Complementiser vs relativiser

A forum for translations, translation challenges etc. Good place to increase your conlang's vocabulary.
Iyionaku
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1662
Joined: 25 May 2014 14:17

Re: Complementiser vs relativiser

Post by Iyionaku » 28 Sep 2016 03:15

:con: Yélian

(1) Quinrai pi Jack yicratet u'pilat.
[ˈkinraɪ̯ pi t͡ʃɛk ɕiˈkratət ʊˈpilɐt]
know-1SG that Jack PST-build-3SG DEF.INAN-house

(2) Quinrai pi vat bit u'pilat der Jack yicratet.
[ˈkinraɪ̯ pɪ vɐ̆bɪt ʊˈpilɐt dɛɾ t͡ʃɛk ɕiˈkratət]
know-1SG that DEM be.3SG.ANIM DEF.INAN-house REL Jack PST-build-3SG

I am not sure if der is the right relative pronoun; could also be vit. But I cannot access my grammar file at the moment. The usage of relative pronouns depends on the function of the relative clause (i.e. how it determines a noun closer).

Another grammar annotation: Normally, the copula form for 3SG.INAN is but. However, the phrase vat bit is a fixed expression (actually bit is used for 3SG.ANIM).
Wipe the glass. This is the usual way to start, even in the days, day and night, only a happy one.

Iyionaku
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1662
Joined: 25 May 2014 14:17

Re: Complementiser vs relativiser

Post by Iyionaku » 28 Sep 2016 03:23

:con: Caelian

(1) Rar kyungral viz Tëssek vportungen sikütkih.
[raɾ kʲʊŋˈral vɪs tʰəˈʃɛk p̪ɔrtʰʊˈŋɛn ʒiˈkʰʏtˈkʰih]
1SG.NOM know.1SG that Jack.NOM house.ACC PST-build.3SG>3SG

(2) Rar kyungral viz Dyong vportowyen, Tëssek töng sikütkih, byäis.
[raɾ kʲʊŋˈral vɪs dʲɔŋ p̪ɔrtʰɔˈʋɛn tʰəˈʃɛk tʰœŋ ʒikʰʏtˈkʰih bʲæɪ̯ʃ]
1SG.NOM know.1SG that DEM.MASC.NOM house.ESS Jack.NOM REL.ACC PST-build.3SG>3SG COP.3SG>3SG
Wipe the glass. This is the usual way to start, even in the days, day and night, only a happy one.

Iyionaku
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1662
Joined: 25 May 2014 14:17

Re: Complementiser vs relativiser

Post by Iyionaku » 28 Sep 2016 03:30

:con: Anto

(1) Da kene da Jeke hute machama ton.
[taː ˈkʰɛnɛ taː ˈt͡ʃɛkʰɛ ˈhutʰɛ ˈmaχama tʰɔn]
1SG know 1SG Jack house build-PST 3.ANIM

(2) Da kene da: He hute de Jeke machama ton macha.
[taː kʰɛnɛ taː hɛ ˈhutʰɛ tɛ ˈt͡ʃɛkʰɛ ˈmaχama tʰɔn ˈmaχa]
1SG know 1SG DEM.PROX house PART_REL{1} Jack build-PST 3.ANIM PART_REL{2}
Wipe the glass. This is the usual way to start, even in the days, day and night, only a happy one.

Iyionaku
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1662
Joined: 25 May 2014 14:17

Re: Complementiser vs relativiser

Post by Iyionaku » 28 Sep 2016 03:41

:con: Bath'aso

Gradeb khek madrusht Tshekz bsħogrtshok.
[ˈgʁadɛb kʰɛk mɑˈdruʂt ͡tʂɛkz̥ ˈbsˤɔgʁ̩͡tʂɔk]
know=1SG.ABS PERF build Jack-ERG house-ABS

Gradeb zhuts bsħogrtshok, medzhis shext madrusht Tshekz.
[ˈgʁadɛb ʐut͡s ˈbsˤɔgʁ̩͡tʂɔk, ˈmɛ͡dʐis ʂɛxt mɑˈdruʂt ͡tʂɛkz̥]
know=1SG.ABS CONT house.ABS, 3SG.ABS-also TERM build Jack-ERG

The suffix -is/us (normally accompanyment, "also", "and") here serves as some kind of marker that the personal pronoun medzh (3SG) refers back to the house, and not to something else. I still have not found the perfect solution for relative clauses in this language: Expression via different word order (and/or aspect particles, OVS instead of the normal VSO) seems fine, but has to be fixed more in detail yet. Maybe I'll keep it.
Wipe the glass. This is the usual way to start, even in the days, day and night, only a happy one.

Iyionaku
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1662
Joined: 25 May 2014 14:17

Re: Complementiser vs relativiser

Post by Iyionaku » 28 Sep 2016 14:36

:con: Paatherye

ओकु वैठज़ फि ओज़ मे JACK तिऌपे षेकू ठोसे धमु.
Ēku waythas phi tilpe șekū Jacku thēse dhame.

[ˈeːku ˈwaɪ̯tʰas pʰi ˈtilpe ˈʒekuː d͡ʒaku ˈtʰeːze ˈθame]
1SG.NOM know.1SG that AUX.PST.3SG.MASC build.PP Jack DEM.MASC.ACC house.ACC

ओकु वैठज़ फि ओज़ मे JACK तिऌपे षेकू ठो धमु.
Ēku waythas phi ēs me Jacku tilpe șekū thē dhamu.

[ˈeːku ˈwaɪ̯tʰas pʰi eːs me d͡ʒaku ˈtilpe ˈʒekuː ˈtʰeː ˈθamu]
1SG.NOM know.1SG that COP.3SG.MASC DEF.MASC.NOM Jack.NOM AUX.PST.3SG.MASC build.PP REL.INAN.MASC.ACC house.NOM
Wipe the glass. This is the usual way to start, even in the days, day and night, only a happy one.

kaleissin
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 8
Joined: 29 Apr 2015 14:51

Re: Complementiser vs relativiser

Post by kaleissin » 28 Sep 2016 23:00

Imralu wrote: :eng:
(1) I know that Jack built the house.
(2) I know that that's the house that Jack built.
Here's a different way:

Substituting "hold" for build (gap in the lexicon) and "cup" for house (because holding a house seems a bit nonsensical...):

:con: Taruven

(1) vyššah Džakan senra fōaþ.
/ˈvyʃːɑh ˈdžɑkɑn ˈsenra ˈfuːɑθ/
1s.SUBJ.know.COMP Jack hold.PST cup-OBJ

(2) vyššah ry fōið senryiðra Džakan talið.
/ˈvyʃːɑh ry ˈfuːið ˈsenryiðrɑ ˈdžɑkɑn ˈtɑlið/
1s.SUBJ.know.COMP DEM.SG cup-DAT hold-RES-DAT-PST Jack.SUBJ REL-DAT

vyššah is of a separate class of verbs known as complemented verbs, where the complementizer is implicit. RES stands for resumptive pronoun, in a relativized object it is incorporated into the verb of the relative clause. The same verb agrees in case with the head, as does the relative marker. The head, fōið, is in the dative because a complemented verb prefers full clauses as arguments, not phrases. Pharses take the dative instead of object-marking. There's no copula and no articles.

The following alternate orders of 1) are possible:

vyššah Džakan fōaþ senra.
vyššah senra Džakan fōaþ.
vyššah senra fōaþ Džakan.
vyššah fōaþ senra Džakan.
vyššah fōaþ Džakan senra.
Džakan senra fōaþ vyššah.
Džakan fōaþ senra vyššah.
senra Džakan fōaþ vyššah.
senra fōaþ Džakan vyššah.
fōaþ senra Džakan vyššah.
fōaþ Džakan senra vyššah.


Note that vyššah cannot break up the inner clause.

There are much fewer possibilities for 2). senryra Džakan talið cannot change order, but if we move the entire relativized clause in front of the cup, talið is unnecessary and drops away:

vyššah ry senryiðra Džakan fōið.

vyššah can move to the end, so we also have:

ry senryiðra Džakan fōið vyššah.
ry fōið senryiðra Džakan talið vyššah.


ry can move with the cup:

senryiðra Džakan ry fōið vyššah.

If ry moves to the "wrong" side of fōið it must also agree:

fōið ryið senryiðra Džakan talið vyššah.

It can move further away...

fōið senryiðra Džakan talið ryið vyššah.

.. but cannot leave the side of vyššah that fōið is on.

Relative clauses have the most restricted ordering of all clauses in Taruven.

User avatar
Imralu
roman
roman
Posts: 895
Joined: 17 Nov 2013 22:32

Re: Complementiser vs relativiser

Post by Imralu » 26 Jun 2017 03:50

:tan: Swahili:

(1) Ninajua kwamba Jack alijenga nyumba.
ni-na-ju-a kwamba Jack a-li-jeng-a nyumba
1s-PRES-know-Ö C Jack 3s.ANIM-PST-build-Ö house(CL9)
I know that Jack built the house.

(2a) Ninajua kwamba ile ni nyumba ambayo Jack alijenga.
ni-na-ju-a kwamba i-le ni nyumba amba-yo Jack a-li-jeng-a
1s-PRES-know-Ö C CL9-DEM.DIST COP house(CL9) REL-REL.CL9 Jack 3s.ANIM-PST-build-Ö
I know that that's the house that Jack built.

(2a) Ninajua kwamba ile ni nyumba aliyojenga Jack.
ni-na-ju-a kwamba i-le ni nyumba Jack a-li-yo-jeng-a
1s-PRES-know-Ö C CL9-DEM.DIST COP house(CL9) 3s.ANIM-PST-REL.CL9-build-Ö Jack
I know that that's the house that Jack built.
Glossing Abbreviations: COMP = comparative, C = complementiser, ACS / ICS = accessible / inaccessible, GDV = gerundive, SPEC / NSPC = specific / non-specific, AG = agent, E = entity (person, animal, thing)
________
MY MUSIC

User avatar
Tuyono
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 139
Joined: 06 Aug 2017 15:09

Re: Complementiser vs relativiser

Post by Tuyono » 21 Jul 2018 19:24

Źilaa Ruńu:

uńjiu nguha ruuśihe źek leen eeźi.
know.IPF-1SG C build.PFV.3SG Jack.NOM house.ACC DIST-INAN.ACC
I know that Jack built the house.

uńjiu nguha eeźi mi leen ei ruuśihe ĺaa źek.
know.IPF-1SG C DIST-INAN.ACC COP.IPF.3SG house.NOM REL build.PFV.3SG 3.INAN.ACC Jack.NOM
I know that that's the house that Jack built.

User avatar
eldin raigmore
korean
korean
Posts: 6387
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 19:38
Location: SouthEast Michigan

Re: Complementiser vs relativiser

Post by eldin raigmore » 21 Jul 2018 23:10

I very much like this thread. I wish I could contribute already.

User avatar
Mándinrùh
hieroglyphic
hieroglyphic
Posts: 35
Joined: 21 Aug 2016 20:37
Location: New England

Re: Complementiser vs relativiser

Post by Mándinrùh » 22 Jul 2018 00:59

Image Ecclesiastical Atili:

Atili uses the same word (e) for both purposes. Previously, Atili had no single complementizer, so you would instead use the word "sol," which is a (now rarely-used) third-person pronoun for abstract nouns, alongside a subordinate clause beginning with the irrealis marker "ée." Purely by coincidence, the irrealis marker (which still survives to mark questions, hortatives, imperitives, and cohortatives) became homophonous with the relativizer "e" as a result of vowel degemination. When the use of the third-person pronouns fell out of favor, the word "sol" went away also (don't mix this up with the verb, leaving behind only the "e" to serve as a complementizer, thus:

1:
E Zóhan házo vah-ví-kun-su, i-jenzí-so.
C Jack house do-3;CLF(person)-3;CLF(container), 1-know-3;CLF(abstract)-PST
/e: 'zo.xan 'xa.zo vəx.'vi.kun.su ɪ.ɣɛn.'zi.so/
'I know that Jack built the house.'

2(a):
I-jenzí-so e nok kó-kun házo e Zóhan vah-ví-kun-su.
1-know-3;CLF(abstract) C this COP-3;CLF(container) REL Jack do-3;CLF(person)-3;CLF(container)-PST
/ɪ.ɣɛn.'zi.so e nok 'ko.kun 'xa.zo e 'zo.xan vəx.'vi.kun.su/
'I know that this is the house that Jack built.'

This second sentence sounds very stilted, though, since the use of the relative pronoun "nok" is dispreferred in a copular construction (some might even call it ungrammatical!). The following sentence is much better (but has no relativizer, so I give the above for completeness).

2(b):
I-jenzí-so e no-kázo vah-ví-kun-su Zóhan.
1-know-3;CLF(abstract) C this-house do-3;CLF(person)-3;CLF(container)-PST Jack
/ɪ.ɣɛn.'zi.so e no.'ka.zo vəx.'vi.kun.su 'zo.xan/
'I know that this house was built by Jack.'
Creator of Image Redentran
Creator of Image Bwángxùd
Creator of Image Atili
My website | My blog

User avatar
Dormouse559
moderator
moderator
Posts: 2818
Joined: 10 Nov 2012 20:52
Location: California

Re: Complementiser vs relativiser

Post by Dormouse559 » 22 Jul 2018 19:34

:con: Silvish

Jou sê qu' li Jack l' a battì la mêzo.
[ʑuˈsɛː kliˈ… la.baˈti la.mɛˈzo]
1S.NOM know.1S SBRD DEF-M.N jack 3S have.3S build-PST_PTCP DEF-ACC.F.C house.ACC

I know that Jack built the house.

Jou sê qu' l' e lla mêzo qu' l' a battî li Jack.
[ʑuˈsɛː klɛl.la.mɛˈzo kla.baˈtiː liˈ…]
1S.NOM know.1S SBRD 3S be.3S DEF-F.C house REL 3S have.3S build-PST_PTCP.F.C DEF-M.N jack

I know that that's the house that Jack built.

N = "noble" or human-associated gender
C = "common" or non-human-associated gender




I've glossed the complementizer as SBRD (subordinator) because I already use C for something else in my glosses. Like a lot of Romance languages, Silvish uses the same word in these sentences. It does use a different pronoun for the subject of a relative clause, though this distinction is often neutralized by vowel reduction.

User avatar
Reyzadren
greek
greek
Posts: 466
Joined: 14 May 2017 10:39
Contact:

Re: Complementiser vs relativiser

Post by Reyzadren » 26 Jul 2018 00:13

:con: griuskant (without the conscript)

aesk shira zhaed jaek daerka raib.
/'esk 'ʃira ʒed 'dʒek 'derka 'raib/
1SG know-V COMP Jack build-V house

aesk shira zhaed zhae az raib zhed jaek daerka.
/'esk 'ʃira ʒed 'ʒe azˤ 'raib ʒəd 'dʒek 'derka/
1SG know-V COMP that is house REL Jack build-V
Last edited by Reyzadren on 23 Oct 2018 23:59, edited 1 time in total.
Image Soundcloud Profile | Image griuskant conlang

User avatar
k1234567890y
runic
runic
Posts: 3080
Joined: 04 Jan 2014 04:47
Contact:

Re: Complementiser vs relativiser

Post by k1234567890y » 26 Jul 2018 06:58

:con: Mayato MKII

Mayato uses a gapped strategy with a prenominal relative clause, and no specific morphology or relativizer is used, which is similar to Japanese, Korean, and some Altaic languages.

Jaek dok duka ya kenu
Jaek dok ∅-duk-a ya ke-nu
Jack house 3.SG>3.G-build-PFV C 1.SG>3.SG-know

Ya Jaek duka dok e ya kenu
Ya Jaek ∅-duk-a dok e ya ke-nu
that Jack 3.SG>3.G-build-PFV house be.3.SG.PRES C 1.SG>3.SG-know

Btw, @Imralu , I have transported this translation to ConWorkShop: https://conworkshop.com/translation.php ... d7c6af8dff , as I feel it would be a good tester for subordinating clauses.
...

User avatar
Imralu
roman
roman
Posts: 895
Joined: 17 Nov 2013 22:32

Re: Complementiser vs relativiser

Post by Imralu » 31 Dec 2018 07:21

:con: Ngolu / Iliaqu

Mahu eni zuo kue ju Tieke xi mala.
known DAT.1S.ICS NOM.C create NOM.3S.DEF.ICS Jack ACC.3S.DEF.INAN house
I know that Jack built the house.

Mahu eni zuo nxu mala xuuo iza kue xi ju Tieke.
known DAT.1S.ICS NOM.C COP-NOM.3S.DEF.INAN house NOM.3S.DEF.INAN-DEM.3 PRED-REL create ACC.3S.DEF.INAN NOM.3S.DEF.ICS Jack
I know that that's the house that Jack built.

The complementiser in Ngolu declines according to case. In these sentences it's in the nominative because that is the case of the "known thing" used with the verbal mahu, with the "knower" in the dative.

The relative marker za is invariable and does not change for case and is thus not really a relative pronoun. Because of the lack of case marking on za, ngolu frequently uses resumptive pronouns in the relative clause, hence the xi in the second sentence. Although I said za is invariable, like all words that sit within verbal phrases, it can be marked with the predicate prefix i-, as in this sentence. This prefix indicates a continuation of the verbal phrase from the beginning of the sentence, indicating that the relative clause relates back to mala "house" in the verbal phrase and not the nominal phrase immediately before it. This is quite common as "heavier" phrases gravitate towards the end of the sentence in Ngolu. The relatively light subject xuuo has been brought before it and thus placed inside the verbal phrase so that it doesn't have to wait till right at the end, where it may also get misanalysed as belonging to the relative clause.
Glossing Abbreviations: COMP = comparative, C = complementiser, ACS / ICS = accessible / inaccessible, GDV = gerundive, SPEC / NSPC = specific / non-specific, AG = agent, E = entity (person, animal, thing)
________
MY MUSIC

User avatar
gestaltist
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1796
Joined: 11 Feb 2015 11:23

Re: Complementiser vs relativiser

Post by gestaltist » 18 Jan 2019 11:32

:con: īsmay

Sat eghem hǔjulu Yak dhālmub (ma).
"I know that Jack built the house."

Code: Select all

house	make\CONT	POSS=3sm=tall	Jack	know<1sm>\NPST.GNO	(1sm).
sat	eghem		ʕ=yad=yulu	Yâk	dhālmub			(ma)
Literally: "I know of Jack's building of the house.


Dal dhālmub (ma) linta sat ǔghem hǔjulu Yakal pak.
"I know that that's the house that Jack built."

Code: Select all

PROX.3sa	know<1sm>\NPST.GNO	(1sm)	EQ.CNJ=COORD	house	POSS=make\CONT	POSS=3sm=tall	Jack=COP	DEM.DIST.3sf
dal 		dhālmub			(ma)	lin=tâ		sat	ʕ=eghem		ʕ=yad=yulu	Yâk=l		pak
Literally: "I know this, which is that this is the house of Jack's building."


Īsmay uses supine forms created from the continuative form of the verb with the ergative-absolutive subject added as the possessor, which makes the glosses hard to parse. Since supines cannot be stacked, the second sentence breaks down the statement with an equative conjunction.

User avatar
Imralu
roman
roman
Posts: 895
Joined: 17 Nov 2013 22:32

Re: Complementiser vs relativiser

Post by Imralu » 18 Jan 2019 15:58

gestaltist wrote:
18 Jan 2019 11:32
Dal dhālmub (ma) linta sat ǔghem hǔjulu Yakal pak.
I hate how the font here can't handle ̌ properly :-(
Glossing Abbreviations: COMP = comparative, C = complementiser, ACS / ICS = accessible / inaccessible, GDV = gerundive, SPEC / NSPC = specific / non-specific, AG = agent, E = entity (person, animal, thing)
________
MY MUSIC

User avatar
Jackk
roman
roman
Posts: 954
Joined: 04 Aug 2012 13:08
Location: tamed.speaks.points

Re: Complementiser vs relativiser

Post by Jackk » 18 Jan 2019 18:25

Boral :con:

Jo saif (ig) Jacq costros y maison.
1s know-1s.prs.ind (comp) Jack build-pst.rmt def house
I know that Jack built the house.

Jo saif (ig) l'ig es y maison Jacq costroit.
1s know-1s.prs.ind (comp) def=dst be-3s.prs.ind def house Jack build-ptcp.pst
I know that that's the house that Jack built.
Eresse anga paris cur neduc, a san teonga.
The only thing more dangerous than doubt is certainty.

User avatar
gestaltist
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1796
Joined: 11 Feb 2015 11:23

Re: Complementiser vs relativiser

Post by gestaltist » 18 Jan 2019 22:18

Imralu wrote:
18 Jan 2019 15:58
gestaltist wrote:
18 Jan 2019 11:32
Dal dhālmub (ma) linta sat ǔghem hǔjulu Yakal pak.
I hate how the font here can't handle ̌ properly :-(
What do you mean exactly? It looks fine on my end (or I have lower standards than you...)

User avatar
Imralu
roman
roman
Posts: 895
Joined: 17 Nov 2013 22:32

Re: Complementiser vs relativiser

Post by Imralu » 19 Jan 2019 03:10

gestaltist wrote:
18 Jan 2019 22:18
Imralu wrote:
18 Jan 2019 15:58
gestaltist wrote:
18 Jan 2019 11:32
Dal dhālmub (ma) linta sat ǔghem hǔjulu Yakal pak.
I hate how the font here can't handle ̌ properly :-(
What do you mean exactly? It looks fine on my end (or I have lower standards than you...)
Image
Glossing Abbreviations: COMP = comparative, C = complementiser, ACS / ICS = accessible / inaccessible, GDV = gerundive, SPEC / NSPC = specific / non-specific, AG = agent, E = entity (person, animal, thing)
________
MY MUSIC

User avatar
gestaltist
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1796
Joined: 11 Feb 2015 11:23

Re: Complementiser vs relativiser

Post by gestaltist » 19 Jan 2019 20:21

Imralu wrote:
19 Jan 2019 03:10
gestaltist wrote:
18 Jan 2019 22:18
Imralu wrote:
18 Jan 2019 15:58
gestaltist wrote:
18 Jan 2019 11:32
Dal dhālmub (ma) linta sat ǔghem hǔjulu Yakal pak.
I hate how the font here can't handle ̌ properly :-(
What do you mean exactly? It looks fine on my end (or I have lower standards than you...)
Image
Oh wow. I wonder why that is. As I said, it looks as intended for me. I wonder how it looks for other people.

Post Reply