Vethari: Difference between revisions

Line 231:

* Because of Vethari being an Agentive-Default language, Agentive arguments are marked on transitive clauses, while the object is in the Patientive. When on intransitive clauses, the subject may be on either cases basing on volition. If it is Intentional/Not emotionally affected, it is marked with the Agentive case, otherwise, if unintentional or/and emotionally affected, it is marked with the Patientive case. For example: "She died" would be marked with the Agentive case, while "died her" would mean that it was unintentional and it is marked with the Patientive Case. Instead of having specific volitional affixes or I fixes to mark emotions/affection or even polypersonal agreement, it has two types for each clause argument.

==== Volitional Verbs ====

There are some verb pairs that distinguish volition, some only used with Agentive subjects and others only with Patientive subjects. For example: Nimoku 'to see' (only Agentive) and Pasoku 'to look' (only patientive). The same way with English on the examples, with 'to see' being only intentional and 'to look' being unintentional. Other notable example is Dyirauku 'to hear' (only Agentive) and Misubuku 'to listen' (only Patientive). Although if the argument, in theory, has to be in the other case, it’s not possible to change, as they function as defective verbs, because they can’t change their cases.

This might create confusion with volitional intransitive verbs, for example sometimes saying something was on purpose, when it’s only because there is not the option to change the subject form. Instead of this, usually people try changing the verb for one that can change the subject.

These verbs evolved from Proto-Vethari, where it had quirky subjects. Because it was Nominative-Accusative, those subjects started dominating all the verbs, dividing them in two, for different cases; Agentive and Patientive. Because of being all affixes and the subject being altogether with the verb root, it started changing along the centuries, resulting in an Active-Stative language. The subjects then started turning into affixes to put with the verb root. Because back then, the verb could only represent the Nominative, the quirky subjects started to appear to change them into other cases. Then, the verbs stopped demonstrating the case, leaving lots of verbs with the same meaning, forming the pairs. Instead of verbs, who started changing for the cases were the subjects, dividing them into the two known classes: Agentive and Patientive.

In Proto-Vethari, verbs declined to volition, so, anyways, even being transitive, verbs could be marked as intentional or unintentional, knowing that currently only intransitive verbs can do that. However, those verbs that marked volition including on the infinitive, evolved into the current verb pairs that only have one subject case.

==== Irregular Verbs ====

@@ Line 231: / Line 231: @@
 * Because of Vethari being an Agentive-Default language, Agentive arguments are marked on transitive clauses, while the object is in the Patientive. When on intransitive clauses, the subject may be on either cases basing on volition. If it is Intentional/Not emotionally affected, it is marked with the Agentive case, otherwise, if unintentional or/and emotionally affected, it is marked with the Patientive case. For example: "She died" would be marked with the Agentive case, while "died her" would mean that it was unintentional and it is marked with the Patientive Case. Instead of having specific volitional affixes or I fixes to mark emotions/affection or even polypersonal agreement, it has two types for each clause argument.
 ==== Volitional Verbs ====
- There are some verb pairs that distinguish volition, some only used with Agentive subjects and others only with Patientive subjects. For example: Nimoku 'to see' (only Agentive) and Pasoku 'to look' (only patientive). The same way with English on the examples, with 'to see' being only intentional and 'to look' being unintentional. Other notable example is Dyirauku 'to hear' (only Agentive) and Misubuku 'to listen' (only Patientive). Although if the argument, in theory, has to be in the other case, it’s not possible to change, as they function as defective verbs, because they can’t change their cases.
+There are some verb pairs that distinguish volition, some only used with Agentive subjects and others only with Patientive subjects. For example: Nimoku 'to see' (only Agentive) and Pasoku 'to look' (only patientive). The same way with English on the examples, with 'to see' being only intentional and 'to look' being unintentional. Other notable example is Dyirauku 'to hear' (only Agentive) and Misubuku 'to listen' (only Patientive). Although if the argument, in theory, has to be in the other case, it’s not possible to change, as they function as defective verbs, because they can’t change their cases.
- This might create confusion with volitional intransitive verbs, for example sometimes saying something was on purpose, when it’s only because there is not the option to change the subject form. Instead of this, usually people try changing the verb for one that can change the subject.
+This might create confusion with volitional intransitive verbs, for example sometimes saying something was on purpose, when it’s only because there is not the option to change the subject form. Instead of this, usually people try changing the verb for one that can change the subject.
- These verbs evolved from Proto-Vethari, where it had quirky subjects. Because it was Nominative-Accusative, those subjects started dominating all the verbs, dividing them in two, for different cases; Agentive and Patientive. Because of being all affixes and the subject being altogether with the verb root, it started changing along the centuries, resulting in an Active-Stative language. The subjects then started turning into affixes to put with the verb root. Because back then, the verb could only represent the Nominative, the quirky subjects started to appear to change them into other cases. Then, the verbs stopped demonstrating the case, leaving lots of verbs with the same meaning, forming the pairs. Instead of verbs, who started changing for the cases were the subjects, dividing them into the two known classes: Agentive and Patientive.
+These verbs evolved from Proto-Vethari, where it had quirky subjects. Because it was Nominative-Accusative, those subjects started dominating all the verbs, dividing them in two, for different cases; Agentive and Patientive. Because of being all affixes and the subject being altogether with the verb root, it started changing along the centuries, resulting in an Active-Stative language. The subjects then started turning into affixes to put with the verb root. Because back then, the verb could only represent the Nominative, the quirky subjects started to appear to change them into other cases. Then, the verbs stopped demonstrating the case, leaving lots of verbs with the same meaning, forming the pairs. Instead of verbs, who started changing for the cases were the subjects, dividing them into the two known classes: Agentive and Patientive.
+In Proto-Vethari, verbs declined to volition, so, anyways, even being transitive, verbs could be marked as intentional or unintentional, knowing that currently only intransitive verbs can do that. However, those verbs that marked volition including on the infinitive, evolved into the current verb pairs that only have one subject case.
- In Proto-Vethari, verbs declined to volition, so, anyways, even being transitive, verbs could be marked as intentional or unintentional, knowing that currently only intransitive verbs can do that. However, those verbs that marked volition including on the infinitive, evolved into the current verb pairs that only have one subject case.
 ==== Irregular Verbs ====