I modified Shonkasika's verb paradigm a bit. I made the aorist (a sort of gnomic and present habitual) and the past habitual members of a full-fledged habitual/gnomic aspect, bringing the total to four: simple(unspecified), habitual, perfect, prospective. The habitual will have two possible regular formations: the most common and currently productive way is a suffix (-li non-future, -lo future), called the 'weak habitual', and an older, non-productive way, partial reduplication of the beginning of the verb stem, called the 'strong habitual'.
Taken with the strong future (ablaut, unproductive) vs. weak future(suffix -bo, productive), and the two groups of regular perfect formation (both suffixes), Shonkasika now has 8 regular verb conjugation classes that are not predictable from the citation form, the active infinitive. The conjugation classes are grouped into 4 general classes, with each one subdivided into subclass A (with Group A perfects, in -ipe) and subclass B (with Group B perfects, in -uka): Class 1: weak habitual, weak future Class 2: weak habitual, strong future Class 3: strong habitual, strong future Class 4: strong habitual, weak future Class 1 has the most members by far, followed in numerical order by the others (at least for now).
0 Comments
I changed Shonkasika's progressive form from a periphrasis (an adverbial participle + a be-verb) to a synthetic form. Unlike the other verb inflections, which are suffixes, this one is a prefix: je- before consonants and jey- before vowels. This prefix can occur alongside just about any tense-aspect-mood form, although it is most common with the present, past, and perfect indicative.
lahut, jelahut I greet, I am greeting lahutu, jelahutu I greeted, I was greeting lahwipet, jelahwipet I have greet, I have been greeting I created a couple of minor declensions for Shonkasika nouns.
Instead of forming its indefinite dual in -bre and its indefinite dual in -bi like most animate nouns, a few animates form them in -ndre and -ni respectively: thoges, thogendres, thogenis ox, two oxen, oxen hiros, hirondres, hironis chicken, two chickens, chickens podis, podindres, podinis child, two children, children Some inanimate nouns, including all ending -ye, form its indefinite dual in -rú, and indefinite plural in -ú, with a stress shift to the last syllable, instead of the normal endings of -ri and -i without stress shift: glaina, glainarú, glaináu eye, two eyes, eyes plesto, plestorú, plestóu ear, two ears, ears faspu, faspurú, faspwó leg, two legs, legs In an effort to create some justified 'regular' irregularity, I've been working on Shonkasika's older, non-productive way of forming the future tense. Shonkasika used to form a 'hypothetic/potential' verb form by ablaut of the final vowel in the verb stem before the personal endings. Over time, this form was reinterpreted as a future form.
An example: tut I give tet If I give/I may give > I will give This new future of banu to be, bo-, became the indicative future suffix for most verbs. I have decided that a group of basic, common, and modal verbs will maintain this old future form by ablaut, which contrasts with the new productive future forms. Additionally, the prospective aspect is formed from the basic stem of the future indicative, so for suffixing verbs, it's the same stem as the non-future. For the ablaut future verbs, it's different: ruvat, ruvabot, ruvavit I love, I will love, I am going/about to love tut, tet, tevit I give, I will give, I am going/about to give I have updated and reorganized the irregular verbs page. Check it out! |
AboutThoughts about my conlangs Archives
October 2020
Categories
All
|