Page 1 of 1

Modern Hittite lang: realistic?

Posted: 06 May 2018 15:57
by Pāṇini
I've been working on a conlang where a descendant of Hittite survives deep in the mountains of Cappadocia (originally titled Cappadocian, or Nasiǝl natively), but I've run into somewhat of an issue. In Hittite animate nouns the nominative singular and both the genitive singular and plural have the same ending (-as). To make things a bit clearer, I've considered creating a sort of status constructus where a word shifts into the dative case when it is possessed, but is that realistic in any way, shape or form?

PS: Please pardon the question d'amateur.

EDIT: changed tense to case.

Re: Modern Hittite lang: realistic?

Posted: 06 May 2018 20:28
by Khemehekis
I don't know the answer, but I believe you mean the dative case, not the dative tense.

Re: Modern Hittite lang: realistic?

Posted: 06 May 2018 23:07
by Pāṇini
Yes, of course, I'm sorry—wasn't quite thinking.

Re: Modern Hittite lang: realistic?

Posted: 07 May 2018 01:15
by sangi39
I seem to recall that some languages use the dative, rather than the genitive, to mark the possessor. Latin and Ancient Greek, according to Wikipedia, used it at least in the sense of "to X is Y" where X is the possessor and Y is the thing possessed, e.g. "to me is a dog" in place of "I have a dog" (Russian does something similar but uses the preposition у + genitive possessor + copula + possessed noun). Apparently Serbo-Croatian takes this one step further, using the dative to mark the possessor directly, although one source I found suggested that this is used alongside the genitive based on inalienable vs. alienable lines, and nouns can be converted into genitive adjectives as well (which then decline to agree with the noun they possess).

As for the possessed noun being marked in the dative, I'm not sure. I haven't found an example of it yet.

Re: Modern Hittite lang: realistic?

Posted: 08 May 2018 21:49
by Lambuzhao
So… … what ur looking for is a "possessed case". I do not think that happens in the IE gang.

The Cariban Languages and Tlingit, as per Wikipedia, apparently have a "possessed case", where the noun possessed is marked, rather than the possessor.

Semitic langs and Egyptian, and Finnish, have pronominal suffixes which sort of act like a possessed case (mebbe ¿?)
at least in a personal-referent sort of way.

Ex.
Tlingit

hit 'house'
Jáan hídi “John's house”.
Spoiler:
This sort of thing kind of reminds me of something that happens in PA German and also in the Spanish spoken especially (but not only) by 2L speakers in Peru from either the Andes or from the Amazon.

In PA German,

Wu iß em Daadi sei Buch?
Where is for the Dad his book?

But this is truly and simply a Dative of Possessor [:S]


In the Spanish of those aforementioned speakers, they do not often show possession with /de/.

Instead of saying la vaca de Juan for 'John's cow', they will simply juxtapose w/ a possessive ADJ,
and say Juan, su vaca, Lit. 'John, his cow'.

CA.RA.ZAY :wat:

However, a Comitative Dative (as in :grc: and :lat: ) might be kitbashed to do duty as a makeshift "possessed case" (¿?)
a. The instrumental dative is often akin to the comitative dative: ““ἀλώμενος νηί τε καὶ ἑτάροισι” wandering with his ship and companions” λ 161, ““νηυσὶν οἰχήσονται” they shall go with their ships” Ω 731, ““θυ_μῷ καὶ ῥώμῃ τὸ πλέον ἐναυμάχουν ἢ ἐπιστήμῃ” they fought with passionate violence and brute force rather than by a system of tactics” T. 1.49.
(H.W. Smyth, A Greek Grammar for Colleges)

If ur Hittite descendant has an Instrumental case, maybe that (¿¿??).

Hm..... Hittite seems to have an allative case in oldenest times. Maybe repurpose that somehow???

It's an interesting question.
:wat:

Re: Modern Hittite lang: realistic?

Posted: 08 May 2018 23:49
by eldin raigmore
as i inderstand it Akkadian (Semitic IIANM) had both a construct state for the posessum (the <<chose possédée>>) and used the genitive for (possibly among other things) the possessor.
Could Hittite and Akkadian have shared areal features?
Could a construct state or possessed case have been such a shared areal feature?

Note: I might be mistaken, but, my impression is “construct” is a “state”, like definite, instead of a “case”, like accusative.
That might not be very relevant to the question at hand.

Re: Modern Hittite lang: realistic?

Posted: 09 May 2018 11:39
by Scytheria
I don't see a logical issue with that idea, but an intermediate step might simply be a total loss of case for the possessor and possessed (or sharing of the same case), perhaps supported by an intervening clitic.

Re: Modern Hittite lang: realistic?

Posted: 09 May 2018 12:08
by Omzinesý
Pāṇini wrote:
06 May 2018 15:57
To make things a bit clearer, I've considered creating a sort of status constructus where a word shifts into the dative case when it is possessed, but is that realistic in any way, shape or form?
You can always analyse that there are two different cases that are just homonymic.
Historically, I don't find it intuitive that the dative accuires genitive meanings, but of course the morphemes can have distinct origins and just collapse by accident.

Re: Modern Hittite lang: realistic?

Posted: 09 May 2018 15:23
by Lambuzhao
Omzinesý wrote:
09 May 2018 12:08
Pāṇini wrote:
06 May 2018 15:57
To make things a bit clearer, I've considered creating a sort of status constructus where a word shifts into the dative case when it is possessed, but is that realistic in any way, shape or form?
You can always analyse that there are two different cases that are just homonymic.
Like the genitive & locative in some of the :lat: declensions. I'd give that a thumbs up.

Historically, I don't find it intuitive that the dative accuires genitive meanings, but of course the morphemes can have distinct origins and just collapse by accident.
From a (P)IE quick'n'dirty comparison, :lat: , :grk:, Sanskrit (if I remember rightly), and Slavic languages demonstrate a 'Dative of Possession', but it's the possessor that's put into the Dative Case, not the noun that's possessed.

:wat:

From a (P)IE perspective, this would definitely be an innovation of (insert) case usage.

Re: Modern Hittite lang: realistic?

Posted: 09 May 2018 15:28
by eldin raigmore
Omzinesý wrote:
09 May 2018 12:08
Pāṇini wrote:
06 May 2018 15:57
To make things a bit clearer, I've considered creating a sort of status constructus where a word shifts into the dative case when it is possessed, but is that realistic in any way, shape or form?
You can always analyse that there are two different cases that are just homonymic.
Historically, I don't find it intuitive that the dative accuires genitive meanings, but of course the morphemes can have distinct origins and just collapse by accident.
To have dative acquire genitive-of-possessor meanings (or vice versa), seems to me much likelier than to have dative acquire construct-state meaning or vice-versa. Recipients tend to become possessors.

Another possibility; have allative acquire dative-of-recipient meanings, while in parallel, locative or adesssive acquires genitive-of-possessor meanings. This might go along with having the agent of ditransitive verbs being in the ablative.

Whatever you decide to do is satisfactory if _you_ are satisfied.

——————————

Lambuzhao and Omzinesy said similar things, while I was typing.

Re: Modern Hittite lang: realistic?

Posted: 09 May 2018 18:58
by KaiTheHomoSapien
Just remember that case labels are only descriptions of their most general functions: cases aren't totally monolithic; there are often blurred lines between them and unexpected functions may arise as the language evolves (as well as various syncretisms in the forms).

But I love this idea because my conlang is heavily based on Hittite, and I agree that the Hittite case forms are a little lackluster [;)]

Re: Modern Hittite lang: realistic?

Posted: 11 May 2018 22:37
by Pāṇini
I find that I've pretty much decided on using the Hittite dative Balkan style as a "to x, y" dative of possession, as most of y'all suggested—it seems a bit more satisfying. Here's a short bit of text in Nasiǝl, using Aesop's famous The North Wind and the Sun:
Spoiler:
The North Wind and the Sun were disputing which was the stronger, when a traveler came along wrapped in a warm cloak. They agreed that the one who made the traveler take his cloak off should be considered stronger than the other. Then, the North Wind blew as hard as he could, but the more he blew the more closely did the traveler fold his cloak around him, and at last the North Wind gave up the attempt. Then the Sun shined out warmly, and immediately the traveler took off his cloak. And so the North Wind was obliged to confess that the Sun was the stronger of the two.

Voǝr Hüvanta nu Saveliya kui nakkin yesta sulloyer, kuvaǝf hocita anda tarpolan küǝrk salikat. Sane omoloyer sana hocitan silanna tarpolan zorlaǝz naǝkk yesǝz. Appa, Voǝr Hüvanta paroyat, pat hüvanta paroyat namma hocita apidda kürk sarǝtat namma, nu Voǝr Hüvanta pieşierat-at appişiaz. Appa, Saveliya ançin maişaşçiat, nu hüdoħ hocita tarpolan küǝrk silat. Nu Voǝr Hüvanta zorlǝtat paradeħoanna Saveliya nakkin yesta.

northern-NOM wind-NOM and sun-NOM who-NOM strong-ACC be-3p-PAST argue-3p-PLUR-PAST, when traveler-NOM in garment-ACC fur-DAT came.near-3p-PAST

3p-PLUR-NOM agree-3p-PLUR-PAST 3p-ANI-NOM traveler-ACC remove-INF garment-ACC force-3p-PRES strong-NOM be-3p-PRES

then, northern-NOM wind-NOM blow-3p-PAST, but wind-NOM blow-3p-PAST more traveler-NOM with fur-ACC wrap-3p-MED-PAST more, and northern-NOM wind-NOM give.up-3p-PAST—3p-INA-ACC in the end

then, sun-NOM hot-ACC shine-3p-PAST, and immediately traveler-NOM garment-ACC fur-DAT remove-3p-PAST
and northern-NOM wind-NOM compel-3p-MED-PAST confess-INF sun-NOM strong-ACC be-3p-PAST
The animate and inanimate genders have fallen into each other, as had already started during the written Hittite period. Among the major sound changes, long vowels have shifted and word final -i has turned into a schwa and metathesized into the preceding syllable. Cappadocian also has been influenced by (quite naturally) Turkish and Byzantine Greek as far as loanwords go. I've been looking at creating an Arabic orthography but I'll admit I don't know enough about the abjad to make something very good—although Nasiǝl's phonology is broadly similar to Azeri. Thoughts?

Re: Modern Hittite lang: realistic?

Posted: 16 May 2018 20:05
by Omzinesý
From which forms construct states / possessed cases usually develop?

In Arabic, I think, it's just old cases suffixes, gender suffixes, and such, that have been left when NP-final affixes have been dropped off.

Re: Modern Hittite lang: realistic?

Posted: 18 May 2018 01:28
by qwed117
The system could make sense as a whole reverse-Suffixaufnahme, but not sure if it would be realistic.