Wednesday, October 2, 2024

Spaces revisited

Last year's exploration of word break conventions brought up some tantalizing questions about Koa's typology. As I've been sitting with those questions, some have remained unresolved -- I still have nothing interesting to say positively about Koa's typological categorization, for instance -- but a couple things have clarified.

First, despite its surprisingly intricate ordering rules, I don't think there's any motivation to think of Koa as agglutinative, or of sequences of particles and predicates at the same syntactic node as necessarily being single "words." Given (A) that pauses between particles modifying a given head are allowed, and (B) that many or even most such particles also exist as "words" independent of that syntax, characterizing them as affixes would require some awkward and unparsimonious assertions.

Taking ni "I/me/my," for example, we can find this in verb-initial position (ninae "I see"), verb-final position (tanáeni "she sees me"), noun-initial position (nimama "my mother"), noun-final position (táloni "my house"), with adjunct particles (la or la ni "to me"), and independently when focalized/fronted (ni sa éteta "It was I who did it"). I'm not sure how productive it would be to classify the chunk of phonetic material [ni] as constituting different words or affixes in these six syntactic positions; it seems better to say that the particle ni may appear in all these positions, with particular effects.

Secondly, I think I took the joining of particles with their heads past the point of both need and aesthetics. Many resulting words are needlessly long; but perhaps more importantly, I just don't like certain combinations. Articles, for example, have never stopped looking dumb to me when mooshed onto their nouns.

Here, then, are the rearticulated and somewhat moderated principles of word break conventions as I'm currently thinking of them.

1. Specifiers (ka, a, ko, ke, hu, po, ti, to) are written separately from their heads. 

2. Preposed particles whose scope is an unarticled predicate, and postposed particles under all circumstances, are written together with that predicate regardless of how complex it is. This may require the use of additional accentuation where pronouns and directionals are suffixed to the root.

lakoto = "homewards"
ninasitemuláheta = "I couldn't make him leave"
nisánota la ko mutulu ka kúmumani  = "I said it to make my teacher angry"

3. Independent complexes of particles which do not include pronouns are written together (nahua "nothing," puiá "that's what they say!").

4. Predicate clusters -- compounds and incorporated objects -- are written together, but plain adjectival phrases are not joined to their head nouns

ko koutusi = "bookbuying"
ka lopuviko = "the weekend," but
ka pasano vime = "the last statement"

5. Conventions for particle complexes including pronouns (la + ni "to me," nahu + nu "none of us") are still under consideration.

6. In all other cases, particles are written independently.

The text referenced in the earlier post on word-break conventions would now look like this:

Talai la ka ásulota la ko vúakupu e ko mivami, sii, tamene la ko kóuva e tule lai la ni. Nisivima poli lo ko pato ve hua i cumisucu, ala helopu poka i pea pono e ka lílani sai i sikali. E ka tana i kali i koe ka sena. Hala kehe nulunike la ko mova ka kecu, ka nuluete la ko mupea ka háotenu nekene koa.

I have to say I like that a whole lot. It feels like a really nice balance between the traditional look and feel of Koa and the legibility advantages of grouping particles with their predicates.

We do still need to make a decision on point 5 above: between laní/la ni, nahunú/nahu nu and the like. For the moment I'm leaning towards separating the pronouns as I did in the excerpt, but I'll play with them in actual usage and see if that sticks.

Friday, September 13, 2024

Modal derivation

The past year seems to have been devoted to Slavic philology -- Macedonian in particular, and obsessively -- rather than Koa, but in honor of Koa Day I wanted to write a quick post on a topic that's been waiting in the queue for at least a few years. The bones of these particular extremely common derivational structures have been in active use since around 2011, so let's formalize them.

Among Koa's modal particles are these three:

te "able to"
ki "must, need to"
lu "want to"

These most often show up alongside verbal predicates, e.g.

ai se-te-náe-ni?
QU 2SG-ABIL-see-1SG
"can you see me?"

When used with adjectival predicates, though, they derive an interesting range of meaning which lacks systematic representation in English:

miko te-koma
friend ABIL-understand
"an understanding friend, a friend who's able to understand"

te-lehu
ABIL-fly
"able to fly, airworthy"

ki-nuku
DEB-sleep
"sleepy"

lu-láeva
DES-play.music
"an aspiring player"

In combination with the passive particle pa, the abilitative really comes into its own, pretty closely translating the English -able/-ible suffix:

te-pa-nae
ABIL-PASS-see
"visible = able to be seen"

na-te-pa-nae
NEG-ABIL-PASS-see
"invisible = not able to be seen"

te-pa-koma
ABIL-PASS-understand
"intelligible"

na-te-pa-ilo
NEG-ABIL-PASS-know
"ineffable"

With ki-, we can create forms like

ki-pa-ete
DEB-PASS-do
"agenda = (things which) must be done"

na-vi-uni u sihi ki-pa-suo
NEG-IMP-forget DEF.PL vegetable DEB-PASS-eat
"don't forget the vegetables that need to be eaten"

ki-pa-tuho sa le Kátako
DEB-PASS-destroy FOC NAME Carthage
"Carthago delenda est"

It occurred to me in whatever year it was that I first wrote up the notes for this post that in tepa- and kipa- we've captured the semantics of Esperanto -ebl- and -end-, respectively. What about E-o -ind-, though: "worthy of being Xed"?

I'm still not sure about this, but for the moment I'm trying out a bit of a semantic extension of the particle lu in this context, with the idea that it's a pretty short jump from an object "wanting" to have something done to it, to that object deserving having that something done to it. For example:

kava lu-pa-ipo
coffee DES-PASS-drink
"coffee worth drinking, coffee that wants to be drunk"

lu-pa-niko
DES-PASS-marvel
"amazing = wanting to be marveled at"

A bit whimsical at best, or facile at worst, but I feel like it might be worth it to get at a semantic which otherwise would require a bunch of analytical circumlocution -- especially when the literal value of that sequence of particles wouldn't otherwise be particularly useful in any contexts where the head lacks consciousness. On the other hand, there are sentences like this that turn out to be worryingly ambiguous:

ni-lu-pa-loha
1SG-DES-PASS-love
"I'm worthy of love" OR "I want to be loved"

As with so many concepts in Koa, I'll have to sit with this one and potentially see how it works out in actual usage. It also matters that the desiderative/volitive/conative lu and the verb halu "want" are actually not synonymous, which should probably be explored in another future post! Thus

ni-halu ko loha
1SG-want ABS love
"I want to love"

ni-lu-loha
1SG-DES-love
"I'm in the mood for love, I feel like loving, I intend to love"

For now, happy 25th, Koa! Clearly lots more still to come.