begin with ‘that’ (rather ‘which’ or ‘who’ must be used); also, such clauses are normally spoken in a lowered intonation with juncture (i.e., brief pauses) immediately before and after the clause.

5.2.2.1 Restricted Clauses. Ilaksh treats the above notions about relative clauses in a different way. We will first analyze how Ilaksh creates equivalents to restricted relative clauses. This can best be approached by analyzing the underlying sentences which give rise to the main and relative clauses. Analyzing Sentence No. 2 above, it can be broken up into two discrete sentences:

That book was written by a priest. (= A priest wrote that book.)
I just finished reading that book.

In Ilaksh, the sentence which will be functioning as the main sentence acts as a “template” in which the secondary sentence is placed. The particular place in the template to be filled is dependent on what semantic role, i.e., case (see Chapter 4) the secondary sentence is to fill. Note that the common point of reference of the two sentences is ‘that book.’ In the main sentence, ‘that book’ functions in the semantic role of CONTENT (See Sec. 4.1.2), superficially equivalent to the direct object of the ABSOLUTIVE subject ‘priest’, therefore, the main sentence becomes the template ‘A priest wrote X’ where X is in the OBLIQUE case (See Section 4.3.1). Meanwhile, in the secondary sentence, the noun which is the common point of reference (what in Western grammar would be called the “head” of the relative clause) is marked with an affix indicating such. So we now have the two sentences as:

A priest wrote [ ]. I just finish reading that book-H.

The ‘-H’ in the second sentence above is meant to represent an affix marking the “head” or common reference point between the two sentences. At this point, Ilaksh inserts the second sentence as a case-frame into the empty “slot” based on the semantic role it will be playing, in this instance the role of CONTENT marked by the OBLIQUE case (see Sec. 4.3.1).

A priest wrote [OBL]. I just finish reading that book-H.

As described in Sec. 5.2.1 above , the verb of the secondary sentence is moved to the beginning of the case-frame and takes the relevant case marker (OBLIQUE).

A priest wrote I just finished reading-OBL that book-H.

Reverse translating this sentence back to English, the closest literal translation would be the rather awkward construction: A priest wrote what I just finished reading, that book. However, this is how Ilaksh translates the English sentence ‘A priest wrote that book that I just finished reading.’

Two observations can be noted from the Ilaksh sentence. First of all, unlike Western languages, the main clause contains no “head.” Instead, the “head” is marked from within the imbedded clause. Secondly, there is no difference between this process and the rendering of other types of subordinate clauses using case-frames, as the main sentence was rearranged (or reinterpreted) to provide a slot for the semantic role of the imbedded sentence, the exact same way that subordinate clauses are constructed in Ilaksh. Therefore, as was previously stated, Ilaksh makes no distinction between subordinate and relative clauses.

Similarly, the other example sentence from above, Lions that like chasing their tails can be seen at any circus would become in Ilaksh: At any circus one can see certain lions-H like to chase-OBL their tails. A literal translation into English would be: At any circus one can see (that) certain lions like chasing their tails.

5.2.2.2 Unrestricted Clauses. As for independent or unrestricted clauses, as shown in example sentences (3) and (4) earlier, Ilaksh treats these differently still. In Western languages, an unrestricted clause does not help to identify a noun or provide a context for it, but simply adds additional information about an already identified noun. Thus, unrestricted relative clauses serve a wholly different cognitive-semantic purpose than restricted clauses, a fact hidden by their nearly identical surface structures. Ilaksh acknowledges this profound difference at the overt sentence level by not subordinating any clause at all. Rather, the two sentences are given co-equal status as main clauses and simply joined by a coordinating affix. Thus sentences (3) and (4) from earlier become:

One can see lions at any circus and they like chasing their tails.
A priest wrote that book and I just finished reading it.

5.2.2.3 Use of the CORRELATIVE Case In Lieu of Simple Relative Clauses. The CORRELATIVE case (discussed in Section 4.5.25) is used to create case-frames which are semantically equivalent to the English phrase ‘that/which/who is/are…’ Such a case-frame would be used in conjunction with specific Functions (see Section 6.4) to convey whether the relationship of the relativized clause to the main clause is one of description, copula identification, etc.

5.2.3 Example of Case-Frames in Use

Andmùt  žiëlùimäv  asavéwöc   ukšu’ŭs  ajgălärň  žö’äàcërb.
IFL/ICH-‘cry’-DEL/U/CSL/UNI    IFL-‘article of clothing’-AFF-DEL/M/CSL/UNI-ROL2/9-CAP1/3    IFL-CPT-OPR-‘know’-PCR-DEL/A/CSL/UNI    FML-‘clown’-OGN-DEL/N/CSL/UNI     IFL-‘rule’-DEL/M/CSL/UNI-TPP1/3     IFL-“article of clothing’-PUR-DEL/A/CSL/UNI-DEV2/1
The incompetent tailor cried after finding out about the clowns’ new directive on nakedness.

Ria  uleuvăst  utpu’öustūyüž.
ma-IND     FML/OPR-PRC/CTX/PPS-CNT-‘job/employment’-PRX/M/ASO/UNI     FML-OPR-‘travel’-CON-PRX/M/ASO/UNI-EXD1/9-CNS1/6
He keeps on working despite having to travel more and more.

Phase refers to variances in the temporal pattern of how an act, condition or event occurs, e.g., in a momentary, lasting, or repetitive manner (or lack thereof). This is especially useful in describing phenomena that occur in sudden bursts of short duration, e.g., flashing, sputtering, blinking, alternating, etc. Phase functions closely with the morphological category of Extension, previously described in Sec. 3.4, to specify the durational nature, starting and ending, and operative pattern of a state, action or event. The nine phases are the CONTEXTUAL, PUNCTUAL, ITERATIVE, REPETITIVE, INTERMITTENT, RECURRENT, FREQUENTATIVE, FRAGMENTATIVE, and FLUCTUATIVE. These are the same as in Ithkuil. They are marked by one of nine patterns of the Cx affix to a formative, depending on the sanction and version of the verb (discussed in Sections 5.4 and 5.5 respectively).

The presence of a Cx infix requires the presence of a Vc prefix, in order to able to distinguish the Cx infix from the Cr root consonant(s). Furthermore, under certain circumstances, the presence of the Cx + Vp syllable requires that the Vc prefix take an alternate form in order to be able able to discern which consonants in a formative correspond to which terms in the formula below. The specifics of these alternate Vc prefix forms and when/how to use them which will be explained in Section 6.5.2.

The values for the Cx affix are shown in Tables 11(a) through 11(f) below.