PRONOUNS II | Getting Social
Вставка
- Опубліковано 3 лип 2024
- More stuff about how languages deal with the category of person markers
-----
LINKS:
CONLANG SHOWCASE: / conlangs_showcase_subm...
SCRIPT w/ SOURCES: docs.google.com/document/d/1N...
CORRECTIONS: docs.google.com/document/d/1m...
WORLD ANVIL (affliate): worldanvil.pxf.io/a7WDY
-----
SPECIAL THANKS PATRONS:
Maggy Bort
Lichen
FrostbiteKelvin
Johan Spaedtke
Spencer Brownlee
Terrablae
Ben McFarlane
Alexander Roper
JJ Albrecht
A3ulez
Andrew P Chehayl
John Hooyer
Usedwashbucket
Patrick Kruse
Slorany
Sean M
P'undrak
Ripta Pasay
World Anvil
Reno Lam
-----
MUSIC:
Udo Grunewald
-----
TIMESTAMPS:
00:00 Intro
00:07 Impersonalisation
01:34 Tense, Aspect & Mood
02:03 Polarity
02:35 Anaphors & Logophors
05:28 Emphatic Forms
06:53 Agreement
09:31 Morphological Alignment
10:56 Possessed Nouns
13:31 Social Distinctions
15:42 Politeness
19:14 Outro (Conlang Showcase)
-----
Thanks for watching everyone. It means a lot. :)
A stable, inalienable relationship with "father"? Never heard of it.
Based joke
This is for a fantasy setting, after all
Can you have a stable relationship with your horse?
mood
They are the same way as bridges are female in portuguese, grammar isn't a accurate portrait of reality
Latin is probably the last language anyone would be offended over someone mispronouncing tbh
... Proto-Indo-European?
Even though Latin words are relatively easy to pronounce. PIE though, that depends...
Depends. A bunch of people get really , stupidly angry over Classical Vs Ecclesiastical Vs Vulgar pronunciations of Latin...
First day on the internet?
@@imrukiitoaoffire1908 The pronunciation isn’t hard, but it’s counterintuitive for English speakers who aren’t familiar with it. If you don’t know that “ae” is /a͜e/ and “c” is always /k/, you’ll pronounce them wrong.
one side effect of the lack of distinction between alienable and inalienable in English is that you can claim ownership of someone else's arm. "my arm" could refer to either the arm that is part of me, or an arm that I just have and acquired through questionably legal means
or you can use inalienable and alienable and say "my arm" with the alienable to encode that you got it through questionably legal means!
You can use this distinction with other nouns too if your conlangs speakers are,,, strangely violent. or have strange morals.
oinky momo, yeah, that ambiguity is unfortunately present in English. One mechanism to distinguish it, though, is the adjective "own," as in "my own arm is right here on my own body, but my other arm, well ..." It's not perfect, but it does help to disambiguate that scenario.
@@claycube9591 Well... maybe the arm in a chair (plane, bus, movie theatre) or it belongs to your SO.
Hmmm, like a family entering a restaurant, “there’s our table” vs “there’s OUR table!!!” 😄
@@Sovairu In Polish, Russian and other Slavic languages we have exactly sth like you suggest, the word: swój/svoy (Pol/Rus.). Obviously declined for number and gender. It's a possessive pronoun that indicates belonging to the subject of the sentence.
John went to Bill and amputated his hand. = ambiguous in English
But in Polish:
John poszedł do Billa i amputował JEGO rękę. = his = Bill's hand
John poszedł do Billa i amputował SWOJĄ rękę. = his own = John's hand
This enables emphasizing some really interesting nuance in meaning where we're talking in 1st person with no other parties involved.
"I went there to take MY arm". - the arm couldn't be anybody else's so there's no ambiguity
In Polish we can still say it in 2 ways though:
Poszedłem zabrać tam SWOJĄ rękę. = my own arm (that's the natural way to say it)
Poszedłem tam zabrać MOJĄ rękę. = this emphasizes that it's my own arm and not somebody else's, but it also feels as if that arm was kinda alien to me. It feels like indicating the 1st person from the perspective of a 3rd person, even though it is stated in the grammatical 1st person.
ah yes, Javanese (also Sundanese, etc) language. when you have to learn at least 3 languages at once, each for speaking to your parents, acquaintance, and people you hate.
Javanese actually have four, the one is keraton language, which you can't use it unless you're a keraton member or worker.
cantonese where speaking is a different language to reading text
1:01
Missed opportunity to use “one does not simply walk into Mordor” as your example
Oh but Edgar, the amount of fathers you have *does* go down over time
it could also go up if he ever finds a way to clone himself
Last time I was this early, PIE was still being spoken
oh hi GBPlumbob from Discord
@@masicbemester Hey
Could you go more into the respect levels that a language could have, and how politeness works in languages? Particularly those likely Japanese and Chinese (I'm still struggling with those).
This was the most interesting part of my Japanese course. Especially the complexity that arises when you need to speak casually to one person about a third person who is higher up on the hierarchy. Oh boy
Korean politeness lvl are also really cool
imo chinese doesnt have politeness linguistically, maybe with paralinguistical stuff, source : im native in taiwanese hokkien and taiwanese mandarin
Chinese doesn't. The most it has linguistically is a T-V distinction like you'll see in plenty of European languages, albeit with different cultural understandings of whom you can talk informally to.
@@justineberlein5916 你/您 (you normal, you polite) is more or less all modern Chinese has. There used to be many more pronouns with different levels of respect/politeness associated with them.
Can you make a video about ASL or sign languages in general? I think they’re really cool. It blows my mind that they’re actually languages just as much as spoken languages are. My dumb speaking person brain isn’t used to thinking like that.
Also, they have some pretty neat features only possible in that medium. For instance, I’m pretty sure the ASL pronouns are literally just pointing at whatever or whomever you’re talking about, or pointing in a random direction if it/they aren’t present, which is wonderfully intuitive and gender neutral. And I love how the grammar involves facial expressions like looking inquisitive to signify that you’re asking a question. And I think to say “Very ____” you just sign the word more dramatically. Though I don’t actually speak ASL, I’ve just been googling a lot about it recently so maybe I’m wrong about some of this.
Also my dad said that some scientists think sign languages might’ve developed before spoken languages. That is meant to explain how we got these amazing voiceboxes to produce intricate sounds for language if understanding them requires us to already have really complex and well-developed language centres of the brain. Though now that I’ve written that, it seems like both could probably have just developed bit by bit together. I’d be interested to hear your thoughts on this.
i wholeheartedly agree with this. or something about making a sign language, like for a species that lives underwater or doesn't have a mouth, so they cant speak and have to sign.
NEW LINGUISTIC VIDEO I LOVE U ARTIFEXIANNN
last time i was early i didn’t have 5+ in progress conlangs
If you're anything like me, that's a long time ago...
He walks home
He is stronga
He is fasta
He is bettera
He is harda
And he adds the dakka
@@oz_jonesAand he do-a the skeeta
This is serious food for thought. I have a race of rock people with three genders and a subclass of children who have not yet chosen their presented gender-- that considers all other races a different subclass entirely and this has opened DOORS for me in building the culture in relation to the humans they've subjugated, not to mention between social classes. I hadn't considered that language could be used to this degree to show strained relations between classes and groups.
It's so clear to everyone over the age of 30 that this "gender ideology" nonsense is artificial, it's made up, it has no bearing in reality. By incorporating it into your work you are pushing an agenda, you are leaning on a message, you are promoting a religion. The religion of wokeism. But by all means don't stop doing it, better to be a visible parasite than an invisible one.
Last time I was this early, Hebrew verbs had aspect but no tense instead of tense but no aspect.
I'm working on a language with 5 3rd person pronouns. Male, female, 3rd gender (working on its name), child, and neutral/ stranger. And those are all people specific pronouns. And videos like this are super super helpful for figuring out how the hell I'm supposed to write these
for the 3rd gender, there is already a perfect term just that nowadays most people dont realize it anymore: in latin neutral/neuter was in fact two words *né uter* which meant *non-of.both* so not male but also not female
ne'uter is btw exactly the same structure as *neither*, it looks even like if it would be the english development of neuter (which it is not, but good aid for memorizing it)
Having distinct impersonal pronouns in a conversational social register is extremely useful! I often find myself wishing English had a way to distinguish referring to someone rhetorically from addressing someone in informal speech!
How about dissing that impersonal pronoun and setting up a verb-form for impersonal? Along with the other 6 persons having their own forms, 1st and 2nd persons using pronouns only for emphasis.
17:34 nahuatl too uses reflexives!
I will NEVER get sick of hearing you talking.
@3:39
For indicating different "she's" in Polish we use personal demonstratives.
We would use a "she" and a personal feminine form of "this" to indicate another woman:
['She' pronoun] said that [a feminine "this"] stopped over in Dubai.
ONA powiedziała, że TA zatrzymała się w Dubaju.
And because, just like in English, the demonstratives dinstinguish between a close and a remote object (this vs. that), we can indicate a third woman as well:
[She pronoun] said that [a feminine "this"] and [a feminine "that"] stopped over in Dubai.
ONA powiedziała, że i TA i TAMTA zatrzymały się w Dubaju.
Dam, this aspect is kinda tense. Mood
"One needs to train / We need to train / People need to..."
In Polish we simply have non-personal verbs that don't require a subject at all. They state actions/states that everybody is subjected to.
Those can be translated as sth like: It is needed to train. Similarly to: It is neccessary to train.
Based Slavic
Great video, as usual!
Excellent video! As always
The long awaited sequel.
I like the slavic way of doing impersonal forms - they use reflexives and third person
like in the common adage - nie wchodzi się dwa razy do tej samej rzeki, which means one doesn't not enter the same river twice (the reason why I'll leave open to discussion, but grammatically it's a personless form)
I'm surprised you didn't mention Irish when talking about emphatic pronouns
Love ur videos! Un abbraccio dall'Italia!
Yess I've been waiting for this!
Logophorisity sounds very nice, I was just wishing I had a way to easily distinguish instances of the same pronoun, when I want to tell a quick story without briefing someone on a bunch of names. Thanks for the fancy vocab.
Switch reference is another thing you might want to take a look at
That could also be really useful from a storytelling perspective. Characters overhear enemies having an entire conversation about events/plans/secrets/etc, but since the enemies already know who and what they’re talking about the actual names, things, and places remain mysterious and have to be discovered later. A way to drop enough information to keep things interesting (they now know there was some betraying and some killing, some spying is currently happening, and some attacking and usurping is planned) while still keeping the narrative tension high (is the killing we already know about related to this newly uncovered betraying? Who’s spying on whom? Is there a traitor on our side? Where/who are they attacking? Who are they usurping?)
Great video.
Glad to see that Pronouns pt. 2 is back! Hope things go better this time around
I was hoping that you'll mention Vietnamese!!!! The pronoun (mình) is really confusing while learning it, since it could mean either: 1st person sg (polite/same generation), inclusive we, 2nd person sg (spouse/very familiar?), and not to mention kinship nouns are used instead of "pure pronouns“, so typically (con) means both "a child", 1st sg (to 1x older generation), or 2nd sg (to younger generations)
Yay!
14:55 - I think this is a good opportunity to consider which side adoptive relationships would fall on (would a person talking to their adopted child use markers for blood relation, or something more like what's used for in-laws?), and how details like that reflect on a culture
(assume the child already knows they are adopted so it's not a matter of keeping it secret, but of how the relationship is expressed)
Dude thinking about this led me into an entire worldbuilding rabbithole and I now have a small society/enclave of people which is basically “none of us are related but we see each other as family”. Basically taking found family/adoption/brotherhoods/etc to the max. There’s a whole historical origin over the course of at least 3-4 generations. All coming from the question of how a society’s view on family would impact the alienable/inalienable pronouns of the language
Possibly my favorite feature I've invented for a conlang are a set of second person pronouns used to mark imperative utterances. Anyone know of a natlang that does this? It seems pretty reasonable, especially given the sorts of other TAM type stuff that natlangs mark on subject pronouns.
Are these "imperative pronouns" separate from non-imperative pronouns, or are they formed from the non-imperative but with some sort of imperative affix/ morphology applied to them? I might know of a language
@@saintburnsy2468 so I was specifically thinking of fully suppletive ones, but either really
@@opalescentyams2742 Ahh okay, hmm I will need to consult the archives then...
@@opalescentyams2742 I found 3 natlangs that might fit the bill! They are: Manak, Guro, and Banawa. The last two are debatable.
(Banawa: www.mmll.cam.ac.uk/files/copil_12_6_tossin.pdf) (Guro: www.academia.edu/7420991/Series_of_personal_pronouns_in_Guro)
However, Manak seems to fit the bill with a separate set of morphologically dedicated, suppletive, imperative pronouns. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mehek_language#Pronouns
But I would be cautious and take the info with a grain of salt, as Manak is a Papuan language, and data on them is notoriously sparse and often unreliable.
I like the idea of taking grammatical paradigms which are usually verbal/ nominal and putting them into places where you wouldn't expect to find them. This is a good example of that! Good conlanging there, bud!
Nahuatl uses xi- instead of the normal ti- to mark second person in imperative. No other imperative markers are used.
Tikkwa 'you eat'
Xikkwa 'eat!'
Is this what you meant?
I don't know if my intuition is weird but my first thought on the second Japanese sentence at 4:48 meant "Yamada married a woman who hated HERself" instead of himself. It can mean both ways, but just a curious observation.
そう思いました！
The large breaks between videos in this series is to give you time to work on the previous episode.
2:24 ok idk why, but i really like the sound of mratuk here. it sounds so cool!
One thing I've learned through this series is that English takes lot of handy shortcuts for speakers. But it makes wrapping your head around linguistics extra hard because we use the same words for everything. The fact that the genitive possessive "'s" is different than the possessive "his" is a bit of a mind bender as a native English speaker.
The English possessive enclitic
Glad to hear there's a natlang that has emotional attitude baked into the grammar - I've been planning on putting that in one of the conlangs I've been toying with, but I was a little worried it'd feel too artificial
last time i was this early-
wait this is my first time being a chosen one
1:56
heheheheh
"shid"
i'm still waiting for OA's showcase.
please do a video specifically on honorifics as well as how to they form
you seem to be the guy who knows alot about earth stuff, and I was wondering, would you happen to be thinking on making a video on tectonic plates? I have an idea on how they work, but most of the other stuff just goes through my head, and how you tend to use pictures to describe everything helps out, its just an idea, I love your work, and best of wishes to you
I need it for a personal project, simular to.when you helped biblaridion with his alien world project, infact simular to
How common is having verb agreement on 1st person forms only? (Is that what Irish does or no?)
Could you do a video on the grammatical notation you use? It seems pretty interesting and i kinda wanna learn it
The English 3rd person-only agreement system is due to the dropping of thou. It used to be I/We/You(pl)/They/Infinitive unmarked, Thou -(e)st, He/She/It -(e)th/-(e)s but because of some cultural tomfoolery during the 14th to 15th century, Early Modern English speakers stopped using the 2nd person singular conjugation and pronouns. So English's system _is_ weird, but it has a logical reason for that weirdness. Namely, British people in the 14th to 15th century don't like being talked down to. And due to the major French influence on English, A T/V distinction was beginning to occur and the lower classes didn't like it. So instead of keeping the T/V distinction, the commoners just universally stopped using the 2nd person singular (thou), because informal you (the same as you sg in many languages) is almost always used to insult someone.
The idea I have for my conlang is that inalienable possession is a small group of nouns that are marked with an affix or even by changing into a completely different word, while alienable possession is marked with an adjective. Is that natural? I was also thinking of making the adjectives different depending on the animacy of the possessed noun, having one set for inanimate objects, another for domestic animals and slaves, and yet another for other types of alienable relationships.
Nice
The father goat thing, I think, is a subtle reference to The Terminal movie. There’s a scene where a Russian dude is trying to enter the USA with some medicine for his father which are illegal. So the Bulgarian guy (main character) figures out that the Russian guy would be allowed to cross with the pills if he said they were for an animal instead of for a human. So the Russian dude, who doesn’t speak english, says “it’s for goat” and the Airport police have to let him through.
For a conlang I was thinking of having one set of pronounce for things from their own country and one for foreign things, and if you wanna insult someone from your own country you use foreign pronouce.
Another neat idea would be to play with honorifics
Will they be doing the conlang showcase next year? I've been getting lots of progress done on my languages the past few months but I doubt I'll be finished enough to submit anything before the deadline...
Yeah same, i'm not gonna have anything i could submit within a few small weeks
Can you make remakes of you old videos, like Dwarf Planets?
I wish I could apply this knowledge but of the vast universe of beings I have created with various civilisations the one I'd most want to have a language for has no spoken language and their written language, like English, is made of words from everyone else's language. So I'd have to make a language for every civilisation to have ever interacted with them, and then work out which words those civilisations would want to trade.
Yes! An Artifexian Video!
I'm using Lardil as the basis for my pronouns. There will be 8 first person pronouns in 4 father-child cycles [A-B], [C-D], [E-F], [G-H] and 2 mother>child cycles [A>G>E>C>A] and [B>D>F>E>B]. So a son in pronoun class D will have a mother in class B and a father in class C. He will look for marriage to a class E woman and their children will be class C. His sister will look for a class E man and her children will be class F. And so on.
Interesting concept
@@tinanguyen5969 The usefulness of this system is discussed in "Skin groups and Onan: computer simulation as an aid to
understanding anthropological phenomena"
4:10 in my conlang, there is a gender neutral third person pronoun.
I could make a pair, when if you need to say the person of the same gender, referring to themselves, you'd need to use that neutral form. So, that would be:
she said that they stopped over in Dubai (one woman talks about herself);
she said that she stopped over in Dubai (one woman talks about another woman);
In russian btw, we could say "she said that stoped over in dubai", (why repeat the pernoun, if it's already mentioned?)
A variation of possession I've heard of, though don't know of any concrete example of, is reciprocative possession. When something is possessed, both the object and subject of the possession are marked. "Your goat's" would then be used to refer to the goat owned by you.
So, something like a possessor marker and a possessed marker in the same phrase? I think that Turkish does that: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish_grammar#Possession and en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish_grammar#Genitive_case
You can also always go with Australia's rules of politeness. The more distant you put between yourself and the target = less respect.
Not Aussie so please correct if I'm wrong.
The more formal means more distance between 1st and 2nd. Less formal means closer. And with the separating of people into groups or otherness being rude by putting someone as "formal or above" you've actually been putting them down.
Someone else please say this better
Ironic politeness?
You're kind of right. It's a bit hard to explain.
Australia has a culture of respecting equals more than superiors, so formal indications of social superiority (e.g. using honorifics like Sir) is often used to convey disrespect. This means to convey respect to a superior you would refer to them as if they were your social equal. Since this is how you refer to your superiors, referring to your social equals as if they were your social equals is less respectful, so to convey respect you typically refer to them as a social inferior, which increases respect by increasing distance. This can be confusing though, because referring to a social inferior as a social inferior does not convey respect, referring them as a social equal does.
So if you and your boss call each other "mate" everything is fine, but if you call your freind "mate" they've probably done something they shouldn't have.
@@matthewparker9276 thank you. That is super cool and I love your explanation
Yes
Wowie
Can alignment be one way for an even number, but the other for odd?
I thrown away my conlang and restarted like 300 times 😐. About to throw away 301...
Does anyone have the original version of this video been looking for it to see what differs
The alienable and inalienable thing is kind of funny!
Where does "my wife/husband" lie between those two?
Wife/husband is not a father or a part of body, such subject can be alienable.
But saying this out-loud when your spouse hears you can make her/him -the actual person- truly alienable. :)
If divorce is legal in your country then your spouse is alienable (in the sense that the government can alienate you).
If divorce is illegal in your country then your spouse is inalienable.
I want to see a language that can distinguish "she and she (but not she), with aid from her, helped her and her help her and her.
He walks
He ia S T R O N G A
He is strongs
So OA is a language you made to demonstrate conlanging… Have you made any others? 😮
You could do what Tamil does and affix demonstratives to the pronoun, Avan (that person), ivan (this person), uvan (that person next to you).
I have literally never been this early to a youtube video. It's amazing, the comments aren't all complete drivel! Early squad rocks.
Japanese also uses honorifics. What honorifics two people use with each other can tell you a *lot* about their relationship. For example, honorifics could be used to indicate disrespect.
I Literally just shouted YEs!!!
For the TAM marked pronouns-is it possible that this may be generalized to all nouns? So instead of marking TAM on the verb, it is marked on the noun in (almost) all situations?
Perhaps anaphoric pronouns which mark for tense are used as suffixed articles, which then fuse to the noun and become TAM markers on the noun.
Nivaclé marks tense aspect mood solely on the noun, and never on verbs.
The title: “Getting Social”
Corona: “Did somebody call me?”
I wanna make a language with a difference between long-term possessive pronouns and short-term pps and have people talk about relationships hihi
7:41 I noticed that Italian is ambiguous, especially for the 3rd person pronoun for being specific with the person's gender.
I know esperanto isn't a natlang, of course, but would it be an example of having nouns, adjectives and adverbs agree with each other, but not verbs? the verbs are marked for tense only and don't agree with subject, object or pronouns, if I remember correctly
I'm pretty sure nouns, adjectives and adverbs in esperanto don't agree in person, right? Remember, that's what this is talking about. You can very well have nouns, articles and adjectives agree in case or number or gender but not have any person agreement in the language at all.
The example isn't in Oa right?
I've been learning Spanish for the past year-ish, and I now find English severely lacking in a standard way to refer to "you all". Yes, "y'all" exists, but it's very niche and has specific associations.
Are there examples of languages with polarity encoded in pronouns?
T thought Oa didn't have an u sound?
1:56 in that person ascept table,the forms of conditional 1stp.* and 3rdpn.* pronouns are identical. why dont you change that 1stp. conditional form to ad?
*1stp. means 1st person and 3rdpn. meand 3rd person neutral.
The Japanese you're using there is spelt very strangely. I've never seen 'jibun' spelt as 'zibun' and we'd typically use 'shi' instead of 'si' in pretty much every situation.
It seems, then, that you are accustomed to the Hepburn Romanization scheme, but other Romanizations do exist. Many of them are older and less common, but they do exist: www.omniglot.com/writing/japanese_romaji.htm
The Japanese themselves often use Kunrei-shiki Romanization, as it more accurately represents Japanese morphology. I often see it in website URLs, in file names or when Japanese people communicate using a method that doesn't support Japanese characters.
Hepburn is basically for Englishspeakers, fitting English orthography/phonology not Japanese, it will be used by companies for this reason. It's not suited for linguistic work.
its phonemically transliterated i.e. just the true underlying pieces of the language -- and shi *IS* just s+i and nothing else, just that for the last hundreds of years you pronounce it as "sh" due to the i ... like with english 'tension' but thats even just an underlying "s" since its from 'tense'+ion not 'tensh'+ion
Whats with all the goats?
idk
Everyone seems to be missing out on using Mixtec as an example of having a lot of pronouns
Ok this seems to be good lol :D "Mixtec has several pronouns that indicate whether the referent is a man, a woman, an animal, a child or an inanimate object, a sacred or divine entity, or _water_. "
Nepali 😍😍😍!!!
Is Artifexian... Back?
THIS IS NOT A DRILL ARTIFEXIAN JUST UPLOADED A VIDEO!!!!
Linguistics good
I miss world building videos
Can you mirror your content on Odysee?
17 seconds
You touched on it a bit with the example of the two-class system, and you went into it a bit with honorifics, but you didn't really go into how complicated social pronouns can get. Like Japanese, where pronouns you use for yourself and others depend more on the relationship you have with that person. Watakushi=formal I/me (talking to someone higher rank than you); watashi=polite I/me (talking to someone slightly higher or someone you don't know); boku=familiar I/me (friends or peers); ore=intamate I/me (talking to family, very close friend, or lover); etc. Second person pronouns are (I believe) equally complicated.
Just to be clear to anyone reading, I don't speak Japanese and I don't claim to. This is based on what I've read. I've also heard that watashi is strictly feminine while all the others are exactly as I said but strictly for masculine. Though, I believe their system isn't gender-based; It's more likely that it's considered a social norm for women to use the polite (watashi) in more circumstances than would a man which could lead to a misunderstanding making people think it's feminine. I've heard it both ways, that it's gender-based and that it's not, and the only reason I can think that it would be is if women had their own spot on the social hierarchy that is completely separate from any other level, requiring them to use different pronouns. Again, I don't speak it, it's just what I've read.
In any case, pronouns can be really complicated when it's based on not just each person's social standing, but how each person's standing relates to the other's.
Also, since I already stalked about Japanese, in case you haven't before you should look into the markers therein. Japanese has a word order and whatnot, but instead of relying on the word order and agreements to tell what the subject, object, etc. are they use a marker. (Sorry if I'm telling you things you already know here) They have a subject marker and object marker as well as many other grammatical "particles" used for different things in their language. For instance, they use a question particle (which I call a verbal question mark, but I don't know if that's a real term for it) to mark a sentence as a question instead of the Indo-European way of changing the word order. I'm sure the particles are much more complicated than I know, though, which is kinda why I think it would be neat for you to look into it and make a video if you haven't. That said, since traditional Japanese is written without spaces, it's debatable whether or not the markers are particles or suffixes. In Japanese, changing from one syllabary to another or from a syllabary to the character system or vice versa is what determines when a word changes, but sometimes syllabary symbols are tacked onto the end of kanji as a suffix and you just have to speak the language to know that it's part of the word instead of a new one, which means just because we put a space between a word and its marker in romaji doesn't necessarily mean that it functions as a particle rather than a suffix. I feel like that's kind of arbitrary though since there isn't a distinction between the two concepts in written Japanese.
Anyone catch the name of the Aboriginal language with twelve pronouns? I think it was Nguyani but that may not be it...
ïm çürßəð
0:22 yes, you don't NEED impersonal pronouns, but they are insanely useful in preventing offense, confusion, legal disputes, and domestic fights.
How many times have you said "you" in the general sense, and then the person you're talking to takes it personally?
And it's no secret that you have to be REALLY careful about what words you say in court or to police, since they can construe your words "we" as an admission.
you only seem to say you don't need stuff or that you should do stuff with the background goal of worldbuilding and artlangs. please.
What is a local controller? A Pronoun or an argument?
Oh I am *deeply* wrong here. This was randomly recommended to me and I assumed, just from the title, that it was about trans and nonbianry issues. Maybe neopronouns, or just the social (and distinctly non-biological) nature of pronouns in general.
Welcome to the deep, deep hole of confusion that is Linguistics UA-cam! The video is playing in the background while writing this comment and I'm not taking any of this in.