Beyond 360

Linguistics is a rich and efflorescent field, being enriched and fertilized by the day. One rich addition to this loam of discovery is the following paper by Baker & Oop (in preparation; to be published 2004?):

The Syntax of Caveman: A Preliminary Dig

Although Caveman language is notably lacking in morphology (as noted in Caveman Morphology: A Fat Lot of Nothing, Baker & Oop 2002, Lascaux University Press, 514 pp.), it makes up for the lack with complex and highly flexible syntactic structures, often marked by sentential tone.

The standard sentence has SVO word order:

1) Og like Nala. “Og likes/liked Nala”

This is to be distinguished from:

2) Nala like Og. “Nala likes/liked Og”.

Simple declarative sentences like this are typically marked by a falling tone on the final word; this intonation is the sole marker to distinguish it from the question, terminating in rising tone:

3) Nala like Og? “Does/did Nala like Og?”

Pronouns (conventionally quoted in objective form to indicate lack of case marking) are rare; when dealing with persons, the proper name of speaker or addressee is often substituted. The sentence

4) Me like Nala. “I like Nala”

can equally well be uttered as:

5) Og like Nala “I like Nala”

if the speaker is Og, or even

6) Like Nala! “I like Nala”,

especially when uttered in a particularly emphatic tone of voice. Similarly, when uttered inquisitively (and somewhat threateningly) to another person, the meaning of the following sentence is obvious:

7) Like Nala? “Do you like Nala [you bastard]?”

Negation is accomplished by adding the negator “no” before the VP:
Nala no like Og. “Nala doesn’t/didn’t like Og.”

If falling tone does not terminate the sentence, further explanatory material can be added:

9) Nala no like Og, him crazy. “Nala doesn’t/didn’t like Og because he’s crazy.”

Like subject prepositions, object prepositions are frequently omitted when the context makes the topic clear:

10) Og like. “Og likes/liked her/him/it”.

There is, therefore, no syntactic bar against sentences like the following:

11) Like! “I like/liked him/her/it”

And indeed such sentences are found, though rarely, perhaps because they share intonation and structure with imperative constructions, e.g.:

12) Kill! “Kill it!”

These structures are also found with direct objects, making a sentence like 13) ambiguous between “Kill the tiger” and “I killed/am going to kill the tiger”:

13) Kill tiger!

Again, context makes the meaning apparent: if spoken by Og, does he have a fresh sabretooth carcass draped over one muscular shoulder, or is he carrying a spear and setting forth to hunt, or is he instructing a neighbor to battle the beast that has invaded his cave?

Possession is usually indicated by simple juxtaposition, with the owner preceding:

14a) Og deer “Og’s deer”
14b) Og woman “Og’s woman/wife”

Juxtaposition can also indicate material or other modification

15a) bone flute “flute made of bone”
15b) woman rock “stone image made to look like a woman”

They can also be multiply embedded, in which case they are always right-headed:

16a) Nala bone flute “the flute made of bone which belongs to Nala”
16b) mountain face rock chip knife “a knife made out of a chip from the rock on the side of the mountain”

I.e. [mountain [face [rock [chip [knife]]]]].

Pronouns can never be used in this construction; it is impossible to say:

17) *me deer “my deer”

As with 9), omission of falling tone on the initial clause can produce conditional sentences:

18) Tiger eat Og deer, me smash! “If the sabretooth eats Og’s (my) deer, I’ll hit him.”

Relative clauses customarily omit the Complementizer:

19) Me smash tiger eat Og deer. “I’ll hit the sabretooth that ate/is eating Og’s (my) deer.”

Noun+relative clause can also be used as a modifier:

20) rock Nala find knife “a knife made from the rock that Nala found”

i.e. [rock [Nala find]] knife]

Infinitive clauses are unmarked, with simple juxtaposition of verbs:

20a) Me like eat deer. “I like to eat a/the deer.”
20b) Nala want eat Og deer? “Does/did Nala want to eat Og’s deer?”
20c) Nala want eat deer Og kill? “Does/did Nala want to eat the deer that Og killed?”

Adjectives always precede nouns:

21) Og ride big mammoth! “Og rode/is riding/will ride the big mammoth.”

Plurality, when necessary, is marked by the determiner “many”:

22) Og see many rhino come. “Og saw/is seeing many woolly rhinoceroses coming.”

Adjectives are predicated by making them follow the noun:

23) Mammoth big! “The mammoth/mammoths is/was/are/were big.”

More study necessary understand all cave talk. Want support effort, send grant money, Baker & Oop, south France.

This entry was posted on Monday, April 28th, 2003 at 11:59 am and is filed under General. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.