Save the last Svan & "sich zusammentelefonieren"
We had our last Fieldwork Course today, awwwwwww... no Svan elicitations anymore! :(
But in this last lesson, we collected some more data, which was quite interesting this time! And funny. ;)
Thogo wanted to know more about the negation in the language and Falko wanted to find out more about the word order, so we asked Nana for some sentences. Apparently, the standard negation particle is mām, which immediately precedes the negated verb. As we couldn't find anything (neither adverb nor noun nor pronoun) to fit inbetween mām and the main verb, we analyzed it as a prefix. This seemed a little weird to me — is direct adjacency really the only criterion for making it a suffix? Judging from a Georgian perspective, this does not seem right to me...
The question particle ma (perhaps a loan from Chinese 吗? ;)) always follows the finite verb. It seemed to be a clitic which is grammatically bound to the preceding verb but phonologically bound to the following word, if there is any. The test sentence was Mām xicnāl ma si. (Don't you laugh?), which both Thogo and Mr. Bickel understood as *masi at first. I said that this si is most likely just the 2nd person singular pronoun. Interestingly, it really did sound like [ˈmasi], with the stress on the question particle. Since I knew that Georgian stress is antepenultimate and it seemed likely that it's the same case in Svan, I wanted to have the sentence with a bisyllabic noun, and indeed: Mām icnāl ma Nana. (Doesn't Nana laugh?) was pronounced like [maːm ˈʔiʦnaːl ˈmanana].
We also wanted to know about the future. It seems there are two forms, one analytic, one synthetic. The analytic form makes use of an auxiliary verb, similar to English 'will' or German 'werden', and the infinitive of the main verb. To our amusement it was even phonetically similar to the German word, as in the sentence: Mi mɨxar mām xverde licnāl. (lit.: I tomorrow not will laugh.), in German this would be "werde" in this case. =)
The synthetic form is with a suffix –ni, which seems to come inbetween the present verb stem and the personal suffixes, if any (i.e., –d and –x in the plural), so "I will laugh" can be expressed both as Mi xverde licnāl. or Mi xvicnālni. — but as if that wouldn't be interesting enough, some verbs even have future stems! "To go", for example... whereas "I go." is realized as Mi esɣvri. (es- is a preverb in this case), "I will go." becomes Mi ɣvuri.. We already know, that [v] and [vu] might be allophones of either /v/ or (less likely) /vɨ/, so this is just the simple verbstem without the preverb! This reminded me of Russian, which is the exact mirror-image in this case (I'll take the 2nd person, which circumvents the /vɨ/-alternation):
But es– is not the only preverb working with ɣri, here. There is also an–, which changes the meaning from "go" to "come". Deictic imperfective preverbs! This also means that in the future tense, one cannot differenciate between "to come" and "to go"... at least not in this construction.
Only now I realised that the verb "to fall", which we had elicitated in one of our first lessons, might as well bear this future suffix –ni mentioned before. The infinitive is lɨšq'ed, but "I am falling" was translated by Nana as mi šq'vedni — note the ending! On the other hand, there is also ligvni (infinitive of "to cry") / mi xvigvni ("I am crying"). There the –ni is also present in the infinitive form. And in liq'lūni ("be afraid") / mi maq'lūni ("I am afraid") as well. Hmm... too bad the course is over... would be interesting to see how those suffixes work.
I also asked Nana how to say "I don't speak Svan" in Svan. Her answer was: Mi lušnud mām xvimbual. I added it to my collection.
- - - - - - - - - - - 8<- - - - - - - - - -
And now to something completely different: German!
Deswegen auch weiter auf Deutsch...
Julia sagte grad am Telefon, dass ihr Vater oft das Wort "sich zusammentelefonieren" benutzt, im Sinne von "telefonieren" oder "sich gegenseitig anrufen". Fand ich lustig, und Julia auch, weil man das doch gar nicht sagt. Ich hab's jedenfalls noch nie so gehört. Deswegen hab ich mal gegoogelt und fand dutzende von Evidenzen dafür:
• "dass wir uns im frühjahr zusammentelefonieren"
• "man kann sich ja ma zusammentelefonieren"
• "Wir können uns ja mal am Freitag zusammentelefonieren"
• "wenn du moechtest koennen wir uns also kurzfristig zusammentelefonieren"
• "damit wir uns zusammentelefonieren können"
• "können uns ja gern mal zusammentelefonieren"
Und sogar flektierte Formen, wie "Und wir Und wir telefonieren uns zusammen, wegen dassma mal wieder fortgehen uns zusammen, wegen dassma mal wieder fortgehen", wie witzig! =)
Der Julia Vater kommt aus Dresden... aber ich glaube nicht, dass der Ausdruck nativ Sächsisch ist. Wer weiß, woher er den eingeschleppt hat. Kennt von euch jemand "sich zusammentelefonieren"?
But in this last lesson, we collected some more data, which was quite interesting this time! And funny. ;)
Thogo wanted to know more about the negation in the language and Falko wanted to find out more about the word order, so we asked Nana for some sentences. Apparently, the standard negation particle is mām, which immediately precedes the negated verb. As we couldn't find anything (neither adverb nor noun nor pronoun) to fit inbetween mām and the main verb, we analyzed it as a prefix. This seemed a little weird to me — is direct adjacency really the only criterion for making it a suffix? Judging from a Georgian perspective, this does not seem right to me...
The question particle ma (perhaps a loan from Chinese 吗? ;)) always follows the finite verb. It seemed to be a clitic which is grammatically bound to the preceding verb but phonologically bound to the following word, if there is any. The test sentence was Mām xicnāl ma si. (Don't you laugh?), which both Thogo and Mr. Bickel understood as *masi at first. I said that this si is most likely just the 2nd person singular pronoun. Interestingly, it really did sound like [ˈmasi], with the stress on the question particle. Since I knew that Georgian stress is antepenultimate and it seemed likely that it's the same case in Svan, I wanted to have the sentence with a bisyllabic noun, and indeed: Mām icnāl ma Nana. (Doesn't Nana laugh?) was pronounced like [maːm ˈʔiʦnaːl ˈmanana].
We also wanted to know about the future. It seems there are two forms, one analytic, one synthetic. The analytic form makes use of an auxiliary verb, similar to English 'will' or German 'werden', and the infinitive of the main verb. To our amusement it was even phonetically similar to the German word, as in the sentence: Mi mɨxar mām xverde licnāl. (lit.: I tomorrow not will laugh.), in German this would be "werde" in this case. =)
The synthetic form is with a suffix –ni, which seems to come inbetween the present verb stem and the personal suffixes, if any (i.e., –d and –x in the plural), so "I will laugh" can be expressed both as Mi xverde licnāl. or Mi xvicnālni. — but as if that wouldn't be interesting enough, some verbs even have future stems! "To go", for example... whereas "I go." is realized as Mi esɣvri. (es- is a preverb in this case), "I will go." becomes Mi ɣvuri.. We already know, that [v] and [vu] might be allophones of either /v/ or (less likely) /vɨ/, so this is just the simple verbstem without the preverb! This reminded me of Russian, which is the exact mirror-image in this case (I'll take the 2nd person, which circumvents the /vɨ/-alternation):
| PRESENT: | ты пишешь (ty pišeš') = 2SG write.2SG | სი ესღრი (si esɣri) = 2SG IPFV.go.2SG |
| FUTURE: | ты напишешь (ty napišeš') = 2SG PFV.write.2SG | სი ღრი (si ɣri) = 2SG go.2SG |
But es– is not the only preverb working with ɣri, here. There is also an–, which changes the meaning from "go" to "come". Deictic imperfective preverbs! This also means that in the future tense, one cannot differenciate between "to come" and "to go"... at least not in this construction.
Only now I realised that the verb "to fall", which we had elicitated in one of our first lessons, might as well bear this future suffix –ni mentioned before. The infinitive is lɨšq'ed, but "I am falling" was translated by Nana as mi šq'vedni — note the ending! On the other hand, there is also ligvni (infinitive of "to cry") / mi xvigvni ("I am crying"). There the –ni is also present in the infinitive form. And in liq'lūni ("be afraid") / mi maq'lūni ("I am afraid") as well. Hmm... too bad the course is over... would be interesting to see how those suffixes work.
I also asked Nana how to say "I don't speak Svan" in Svan. Her answer was: Mi lušnud mām xvimbual. I added it to my collection.
- - - - - - - - - - - 8<- - - - - - - - - -
And now to something completely different: German!
Deswegen auch weiter auf Deutsch...
Julia sagte grad am Telefon, dass ihr Vater oft das Wort "sich zusammentelefonieren" benutzt, im Sinne von "telefonieren" oder "sich gegenseitig anrufen". Fand ich lustig, und Julia auch, weil man das doch gar nicht sagt. Ich hab's jedenfalls noch nie so gehört. Deswegen hab ich mal gegoogelt und fand dutzende von Evidenzen dafür:
• "dass wir uns im frühjahr zusammentelefonieren"
• "man kann sich ja ma zusammentelefonieren"
• "Wir können uns ja mal am Freitag zusammentelefonieren"
• "wenn du moechtest koennen wir uns also kurzfristig zusammentelefonieren"
• "damit wir uns zusammentelefonieren können"
• "können uns ja gern mal zusammentelefonieren"
Und sogar flektierte Formen, wie "Und wir Und wir telefonieren uns zusammen, wegen dassma mal wieder fortgehen uns zusammen, wegen dassma mal wieder fortgehen", wie witzig! =)
Der Julia Vater kommt aus Dresden... aber ich glaube nicht, dass der Ausdruck nativ Sächsisch ist. Wer weiß, woher er den eingeschleppt hat. Kennt von euch jemand "sich zusammentelefonieren"?

