Koa Update 1: Lexical Class & Particles

Up early on a Saturday, the rest of the house still sleeping, time for Koa? Definitely.

I've been panicking a bit, frankly, at the scope of my table of contents, which has continued to grow over the past week. I just realized with relief, though, that for now at least I don't need to write a full description of everything! Initially I think I just need to identify the things that have changed from the understandings and assumptions that have been demonstrating on this blog. And so...

1. Lexical Class in Koa

Koa entirely lacks lexical class (nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs) in the way familiar to European languages, predicate function being determined constructionally from syntactic context. However, Koa does have a different type of lexical class in the form of the distinction between particles and predicates. This is not new, but it is worth saying overtly.

Koa being a designed, planned language, all lexical classes are closed except for those predicates which are proper names. However, new meanings can be created via derivation, compounding, etc.

1.1 The Particle

Koa particles contribute grammatical (syntactic, morphological, derivational, pragmatic) meaning. They are monosyllabic in form, most typically (C)V: a, ki, te, etc. Some are orthographically VV, but still represent phonological monosyllables: ai, io.

Particles may frequently be compounded, in which case the scope of each leftward particle layers over the material to its right. When scoping a predicate, particles are typically spoken as a single accentuation group with that predicate: that is, as a single phonological word. When occurring independently they are accented on the last member unless that compound has been accepted as an independent predicate root: haná "unless" lit. "if not," civé "although" lit. "even [given] that"; but meno "regardless, nevertheless, either way" lit. "with without," nini 1sg emphatic lit. "I I."

1.1.1 Typing & Distribution

Particles have both a typing function and a distributional outcome. Their typing function determines how the material within their scope is construed internally; the completed construction’s distribution determines the syntactic positions in which it may occur. Thus:

ka types its scope as an argument (ka sene "a/the cat") and forms an argumental construction, licensing it for argumental distribution (ka sene i peme "the cat is soft").

i types its scope as a nucleus (i peme "is soft") and forms a clause (ka sene i peme "the cat is soft").

ko types its scope as a clause (ko ka sene i peme "that the cat is soft") and forms an argumental construction (ni lule ko ka sene i peme "I think that the cat is soft").

ne types its scope as an argument (ne miti "on [a/the] bed") and forms an adjunctive construction (ni mahiva ka sene ne miti "I am petting the cat on the bed").

pi types its scope as a quantifier (kume hitu pi "17 [of something]") and forms a quantifier construction (ni mahiva kume hitu pi sene "I am petting 17 cats").

...and so on. This is also not new, but it has never been articulated and made plain before! I've adjusted the particle listing in my lexicon to include this (internal type, external distribution, etc.) and a number of other important attributes.

1.1.2 Particle Categories

This is rather nifty -- I've finally got my particles organized into 15 groupings by type and function, their previously having formed a kind of vague cloud I was never sure how to describe systematically. Particle categories include:

Argument markers, marking constituents being used as -- surprise! -- arguments. These include a subclass of specifiers (ka anchored reference, ti proximal/cataphoric, to distal/anaphoric, ke interrogative, le proper name) and quantifiers (a existential/nonempty, co unrestricted, po universal/generic). You may notice some big business in progress around ka and a, and the absence of hu in this list...this is possibly the biggest deal in my understanding of Koa since 2002 and will be discussed in detail in section 1.2.1.1. Note also the absence of initial personal pronouns in this list, allowed for inalienable possession for at least 20 years, but no longer acceptable as argument markers.

Aspectual particles, determining the aspect of predication. We have ca persistive, hu prospective (!!!), io iamitive, ma progressive, mi inchoative, si anterior, su cessative, va habitual. hu in this meaning is experimental, suggesting something that is imminent, about to occur: Le Iúliki i huete cai "Julie is about to make tea." (Don't mind if I do...)

Clausalizers mark the constituent in their scope as a clause, however long it happens to be, and license it to be used in a particular syntactic distribution. ko creates an argument clause, ve a circumstantial adjunct clause, ha a protatic adjunct clause, and u a modifier clause. Yes, I have (hopefully permanently) retracted my elegant Washington Manor idea, to be discussed in full in section 6.1.

Emotive particles communicate the emotional state of the speaker. aa understanding/surprise, ee uncertainty, eu disgust, ii pain/dislike/nervousness, oo understanding/confirmation, ui regret/commiseration, uu excitement/pleasure.

Epistemic particles give information about the information: the speaker's commitment to it, its source, or its familiarity status: ho mirative, ku common ground, pu reportative, li presumptive, vu dubitative. Ia, though formally classified as a polarity particle (see below), could also belong to this group to the extent that it represents a full commitment to the information.

Interactional particles interact with the attention of the listener: ei attention-getting, oi feedback-seeking, vo presentative. vo also has a large role in structuring discourse and information.

Junctive particles connect constituents, whether clauses, predicates or even particles (e.g. ia ai na? "yes or no?"). ai interrogative/alternative, au disjunction, e conjunction.

Medial Dependency is a catchall category including particles that form a link between constituents on either side of them, conveying particular information about each. sa, focalizer, places the discourse focus on the constituent to its left, with the gapped clausal residue to its right; pi, quantificationalizer (ugh I know, but I'm really having trouble finding a better term) creates a unit of quantity, formally a quantifier, to its left, which quantifies the domain to its right. In both cases, the material to the right may be elided when recoverable from context.

Modal particles contribute mode/mood to the predication: cu irrealis, vi imperative-optative, ki necessitative, lu volitive, te potential.

Polarity particles: na negative, ia affirmative/verum.

Nucleus markers, identifying and typing the nucleus (or nuclear complex) of a clause. These include the general nucleus marker i, and the more specialized ao precative, ea hortative and oe admonitive. It is an open question, probably to be answered by hypothetical future Koa syntactical theorists rather than by me, whether pronominal particles (see below) also fall into this category or simply suppress the appearance of i (i.e. le Iúliki i kiuni "Julie is tired" vs [i?] ta kiuni "she is tired").

Pronominal particles can function as person/number marking of a pronominal first argument of the nucleus, or as independent arguments in their own right: ni 1sg, se 2sg, ta 3sg; nu 1pl, so 2pl, tu 3pl.

Relators create adjuncts, indicating a physical, temporal, conceptual or other relationship with the scoped argument: he temporal, la goal, lo reason, me comitative, mo similative, ne location, no privative, o source, pe reference. Note that (A) ci has been removed as an instrumental marker, this role being taken over by me or i itu for instruments and o for demoted agents; (B) almost all meta-language deriving from IE case systems has been replaced with more neutral terms, e.g. "goal" rather than "dative" or "allative."

Scalar particles indicate the degree or inclusivity of their scope. These include ce degree-raising, iu degree-matching, ie restrictive ("just"), ci inclusive ("even"). In some cases, as with e.g. a ce kane "a real man" lit. "a very man," the predicate's meaning is coerced into a scalar; whether these particles should therefore also be considered to type their scope as modifiers is an open question. ci as an inclusive scalar feels like a much better use than the erstwhile instrumental, and it provides an elegant means for forming concessive clauses (separate post to come).

Lastly, valence particles perform valence operations on the nucleus they scope: hi reflexive/impersonal, mu causative, pa passive.

I'm also pleased to have finally standardized abbreviations for all these, so my glosses will be a little more coherent in the future.

...I was going to try to do the entirety of Section 1 in this post, but there is so very much to say about predicates that I'm going to stop for breath here and pick up at 1.2 next time.