Aesthetic license

I'm going to change the course of this project. Up until now, I've been talking about a language which is to be used as a tool to extend the benefits of Latin and Greek to the mass population. This has left me feeling somewhat constrained from making decisions that are simply for aesthetic purposes.

But I want to be able to use the language for my own enjoyment and my study of Latin and Greek, and as such, I'll deviate from making decisions based on what may be logical or simple. In the last post, I talked about a way to make adjectives plural, and here, I'd like to complicate the derivation of certain Greek-derived neuter words.

Following the scheme previously discussed, Greek 3rd declension neuter nouns would come into Vulgare as the following: onomate, hydrate, haemate, stigmate, stomate. Yet in Greek, the nominative and accusative are the same - the shortened forms onoma, hydra, haema, stigma, and stoma. It's these shortened forms that I would like to incorporate into Vulgare over the form derived from the genitive.

Playing with plurals

I want to try something just for aesthetics. Now this may not be completely straightforward, and may detract from the stated goal of making a language that is utilizable, but I'll take some artistic license.

Previously, we discussed producing plurals simply by adding an -s to the end of a word, as in the following:

rosa -> rosas - roses

dono -> donos - gifts

principe -> principes - princes

corde -> cordes - hearts

manu -> manus - hands

Now note that the plural is pretty much the same as the actual Latin plural accusative for most forms except in the case of corde which is a neuter noun and would become corda. It's true that all nouns derived from neuter Latin ones will have artificial plurals, like nomines, crures, genus, or operes instead of nomina, crura, genua, or opera. But that's okay for this conlang.

Now if adjectives are also to agree with nouns based on number, one would have terms like the following:

bono puero

bona filla

bonos pueros

bonas fillas

longos nomines

breves crures

Personally, I don't like the repetition of the -s sound in the plural phrases - I feel it gets in the way of the flow and is clumsy. Also, I personally don't like having to deal with grammatical gender, remembering the gender of ambiguous words like nomine or crure.

What I'm proposing is a way to deal with adjectives that would get rid of the -s repetition and having to worry about gender - by using the singular and plural neuter forms for all adjectives. The singular form often may end in -o or -e; the plurals of adjectives could possibly transforms those endings to -a or -ia respectively. Thus one would get forms like the following:

bono puero

bona pueros

longa nomines

brevia crures

Now for words that are conspicuously feminine-sounding like filla, I would suggest using bona over bono even in the singular for aesthetic purposes. But ambiguously feminine nouns like parte may use the -o scheme:

bona filla

bona fillas

longo parte

longa partes

breve parte

brevia partes

I know I'm not being too clear - I'm writing in a hurry. With the scheme above, there wouldn't be a need for grammatical gender - adjectives would only have to agree in number except if the singular noun ends in -a. These adjectives would all end in vowels for aural purposes.

So to recap my poorly explained rules:

Nouns: form a plural by adding -s

Adjectives: form a plural by the following

-o -> -a for adjectives derived from 1st/2nd declension Latin adjectives.

-a -> -a (no change) when derived from 1st/2nd declension Latin adjectives and when the noun being modified ends in -a or is conspicuously feminine

-e -> -ia for adjectives derived from 3rd declension Latin adjectives.

Translation thoughts

Two posts ago, I translated verse 30:22 of the Qur'an, but the form that I initially came upon was similar to the following (I've put the main changes in bold):

Et ex signos Ei sunt genese caelorum et geae cae variatione glossarum et colorum hymum - ecce, in eceino sunt signos ad tos scientes.

Newer translation: Et ex signos Ei sunt genese de caelos et gea cae variatione de glossas et colores vestri - ecce, in eceino sunt signos ad scientes.

The main differences concern the plural genitive as well as the definite article. The plural genitive is definitely a fancy feature, but in the translation above, it seemed to obscure the meaning of the Latin and Greek-origin words. In particular, the use of the plural genitive may not help in a user's attempt to increase her classical vocabulary - it makes reading a little unnecessarily complex. Also, I wonder how much the plural genitive adds to a user's ability to access old Latin texts - doing away with it in Vulgare may be a beneficial trade-off.

Having a genitive may be beneficial for single singular words, but for plurals or complex phrases that have more than one argument, the preposition de may be the best. I think it is well recognizable by people with a background in romance languages and simplifies the grammar. Instead of the plural genitive, it may be a good idea to include a simple optional accusative case into the grammar for singular words, one which would just add -m to the end of singular words (with vowel changes if necessary). Here's what I'm thinking:

glossa -> glossam

caelo -> caelum (note vowel change)

colore -> colorem

manu -> manum

It's simple and may help a lot in the access of real Latin. There wouldn't be any specific plural accusative. It's already the form of any word that ends with -s.

Now the last point was the issue of the definite article, which I found very distracting. Although it's very common in classical Greek, I think it's use in Vulgare should be limited. All nouns should be contextual as to whether they are definite or indefinite. If one really wants to specify, one can then use markers as the definite or indefinite article.

From Greek and Latin

This is a quote from Luke when Christ compares the Kingdom of God to a mustard seed that sprouts forth and becomes a giving tree (Luke 13:19). The verse already exists in both Greek and Latin, which will make translation fairly easy. I'll do a direct translation from both languages such that the comparisons can be seen. Then I'll combine them into a third possible translation with roots from both languages.

Greek - ομοια εστιν κοκκω σιναπεως ον λαβων ανθρωπος εβαλεν εις κηπον εαυτου και ηυξησεν και εγενετο εις δενδρον μεγα και τα πετεινα του ουρανου κατεσκηνωσεν εν τοις κλαδοις αυτου

Vulgare 1 - homoea est ad cocco sinapis ho, echente lambanomeno, anthrope e-balat eis cepo heauti cae e-auxesat cae e-genat eis dendro megalo cae peteinos urani e-catascenosant in clades auti.

Latin - simile est grano sinapis quod acceptum homo misit in hortum suum et crevit et factum est in arborem magnam et volucres caeli requieverunt in ramis eius.

Vulgare 2 - simile est ad grano sinapis quo, accepto, homine misit eis horto suo et crevit et facto fuit eis arbore magna et volucres caeli requievent in rames ei.

There are probably a number of mistakes above. Interestingly, the exercise came up with the same word for the genitive of mustard - sinapis. Furthermore, I used the preposition eis in the Latin translation to get the sense of movement into which is lost when one loses the Latin accusative case. The Greek original uses the aorist form for all the verbs, which I tried to maintain. However, since Vulgare doesn't have an aorist active participle, I used echente lambanomeno, having taken, which may seem very bulky. Also, having the recurrent past marker e- seems unnecessary if the context is known, so they may not be necessary.

Here's another translation which may mix elements of the Greek and the Latin:

Homoea est ad grano sinapis quo, accepto, anthrope misit eis cepo suo cae auxesat cae genat eis dendro magno cae volucres urani catascenosant in clades ei.

Translation exercise

It seems like a rite of passage for conlangers to translate the Babel verses of Genesis. But I'd like to start experimenting with a translation of verse 30:22 of the Qur'an.

Et ex signos Ei sunt genese de caelos et gea cae variatione de glossas et colores vestri - ecce, in eceino sunt signos ad scientes.

And among His signs are the creation of the heavens and the earth and the variation of your languages and colors. Surely in that are signs for those who know. (Q30:22)

There are probably a few mistakes I'd have to hammer out. But it's a start.

Various indicative verb forms

As Vulgare currently stands, verbs have been simplified to express aspect and not tense. The imperfect form expresses an event that is continuing, which may be in the present time, sometime in the past, or sometime in the future. In order to express different concepts, Vulgare would use the sentence context or various helper verbs and participles. In order to choose these forms, I believe it beneficial to see the evolution of verbs in Latin's offspring languages like Spanish and French, as well as Classical Greek's modern offspring. In this post, I'll go through the indicative tenses one by one.

Active Tenses:

Present Tense

The present tense expresses an action which is continuing and is thus imperfect. This is the most basic verb form. Now if someone wants to stress the fact that the action is present progressive, one can use the verb esse (to be) + the active participle.

I am hearing - audio or sum audiente

Past Imperfect

The past imperfect tense expresses an action progressing in the past but not necessarily completed. The sentence "I was loving" would be expressed in Latin as amabam and in greek as ephiloun. Now this could be expressed in Vulgare using the perfect form of esse + the active participle. It could also be expressed by incorporating the Greek prefix e- which expresses past events.

I was hearing - e-audio or fui audiente

Future

In romance languages, the future tense of Latin was dropped and a new construction developed using the infinitive + habere (to hold, have). Thus you have the French future verai from ver (to see) + ai (I have) = I hold to seeing, I will see. Also, modern languages often use the helping verb ire (to go) + the infinitive. Either forms would work, but if contracting, I would suggest using an apostrophe to better represent the origin of the construct.

I will hear - io/habeo audire or audir'eo where audir'eo = audire + habeo

I'm dropping the Latin active future participle for the following:

auditurus (L.) --> iente/habente audire or audir'ente

Present Perfect

This tense shows that a verb has been currently completed, and although the perfective form is sufficient to express this, one may also want a simpler way to express this concept that corresponds to the developments in modern Romance languages and modern Greek. Over time, the Latin perfect participle transitioned into a passive participle, but it still retained part of its original role when complexed with the verb habere (to have). In French, for instance, saying "J'ai vu la fille" literally meant "I hold the girl seen." I believe modern Greek also has this development using have - echo. This can be easily incorporated into Vulgare.

I have heard - audavi or habeo/echo audito

The perfect participle can be formed as the following structure:

habente/echente audito

Pluperfect

This can be formed in a couple of ways paralleling forms above:

I had heard - e-audavi or habui audito

Future Perfect

You may get the drift. There are more options than the one below:

I will have heard - haber'eo audito

Passive:

Present

We have a conjugation for passive verbs, but one can also use the passive participle.

I am heard - audior or sum audito

Past Imperfect

I was heard - e-audior or fui audito

Future

I will be heard - io/habeo esse audito or ess'eo audito

Perfect

For the perfect forms, we may need a perfect participle of the verb esse (to be), maybe something as simple as eta/o. Thus one comes upon the following.

I have been heard - habeo/echo eto audito

Since the Latin perfect participle transitioned into a present passive participle, as we have in Vulgare, the new perfect participle would be made similar to the formation above. 

auditus (L.) --> habente/echente eto audito

Pluperfect

I had been heard - habui eto audito

Future Perfect

I will have been heard - haber'eo eto audito

There may be a few kinks in the schema above. Nothing's final.

Keeping the Greek Aorist

So I've been thinking about the verb situation a bit and got some advice from the conlang list too. As I mentioned before, the goal of Vulgare is to simplify Latin grammar to make it accessible, while maintaining enough complexity such that users may be able to "get by" if they were to read an actual Latin text. The same consideration exists for Greek vocabulary.

Vulgare thus maintains verb number and person, concepts inherent to Latin and Greek. I also kept a distinction between the imperfect and the perfect so that users will know the difference various Latin verb forms. Now, Greek verbs have a third root that I'd also like to maintain - the aorist, which is technically neither imperfect or perfect. Even modern Greek maintains the aorist root form, so I feel it's a concept that users should be familiar with. But how can it be incorporated into the language with Latin-based verbs that don't have an aorist? I don't really feel like creating a new aorist form for those verbs, so maybe users would just have to learn that some verbs have aorist forms and some verbs don't, which I don't believe would be a problem because the aorist form would probably not be used so much overall. Here's what I'm currently thinking:

For the (Latin-derived) verb amare - to love

Imperfect: amo, amas, amat, amamus, amatis, amant

Perfect: amavi, amavis, amavit, amavimus, amavitis, amavent

No Aorist

Imperative: ama

Active Participle: amante

Passive Participle: amata/o

Full principle parts (amo, amare, amavi, amata)

For the (Greek-derived) verb philere - to love

Imperfect: philo, philes, philet, philemus, philetis, philent

Perfect: pephileci, pephilecis, pephilecit, pephilecimus, pephilecitis, pephilecent

Aorist: philesa (or ephilesa), philesas, philesat, philesamus, philesatis, philesant

Imperative: phile (which will be homographic with the word for friend)

Active Participle: philente

Passive Participle: philomena/o

Full principle parts (philo, philere, pephileci/philesa, philomena)

So users would be just required to learn the principle parts of any verb with the addition of the aorist form if it's a Greek-derived verb. I'm not sure if the aorist form should have the initial e- attached to it. I was thinking of possibly having that initial e- as a generalized tense marker to indicate past tense (and I seem to remember that Peano suggested the same idea in his Latino Sine Flexione).

No it's all fine and good to have specified aspects (imperfect, perfect, and aorist), but there are more tenses than that (the future, for instance). I'll deal with that in my next post.

u/v and i/j

My intention is that there would be no difference between the letters v and u and i and j. I'm only using one or the other out of convention and visual harmony, but in Vulgare (or possibly Uulgare if one pleases), there would be no difference. The sounds would be pronounced according to the classical method, as vowels or vowel approximates.

Prepositions

We haven't discussed prepositions as of yet. They're not too difficult, since they are not declined and thus can be taken directly. Yet certain prepositions in Latin and Greek can have different meanings based on the case of the nouns they govern, and I'm not sure how to maintain that distinction. I'll deal with that later.

ab - from

ad - to

amphi - around, about, concerning

ana - up, throughout

ante - before

anti - instead of, in the place of

apo - from, away from

apud - by, before

cata - down from, against, according to, throughout

circa - about

circum - around

cis - this side of

clam - unknown to

coram - in the presence of

contra - against

cum - with

de - down from, from, of

dia - through, by means of, on account of, because of

eis - into

erga - towards (of relation)

ex - out of, from

extra - outside

epi - upon, on, onto, in the time of

hyper - beyond, above, on behalf of

hypo - under, subject to, by

in, en - into, in, at

infra - below

inter - between

intra - within

iuxta - close to

meta - with, after

ob - in front of

palam - in the presence of

para - beside, beyond, contrary to

penes - in the power of

per - through

peri - around, about, concerning

pone - behind

post - behind, after

prae - in front of

praeter - past, beyond

pro - before, in front of, rather than

procul - far from

prope - near

propter - near, because of

pros - to, towards, near

secundum - following on

simul - together with

sine - without

sub - under

subter - under

super - over, above

supra - over

syn - in the company of

tenus - as far as

trans - across

versus - towards

ultra - beyond

usque - right up to

More Greek-based verbs: past participle

Now I mentioned a way to add Greek verbs into the mix a few posts ago. Now, the verbs derived from Latin have four principle parts that I intend users will memorize: the imperfect, the infinitive, the perfect, and the passive participle. I've only mentioned my thoughts concerning the indicative and the perfect forms (which are by no means set), but I wanted to mention also the passive participle which can be derived directly from the Greek present perfect participle.

Compare the four principle parts of:

the Greek-origin verb "to stop:" pavo, pavere, epausi (or pepauci), and pavomena/o

the Latin-origin verb "to love:" amo, amare, amavi, and amata/o

Long time, no post

Got caught up in med school for the past few months. Hopefully I can start up something again.