Chapter 5

Ilaksh: A Philosophical Design for a Hypothetical Language

Chapter 5: Verb Morphology

The Ilaksh verbal formative (termed “verb” in + this chapter for simplicity’s sake) is the workhorse of the language, + inflecting for twenty-one different morphological categories. These include + the seven categories shared by all formatives and already discussed in Chapter + 3: Configuration, Affiliation, Perspective, Extension, Essence, + Context, and Designation. Additionally the following + fourteen categories apply solely to verbs: Mood, Function, Illocution, Level, Case-Frame, Format, Modality, Valence, Validation, Phase, + Sanction, Version, + Aspect, and Bias. The verb can also + theoretically take any number of the over 1300 suffixes available to formatives. + Such suffixes are analyzed in Chapter + 7.

The full structure of a Ilaksh verbal formative is in two parts, + i.e., having two distinct words, these being a valence/modality adjunct + and the verb itself. In simple sentences, the valence/modality adjunct may be missing. The following extreme example of a fully inflected + Ilaksh verb illustrates all the morphological components of the two-word structure:

A highly stilted but approximate English translation of the + above, capturing as many of the nuances of the Ilaksh phrase as possible, would + be: ‘…despite presumably being on the verge, contrary to the + allegation, of just so happening to want to succeed in vowing to maybe return + periodically to the honorable practice of superlative architecture for others + to follow by example’

Of the 14 morphological + categories particular to verbal formatives, we will examine in this chapter eight of the ten which constitute part of the verbal formative itself (Mood, Case-Frame, Phase, Sanction, Version, Aspect, Illocution, and Level). The remaining categories specific to valence/modality adjuncts (Modality, Valence, Validation, and Bias) will be described in Chapter + 6. Additionally, the categories of Function and Format, while displayed within the formative, are closely allied with the phenomenon of stem incorporation which is displayed within the valence/modality adjunct. Therefore, Function, Format, and stem incorporation will be discussed together in Chapter 6.

Most languages have a morphological category for verbs known + as “mood,” serving to indicate specific attitudes or perspectives + on the act, condition, or event, or the degree of factuality involved. Example + moods common to Western languages include the indicative (factual utterances), + subjunctive (showing doubt or probability, expressed by ‘may/might’ + in English), imperative (indicating commands, e.g., Go now!, Sing it for + us! ), conditional (expressing hypotheticals, e.g., She would travel + if she could), optative (indicating wishes, hopes, expectations, e.g., I wish he’d go, I expect him to be here), and hortative (indicating + exhortations, e.g., May he live 100 years! Let them see for themselves!).

We will see later in Section 5.7 + that in Ilaksh the functions of certain moods in Western languages + correspond not to Mood, but to the grammatical category of Illocution, specifically + where Western moods function to describe types of speech acts. In Ilaksh, moods + simply convey a two-fold distinction as to whether the factuality of an utterance + is certain or uncertain, combined with a four-way distinction as to whether + the factuality of an explicit or implicit assumption underlying the utterance + (i.e., a presupposition) is true, false, unknown, or a determinant of the factuality + of the utterance. This twofold by fourfold matrix renders eight moods in Ilaksh.

The eight moods are FACTUAL, SUBJUNCTIVE, ASSUMPTIVE, + SPECULATIVE, COUNTERFACTIVE, HYPOTHETICAL, IMPLICATIVE, and ASCRIPTIVE. +(These are the same as in Ithkuil and have the same function.) They are shown in conjunction with the morphological category of Context (see Section 3.5) by a vocalic suffix. Table 10 below shows these suffixes.

The FACTUAL mood signifies that the + factuality of the speaker’s statement is certain and that there either + is no underlying presupposition to the statement, or if there is, its factuality + is also certain or has no bearing on the factuality of the statement. + Examples:

His kids are ill. [i.e., it is known he has kids and + it is known they are ill]

We’re taking a walk later on. [i.e., it is our + intention and we have the opportunity to do so]
+
+
+

The SUBJUNCTIVE mood indicates that the + factuality of an explicit or implicit presupposition underlying the statement + is certain, but the factuality of the speaker’s statement itself is questionable + or uncertain, the specific nuance of factuality intended being subject to the + particular Bias and Validation associated with the verb. Corresponds roughly + with English ‘may,’ ‘maybe’ or ‘might,’ + with the added distinction that an explicit or implicit (i.e., underlying) presupposition + is true. Examples:

Maybe his kids are ill. [i.e., it is known that he + has kids but it is not known whether they are ill]

We may take a walk later on. [i.e., it is known that + the opportunity to do so will arise, but it is uncertain whether we will choose + to]
+
+
+

The ASSUMPTIVE mood functions identically to the FACTUAL except that the factuality of an underlying presupposition is unknown. It therefore + conveys an act, state, or event whose factuality is dependent on whether something + else is factual, thus corresponding to certain usages of English ‘maybe’ + and ‘will’ (where ‘will’ primarily conveys possibility, + not future tense). As with all moods, the specific translation is subject to + the particular Bias and Validation associated with the verb. Examples:

His kids’ll be ill OR If he has kids, they are ill. [i.e., it is unknown whether he has kids, + but if he does, they are certainly ill.]

We’ll take a walk later on [i.e., if we can] OR We intend to take a walk. [i.e., but we don’t know if we’ll be able to]
+
+
+

The SPECULATIVE mood indicates that the factuality of both the presupposition and the statement + itself are unknown. Its translation into English is dependent on the specific + context, sometimes corresponding to ‘may,’ ‘maybe’ or + ‘might,’ and at other times corresponding to the auxiliary ‘would.’ + Compare the examples below to those above:

Maybe his kids are ill [i.e., it is unknown if he + has kids but if he does, they may be ill].

We may take a walk later on [i.e., it is unknown whether + we will have the opportunity to do so, and even if we do, it is uncertain whether + we will choose to].
+
+
+

The COUNTERFACTIVE mood indicates that the factuality of the underlying presupposition + is false or unreal but that the factuality of the statement would otherwise + be true. It thus corresponds to the English construction of auxiliary ‘would’ + or ‘would have’ in its use to show counterfactuality (i.e., what + would have been if a false presupposition had been true). Again, the specific + translation is subject to the particular Bias and Validation associated with + the verb. Compare the examples below to those above.

His kids would be (would have been) ill [i.e., if + he had kids they would be ill, but he doesn’t].

We would take (would have taken) a walk later on [i.e., + it is our intention but we won’t have the opportunity].
+
+
+

The HYPOTHETICAL mood indicates that the factuality of the underlying presupposition is + false or unreal and that the factuality of the statement itself is uncertain. + It thus corresponds to the English construction of auxiliary ‘might have’ + in its use to show possible counterfactuality (i.e., what might have been if + a false presupposition had been true). Again, the specific translation is subject + to the particular Bias and Validation associated with the verb. Compare the + examples below to those above.

His kids might’ve been ill [if he had kids, + but he doesn’t, so we’ll never know].

We might’ve taken a walk later on [i.e., but + we won’t have the opportunity, so the decision whether to do so is moot].
+
+
+

The IMPLICATIVE mood indicates that the factuality of the underlying presupposition + determines the factuality of the statement and that the relationship between + the two need not necessarily be a direct cause-and-effect, but merely an indirect + chain of events from which the speaker infers the statement from the underlying + presupposition. In grammatical analysis, this is referred to as an “epistemic + conditional.” Examples are shown below.

His kids are (must be) ill [i.e., as implied by some + other fact such as his staying home from work].

If she wears a blue dress, we’ll be taking a walk + later on OR She’s wearing + a blue dress, so that means we’ll be taking a walk later on [i.e., + the dress implies something has happened that we’ll make the walk a certainty].
+
+
+

The ASCRIPTIVE mood functions identically to the IMPLICATIVE immediately above, except that the factuality of the inference derived from + the underlying presupposition is uncertain. Examples:

His kids may be ill [i.e., as implied by some other + fact such as his staying home from work].

If she wears a blue dress, we might be taking a walk later + on OR She’s wearing a + blue dress, so that means we might be taking a walk later on [i.e., the + dress implies something has happened that we’ll make the walk a possibility].

+ 5.1.9 Examples of Mood in Use

Virtually all languages allow for sentences to be hierarchically + embedded within other sentences, a process termed subordination. + In Western languages, the embedded sentence becomes either a subordinate clause + or a relative clause, explicitly introduced by a conjunctions such as ‘that,’ + ‘which,’ ‘who,’ ‘where,’‘although,’‘if,’‘while,’‘whereas,’ + or a preposition followed by a conjunction, such as ‘through which,’‘by + whom,’etc. In English, such clauses can also occur as an infinitive or + gerundial verb construction. Both relative and subordinate clauses are illustrated + in the following sentences:

The Ilaksh equivalent to relative or subordinate clauses is + known as a case-frame, or simply, frame. Conceptually, + the sentence to be embedded is simply treated as a noun participant to the main + verb of a sentence and is therefore marked for case like any other noun. For + example, take the following two sentences:

Suppose we want to use the second sentence to provide a temporal + context for the first sentence. In English we could do this by subordinating + the second sentence to the first using the conjunction ‘while,’ + as in She and I were working together while the two nations were at war. + Alternately, we could create a relative clause by inserting a connecting prepositional + phrase, as in She and I were working together during the time (that) the + two nations were at war.

In Ilaksh, temporal context for a sentence may be provided + by a noun in any of the temporal cases such as the CONCURSIVE (see Sec. 4.6.3). A word + such as ‘summer’ or ‘famine’ would be placed in the CONCURSIVE case to create a sentence corresponding to:

Just as the single words ‘summer’ and ‘famine’ + are placed in the CONCURSIVE case, so an entire sentence + such as The two nations were at war can be placed in the CONCURSIVE case to provide the temporal context for the main sentence. In other words, + Ilaksh treats the entire subordinate sentence as a noun phrase to be declined + into any required case. That is the purpose of a frame, to place sentences into + noun cases. By doing so, Ilaksh accomplishes the same task for which Western + languages use relative and subordinate conjunctions. In theory, any sentence + can be placed into any of the 96 cases and inserted into another sentence wherever + a simple noun might be placed in the sentence using that same case.

+ 5.2.1 Relation and the Placement of Frames

To construct a case-frame, the second-order sentence (i.e., + the sentence to be subordinated) is placed in the main sentence at the point + where a noun declined for the required case would appear. The actual case of the second-order sentence is indicated in the verbal + formative the same way as for nominal formatives, i.e., by mutation of the + stem vowel into the appropriate mutation series, as described in Chapter 4 on Case. If inserted + into the middle of the main sentence, the final word of the case-frame should + be a noun (or a personal reference adjunct – see Sec. + 8.1) and carries a special suffix, V1’ (see details in Section 7.4.13), which signifies the end of the frame if + this will help to avoid confusion as to which words in the sentence belong inside + the frame (i.e., with the secondary sentence), and which belong to the main +sentence.

A case-frame usually has its verb appear + as the first element of the case frame. This is to easily recognize the beginning + of the case-frame visible via the mutation of the stem vowel to show the case (see Section 2.5 and Chapter 4). For case-frames in the OBLIQUE case where the stem vowel does not mutate, or where otherwise necessary to overtly indicate that the formative is part of a case frame, the suffix V1’ is added to the formative (details in Section 7.4.13).

In general, the perspective of the verb in + the secondary sentence operates independently from that of the main verb, however, + it is also common for the perspective of the verb in the secondary sentence + to be placed in the ABSTRACT, which has the effect of + deferring all Perspective information about the verb to the main verb, similarly to the way English subordinate + clauses using gerunds and infinitives defer all tense information to the main +verb of the sentence.
+

5.2.2 Reinterpreting the Notion of a Relative Clause

There is no direct equivalent in Ilaksh to the relative clauses + of Western languages. Ilaksh treats such clauses the same as subordinate clauses + using case-frames as described above. However, the manner in which this is done, + while ultimately logical, is somewhat complex and confusing from a Western perspective. + Therefore, to analyze how Ilaksh reinterprets Western relative clauses into + subordinate case-frames will first require us to review the nature of relative + clauses in Western languages such as English.

A relative clause refers to an imbedded sentence which modifies + or describes a “head” noun in the main clause. There are two types + of relative clauses, restricted (or dependent) and unrestricted (or independent). + The two types are illustrated in the following English sentences.

RESTRICTED CLAUSE
+ (1) Lions that like chasing their tails can be seen at + any circus.
+ (2) That book (that) I just finished reading was written + by a priest.

UNRESTRICTED CLAUSE
+ (3) Lions, which like chasing their tails, can be seen + at any circus.
+ (4) That book, which I just finished reading, was written + by a priest.

In the first sentence, the clause ‘that like chasing + their tails’ refers to a specific type of lion found at a circus (i.e, + not all lions chase their tails). Similarly, the clause ‘(that) I just + finished reading’ in the second sentence is restricted in that it is considered + by the speaker as being necessary in order to identify which book is being talked + about, i.e., without the clause, the listener would not know which book the + speaker was referring to.

Note the difference in meaning, however, when comparing the + first two sentences to the third and fourth sentences. In the third sentence, + the speaker implies that all lions chase their tails regardless of whether they + are in the circus. In the fourth sentence, the identity of the book is already + known to the listener, and the speaker is merely providing two additional facts + about it: the fact that he just finished reading it and the fact about its author. + Notice that in English, an unrestricted relative clause is set off in writing + by commas and cannot begin with ‘that’ (rather ‘which’ + or ‘who’ must be used); also, such clauses are normally spoken in + a lowered intonation with juncture (i.e., brief pauses) immediately before and + after the clause.

+ 5.2.2.1 Restricted Clauses. Ilaksh treats the above notions + about relative clauses in a different way. We will first analyze how Ilaksh + creates equivalents to restricted relative clauses. This can best be approached + by analyzing the underlying sentences which give rise to the main and relative + clauses. Analyzing Sentence No. 2 above, it can be broken up into two discrete + sentences:

That book was written by a priest. (= A priest wrote that + book.)
+ I just finished reading that book.

In Ilaksh, the sentence which will be functioning as the + main sentence acts as a “template” in which the secondary sentence + is placed. The particular place in the template to be filled is dependent on + what semantic role, i.e., case (see Chapter + 4) the secondary sentence is to fill. Note that the common point of reference + of the two sentences is ‘that book.’ In the main sentence, ‘that + book’ functions in the semantic role of CONTENT (See Sec. + 4.1.2), superficially equivalent to the direct object of the ABSOLUTIVE subject ‘priest’, therefore, the main sentence becomes the template + ‘A priest wrote X’ where X is in the OBLIQUE case (See Section 4.3.1). + Meanwhile, in the secondary sentence, the noun which is the common point of + reference (what in Western grammar would be called the “head” of + the relative clause) is marked with an affix indicating such. So we now have + the two sentences as:

The ‘-H’ in the second sentence + above is meant to represent an affix marking the “head” or common + reference point between the two sentences. At this point, Ilaksh inserts the + second sentence as a case-frame into the empty “slot” based on the + semantic role it will be playing, in this instance the role of CONTENT marked + by the OBLIQUE case (see Sec. + 4.3.1).

As described in Sec. 5.2.1 above , the verb + of the secondary sentence is moved to the beginning of the case-frame and takes + the relevant case marker (OBLIQUE).

Reverse translating this sentence back to English, the closest + literal translation would be the rather awkward construction: A priest wrote + what I just finished reading, that book. However, this is how Ilaksh translates + the English sentence ‘A priest wrote that book that I just finished reading.’

Two observations can be noted from the Ilaksh sentence. First + of all, unlike Western languages, the main clause contains no “head.” + Instead, the “head” is marked from within the imbedded clause. Secondly, + there is no difference between this process and the rendering of other types + of subordinate clauses using case-frames, as the main sentence was rearranged + (or reinterpreted) to provide a slot for the semantic role of the imbedded sentence, + the exact same way that subordinate clauses are constructed in Ilaksh. Therefore, + as was previously stated, Ilaksh makes no distinction between subordinate and + relative clauses.

Similarly, the other example sentence from above, Lions + that like chasing their tails can be seen at any circus would become in + Ilaksh: At any circus one can see certain lions-H like to chase-OBL their tails. A literal + translation into English would be: At any circus one can see (that) certain + lions like chasing their tails.

+ 5.2.2.2 Unrestricted Clauses. As for independent or unrestricted + clauses, as shown in example sentences (3) and (4) earlier, Ilaksh treats these + differently still. In Western languages, an unrestricted clause does not help + to identify a noun or provide a context for it, but simply adds additional information + about an already identified noun. Thus, unrestricted relative clauses serve + a wholly different cognitive-semantic purpose than restricted clauses, a fact + hidden by their nearly identical surface structures. Ilaksh acknowledges this + profound difference at the overt sentence level by not subordinating any clause + at all. Rather, the two sentences are given co-equal status as main clauses + and simply joined by a coordinating affix. Thus sentences (3) and (4) from earlier + become:

+ 5.2.2.3 Use of the CORRELATIVE Case In Lieu of Simple + Relative Clauses. The CORRELATIVE case (discussed in Section + 4.5.25) is used to create case-frames which are semantically equivalent to the English phrase ‘that/which/who + is/are…’ Such a case-frame would be used in conjunction with specific Functions (see Section 6.4) to convey whether the relationship of the relativized clause to the main clause is one of description, copula identification, etc.

+ 5.2.3 Example of Case-Frames in Use

Phase refers to variances in the temporal pattern of how an + act, condition or event occurs, e.g., in a momentary, lasting, or repetitive + manner (or lack thereof). This is especially useful in describing phenomena + that occur in sudden bursts of short duration, e.g., flashing, sputtering, blinking, + alternating, etc. Phase functions closely with the morphological category of + Extension, previously described in Sec. + 3.4, to specify the durational nature, starting and ending, and operative + pattern of a state, action or event. The nine phases are the CONTEXTUAL, + PUNCTUAL, ITERATIVE, REPETITIVE, INTERMITTENT, RECURRENT, FREQUENTATIVE, FRAGMENTATIVE, + and FLUCTUATIVE. These are the same as in Ithkuil. They are marked by one of nine patterns + of the Cx affix to a formative, depending on the sanction + and version of the verb (discussed in Sections 5.4 and 5.5 respectively).

The presence of a Cx infix requires the presence of a Vc prefix, in order to able to distinguish the Cx infix from the Cr root consonant(s). Furthermore, under certain circumstances, the presence of the Cx + Vp syllable requires that the Vc prefix take an alternate form in order to be able able to discern which consonants in a formative correspond to which terms in the formula below. The specifics of these alternate Vc prefix forms and when/how to use them which will be explained in Section 6.5.2.

+ The nine phases + are explained in the following sections. Sanction and Version are explained in Sections 5.4 and 5.5 respectively.

The CONTEXTUAL is the default phase, + describing a single act, condition, or event as a relatively brief (but not + instantaneous), single holistic occurrence considered once, where the actual + duration of the occurrence is not relevant in the particular context. It can + be visually represented along a progressive timeline by a short dash, e.g., —
+

The PUNCTUAL describes an act, condition, + or event which is point-like, momentary or instantaneous in nature, such as + an explosion, a flash of lightning, a blow, a single handclap, a collision between + two objects, a stab of pain, a single cough, the clicking of a lock, etc. It + can be visually represented along a timeline by a single point, e.g., •
+

The ITERATIVE refers to a momentary or + instantaneous event, like the PUNCTUAL above, which repeats + itself in a rapid, on/off, staccato manner, like a machine gun burst, strobe + light burst, an alarm bell ringing, or the quick unconscious tapping of a finger, + the whole comprising a single CONTEXTUAL event.

The REPETITIVE refers to a relatively + brief event of indeterminate or vague duration (i.e., as with the CONTEXTUAL phase above), but repeated in an on/off staccato manner, like a car horn being + honked repeatedly in a fast steady rhythm, or an automatic machine press. Visual + representation: — — + — —
+
+
+

The INTERMITTENT is similar to the ITERATIVE above, identifying a repetitive occurrence of a PUNCTUAL event, however, unlike the ITERATIVE, the duration of + time between repetitions is relatively long and contextually relevant. It would + be used in describing the downbeat pattern of a pop song, the ongoing snapping + of fingers to music, the steady one-drop-at-a-time dripping of a faucet, etc.

The RECURRENT is to the REPETITIVE as the INTERMITTENT is to the ITERATIVE. + It indicates a slow repetition of a CONTEXTUAL event, + where the duration between occurrences is relatively long and contextually relevant. + Exemplified by the sounding of a foghorn, or the ongoing hooting of an owl.

The FREQUENTATIVE indicates an iterative + occurrence (a single set of punctual repetitions) which in turn repeats at intervals, + the whole considered as a single CONTEXTUAL event. Examples + would be the repetitive sets of hammerings of a woodpecker or the repeated short + bursts of a jackhammer.

Visual representation: ——• + • •— • • + •— • • + •— • • + •
+
+
+

The FRAGMENTATIVE indicates a random + pattern of punctual occurrences, the whole considered as a single CONTEXTUAL event.

Visual representation: ——• + •— • • • ——• + • —• • • + • •—— • —• + •
+
+
+

The FLUCTUATIVE indicates a random pattern + of both punctual and longer occurrences. An example would be the “sputtering” + of a lighted fuse, the random patterns of tongues of flames, the chirping of + birds in the wild, etc.

Visual representation:—— + • • —— • — • •— ——• + • — • + • • —• + •— —— • — • •

5.3.10 Examples of Phase in Use

The morphological category of Sanction indicates the discourse-related + purpose of an utterance in relation to what sort of truthfulness the listener + should ascribe to it. In everyday terms, this corresponds to whether the utterance + is a neutral proposition or assertion, an allegation, a rebuttable presumption, + a counter-argument, a refutation of an allegation, a rebuttal, etc.

There are nine sanctions: the PROPOSITIONAL, + EPISTEMIC, ALLEGATIVE, IMPUTATIVE, REFUTATIVE, REBUTTATIVE, THEORETICAL, EXPATIATIVE, + and AXIOMATIC. Sanction is shown by the Cx affix to formative, as shown in Table + 11 in Sec. 5.3 above, the specific affix value being dependent on the version + and phase of the verb.

The PROPOSITIONAL sanction is either + unmarked (where there is no aspectual adjunct), or marked by Grade 1 mutation + of the Cx affix. It is the default sanction, indicating the utterance represents + a neutral proposition or assertion of ontologically objective fact, i.e., a + statement of fact irrespective of third-party opinion, belief, or interpretation. + Example of such statements would be That is a mountain, or I’m + hungry.
+
+
+

The EPISTEMIC sanction is marked by Grade + 2 mutation of the Cx affix. It identifies an utterance as being a statement + of shared knowledge or conventionalized fact whose ontology is human convention + (i.e., agreed-upon knowledge) as opposed to objective fact irrespective of human + knowledge. An example would be That mountain is Mount Fuji or The + U.N. tries to relieve hunger in the Third World.
+
+
+

The ALLEGATIVE sanction is marked by Grade + 3 mutation of the Cx affix. It identifies an utterance + as an ontologically subjective assertion or allegation, i.e., a proposition + expressing one’s opinion, belief, or interpretation, open to challenge + or refutation. Examples would be That mountain is beautiful or No + one in the United States goes hungry.
+
+
+

The IMPUTATIVE sanction is marked by Grade + 4 mutation of the Cx affix. It identifies an utterance + as a rebuttable presumption, i.e., an assertion, whether ontologically objective + or by convention, that is to be assumed true unless and until rebutted by a + sufficient counter-argument or other evidence. Examples would be He knows + how to drive [e.g., because he owns a car] or She can’t be hungry + now [e.g., because I saw her come out of the restaurant].
+
+
+

The REFUTATIVE sanction is marked by Grade + 5 mutation of the Cx affix. It identifies an utterance + as a counter-allegation, refutation, or rebuttal of a previous assertion, allegation + or presumption, where the counter-allegation, refutation, or rebuttal is epistemic + in nature, i.e., based on shared human knowledge as opposed to ontologically + objective fact.
+
+
+

The REBUTTATIVE sanction is marked by Grade + 6 mutation of the Cx affix. It identifies an utterance + as a counter-allegation, refutation, or rebuttal of a previous assertion, allegation + or presumption, where the counter-allegation, refutation, or rebuttal is based + on ontologically objective fact, irrespective of subjective opinion, belief, + or interpretation.
+
+
+

The THEORETICAL sanction is marked by Grade + 7 mutation of the Cx affix. It identifies an utterance + as a testable hypothesis or potentially verifiable theory.
+
+
+

The EXPATIATIVE sanction is marked by Grade + 8 mutation of the Cx affix. It identifies an utterance + as a hypothesis or theory that is not necessarily provable or verifiable.
+
+
+

The AXIOMATIC sanction is marked by Grade + 9 mutation of the Cx affix. It identifies an utterance + as a conclusive presumption, i.e., a statement of ontologically objective, pan-experiential + fact not open to rational argument or refutation. Examples would be Gravity + is ubiquitous, or Hunger is caused by not consuming enough food.

+ 5.4.10 Examples of Sanctions In Use

Version refers to a six-way aspectual distinction indicating + whether the verb refers to an act, event or state which is goal- or result-oriented, + and/or whether it has been successfully actualized subsequent to one’s + initial intention. Like many Ilaksh morphological categories, version addresses + semantic distinctions which are usually rendered by lexical differentiation + (i.e., word choice) in other languages.

Version is shown by the Cx affix to a formative, in conjunction with Phase and Sanction as explained above in Sections 5.3 and 5.4. The values for Cx are shown above in Table 11 above. The six versions are PROCESSUAL, COMPLETIVE, INEFFECTUAL, INCOMPLETIVE, POSITIVE and EFFECTIVE.

The PROCESSUAL describes all acts, conditions, + or events which are ends in themselves and not goal-oriented, i.e., are not + focused on an anticipated outcome or final purpose toward which a progressive + effort is being made.

The COMPLETIVE describes acts, conditions, + or events which achieve, or are intended to achieve, an anticipated outcome, + i.e., which are oriented toward the achievement of some purpose, outcome, or + final state. Such a distinction is usually handled by word choice in Western + languages. The dynamism of Version can be seen in the following comparisons:

This version, the INEFFECTUAL, and the + next, the INCOMPLETIVE, operate in parallel fashion to + the PROCESSUAL and the COMPLETIVE versions respectively but are specific to acts, events, or states initially + expressed (whether explicitly or implicitly) as unrealized intentions, attempts, + desires, needs, etc., often in conjunction with a modality affix to the verb + (see Section 6.1). Such “unrealized” + verbs are exemplified in the following sentences: I want to dance, She needs + to work, I tried to finish, She must find him, I choose to celebrate. Each + of these sentences in itself does not specify whether the action was “realized” + or not, i.e., just because I want to dance doesn’t necessarily mean that + I actually do dance; her need to work doesn’t tell us by itself whether + she in fact will work, etc.

The INEFFECTUAL version indicates that + the outcome of an “unrealized” PROCESSUAL verb is unsuccessful. Thus the sentence I want to dance in the INEFFECTUAL would be translated as I want to dance but I’m not going to, + while the sentence I tried to eat in the INEFFECTUAL means I tried to eat but couldn’t.

The INCOMPLETIVE version indicates that + the outcome of an “unrealized” COMPLETIVE verb is unsuccessful. It functions identically to the INEFFECTUAL, + except that it refers to a verb that is result/goal-oriented, as illustrated + in the comparative chart shown above for the COMPLETIVE version. Thus, the sentence I tried to eat in the INCOMPLETIVE means I tried to eat all of it but couldn’t.

Complementing the INEFFECTUAL, the POSITIVE version indicates an intention brought to reality. Thus the sentence I want + to dance in the POSITIVE would be translated as I + want to dance and so I’m going to, while the sentence I tried + to eat in the POSITIVE means I succeeded in eating + something.

Likewise, the EFFECTIVE version complements + the INCOMPLETIVE, indicating the same successful effort + implied by the POSITIVE version, only applied to goal-/result-oriented + verbs. Thus I wanted to finish in the EFFECTIVE implies that the desire was successfully carried out; I tried to eat in the EFFECTIVE means I succeeded in eating it all + up.

+ 5.5.7 Examples of Version in Use

Aspect provides detailed and specific temporal information + about the verb, not in relation to the speaker’s present moment of utterance + (as with Perspective in Sec. + 3.3), but rather in relation to the contextual “present” of + the act, condition, or event being spoken about. There are 32 aspects, each + shown by a vocalic prefix to an aspectual adjunct. A second aspect may be shown + by a vocalic suffix. For the most part, they translate various common adverbial + phrases used in English.

+ 5.6.1 Aspect Infixes

Each + aspect is represented by a single vocalic form, appearing as the Vp infix to a formative. The presence of a Vp infix requires the presence of both a preceding Cx infix as well as a Vc prefix, in order to able to distinguish the Cx infix from the Cr root consonant(s). Furthermore, under certain circumstances, the presence of the Cx + Vp syllable requires that the Vc prefix take an alternate form in order to be able able to discern which consonants in a formative correspond to which terms in the formula below. The specifics of these alternate Vc prefix forms and when/how to use them which will be explained in Section 6.5.2. The values +of the Vp infix are shown in Table 12 below.

NOTE: In Section 6.7, we will see that aspect may also be shown as a suffix to a valence/modality adjunct.

5.6.2 Explanation of Aspect Categories

+ + + + + + +

5.6.2.1

RTR

RETROSPECTIVE

+ This aspect operates in conjunction with Perspective (see Sec. 3.3) to create + various equivalents to Western tense categories. With the MONADIC, + the RETROSPECTIVE can be translated by English ‘have + already’ as in I’ve already done it. With the UNBOUNDED, + the RETROSPECTIVE is equates with the English simple past + tense. With the NOMIC and ABSTRACT, + it adds a sense of ‘and it’s always been that way’ to the + verb.
+
+ + + + + + +

5.6.2.2

PRS

PROSPECTIVE

+ Like the RETROSPECTIVE above, this aspect operates in + conjunction with Perspective to create various equivalents to Western tense + categories. With the MONADIC, the PROSPECTIVE equates with the English future tense. With the UNBOUNDED, + it can be translated by the English future perfect (i.e., ‘will have…’). + With the NOMIC and ABSTRACT, it + adds a sense of ‘and it’ll always be that way’ or ‘from + now on’ to the verb.
+
+ + + + + + +

5.6.2.3

HAB

HABITUAL

+ When used with the MONADIC perspective, this aspect conveys + the idea of ‘always’ or ‘continues to’, while with the UNBOUNDED, the English ‘used to’ construction + offers an equivalent translation, as in She used to come see me on Wednesdays.
+
+ + + + + + +

5.6.2.4

PRG

PROGRESSIVE

+ This aspect conveys the idea of an act in progress, similar to the English construction + ‘in the midst of [verb] + ing’ or the use of the present participle + in Spanish.
+
+ + + + + + +

5.6.2.5

IMM

IMMINENT

+ Conveys that an action, state or event is imminent. Translates phrases such + as ‘(just) about to’ or ‘on the verge of’ as in I + think Carl is about to cry.
+
+ + + + + + +

5.6.2.6

PCS

PRECESSIVE

+ Conveys that an action, state or event has immediately preceded. Translates + such phrases as ‘just’ or ‘just now,’ as in We just + saw a clown in the toy store.
+
+ + + + + + +

5.6.2.7

REG

REGULATIVE

+ Conveys the idea of participation or involvement in an action, state, or event + over an amount of time extending from the past into the future relative to the + contextual present. Translates English phrases such as ‘engaged in’ + or ‘involved in’ as in Her husband is engaged in construction of + the new bridge.
+
+ + + + + + +

5.6.2.8

EPR

EXPERIENTIAL

+ Translates English ‘ever’ in the sense of ‘within the realm + of one’s experience’ or ‘at some point in one’s experience,’ + as in Does he ever shut up? Note the EXPERIENTIAL does not equate to ‘ever’ when it means ‘always,’ as + in Ever does he seek his destiny nor as an adverb of mere emphasis + as in Was she ever tired.
+
+ + + + + + +

5.6.2.9

RSM

RESUMPTIVE

+ Conveys the idea of an act, state, or event resuming after having previously + ceased, as in The girl resumed singing, or He is starting to laugh + again.
+
+ + + + + + +

5.6.2.10

CSS

CESSATIVE

+ Conveys the idea of cessation of an event, state or action. Translates English + phrases such as ‘stop,’ ‘discontinue,’ or ‘cease,’ + as in They stopped dancing at midnight.
+
+ + + + + + +

5.6.2.11

RCS

RECESSATIVE

+ Conveys the idea of cessation of event again, after having previously ceased + then resumed, as in Lyudmila stopped eating yet again in order to enjoy + a quick interlude with the neighborhood clown.
+
+ + + + + + +

5.6.2.12

PAU

PAUSAL

+ Indicates a pause in an action, state or event, with an implied intention to + resume. Translates phrases such as ‘take a break from’ or ‘pause + in’ as in Mother took a break from cleaning to gossip with + her friends.
+
+ + + + + + +

5.6.2.13

RGR

REGRESSIVE

+ Conveys the idea of a return to an original or previous action, state or event + after a long hiatus involving an intervening change of state or situation, as + translated by the phrase ‘return to.’ The REGRESSIVE should be distinguished from the RESUMPTIVE above, which + merely implies the restarting after a stop or pause without an intervening change + of state or situation. An example would be Mr. Yates returned to golf after + recovering from his stroke.
+
+ + + + + + +

5.6.2.14

PCL

PRECLUSIVE

+ Conveys the fact that an action, state, or event takes place from inception + to conclusion all in one contextual segment, translating such phrases as ‘all + at once,’ ‘all in one go,’ ‘without stopping,’ + etc. as in Walter drank the entire bottle in one gulp.
+
+ + + + + + +

5.6.2.15

CNT

CONTINUATIVE

+ Conveys the idea that an action, event, or state continues on. Translates phrases + such as ‘keep on,’ ‘still,’ ‘stay,’ ‘yet,’ + etc. When used in a negative sentence, conveys the idea of English ‘no + longer’ or ‘not anymore’ as in She kept on singing, You’re + still staring at me, I’ve yet to meet him, Sam no longer loves you / Sam + doesn’t love you anymore.
+
+ + + + + + +

5.6.2.16

ICS

INCESSATIVE

+ Conveys that an action, state or event continues on without stopping. Translates + such English adverbials as ‘…on and on’ or ‘…away’ + as in They danced the night away or They’ve been battling + on and on since last year.
+
+ + + + + + +

5.6.2.17

PMP

PREEMPTIVE

+ Emphasizes the singularity and initial occurrence an action, state or event, + as translated by such English phrases as ‘for once’ or ‘just + once,’ as well as the anticipation preceding a long-expected situation, + as translated by phrases such as ‘at last,’ ‘after all this + time,’ ‘finally,’ and ‘for the first time.’
+
+ + + + + + +

5.6.2.18

CLM

CLIMACTIC

+ Emphasizes the finality of an action, state or event, as translated by such + English phrases as ‘once and for all’ or ‘for the last time.’
+
+ + + + + + +

5.6.2.19

PTC

PROTRACTIVE

+ Conveys that an action, state or event takes place over a long period of time. + If used with the CONTEXTUAL or PUNCTUAL phases, or with formatives describing naturally brief durations, the PROTRACTIVE conveys the idea of the act or event being long-delayed. Example usages: It + rained for quite a while, We shared a long kiss, That slap to his face was a + long time coming.
+
+ + + + + + +

5.6.2.20

TMP

TEMPORARY

+ Conveys that an action, state or event is being considered or is applicable + only to the present subjective context or range of the contextual present, as + translated by phrases such as ‘for the time being’ or ‘but + only for the moment’ or ‘for now’ as in This will be sufficient + for now or For the time being you’ll have to drink water.
+
+ + + + + + +

5.6.2.21

MTV

MOTIVE

+ Conveys that an action, state or event involves physical removal or absence + of the participant from the present context of discourse. Translates such phrases + as ‘be off …-ing’ or ‘go off to …’ as in Dad’s off hunting or They went off to cavort with the clowns.
+
+ + + + + + +

5.6.2.22

CSQ

CONSEQUENTIAL

+ This aspect conveys the idea of proceeding or engaging in an action or event + despite the possibility of adverse consequences. It translates the English phrases + such as ‘go ahead and’ or ‘anyway,’ as in She went + ahead and bought the furniture or I decided to go there anyway.
+
+ + + + + + +

5.6.2.23

SQN

SEQUENTIAL

+ This aspect conveys the idea a “sequential progressive” in which + a series of contextually identical instances is seen as comprising a single + event, usually with an implied culmination point. It translates the English + use of ‘off’ as in He's checking off each item as it is inventoried, + or The sheep died off from the disease.
+
+ + + + + + +

5.6.2.24

EPD

EXPEDITIVE

+ Conveys a sense of haste associated with an action or event. Translates English + ‘hurry (up)’ as in Hurry up and finish or They ate + in a hurry.
+
+ + + + + + +

5.6.2.25

DSC

DISCLUSIVE

+ Focuses on the revelatory nature of an action, state or event, translating phrases + such as ‘turn out to be,’ ‘turn out that…’ and + ‘be revealed that….’
+
+ + + + + + +

5.6.2.26

CCL

CONCLUSIVE

+ Conveys the direct outcome of an action, state or event within the short-term + context of the situation at hand. Translates phrases such as ‘end up…, + come to, reach the point where,’ as in I ended up crashing the car or He drank to the point where he passed out.
+
+ + + + + + +

5.6.2.27

CUL

CULMINATIVE

+ Similar to the CONCLUSIVE above, but with a focus on the + eventual, long-term outcome over an extended period of time or through a series + of developmental steps. Compare the following examples with the CONCLUSIVE aspect above: In the end, I’ll have to leave town; Things got to the + point where the mayor got involved; Eventually, they fell in love.
+
+ + + + + + +

5.6.2.28

IMD

INTERMEDIATIVE

+ Conveys the idea that the action, state, or event takes place at some point + along the timeline of, or within the duration of, another action, state, event, + or background context, as translated by the phrases ‘at some point’ + or ‘somewhere along the way….’
+
+ + + + + + +

5.6.2.29

TRD

TARDATIVE

+ Conveys the idea that an action, state, or event lessens, dwindles, or slackens + in energy, intensity, or effect, impliedly by exhaustion of the active source + of energy or agency, or by dissipation of the foundational context involved. + Translates such phrases as ‘to get tired of,’ ‘peter out,’ + ‘trail off,’ etc.
+
+ + + + + + +

5.6.2.30

TNS

TRANSITIONAL

+ Focuses on the initial stage of preparation, adjustment, or accustomization + to an action, state or event, translated by phrases such as ‘take up,’ + ‘start to,’ etc. implying a long-term process of initialization, + as in I’m planning to take up golf.
+
+ + + + + + +

5.6.2.31

ITC

INTERCOMMUTATIVE

+ Conveys the idea of “sequential reciprocity,” meaning that the action + or event is a consequent reciprocation triggered by, or in reaction to, an initiating + action or event. It translates the English verbal particle ‘back’ + as in The boy threw it back or She stared back at the men ogling + her.
+
+ + + + + + +

5.6.2.32

CSM

CONSUMPTIVE

+ Conveys an all-consuming action, state, or event which interferes with or prevents + other events from occurring. It translates English phrases such as ‘spend + one’s time’ or ‘away’ as in Mother spends her life + worrying or He’s pining away.

+ 5.6.3 Examples of Aspect In Use

Illocution refers to what in linguistics is usually termed + types of speech acts, i.e., the general purpose of a statement such as whether + it is an assertion, a command, a declaratory pronouncement, a question, a warning, + etc. This is a category which is not generally marked within Western languages + in any consistent grammatical sense, the nearest equivalent grammatical category + usually being Mood. As was seen above in Section 5.1, Mood functions in a much narrower grammatical range than in Western languages. + When the moods of Western language actually relate to types of speech acts, + the equivalent function in Ilaksh is shown by the category of Illocution.

There are eight illocutions in Ilaksh: ASSERTIVE, DIRECTIVE, COMMISSIVE, EXPRESSIVE, DECLARATIVE, INTERROGATIVE, ADMONITIVE and HORTATIVE. + They distinguish the type of speech act being performed by the speaker, with + a specific focus on the type of commitment being made on the part of either + the speaker or the hearer to the truth or purpose of the utterance. Illocution is + marked by a consonantal prefix to the verb, Ci, which immediately precedes the Vc Designation-Essence-Format + prefix as shown in our standard morphological diagram for formatives below:

The ASSERTIVE illocution is unmarked + if the Ci element is in word-initial position. However, in cases where it is preceded by the VL Level prefix, then the ASSERTIVE is indicated by the prefix hw- as the Ci element. The ASSERTIVE is used to express propositions + which purport to describe or name some act, event, or state in the real world, + with the purpose of committing the hearer to the truth of the proposition. Thus, + an utterance in the ASSERTIVE illocution is one that can + be believed or disbelieved, and is either true or false. Such utterances would + include general statements, descriptions, and explanations.

The DIRECTIVE illocution is marked by + the prefix h-. + The DIRECTIVE illocution is for the purpose of committing + the hearer to undertake a course of action represented by the proposition, where + the proposition describes a mental wish, desire, or intention on the part of + the speaker. Thus, an utterance in the DIRECTIVE is one + that is neither true nor false because it is not describing something that purports + to exist in the real world; rather, it describes an act or situation which can + potentially be made real, i.e., that can be fulfilled or carried out. Such utterances + include commands, orders, and requests and would generally be marked in Western + languages by either the imperative, optative, or subjunctive moods. The commitment + on the part of the hearer is not belief or disbelief, but rather whether to + obey, comply with, or grant.
+
+
+

The COMMISSIVE illocution is marked by + the prefix çw-. The COMMISSIVE illocution is similar to the DIRECTIVE above, except that the listener and the speaker are the same person, i.e., the + statement is a wish or command directed at oneself as in a promise, vow, pledge, + oath, contract, or guarantee.

The EXPRESSIVE illocution is marked by + the prefix hm-. + The EXPRESSIVE is used for various types of specialized + utterances where the truth-value of the proposition is taken for granted and + the commitment imposed upon the hearer is one of acceptance or non-acceptance. + Such utterances include welcomes, offers, congratulations, condolences, and + apologies.

The DECLARATIVE illocution is marked + by the prefix y-. The DECLARATIVE is used for utterances + whose purpose is to themselves effect a change upon the real world, based upon + convention, cultural rules, law, subjective authority, or personal authority + or control of a situation. The commitment imposed upon the hearer is one of + recognition or non-recognition. Such utterances include declarations, announcements, + proclamations, and various “performative” expressions. Certain languages + mark this function of a verb using a mood known as hortative. Examples would + be: I dub thee “Clown Master”!, The king will hear all grievances + at noon each day, This court is now in session, We hereby declare this treaty + null and void!

The INTERROGATIVE illocution is marked + by the prefix w-. The INTERROGATIVE is used for utterances corresponding to questions in other languages. Questions, + as such, do not exist in Ilaksh. All inquiries and interrogatives are treated + as a type of directive in which the speaker tells the addressee to validate + the truth of an assertion or provide missing information specified by an interrogative + affix to a formative, i.e., when using the INTERROGATIVE, + one is not asking Would you like to dance with me? Rather, one is expressing + what can only be translated either a specialized command (State whether) + you will dance with me or a specialized assertion (I inquire whether) + you will dance with me. One does not say What’s your name?, + but rather Tell me your name.

Indeed, Ilaksh has no words corresponding to the English words + ‘question’ or ‘ask,’ the nearest equivalents being derived + from the words for ‘investigation’ and ‘determine.’ + Consequently, there is no question mark used at the end of the sentence, nor + does the pitch of the voice rise as is usual with Western languages when asking + questions. The commitment on the part of the listener in regard to the INTERROGATIVE is one of compliance or non-compliance in divulging the information sought, + and the truth value of the utterance is neutral pending the reply.

The ADMONITIVE illocution is marked by + the prefix hn-. The ADMONITIVE is used for admonitions and warnings, corresponding to English phrases such + as ‘(I) caution you lest…,’ ‘(I) warn you against…,’ + or ‘Be careful not to….’ The utterance is neither true nor + false because it describes only a potential act or situation which may occur + unless avoided. The commitment on the part of the hearer is to assess the degree + of likelihood of the potentiality, followed by a choice whether to heed or ignore/defy + the utterance.

The ADMONITIVE illocution is marked by + the prefix ççw-. The HORTATIVE is used for statements that are untrue or unreal, but wished to be true or real, corresponding to English phrases such + as ‘if only…’, or ‘were it that….’
+

+ 5.7.9 Examples of Illocution in Use

Level corresponds roughly to what is known + as degree of comparison in other languages. Many languages morphologically indicate + degrees of comparison as exemplified by the English suffixes -er and + -est seen in great-greater-greatest, or alternately with the adverbs more and most, as well as their negative counterparts less and least. The Ilaksh comparison schema is much more complex than those found in natural languages and is designed to eliminate various ambiguities that arise from those simpler schemata, as discussed below.
+

5.8.1 Ambiguity and Under-specification in Natural Languages

The comparison schemata of natural languages tend to grossly under-specify the exact semantic nature of the comparison. A clear case of such under-specification can be seen in an English example sentence such as Jane is healthier. This sentence can mean any of the following:

(a) Jane's state of health has improved, although she is still unwell.
+(b) Jane's state of health has improved so that now she is well (whereas before she was unwell).
+(c) Jane's state of health is even better than it previously was (i.e., she was healthy before, but is even healthier now).
+(d) Jane's state of health is not as poor as someone else's state of health (although neither Jane nor the other person are well).
+(e) Jane's state of health is better than someone else's state of health, so that Jane can be considered healthy while the other is unwell.
+(f) Jane's state of health is better than someone else's state of health, even though both can be considered healthy.

This ambiguity is not alleviated even when we specify a party to which Jane's health is being compared as in Jane is healthier than Sue, which can mean:

(a) Jane's state of health is not as poor as Sue's although both are unwell.
+ (b) Jane's state of health is better than Sue's, so that Jane can be considered well while Sue is unwell.
+ (c) Both Jane and Sue are healthy, but Jane's state of health is even better than Sue's.
+ (d) Jane's state of health is not as poor as Sue's (although neither Jane nor the other person are well).

This sort of ambiguity allows odd-sounding sentences such as Snow is warmer (e.g., than liquid nitrogen) to be perfectly grammatical. What is important to note about the above analysis is that the words healthier or warmer do not indicate in the actual context of usage whether a person is actually healthy or whether snow is actually warm! Rather English -er and -est (and more and most) as well as their negative counterparts (less and least) merely serve to indicate on a relative scale a relationship between two entities being compared (or where only one party is mentioned, in relationship to some unspecified standard or expectation). Additional statements are needed to clarify the actual context to determine where the entities fall on the quantitative "spectrum" or range of the particular quality or attribute pair in question, e.g., unhealthy < --- > healthy.

The comparison scheme of Ilaksh has been designed to inherently specify such relative comparison while simultaneously specifying placement within the qualitative spectrum, so that ambiguity as to whether “healthier” means the person is well or unwell is eliminated.

5.8.2 Relative Versus Absolute Comparison

An additional aspect of Ilaksh comparison is the concept of relative comparison versus absolute comparison. This is an important concept which impacts the truth value of a statement based upon context. Specifically, relative comparison allows for statements to be true within the narrow confines of the context-at-hand, whereas absolute comparison allows for statements to be true without reference to any specific context. This can be illustrated by the following examples.

(a) Sirius is the brightest star in the night sky.
+(b) That highway is the fastest way into town.

Both of these sentences are true in certain pragmatic contexts and not true in others. For example, while Sirius is the most luminous star as seen from Earth, this is merely due to its relative nearness to Earth (8.4 light years) as compared to most other stars. There are thousands of known stars which are larger (and inherently more luminous) than Sirius but are much further away from Earth. So Sentence (a) is true in a relative context but false in an absolute context. Similarly the highway in Sentence (b) may be the fastest way in most conditions, but if there is a traffic jam or an accident blocking the highway, or if one has access to a private helicopter, then the statement would be false. Therefore, it is only true in a narrow context determined by the pragmatics of the moment it is spoken. Ilaksh allows speakers to specify whether a comparison is to be interpreted within the context-at-hand (relative comparison) or as an absolute statement irrespective of the context-at-hand.

+5.8.3 Comparison Operators (Levels)

There are nine comparison operators for the Ilaksh verb, called Levels, which specify the comparative relationship involved, e.g., same as, more than, less than, etc. These levels are marked by a word-initial vocalic prefix to the verb, VL. Each prefix comes in two varieties, to distinguish between relative versus absolute comparison. Additionally there is an unmarked default zero-level in which no comparison is being made).

+In interpreting the meaning of the various Levels, the terms used in the formulas refer to the following X-M-(Y) model, where M represents a verb or an adjectival description, X is the "subject" of the verb, and Y is the standard being compared to.

Note that the meaning of each Level allows for an interpretation in which there is no Y term so that the standard of comparison is a previous state of X, e.g., the difference between Sue dances better than Mary versus Sue dances better than before.
+

5.8.4 The Comparison Cases

In addition to Level, there are 24 specialized noun cases which identify the exact nature of the comparison in relation to the quantitative spectrum, range, or standard for the particular attribute, quality, or act in question. These cases are applied to the noun to which something is compared, i.e., the term Y in the above formulas. So, for example, in the Ilaksh translation of the sentence Jane is healthier than her sister, the equivalent to is healthier would be shown by a Level prefix meaning "more than" applied to a formative meaning "manifesting a state of health," while the phrase corresponding to than her sister would be the word sister marked for a case which specifies whether the other noun to which the sister is being compared (i.e., Jane) is now well, or is nevertheless still unhealthy, etc.

It is primarily through the use of these specialized comparison cases that the ambiguities discussed above in Sec. 5.6.1 are eliminated. The meaning of each case as applied to Y, in terms of the X-M-Y formula discussed above, would be:

where Q indicates the change (or lack thereof) in X over time and S indicates an external standard of comparison for M. An example of this formula in use would be where the term Q = "was previously less M than Y" and S = "although X (still) isn't very M compared to some external standard or expectation of M-ness" applied to the sentence Jane is healthier than Sue, now disambiguated to mean that Jane, while being in a healthier stated than Sue, still isn't very healthy.

There are eight possible values for Q and three possible values for S, rendering a total of 24 possible Q + S combinations. It is these 24 possible Q + S combinations that are rendered as the Comparison cases in Ilaksh. The eight possible values for Q are as follows:

The eight values of Q combine with the three values of S to give the specific meanings of the 24 comparison cases as shown below in Table 14. The 24 comparison cases are shown by vocalic mutation of the root vowel, Series 73 through 96 (see Section 2.5):

Table 14: The 24 Comparison Cases (as per the formula: [X] [M] [in comparison to Y] where X Q in terms of reference standard S)

5.8.5 The COS Suffix

Since Level affixes modify a verb directly, there is still a potential for ambiguity due to the fact that Levels and the Comparison cases specify the relationship between two entities being compared, but they do not specify the particular parameter of the term M. In other words, the verb "laugh" in the SURPASSIVE Level might be best translated as "out-laugh," as in Sam out-laughed George, but we still do not know if this means the laugh was louder, longer, or "harder." Therefore, verbs marked for Levels often take the COS suffix as well, to specify the parameters of he quality or act in question. This suffix is found in the list of derivational suffixes in Chapter 7, but is shown here as well, for the sake of convenience. (See Section 2.7 for an explanation of the nine degrees and three suffix-types associated with derivational suffixes).

+ 5.8.6 Examples of Level and the Comparison Cases in Use

(Note that in the morphological interlinear analysis below, the distinction between absolute versus relative Level is indicated by a small “a” versus a small “r” attached to the label/abbreviation for the particular Level.)


Home	4 Case Morphology	9 Syntax
Introduction	5 Verb Morphology	10 Lexico-Semantics
1 Phonology	6 More Verb Morphology	11 The Writing System
2 Morpho-Phonology	7 Suffixes	12 The Number System
3 Basic Morphology	8 Adjuncts	The Lexicon

	MOOD
+ CONTEXT + (explained in Sec. 3.5) + ↓ +	+ FAC	+ SUB	+ ASM	+ SPE	+ HYP	+ COU	+ IPL	+ ASC
1 EXISTENTIAL	(a)*	o	ü	ei	iu	au	io	uo
2 FUNCTIONAL	ai	i	oi	ë	ia	ua	ie	ue
3 REPRESENTATIONAL	u	e	ëi	ëu	ea	oa	eo	üo
4 AMALGAMATE	ui	ö	ou	eu	ï	iö	öi	öu

NAME OF + VERSION	PHASE + LABEL	NAME OF PHASE	SANCTION
NAME OF + VERSION	PHASE + LABEL	NAME OF PHASE	1 + PPS	2 + EPI	3 + ALG	4 + IPU	5 + RFU	6 + REB	7 + THR	8 + EXV	9 + AXM
+ + PROCESSUAL + PRC	CTX	Contextual	l	ll	mn	rl	lr	nm	lř	lw	ly
	PCT	Punctual	t	tt	lt	rt	tr	tl	tř	tw	ty
	ITR	Iterative	k	kk	lk	rk	kr	kl	kř	kw	ky
	REP	Repetitive	p	pp	lp	rp	pr	pl	př	pw	py
	ITM	Intermittent	r	rr	ř	řl	řř	řw	řy	rw	ry
	RCT	Recurrent	f	ff	lf	rf	fr	fl	fř	fw	fy
	FRE	Frequentative	ŧ	ŧŧ	lŧ	rŧ	ŧr	ŧl	ŧř	ŧw	ŧy
	FRG	Fragmentative	x	xx	lx	rx	xr	xl	ňm	xw	ňn
	FLC	Fluctuative	nt	mp	ňk	nd	mb	ňg	nŧ	mf	ňx

NAME OF + VERSION	PHASE + LABEL	NAME OF PHASE	SANCTION
NAME OF + VERSION	PHASE + LABEL	NAME OF PHASE	1 + PPS	2 + EPI	3 + ALG	4 + IPU	5 + RFU	6 + REB	7 + THR	8 + EXV	9 + AXM
+ + COMPLETIVE + CPT	CTX	Contextual	s	ss	ls	rs	sr	sl	sř	sw	sy
	PCT	Punctual	š	šš	lš	rš	šr	šl	šř	šw	šy
	ITR	Iterative	h	hh	lh	rh	hr	hl	ňh	hw	řç
	REP	Repetitive	v	vv	lv	rv	vr	vl	vř	vw	vy
	ITM	Intermittent	đ	đđ	lđ	rđ	đr	đl	đř	đw	đy
	RCT	Recurrent	ç	çç	lç	rç	çr	çl	çř	çw	mç
	FRE	Frequentative	b	bb	lb	rb	br	bl	bř	bw	by
	FRG	Fragmentative	d	dd	ld	rd	dr	dl	dř	dw	dy
	FLC	Fluctuative	g	gg	lg	rg	gr	gl	gř	gw	gy

5.5 Version

5.2 Case-Frames

5.7 Illocution

5.4 Sanction