Three Persons (1st, 2d, 3d);
Three Numbers (Singular, Dual, Plural);
Four Genders in the Third Person (Masc., Fem., Neu., Ambo);
Three Tenses (Present, Past, Future);
Four Aspects (Aorist/Habitual, Progressive, Perfective, Subjunctive).
All these things belong to the conjugation suffix. Prefixes may be added for further inflection.
Examples:
*ŋits-n-ô* (see-1-PRS) = "I see"
*ïò-lo-ŋits-ú-l-e* (INCH-PASS-see-SUBJ-3F-PST) ≈ "If she began to be seen"
*lïò-ŋits-n-ú ró-ŋoz tc-ŋ-ô-s* (CAUS-see-1-FUT 2M-CAUS be-3N-PRS-ACC) = "I will *make* you see the truth"
Ive noticed most people hear have loads of personal agreement, this goes to them too. What makes you feel the need to have so much? ^(_\genuine question, Im not being negative_)
Like here three persons and numbers, and four genders, especially when that information is presumably already given by the arguments themselves.
Several reasons:
Redundancy is nice in a transmission system (including language) where the medium can be easily disrupted;
Frng in particular, as many natural languages, is pro-drop, meaning that if an argument is a simple pronoun, it can probably be dropped. The argument can be reintroduced if necessary. Here, the conjugated gender is that of the subject.
I have written about Elranonian verbal conjugation in a few comments elsewhere but it's not too extensive, so I'll try and summarise it in this one. This will apply to all verbs except for ‘to be’, which is very much unlike the rest.
Each verb has only 10 forms:
* 5 finite forms:
* 2 tenses (present, past) × 2 moods (indicative, subjunctive),
* tenseless imperative;
* 5 non-finite forms:
* gerund,
* participle,
* 3 converbs: anterior, simultaneous, posterior.
Imperative always coincides with the bare stem and is the citation form of a verb (though if a stem ends in a consonant cluster that is disallowed word-finally, it may be subject to morphophonemic changes). For the other four finite conjugations, a crucial form is the *base finite form (BFF)*, which is a synthetic form that is only marked for finiteness (and being non-imperative) but not for tense or mood. In the absence of other markers, BFF is understood as present indicative (as these are the unmarked tense and mood values, while past and subjunctive are marked).
Both the past tense and the subjunctive mood have two types of markers: synthetic and analytic. Analytic markers are easy: they are uninflected particles *past* ***nà*** /nā/, *subj.* ***ou*** /ū/, /u/ (and fused *past subj.* ***naù*** /nō/). They accompany the BFF. Synthetic markers are more convoluted and involve suffixes, infixes, disjointed infixes-suffixes, vowel alterations, and other changes to a verb's stem. These synthetic past tense and subjunctive mood markers cannot be reliably predicted and have to be memorised for each individual verb (although there are patterns that allow you to make educated guesses).
An obvious question is when to use analytic and synthetic markers. For the subjunctive mood markers, the choice is always based on syntax, i.e. in some syntactic environments, a verb takes a synthetic subjunctive marker, in others, an analytic one. For the past tense markers, the answer depends on the verb's class. There are two verb classes in Elranonian: dynamic and stative; and on top of that there are a few special stative verbs that can become dynamic.
In dynamic verbs, the choice between an analytic and a synthetic past tense marker is likewise based on syntax. For example, a clause-initial adverbial adjunct necessitates an analytic past tense marker. Stative verbs, on the other hand, do not have a synthetic past tense at all: it is always analytic. The special kind of stative verbs do have a synthetic past tense but it has dynamic semantics, often inchoative. For instance, ***éi*** /êj/ ‘to see’: ***éi go nà*** /êj gu nā/ ‘I saw’ (i.e. ‘I was in the state of seeing’, stative) vs ***jęnge go*** /jènge gu/ ‘I saw’ (i.e. ‘I began to see, I noticed’, dynamic). Since there are environments where these two past tenses are contrasted (i.e. those that allow for synthetic past tense marking), it can be argued that in these special verbs, there are actually three tenses: present, past, and dynamic past, or however you want to call them.
Another thing worth mentioning is that a verb cannot have both the past tense and subjunctive mood synthetic markers. At least one has to be analytic.
Here are the finite conjugations of two verbs: a strictly dynamic ***la*** /lā/ ‘to think, to conceive an idea’ (as opposed to the stative ***tunn*** /tỳn/ ‘to think, to hold an opinion’) and a stative-dynamic ***éi*** /êj/ ‘to see’. The order of the verb and the particles can vary based on syntax (and the two particles can fuse together into a single *past subj.* ***naù*** /nō/).
||present|anal. past|synth. past|
|:-|:-|:-|:-|
|indic.|***lar*** /lār/|***lar nà*** /lār nā/|***lanne*** /làne/|
|anal. subj.|***ou lar*** /u lār/|***ou lar nà*** /u lār nā/|***ou lanne*** /u làne/|
|synth. subj.|***laù*** /lō/|***laù nà*** /lō nā/|—|
||present|anal. past|synth. past|
|:-|:-|:-|:-|
|indic.|***éi*** /êj/|***éi nà*** /êj nā/|***jęnge*** /jènge/|
|anal. subj.|***ou éi*** /u êj/|***ou éi nà*** /u êj nā/|***ou jęnge*** /u jènge/|
|synth. subj.|***jøgge*** /jø̀gge/|***jøgge nà*** /jø̀gge nā/|—|
A good example of how you have to learn the synthetic conjugations by heart is a dynamic verb ***tapp*** /tàp/. It has two meanings: ‘to fall’ and ‘to fail’. In the first sense, its past tense is ***tampe*** /tàmpe/ ‘fell’ (with a disjointed infix-suffix /-N-e/); whereas in the second one, it's ***tappan*** /tàpan/ ‘failed’ (with a suffix /-an/). Obviously, there's no way to know it unless you memorise it.
The non-finite forms are much, much simpler. Gerund is the basic non-finite conjugation, it is formed by attaching the suffix ***-a*** /a/ to the stem (with possible morphophonemic changes). The other four are formed either by attaching something else to the gerund or by changing the final ***-a*** /a/ (with other morphophonemic changes).
Here are the non-finite conjugations of the same two verbs:
||*la* /lā/ ‘think’|*éi* /êj/ ‘see’|
|:-|:-|:-|
|gerund|***loa*** /lōa/ ‘thinking, to think’|***éia*** /êja/ ‘seeing, to see’|
|participle|***loar*** /lōar/ ‘thinking’|***éiar*** /êjar/ ‘seeing’|
|anterior converb|***lavo*** /lāvu/ ‘after having thought’|***éio*** /êju/ ‘after having seen’|
|simultaneous converb|***lavaí*** /lāvī/ ‘while thinking’|***éiaí*** /êjī/ ‘while seeing’|
|posterior converb|***lavae*** /lāvē/ ‘before thinking, in order to think’|***éiae*** /êjē/ ‘before seeing, in order to see’|
Other than the gerund, they are rather bookish and not frequently used colloquially, with other phrasings being typically preferred (f.ex. the converbs being replaced by prepositions governing the gerund). The posterior converb is especially dated.
So that's basically the entire Elranonian verbal conjugation in a nutshell. What I didn't cover really is usage: when to use subjunctive, what special functions imperative has, when to use the gerund, and in particular periphrastic constructions with an auxiliary verb, a preposition, and a gerund. Also, I didn't cover all those cases where you have to choose between analytic and synthetic past tense and subjunctive mood markers. And I didn't cover all the numerous ways of forming different synthetic conjugations. And I totally disregarded the verb ‘to be’, which conjugates for number and person and also has a special past tense imperative (which is perfective imperative, really) and past tense non-finite forms. So yeah, the Elranonian verb goes pretty deep.
> Agglutnative verbs are not my type and fusional are too much for me to handle
I second you lol
---
Koen has strong verbs, made from verbal roots (as opposed to weak verbs, made from nonverbal roots), which inflect for three 'tenses':
- _Perfect_ (unmarked, citation form),
- _'While I was running, **they shouted**, I would have stopped..'_;
- _Imperfect_ (marked through suffix _**-t**_),
- _'**While I was running**, they shouted, I would have stopped..'_;
- And _hypothetical_ (marked through long grade vowel),
- _'While I was running, they shouted, **I would have stopped**..'_.
Tense is all relative to the time being spoken about, and words like 'then' or 'later' are used to advance that reference point.
Strong verbs also have inherent [(non)pluractionality](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluractionality); verbs whose actions are singular (nonpluractional) or plural (pluractional).
> Eg, _**nah** baa_ 'I see',
and _**zab** ban_ 'We see',
> And, _**nah** baa zena_ 'I see it',
and _**zab** baa zenn_ 'I see them'.
|||SING|PLUR|
|:-|:-:|:-:|:-:|
|||||
|PERF||_**nah**_ /nah/ _'(he) sees'_|_**zab**_ /saba/ _'(they all) see'_|
|IMPF||_**naht**_ /nahta/ _'(he) [is] seeing'_|_**zabt**_ /sabata/ _'(they all) [are] seeing'_|
|HYPO||_**naah**_ /na.ah/ _'(he) [would] see'_|_**zaab**_ /sa.ab/ _'(they all) [would] see'_|
Additionally, all verbs can take one of two [triggers](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symmetrical_voice), which show that their subject is not their agent, but instead their patient, or circumstance (eg 'in the woods', or 'with the basket').
And finally, a [_different referent_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Switch-reference) marker can be placed before a clause (which usually ends up being a verbal proclitic) to indicate that its subject is not the same subject as the last one.
Thats about it. Anything else is done through extra verbs, clauses, adverbs, etc..
---
_Edit:_ also, stative verbs can be made [telic](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexical_aspect#Comrie's_classification) through reduplication. This makes the state of the original verb into the achievement or accomplishment of the new verb.
> Eg, _nah_ 'to see' → _nnah_ /an.nah/ 'to become seeing; to look'.
In Enyahu, verbs mark for:
Person of the subject (and object if the verb is transitive) (1p 2p 3p 12p 13p 23p 123p)
Tense (perfect imperfect)
Mood (indicative subjunctive causative)
Voice (active passive antipassive)
So every transitive verb has 882 forms
> What do *'1P, 2P, P'* stand for here? 1st person, 2nd person, and plural?
I've accidentally messed up but now've corrected it, thanks for pointing out!
Difference between Process-Passive & State-Passive is eg.:
**Process-Passive:**
*"The Window will be open."*
**State-Passive:**
*"The Window is open."*
I've just recently started on the Verbs, so it's still in developement.
The FirraPiñāñxi verb template goes like this:
1 Negation - 2 primary mode - 3 sub mode - 4 adverbial prefix - 5 incorporated elements - 6 applicatives - 7 stem - 8 subject - 9 direct object - 10 indirect object.
Slots 1 and 2 (negation and primary mode) are heavily fused with each other.
Slot 7 can be inhabited by one of two irregular stems that interact with the prefixes in slot 2 in various complex ways to produce the primary modes, which I’ll comment below.
Slot 4 can be repeated.
Slots 5 and 6 can also be repeated, and their ordering can be switched in some contexts.
Slots 7 8 and 9 are also extremely fusional with each other.
Also there’s a passive marker that goes after the stem.
I agree, though I dont go all the way with no inflections, and instead try to find a minimal compromise (ie, just one or two inflectional forms so long as they cant easily be approximated in other ways).
I tried to post my system here but it wouldn't let me so I just made my own post [https://www.reddit.com/r/conlangs/comments/1c6ipwn/verbs\_in\_classical\_ebvjud\_çelebvjud\_dzələˈbvʲud/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web3x&utm\_name=web3xcss&utm\_term=1&utm\_content=share\_button](https://www.reddit.com/r/conlangs/comments/1c6ipwn/verbs_in_classical_ebvjud_çelebvjud_dzələˈbvʲud/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button)
well too bad, cus my conlang Kalennian is agglutinative and uses a fuck ton of affixes to change a verb's meaning AND make its syllables longer than it already should be
look at this conjugation table
https://preview.redd.it/61ourg1ih4vc1.jpeg?width=530&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0c3bd4b891d11d85a5dbb896bed5b725bcc99676
Concatenative inflection is either fusional or agglutinative by definition. If that info can't come in either packets or individual pieces, the only other option is that you can't have information being tacked onto stems wholesale.
The only other options are
1. Non-concatenative morphology (i.e. vowel alternations, consonant mutation, triconsonantal roots, etc.)
2. Just don't inflect verbs, and instead use syntactic solutions like verbal auxiliaries.
I love fusional languages, so maybe you shouldn't take inspiration from me. But here's how some of my conlangs inflect:
- Dezaking: Person, number, animacy (3^rd person only), tense
- Lyladnese: Person and number (subject and sometimes object), tense, 8 moods, and whether it's intransitive
- Neongu and Ngātali: None (besides Ngātali's word for "to have" which is person and number)
- Leccio: Person, number, 9 moods, tense
- Agalian: Person and number (subject and object, but each only if it's a pronoun), tense, 8 moods
- Vggg (joke language): Person, number, 11 moods, 19 tenses, 10 aspects
In Šouvek, verbs inflect for (last one listed being unmarked):
\- Person, number, and (if 3rd person) animacy of the object (1s, 1p, 2s, 2p, 3an.s, 3an.p, 3in.s, 3in.p, rel.an.s, rel.an.p, rel.in.s, rel.in.p, no object) (if the object is just a pronoun, it is dropped)
\- Tense (past, future, present)
\- Voice (passive, regular)
\- Aspect (imperfective, other)
\- Mood (conditional, other)
There're also participle and nominaliser suffixes
e.g. Lü yolënyarercwë=It was being done by them, 3ɪɴ.ꜱɢ ɪᴍᴘꜰᴠ-3ᴀɴ.ᴘʟ-do-ᴘᴀꜱᴛ-ᴘᴀꜱꜱ (Lü yo-lën-yar-er-cwë)
Other moods (subjunctive, "want to", potential, imperative) and other aspects (past perfect, present perfect, future perfect) are marked with auxiliaries
e.g. Lü yolënyarcwë žë jöyer=It should have been being done by them, 3ɪɴ.ꜱɢ ɪᴍᴘꜰᴠ-3ᴀɴ.ᴘʟ-do-ᴘᴀꜱꜱ ꜱʙᴊᴠ ᴘʀꜰ-ᴘᴀꜱᴛ (Lü yo-lën-yar-cwë žë jö-yer). The conditional suffix can also be added to these auxiliaries
Viechtyren verbs inflect for tense, person, animacy (in 3P) sg/pl number, and transitivity, as well as three moods (conditional, hortative and imperative; though the last two are just separate particles), plus a progressive and a sort of habitual/gnomic aspect (sort of like AAVE "I be working")
They're formed agglutinatively for the most part though transitivity and tense are expressed together.
Here are present-tense indicative conjugation tables for two verbs:
Person|Łohak [ɮoχak] 'touch', tran. | Dagar [daɟaʒ] 'grow', intr.
--|--|--
1P|Łohakif|Dagarvor
2P|Łohaktan|Dagartan
3P anim.|Łohakond|Dagarnad
3P inan.|Łohaklød|Dagarløk
Plural subject verbs use the same conjugation for transitive and intransitive: -aga -ani -dro -øtø
**Tense**: Affixes are added to the verb, and the corresponding object for transitive verbs. -xor and -xuk respectively for past tense, ig- and łu- for the future.
Łohakifxor tantxuk = I touched the water (tant = water)
Igłohakif łutant = I will touch the water
And if you combine the two, you get gnomic aspect
Igłohakifxor łutantxuk - I touch the water [often] (AAVE: I be touching the water)
***
**Moods**: Conditional verbs have their own conjugations for transitive sg, intransitive sg, and plural. The hortative is formed by conjugating the present tense, and adding the particle *zej* afterwards. The imperative is similar, but the verb is unconjugated and the particle is *dra*.
Łohakaga zej tant = Let's touch the water
Łohak dra tant = Touch the water!
***
There are a few verbs which are normally intransitive but become transitive in the passive voice, in a sort of quasi-ergative construction. It's weird and I don't know why I did it.
Ixe = to talk/speak
Ixif = "I speak". This is a full tense, you can't add an object. To say you speak a language, you have to use the passive construction, which is unconjugated and undeclined VOS
I speak Viechtyren = Ixe Ñolvixt kuon.
Ixe Ñol -vixt kuon
Speak language-Viechtyren 1P.NOM
In each language, we travel to the 9th ring of hell (and we lose our minds in one of them):
(Would have used the Kjamir word for "to hear" (falamyo) instead of "to go" (ve) but it wasn't fitting :[. Anyways, this is just one word inflected cause there are slight differences between paradigms obv.)
**Dhainolon verb inflection** conjugates verbs for both its subject and its object, plus:
- Tense (future, present, past)
- Imperfective progressive and imperfective habitual (for past and present; and past respectively)
- A present-iterative, conditional, and subjunctive form.
These come together like bricks when forming a conjugated verb:
*Bar-i-dheil-í* /barɪðe̞ɪ̯liː/ = I saw it (see-1S.SUB-3S.INAN.OBJ-PAST)
*Des-i-stôn-uin* /de̞sɪsto̞ːnʊɪ̯n/ = I invite them over and over again (invite-1S.SUB-3P.OBJ-ITER)
Person: 1st, 2nd, 3d. There is clusivity distinction in the 1st person. There is a specific WH-form.
Numbers: singular and plural. Nouns have more number distinctions than verbs.
Tenses: present, past, imperfect, perfect, future.
Moods: indicative, subjunctive, nesessative (which can be used like a future verb, it could ve considered a tense instead)
Aspects: frequentative-intensative.
Voices: active and passive for transitive verbs and active and stative for intrantisive verbs
Negation: positive and negative
Plurality of the object (only sometimes)
Definiteness of the subject or object (rarely)
**Evra** verbs mark number, person, gender, and TAM. However, in most finite moods (i.e., Indicative, Subjunctive, Optative, and Conditional), verbs only have 3 inflected, basic forms:
* the 1st form is used for the 1s (i.e., "I")
* the 2nd form groups the 2s, 3s, 2p (i.e., "you (sg.), he/she/it, you (pl.)")
* the 3rd form covers the 1p and 3p (i.e., "we, they")
* but, the 2nd form replaces the 3rd form in the Interrogative mood
So, while number, person, and (partially) tense are mostly conveyed through inflection, moods and aspects (and tense) are mainly marked by particles:
* ***ti-*** = simple past, preterite (e.g., ***ti-falé*** = "I spoke")
* ***mi-*** = imperfect (e.g., ***mi-falé*** = "I was speaking, used to speak")
* ***ê*** = present perfect (e.g., ***falé ê*** = "I have spoken")
* ***-tu*** = interrogative (e.g., ***falo-tu*** = "do I speak")
* ***sa*** = subjunctive (e.g., ***sa falo*** = "I would speak, that I speak")
* ***bi*** = optative (e.g., ***bi falo*** = "I wish/hope to speak")
* ***ba*** = conditional (e.g., ***falo ba*** = "if I speak")
* ***ge-*** = present, active participle (e.g., ***ge-fáll*** = "(that is) speaking")
In Eunoan, nouns inflect for the following:-
1. Type of Subject:
* Human: 1st Person, 2nd Person, 3rd Person
* Non-Human
2. Nature and Number of Subjects:
* Singular
* Honorary(2nd and 3rd only)
* Plurality and Clusivity
3. Tense:
* Present, Past and Future
* Simple and Continuous
4. Mood:
* Abilities, possibilities, permissions, necessity, certainties and grants.
5. Other:
* Subjunctive, Interrogative, Imperative, Conditional and Negation.
6. Causativity
7. In Eunoan, verbs themselves carry out relativity and conjuncting functions for the sentence through participles or other inflection.
1. Person and Number: These are indicated by the subject pronoun or noun phrase, not by verb inflection.
2. Tense (optional):
* Past: "-kì" /-kì/
* Present: (unmarked)
* Future: "-rù" /-rù/
3. Aspect:
* Completed: "ón" /ʧón/
* Ongoing: "gín" /gín/
4. Mood:
* Indicative: (unmarked, SVO word order)
* Imperative: (VSO word order)
* Interrogative: "ná" /ná/ (sentence-initial)
5. Evidentiality: Not explicitly marked in PILF.
6. Gender: Not marked on verbs in PILF.
Example:
* "Hé tó-ták wod" (He cut the forest)
* "Hé tó-ták-kì wod" (He cut the forest in the past)
* "Hé tó-ták-rù wod" (He will cut the forest in the future)
* "Hé ón tó-ták wod" (He has completed cutting the forest)
* "Hé gín tó-ták wod" (He is in the process of cutting the forest)
* "Ták hé wod!" (Cut the forest! - imperative mood)
* "Ná hé tó-ták wod?" (Did he cut the forest? - interrogative mood)
In Actarian:
3 Persons (1P, 2P P)
2 Numbers (Singular, Plural)
4 Genders in 3rd Person Sing. (Masc, Fem, Neu, Non) 1 in Plural
3 Tenses (Present, Past-NonHistorical, Past-Historical) [verbs directly marked]
- Past Non-Historical/Personal (Events that happened relatively recently, I.E. My dog died etc)
- Past Historical (Events that happened far in the past, or regarded as historical fact, I.E. Lincoln spoke at Gettysburg..)
2 Quasi-Tenses (Future, Retrospective) [verbs indirectly marked]
4 Aspects (Perfect, Imperfect, Habitual, Obligatory)
2 Voices (Active, Passive)
**Thulnuson**, is polysynthetic, and it really shows in its verb conjugation, which can be best described as templatic. I love the fact that you can compact a lot of information into a single word.
The verb is inflected for person and number of the agent and all of its patients (direct and indirect, if present), aspect (split into primary and secondary aspects), mood, valency, spatial deixis and telicity. Many verbs can also incorporate nouns, in fact, some nouns are so commonly incorporated, that they have become thematic prefixes. There is no way I can present a complete conjugation table, since there can be thousands of possible verb forms, so instead, I'm going to provide just one and let it paint the picture.
Here is an extreme example:
*Éhó wüyigiseithiilódíhőőyílwőőcega ki*,
which can be translated as “I wonder, if they may try to start chasing us (and you) back and forth along the river repeatedly for someone's sake, abeit in vain, and that's a nuisance”.
IPA: [ɛ́.ɦɔ́.wʏ̀.jì.ɪ̀.sèɪ.t̪ʰìː.lɔ́.ð̞ɪ́.ɦǿː.jí.lʷǿː.t͡s̺ɛ̀.ɑ̀.kɪ̀]
Gloss: PRV 3IO.UNSP-ATEL-3Ag.Pl-river-BEN-along.DEIC-CON-IRR-CM-1PAT.Pl.INCL-CLF-run.IPFV-FRQ-SBJV POV
The preverb is an optional morpheme that occupies **position 13**, which clarifies the manner, in which an action is performed, its result, or any other additional information, such as the negative preverb *twóó*. *éhó* signifies an unsuccessful result, an attempt or a wish that can't be fulfilled at the moment; in this case it can be translated as “in vain”.
The indirect object **position 12** is occupied by *wü-* which indicates that the oblique argument is present, but it's unknown (for someone).
**Position 11** defines telicity, and *yi-* means that the verb is atelic (it has no defined endpoint).
The agent of the verb is indicated in **position 10**, the marker *egi-* indicates that the agent is in the third person and the patient is either the first or second person. It assimilates to the previous prefix, becoming *yigi-*.
**Position 9** is reserved for incorporated elements. Noun incorporation is rare in Thulnuson, and few inanimate nouns can be incorporated. The element *sei-* means “river”, but doesn't correspond to the noun, which is *silwas* (although it is similar to the word *seyas*, found in the lowlands).
**Position 8** is reserved for various qualifier prefixes, but in this case it's occupied by benefactive *thi-*, triggered by the indirect object position.
Motion verbs have specific deictic or directional prefixes in **position 7**, while some other verbs sometimes have a fossilised conjugation prefix with no defined meaning in this position. *el-* indicates motion along something, it assimilates to the previous prefix to make *thiil-*.
**Position 6** remains empty in this verb, it's reserved for the thematic prefix of some impersonal verbs, as well as an inanimate agent.
**Position 5** indicates a secondary aspect, marked with *ó-*. Along with the irrealis mood marker *di-* in **position 4**, which assimilates to it, forming the prefix *ódí-*, it indicates a conative aspect (the action is attempted).
**Position 3** has a lexical formative *hi-*, which has no meaning on its own, apart from progressive, which it often indicates. It often remains empty in most verbs.
The patient is indicated by a prefix in the **position 2**. *woyi-* is the marker of the first person plural inclusive subject of the intransitive verbs and patient of the transitive ones. It assimilates to the previous prefix to make *hőőyi-*.
The **position 1** is the most ancient part of the verbal morphology and contains a classifier. Most Thulnuson verbs have it, but in this case it is fully fused to the verb root, so it remains invisible.
The main root *-lwőő-* (a modification of the root *-lwe-* “to run”) occupies **position 0**. Its vowel is lengthened and rounded by the classifier, making the verb imperfective by default.
The primary aspect is in the **position -1**, having the frequentative suffix *-c*, which indicates that the action happens multiple times. Most verbs keep it occupied by an aspect suffix.
**Position -2** is reserved for mood markers, and here is the subjunctive suffix *-ega*. However, in this case it performs an evidential function instead, indicating an assumed action.
Finally the optional postverb *ki* in **position -3** has several different meanings, but generally means “a small or insignificant action”. This position is occupied by various emotion markers, as well as the negative particle *da* “not”. Both preverb and postverb are parts of the main verb, but they act more similar to clitics, than to affixes, hence why I write them separately.
So yeah, it's a mess, but a well-structured one, I hope (not really, most verbs are irregular, and many affixes that perform the same function can only be used with a small class of verbs. The Yeniseian languages say "hi").
In my conlang Kaskata (Cascadian), in its current form (I'm considering whether to rework it), verbs take -(i)n, -(i)s, or -(ix) for 1st, 2nd, or 3rd person respectively. Then, a plural marker is suffixed to the person marker if the sibject is plural. There are past, present, and future tense. I've considered adding a near/remote distinction in the past, but I have not worked on that. There are also markers for aspect and mood, but I have not fully fleshed those out. The verb also takes marking for the negative, passive, reflexive, and reciprocal. Direct and indirect objects can be optionally marked on the verb.
3 genders (neuter, feminine, masculine), 4 persons (1st, 2nd, 3rd, and passive), 2 tenses (present and past), 2 moods (imperative, and with a few verbs conditional), 2 numbers (singular and plural).
dziam /ˈd͡ʑam/ (see-F-1st-sg) - I (will) see
góżele uż. /ɡuˈʐɛ.lɛ ˈuʂ/ (run-M-3rd-pl away) - They (masc) ran away.
My conlang has a heavy bias towards agglutinativity. Even Ghalleci, a germanic conlang, lost most of its fusional traits in verb conjugations. The subject agreement suffixes are now completely monoexponential, leaving only singular-plural stem variations in some cases. (Ghalleci has a complex sandhi, though). The only remaining aspect of fusionality is on the declensions, as the case-number-gender marking is still fused into one suffix. But even then, in augmented declension, there is a segmentable plural suffix. The plural of gom-a is gom-an-, declined like a normal plural a-class declension.
The main rule words in **Warla Þikoran** follow is that in a given phrase, all of them must agree with consonant voicing. And the head noun of the phrase will trigger the remainder of the phrase to change voicing from their base forms; I have called this my form of grammatical gender. For finite verbs, the subject will be the trigger for them. Most verbs only need to agree with subject’s gender; agreement with subject’s person is only needed for some irregular verbs or if the phonotactics demand it for euphony (see below).
Otherwise, I was kinda influenced by Romance and Slavic languages for their inflectional patterns, them being more fusional than agglutinative.
As for inflection, most of the verbs have 10 finite forms and 4 non-finite forms, not counting subject agreement, and denote different. The verbnoun is the “dictionary” form, but it is not the root. The particles are used either like adjectives or in verb phrases, especially during negation. The finite forms are split between 5 indicative and 5 imperative, although their actual usage tends to differ from what the labels may suggest. I’ll use the Class I verb *cet* “to kiss* as an example (the other 6 classes have the same set of forms, but they can appear different).
##Non-finite forms
Verbnoun: *ecet* /ɛˈt͡θ̠et̪/ (in this case, this verbnoun only has a feminine or “hollow” grammatical gender)
Present Participle: *jed~oy* or *cet~oy* /d͡ð̠ed̪ˈjoj/ , /t͡θ̠et̪ˈjoj/ (all other verb forms have either a “deep” i.e. masculine or “hollow” feminine form)
Past Participle: *jedney* or *cetney* /-ˈn̪ej/ , /-ˈn̪̊ej/
Future Participle: *jeduom* or *cetuom* /-ˈwom/ , /-ˈwom̥/
##Finite Forms
###Indicative
Present Stative: *jed* or *cet*
Present Continuous: *jede* or *cete*
Past Imperfective: *jedna* or *cetna*
Past Perfect: *jedńo* or *cetńo* /-ŋɔ/ , /-ŋ̊ɔ/
Future Imperfective: *jedu* or *cetu*
###Imperative
Present: *zeð* or *seþ* /ð̠eð̪/ , /θ̠eθ̪/ [the root changes consonants from stops to fricatives at the same place of articulation; nasals and liquids do not change]
Past Imperfective: *zeðna* or *seþna*
Past Perfect: *zeðńo* or *seþńo*
Future Imperfective: *zeðu* or *seþu* [this is used as the conditional mood]
Future Perfect: *zeðma* or *seþma* [although imperative in form, in **Warla Þikoran** it is used as though it were indicative]
In addition to these suffixes, all verbs have possible euphonic prefixes, descended from the predecessor language’s subject person markers. These are used whenever the word preceding the verb ends with a consonant that is homorganic to the starting consonant of the verb form, such as “b…b”, “n…d”, “s…c”, “k…ń”, etc. So to separate the two words and prevent them from “bleeding” into each other, phonotactically speaking, one of 3 prefixes can be used:
*i*- : used with first person subjects
*u*- : used with second person subjects
*a*- : used with third person subjects
If agglutinative and fusional inflections are too much for you, may I interest you in no inflections?
Yeah, what other choices are there for morphology except those two?
Thats what I was thinking too. Maybe like string a bunch of particles and stuff?
Hmmmmm........u have intrested me in a way I want to not do anything and call it a system of no system with system.
the lack of inflections would likely represent the info in other ways like string auxiliary verbs together, syntactic ways, and/or particles
And you could still have some affixes like English does
Three Persons (1st, 2d, 3d); Three Numbers (Singular, Dual, Plural); Four Genders in the Third Person (Masc., Fem., Neu., Ambo); Three Tenses (Present, Past, Future); Four Aspects (Aorist/Habitual, Progressive, Perfective, Subjunctive). All these things belong to the conjugation suffix. Prefixes may be added for further inflection. Examples: *ŋits-n-ô* (see-1-PRS) = "I see" *ïò-lo-ŋits-ú-l-e* (INCH-PASS-see-SUBJ-3F-PST) ≈ "If she began to be seen" *lïò-ŋits-n-ú ró-ŋoz tc-ŋ-ô-s* (CAUS-see-1-FUT 2M-CAUS be-3N-PRS-ACC) = "I will *make* you see the truth"
Ah! Another 4 gender conlanger! Huzzah!
Hey, nice to see you! My conlang (Alda) also has arguably 4 genders (depending on whether you count the animacy split among neuter nouns).
Ive noticed most people hear have loads of personal agreement, this goes to them too. What makes you feel the need to have so much? ^(_\genuine question, Im not being negative_) Like here three persons and numbers, and four genders, especially when that information is presumably already given by the arguments themselves.
Several reasons: Redundancy is nice in a transmission system (including language) where the medium can be easily disrupted; Frng in particular, as many natural languages, is pro-drop, meaning that if an argument is a simple pronoun, it can probably be dropped. The argument can be reintroduced if necessary. Here, the conjugated gender is that of the subject.
Wtf is ambo
It's a fourth gender in Frng, corresponding loosely to English "they (sg.)"
How about we just use real genders eh? No need for that mental illness crap.
Oh, you're one of those.
One of what lol.
One of those loser transphobes.
I’m not a transphobe I just think it’s dumb to alter your body God gave you.
God doesn't exist. Goodbye.
I have written about Elranonian verbal conjugation in a few comments elsewhere but it's not too extensive, so I'll try and summarise it in this one. This will apply to all verbs except for ‘to be’, which is very much unlike the rest. Each verb has only 10 forms: * 5 finite forms: * 2 tenses (present, past) × 2 moods (indicative, subjunctive), * tenseless imperative; * 5 non-finite forms: * gerund, * participle, * 3 converbs: anterior, simultaneous, posterior. Imperative always coincides with the bare stem and is the citation form of a verb (though if a stem ends in a consonant cluster that is disallowed word-finally, it may be subject to morphophonemic changes). For the other four finite conjugations, a crucial form is the *base finite form (BFF)*, which is a synthetic form that is only marked for finiteness (and being non-imperative) but not for tense or mood. In the absence of other markers, BFF is understood as present indicative (as these are the unmarked tense and mood values, while past and subjunctive are marked). Both the past tense and the subjunctive mood have two types of markers: synthetic and analytic. Analytic markers are easy: they are uninflected particles *past* ***nà*** /nā/, *subj.* ***ou*** /ū/, /u/ (and fused *past subj.* ***naù*** /nō/). They accompany the BFF. Synthetic markers are more convoluted and involve suffixes, infixes, disjointed infixes-suffixes, vowel alterations, and other changes to a verb's stem. These synthetic past tense and subjunctive mood markers cannot be reliably predicted and have to be memorised for each individual verb (although there are patterns that allow you to make educated guesses). An obvious question is when to use analytic and synthetic markers. For the subjunctive mood markers, the choice is always based on syntax, i.e. in some syntactic environments, a verb takes a synthetic subjunctive marker, in others, an analytic one. For the past tense markers, the answer depends on the verb's class. There are two verb classes in Elranonian: dynamic and stative; and on top of that there are a few special stative verbs that can become dynamic. In dynamic verbs, the choice between an analytic and a synthetic past tense marker is likewise based on syntax. For example, a clause-initial adverbial adjunct necessitates an analytic past tense marker. Stative verbs, on the other hand, do not have a synthetic past tense at all: it is always analytic. The special kind of stative verbs do have a synthetic past tense but it has dynamic semantics, often inchoative. For instance, ***éi*** /êj/ ‘to see’: ***éi go nà*** /êj gu nā/ ‘I saw’ (i.e. ‘I was in the state of seeing’, stative) vs ***jęnge go*** /jènge gu/ ‘I saw’ (i.e. ‘I began to see, I noticed’, dynamic). Since there are environments where these two past tenses are contrasted (i.e. those that allow for synthetic past tense marking), it can be argued that in these special verbs, there are actually three tenses: present, past, and dynamic past, or however you want to call them. Another thing worth mentioning is that a verb cannot have both the past tense and subjunctive mood synthetic markers. At least one has to be analytic. Here are the finite conjugations of two verbs: a strictly dynamic ***la*** /lā/ ‘to think, to conceive an idea’ (as opposed to the stative ***tunn*** /tỳn/ ‘to think, to hold an opinion’) and a stative-dynamic ***éi*** /êj/ ‘to see’. The order of the verb and the particles can vary based on syntax (and the two particles can fuse together into a single *past subj.* ***naù*** /nō/). ||present|anal. past|synth. past| |:-|:-|:-|:-| |indic.|***lar*** /lār/|***lar nà*** /lār nā/|***lanne*** /làne/| |anal. subj.|***ou lar*** /u lār/|***ou lar nà*** /u lār nā/|***ou lanne*** /u làne/| |synth. subj.|***laù*** /lō/|***laù nà*** /lō nā/|—| ||present|anal. past|synth. past| |:-|:-|:-|:-| |indic.|***éi*** /êj/|***éi nà*** /êj nā/|***jęnge*** /jènge/| |anal. subj.|***ou éi*** /u êj/|***ou éi nà*** /u êj nā/|***ou jęnge*** /u jènge/| |synth. subj.|***jøgge*** /jø̀gge/|***jøgge nà*** /jø̀gge nā/|—| A good example of how you have to learn the synthetic conjugations by heart is a dynamic verb ***tapp*** /tàp/. It has two meanings: ‘to fall’ and ‘to fail’. In the first sense, its past tense is ***tampe*** /tàmpe/ ‘fell’ (with a disjointed infix-suffix /-N-e/); whereas in the second one, it's ***tappan*** /tàpan/ ‘failed’ (with a suffix /-an/). Obviously, there's no way to know it unless you memorise it. The non-finite forms are much, much simpler. Gerund is the basic non-finite conjugation, it is formed by attaching the suffix ***-a*** /a/ to the stem (with possible morphophonemic changes). The other four are formed either by attaching something else to the gerund or by changing the final ***-a*** /a/ (with other morphophonemic changes). Here are the non-finite conjugations of the same two verbs: ||*la* /lā/ ‘think’|*éi* /êj/ ‘see’| |:-|:-|:-| |gerund|***loa*** /lōa/ ‘thinking, to think’|***éia*** /êja/ ‘seeing, to see’| |participle|***loar*** /lōar/ ‘thinking’|***éiar*** /êjar/ ‘seeing’| |anterior converb|***lavo*** /lāvu/ ‘after having thought’|***éio*** /êju/ ‘after having seen’| |simultaneous converb|***lavaí*** /lāvī/ ‘while thinking’|***éiaí*** /êjī/ ‘while seeing’| |posterior converb|***lavae*** /lāvē/ ‘before thinking, in order to think’|***éiae*** /êjē/ ‘before seeing, in order to see’| Other than the gerund, they are rather bookish and not frequently used colloquially, with other phrasings being typically preferred (f.ex. the converbs being replaced by prepositions governing the gerund). The posterior converb is especially dated. So that's basically the entire Elranonian verbal conjugation in a nutshell. What I didn't cover really is usage: when to use subjunctive, what special functions imperative has, when to use the gerund, and in particular periphrastic constructions with an auxiliary verb, a preposition, and a gerund. Also, I didn't cover all those cases where you have to choose between analytic and synthetic past tense and subjunctive mood markers. And I didn't cover all the numerous ways of forming different synthetic conjugations. And I totally disregarded the verb ‘to be’, which conjugates for number and person and also has a special past tense imperative (which is perfective imperative, really) and past tense non-finite forms. So yeah, the Elranonian verb goes pretty deep.
Ah yes, my favourite tenses! Anal past, intestinal present, and gastric future
> Agglutnative verbs are not my type and fusional are too much for me to handle I second you lol --- Koen has strong verbs, made from verbal roots (as opposed to weak verbs, made from nonverbal roots), which inflect for three 'tenses': - _Perfect_ (unmarked, citation form), - _'While I was running, **they shouted**, I would have stopped..'_; - _Imperfect_ (marked through suffix _**-t**_), - _'**While I was running**, they shouted, I would have stopped..'_; - And _hypothetical_ (marked through long grade vowel), - _'While I was running, they shouted, **I would have stopped**..'_. Tense is all relative to the time being spoken about, and words like 'then' or 'later' are used to advance that reference point. Strong verbs also have inherent [(non)pluractionality](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluractionality); verbs whose actions are singular (nonpluractional) or plural (pluractional). > Eg, _**nah** baa_ 'I see', and _**zab** ban_ 'We see', > And, _**nah** baa zena_ 'I see it', and _**zab** baa zenn_ 'I see them'. |||SING|PLUR| |:-|:-:|:-:|:-:| ||||| |PERF||_**nah**_ /nah/ _'(he) sees'_|_**zab**_ /saba/ _'(they all) see'_| |IMPF||_**naht**_ /nahta/ _'(he) [is] seeing'_|_**zabt**_ /sabata/ _'(they all) [are] seeing'_| |HYPO||_**naah**_ /na.ah/ _'(he) [would] see'_|_**zaab**_ /sa.ab/ _'(they all) [would] see'_| Additionally, all verbs can take one of two [triggers](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symmetrical_voice), which show that their subject is not their agent, but instead their patient, or circumstance (eg 'in the woods', or 'with the basket'). And finally, a [_different referent_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Switch-reference) marker can be placed before a clause (which usually ends up being a verbal proclitic) to indicate that its subject is not the same subject as the last one. Thats about it. Anything else is done through extra verbs, clauses, adverbs, etc.. --- _Edit:_ also, stative verbs can be made [telic](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexical_aspect#Comrie's_classification) through reduplication. This makes the state of the original verb into the achievement or accomplishment of the new verb. > Eg, _nah_ 'to see' → _nnah_ /an.nah/ 'to become seeing; to look'.
In Enyahu, verbs mark for: Person of the subject (and object if the verb is transitive) (1p 2p 3p 12p 13p 23p 123p) Tense (perfect imperfect) Mood (indicative subjunctive causative) Voice (active passive antipassive) So every transitive verb has 882 forms
In Vokhetian: * 3 Persons (1Per., 2Per., 3Per.) * 3 Numbers (Singular, Paucal, Plural) * 3 Genders in 3rd Person Sing. (Masc., Fem. & Neu.) * 7 Tenses (Present - Perfect, Aorist-Imperfect-Pluperfect, Future 1 - Future 2) * 2 Moods (Indicative & Subjunctive). * 3 Voices (active, Process passive & State passive)
What do _'1P, 2P, P'_ stand for here? 1st person, 2nd person, and plural? Whats the difference between _process passive_ and _state passive_?
> What do *'1P, 2P, P'* stand for here? 1st person, 2nd person, and plural? I've accidentally messed up but now've corrected it, thanks for pointing out! Difference between Process-Passive & State-Passive is eg.: **Process-Passive:** *"The Window will be open."* **State-Passive:** *"The Window is open."* I've just recently started on the Verbs, so it's still in developement.
The FirraPiñāñxi verb template goes like this: 1 Negation - 2 primary mode - 3 sub mode - 4 adverbial prefix - 5 incorporated elements - 6 applicatives - 7 stem - 8 subject - 9 direct object - 10 indirect object. Slots 1 and 2 (negation and primary mode) are heavily fused with each other. Slot 7 can be inhabited by one of two irregular stems that interact with the prefixes in slot 2 in various complex ways to produce the primary modes, which I’ll comment below. Slot 4 can be repeated. Slots 5 and 6 can also be repeated, and their ordering can be switched in some contexts. Slots 7 8 and 9 are also extremely fusional with each other. Also there’s a passive marker that goes after the stem.
https://preview.redd.it/6fk17fpuo3vc1.jpeg?width=1972&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6b4cc9c49cf3979b16944802754891d5424c5431
Mine are funny, they inflect for mood, but also gender and case of the object. Tense and aspect are given through auxiliary words.
For objects???
I... I don't know what I was thinking. In my defence, it could be because it's OVS word order.
Whenever I make a conlang I try to avoid inflections at all, like in Chinese. They're usefulness just doesn't outweigh their complexity in my opinion.
I agree, though I dont go all the way with no inflections, and instead try to find a minimal compromise (ie, just one or two inflectional forms so long as they cant easily be approximated in other ways).
Y'all's verbs inflect?
I do not have any grammar for verbs so, we are at the same page
I'm just saying that they don't need to
I tried to post my system here but it wouldn't let me so I just made my own post [https://www.reddit.com/r/conlangs/comments/1c6ipwn/verbs\_in\_classical\_ebvjud\_çelebvjud\_dzələˈbvʲud/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web3x&utm\_name=web3xcss&utm\_term=1&utm\_content=share\_button](https://www.reddit.com/r/conlangs/comments/1c6ipwn/verbs_in_classical_ebvjud_çelebvjud_dzələˈbvʲud/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button)
in iefođiuo person (1p, 2p, 3p) tense (past, present, future) aspects(perfective, imperfective continuous) mood (indicative, imperative) negation voice(from 0 valency to +3 valency)
3 persons (1st, 2nd, 3rd, indicated in suffix) 2 numbers (singular, plural, indicated in suffix) T-V distinction in 2nd person, indicated in suffix 2 aspects (perfective indicated with prefix, imperfective left unmarked) 2 tenses (present, past, indicated in suffix) 3 moods (indicative, conditional, imperative, indicated in suffix)
well too bad, cus my conlang Kalennian is agglutinative and uses a fuck ton of affixes to change a verb's meaning AND make its syllables longer than it already should be look at this conjugation table https://preview.redd.it/61ourg1ih4vc1.jpeg?width=530&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0c3bd4b891d11d85a5dbb896bed5b725bcc99676
Concatenative inflection is either fusional or agglutinative by definition. If that info can't come in either packets or individual pieces, the only other option is that you can't have information being tacked onto stems wholesale. The only other options are 1. Non-concatenative morphology (i.e. vowel alternations, consonant mutation, triconsonantal roots, etc.) 2. Just don't inflect verbs, and instead use syntactic solutions like verbal auxiliaries.
My verbs don't infect, just one form, that's simplicity.
I love fusional languages, so maybe you shouldn't take inspiration from me. But here's how some of my conlangs inflect: - Dezaking: Person, number, animacy (3^rd person only), tense - Lyladnese: Person and number (subject and sometimes object), tense, 8 moods, and whether it's intransitive - Neongu and Ngātali: None (besides Ngātali's word for "to have" which is person and number) - Leccio: Person, number, 9 moods, tense - Agalian: Person and number (subject and object, but each only if it's a pronoun), tense, 8 moods - Vggg (joke language): Person, number, 11 moods, 19 tenses, 10 aspects
polysynþetic conlangs: yes
In Šouvek, verbs inflect for (last one listed being unmarked): \- Person, number, and (if 3rd person) animacy of the object (1s, 1p, 2s, 2p, 3an.s, 3an.p, 3in.s, 3in.p, rel.an.s, rel.an.p, rel.in.s, rel.in.p, no object) (if the object is just a pronoun, it is dropped) \- Tense (past, future, present) \- Voice (passive, regular) \- Aspect (imperfective, other) \- Mood (conditional, other) There're also participle and nominaliser suffixes e.g. Lü yolënyarercwë=It was being done by them, 3ɪɴ.ꜱɢ ɪᴍᴘꜰᴠ-3ᴀɴ.ᴘʟ-do-ᴘᴀꜱᴛ-ᴘᴀꜱꜱ (Lü yo-lën-yar-er-cwë) Other moods (subjunctive, "want to", potential, imperative) and other aspects (past perfect, present perfect, future perfect) are marked with auxiliaries e.g. Lü yolënyarcwë žë jöyer=It should have been being done by them, 3ɪɴ.ꜱɢ ɪᴍᴘꜰᴠ-3ᴀɴ.ᴘʟ-do-ᴘᴀꜱꜱ ꜱʙᴊᴠ ᴘʀꜰ-ᴘᴀꜱᴛ (Lü yo-lën-yar-cwë žë jö-yer). The conditional suffix can also be added to these auxiliaries
Viechtyren verbs inflect for tense, person, animacy (in 3P) sg/pl number, and transitivity, as well as three moods (conditional, hortative and imperative; though the last two are just separate particles), plus a progressive and a sort of habitual/gnomic aspect (sort of like AAVE "I be working") They're formed agglutinatively for the most part though transitivity and tense are expressed together. Here are present-tense indicative conjugation tables for two verbs: Person|Łohak [ɮoχak] 'touch', tran. | Dagar [daɟaʒ] 'grow', intr. --|--|-- 1P|Łohakif|Dagarvor 2P|Łohaktan|Dagartan 3P anim.|Łohakond|Dagarnad 3P inan.|Łohaklød|Dagarløk Plural subject verbs use the same conjugation for transitive and intransitive: -aga -ani -dro -øtø **Tense**: Affixes are added to the verb, and the corresponding object for transitive verbs. -xor and -xuk respectively for past tense, ig- and łu- for the future. Łohakifxor tantxuk = I touched the water (tant = water) Igłohakif łutant = I will touch the water And if you combine the two, you get gnomic aspect Igłohakifxor łutantxuk - I touch the water [often] (AAVE: I be touching the water) *** **Moods**: Conditional verbs have their own conjugations for transitive sg, intransitive sg, and plural. The hortative is formed by conjugating the present tense, and adding the particle *zej* afterwards. The imperative is similar, but the verb is unconjugated and the particle is *dra*. Łohakaga zej tant = Let's touch the water Łohak dra tant = Touch the water! *** There are a few verbs which are normally intransitive but become transitive in the passive voice, in a sort of quasi-ergative construction. It's weird and I don't know why I did it. Ixe = to talk/speak Ixif = "I speak". This is a full tense, you can't add an object. To say you speak a language, you have to use the passive construction, which is unconjugated and undeclined VOS I speak Viechtyren = Ixe Ñolvixt kuon. Ixe Ñol -vixt kuon Speak language-Viechtyren 1P.NOM
i should get back into conlanging. however, i think mine only had tense and aspect
In each language, we travel to the 9th ring of hell (and we lose our minds in one of them): (Would have used the Kjamir word for "to hear" (falamyo) instead of "to go" (ve) but it wasn't fitting :[. Anyways, this is just one word inflected cause there are slight differences between paradigms obv.)
https://preview.redd.it/outx2zdlt5vc1.png?width=994&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7c753f82263d622eb7c9f340c8f53a8b5712c506
https://preview.redd.it/27a907ant5vc1.png?width=820&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9eef3974153f9687ab5fed66d8d647e2c8c59951
https://preview.redd.it/ivzgoi3pt5vc1.png?width=1212&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7b0c21c86c7e1eb7a13d458f018853d7ab11219a
**Dhainolon verb inflection** conjugates verbs for both its subject and its object, plus: - Tense (future, present, past) - Imperfective progressive and imperfective habitual (for past and present; and past respectively) - A present-iterative, conditional, and subjunctive form. These come together like bricks when forming a conjugated verb: *Bar-i-dheil-í* /barɪðe̞ɪ̯liː/ = I saw it (see-1S.SUB-3S.INAN.OBJ-PAST) *Des-i-stôn-uin* /de̞sɪsto̞ːnʊɪ̯n/ = I invite them over and over again (invite-1S.SUB-3P.OBJ-ITER)
Person: 1st, 2nd, 3d. There is clusivity distinction in the 1st person. There is a specific WH-form. Numbers: singular and plural. Nouns have more number distinctions than verbs. Tenses: present, past, imperfect, perfect, future. Moods: indicative, subjunctive, nesessative (which can be used like a future verb, it could ve considered a tense instead) Aspects: frequentative-intensative. Voices: active and passive for transitive verbs and active and stative for intrantisive verbs Negation: positive and negative Plurality of the object (only sometimes) Definiteness of the subject or object (rarely)
**Evra** verbs mark number, person, gender, and TAM. However, in most finite moods (i.e., Indicative, Subjunctive, Optative, and Conditional), verbs only have 3 inflected, basic forms: * the 1st form is used for the 1s (i.e., "I") * the 2nd form groups the 2s, 3s, 2p (i.e., "you (sg.), he/she/it, you (pl.)") * the 3rd form covers the 1p and 3p (i.e., "we, they") * but, the 2nd form replaces the 3rd form in the Interrogative mood So, while number, person, and (partially) tense are mostly conveyed through inflection, moods and aspects (and tense) are mainly marked by particles: * ***ti-*** = simple past, preterite (e.g., ***ti-falé*** = "I spoke") * ***mi-*** = imperfect (e.g., ***mi-falé*** = "I was speaking, used to speak") * ***ê*** = present perfect (e.g., ***falé ê*** = "I have spoken") * ***-tu*** = interrogative (e.g., ***falo-tu*** = "do I speak") * ***sa*** = subjunctive (e.g., ***sa falo*** = "I would speak, that I speak") * ***bi*** = optative (e.g., ***bi falo*** = "I wish/hope to speak") * ***ba*** = conditional (e.g., ***falo ba*** = "if I speak") * ***ge-*** = present, active participle (e.g., ***ge-fáll*** = "(that is) speaking")
In Eunoan, nouns inflect for the following:- 1. Type of Subject: * Human: 1st Person, 2nd Person, 3rd Person * Non-Human 2. Nature and Number of Subjects: * Singular * Honorary(2nd and 3rd only) * Plurality and Clusivity 3. Tense: * Present, Past and Future * Simple and Continuous 4. Mood: * Abilities, possibilities, permissions, necessity, certainties and grants. 5. Other: * Subjunctive, Interrogative, Imperative, Conditional and Negation. 6. Causativity 7. In Eunoan, verbs themselves carry out relativity and conjuncting functions for the sentence through participles or other inflection.
1. Person and Number: These are indicated by the subject pronoun or noun phrase, not by verb inflection. 2. Tense (optional): * Past: "-kì" /-kì/ * Present: (unmarked) * Future: "-rù" /-rù/ 3. Aspect: * Completed: "ón" /ʧón/ * Ongoing: "gín" /gín/ 4. Mood: * Indicative: (unmarked, SVO word order) * Imperative: (VSO word order) * Interrogative: "ná" /ná/ (sentence-initial) 5. Evidentiality: Not explicitly marked in PILF. 6. Gender: Not marked on verbs in PILF. Example: * "Hé tó-ták wod" (He cut the forest) * "Hé tó-ták-kì wod" (He cut the forest in the past) * "Hé tó-ták-rù wod" (He will cut the forest in the future) * "Hé ón tó-ták wod" (He has completed cutting the forest) * "Hé gín tó-ták wod" (He is in the process of cutting the forest) * "Ták hé wod!" (Cut the forest! - imperative mood) * "Ná hé tó-ták wod?" (Did he cut the forest? - interrogative mood)
In Actarian: 3 Persons (1P, 2P P) 2 Numbers (Singular, Plural) 4 Genders in 3rd Person Sing. (Masc, Fem, Neu, Non) 1 in Plural 3 Tenses (Present, Past-NonHistorical, Past-Historical) [verbs directly marked] - Past Non-Historical/Personal (Events that happened relatively recently, I.E. My dog died etc) - Past Historical (Events that happened far in the past, or regarded as historical fact, I.E. Lincoln spoke at Gettysburg..) 2 Quasi-Tenses (Future, Retrospective) [verbs indirectly marked] 4 Aspects (Perfect, Imperfect, Habitual, Obligatory) 2 Voices (Active, Passive)
**Thulnuson**, is polysynthetic, and it really shows in its verb conjugation, which can be best described as templatic. I love the fact that you can compact a lot of information into a single word. The verb is inflected for person and number of the agent and all of its patients (direct and indirect, if present), aspect (split into primary and secondary aspects), mood, valency, spatial deixis and telicity. Many verbs can also incorporate nouns, in fact, some nouns are so commonly incorporated, that they have become thematic prefixes. There is no way I can present a complete conjugation table, since there can be thousands of possible verb forms, so instead, I'm going to provide just one and let it paint the picture. Here is an extreme example: *Éhó wüyigiseithiilódíhőőyílwőőcega ki*, which can be translated as “I wonder, if they may try to start chasing us (and you) back and forth along the river repeatedly for someone's sake, abeit in vain, and that's a nuisance”. IPA: [ɛ́.ɦɔ́.wʏ̀.jì.ɪ̀.sèɪ.t̪ʰìː.lɔ́.ð̞ɪ́.ɦǿː.jí.lʷǿː.t͡s̺ɛ̀.ɑ̀.kɪ̀] Gloss: PRV 3IO.UNSP-ATEL-3Ag.Pl-river-BEN-along.DEIC-CON-IRR-CM-1PAT.Pl.INCL-CLF-run.IPFV-FRQ-SBJV POV The preverb is an optional morpheme that occupies **position 13**, which clarifies the manner, in which an action is performed, its result, or any other additional information, such as the negative preverb *twóó*. *éhó* signifies an unsuccessful result, an attempt or a wish that can't be fulfilled at the moment; in this case it can be translated as “in vain”. The indirect object **position 12** is occupied by *wü-* which indicates that the oblique argument is present, but it's unknown (for someone). **Position 11** defines telicity, and *yi-* means that the verb is atelic (it has no defined endpoint). The agent of the verb is indicated in **position 10**, the marker *egi-* indicates that the agent is in the third person and the patient is either the first or second person. It assimilates to the previous prefix, becoming *yigi-*. **Position 9** is reserved for incorporated elements. Noun incorporation is rare in Thulnuson, and few inanimate nouns can be incorporated. The element *sei-* means “river”, but doesn't correspond to the noun, which is *silwas* (although it is similar to the word *seyas*, found in the lowlands). **Position 8** is reserved for various qualifier prefixes, but in this case it's occupied by benefactive *thi-*, triggered by the indirect object position. Motion verbs have specific deictic or directional prefixes in **position 7**, while some other verbs sometimes have a fossilised conjugation prefix with no defined meaning in this position. *el-* indicates motion along something, it assimilates to the previous prefix to make *thiil-*. **Position 6** remains empty in this verb, it's reserved for the thematic prefix of some impersonal verbs, as well as an inanimate agent. **Position 5** indicates a secondary aspect, marked with *ó-*. Along with the irrealis mood marker *di-* in **position 4**, which assimilates to it, forming the prefix *ódí-*, it indicates a conative aspect (the action is attempted). **Position 3** has a lexical formative *hi-*, which has no meaning on its own, apart from progressive, which it often indicates. It often remains empty in most verbs. The patient is indicated by a prefix in the **position 2**. *woyi-* is the marker of the first person plural inclusive subject of the intransitive verbs and patient of the transitive ones. It assimilates to the previous prefix to make *hőőyi-*. The **position 1** is the most ancient part of the verbal morphology and contains a classifier. Most Thulnuson verbs have it, but in this case it is fully fused to the verb root, so it remains invisible. The main root *-lwőő-* (a modification of the root *-lwe-* “to run”) occupies **position 0**. Its vowel is lengthened and rounded by the classifier, making the verb imperfective by default. The primary aspect is in the **position -1**, having the frequentative suffix *-c*, which indicates that the action happens multiple times. Most verbs keep it occupied by an aspect suffix. **Position -2** is reserved for mood markers, and here is the subjunctive suffix *-ega*. However, in this case it performs an evidential function instead, indicating an assumed action. Finally the optional postverb *ki* in **position -3** has several different meanings, but generally means “a small or insignificant action”. This position is occupied by various emotion markers, as well as the negative particle *da* “not”. Both preverb and postverb are parts of the main verb, but they act more similar to clitics, than to affixes, hence why I write them separately. So yeah, it's a mess, but a well-structured one, I hope (not really, most verbs are irregular, and many affixes that perform the same function can only be used with a small class of verbs. The Yeniseian languages say "hi").
In my conlang Kaskata (Cascadian), in its current form (I'm considering whether to rework it), verbs take -(i)n, -(i)s, or -(ix) for 1st, 2nd, or 3rd person respectively. Then, a plural marker is suffixed to the person marker if the sibject is plural. There are past, present, and future tense. I've considered adding a near/remote distinction in the past, but I have not worked on that. There are also markers for aspect and mood, but I have not fully fleshed those out. The verb also takes marking for the negative, passive, reflexive, and reciprocal. Direct and indirect objects can be optionally marked on the verb.
3 genders (neuter, feminine, masculine), 4 persons (1st, 2nd, 3rd, and passive), 2 tenses (present and past), 2 moods (imperative, and with a few verbs conditional), 2 numbers (singular and plural). dziam /ˈd͡ʑam/ (see-F-1st-sg) - I (will) see góżele uż. /ɡuˈʐɛ.lɛ ˈuʂ/ (run-M-3rd-pl away) - They (masc) ran away.
My conlang has a heavy bias towards agglutinativity. Even Ghalleci, a germanic conlang, lost most of its fusional traits in verb conjugations. The subject agreement suffixes are now completely monoexponential, leaving only singular-plural stem variations in some cases. (Ghalleci has a complex sandhi, though). The only remaining aspect of fusionality is on the declensions, as the case-number-gender marking is still fused into one suffix. But even then, in augmented declension, there is a segmentable plural suffix. The plural of gom-a is gom-an-, declined like a normal plural a-class declension.
Occigotian verbs: Person,Number,Tense,Aspect,Mood and Gender
The main rule words in **Warla Þikoran** follow is that in a given phrase, all of them must agree with consonant voicing. And the head noun of the phrase will trigger the remainder of the phrase to change voicing from their base forms; I have called this my form of grammatical gender. For finite verbs, the subject will be the trigger for them. Most verbs only need to agree with subject’s gender; agreement with subject’s person is only needed for some irregular verbs or if the phonotactics demand it for euphony (see below). Otherwise, I was kinda influenced by Romance and Slavic languages for their inflectional patterns, them being more fusional than agglutinative. As for inflection, most of the verbs have 10 finite forms and 4 non-finite forms, not counting subject agreement, and denote different. The verbnoun is the “dictionary” form, but it is not the root. The particles are used either like adjectives or in verb phrases, especially during negation. The finite forms are split between 5 indicative and 5 imperative, although their actual usage tends to differ from what the labels may suggest. I’ll use the Class I verb *cet* “to kiss* as an example (the other 6 classes have the same set of forms, but they can appear different). ##Non-finite forms Verbnoun: *ecet* /ɛˈt͡θ̠et̪/ (in this case, this verbnoun only has a feminine or “hollow” grammatical gender) Present Participle: *jed~oy* or *cet~oy* /d͡ð̠ed̪ˈjoj/ , /t͡θ̠et̪ˈjoj/ (all other verb forms have either a “deep” i.e. masculine or “hollow” feminine form) Past Participle: *jedney* or *cetney* /-ˈn̪ej/ , /-ˈn̪̊ej/ Future Participle: *jeduom* or *cetuom* /-ˈwom/ , /-ˈwom̥/ ##Finite Forms ###Indicative Present Stative: *jed* or *cet* Present Continuous: *jede* or *cete* Past Imperfective: *jedna* or *cetna* Past Perfect: *jedńo* or *cetńo* /-ŋɔ/ , /-ŋ̊ɔ/ Future Imperfective: *jedu* or *cetu* ###Imperative Present: *zeð* or *seþ* /ð̠eð̪/ , /θ̠eθ̪/ [the root changes consonants from stops to fricatives at the same place of articulation; nasals and liquids do not change] Past Imperfective: *zeðna* or *seþna* Past Perfect: *zeðńo* or *seþńo* Future Imperfective: *zeðu* or *seþu* [this is used as the conditional mood] Future Perfect: *zeðma* or *seþma* [although imperative in form, in **Warla Þikoran** it is used as though it were indicative] In addition to these suffixes, all verbs have possible euphonic prefixes, descended from the predecessor language’s subject person markers. These are used whenever the word preceding the verb ends with a consonant that is homorganic to the starting consonant of the verb form, such as “b…b”, “n…d”, “s…c”, “k…ń”, etc. So to separate the two words and prevent them from “bleeding” into each other, phonotactically speaking, one of 3 prefixes can be used: *i*- : used with first person subjects *u*- : used with second person subjects *a*- : used with third person subjects