January-August 2021 Otseqon notes

be.ready, be.made + TR → to fix, to prepare, to repair

COM applicative also handles content (think about, talk about, etc) ↳ maybe INSTR/LOC instead

prey, followed thing + TR → to follow, to pursue

LS ‘face, principle part of something’

locative LSes (LS with only a location meaning)

simple; hasty

external negation (not.exist NOM-x) sometimes means 'not yet' especially with 'scheduled/repeating activity verbs' like eat, sleep, etc

LS:connection, tie, link, contact, filler, thickener, intermission, …

‘do over a distance’ (tele-)

pull(?)+LS:trace ‘leave a lasting effect’

LS manner, means, way, custom, field (of study)

★ LSes appear on nominalized clauses and function sorta as complementizers (very much like Yimas) 3-forget:NCTR ART eat-NOM+LS:heart-3POSS ART sugar ‘he lost his taste for sugar’

instr ‘by conjecture, by deduction’ by.conjecture+know:POT → can be easily guessed

middle (or, perhaps, the job-like antipassive) also forms ""agent nominalizations"" (not nominalized at all just headless relative clauses) (probably without agent pronominal prefix?) ART write-MID ‘writer’

★ nominalizations can be transitivized meaning like uh… decide to? not sure yet ‘make it so that … (clause)’ probably decide to for at least nominalized volitional clauses (nom vol clauses or volitionalized nominalized clauses?) wait where do the persons go maybe the nominalization has to be controlled by the subject of the transitive of the whole thing 1ERG-write-MID-NOM-VOL ‘i decided to write’ if NOM subject is instead marked by POSS suffixes maybe not a problem, at least for subject also what about external arguments 1ERG-write-VOL-NOM-VOL ART book ‘i decided to write a book’ (?) なんだこりゃ

does external negation (not.exist (NREF) clause-NOM) mean ‘never’ or ‘not yet’

uncontrolled (has person marking) versus controlled (no subject agreement, subject = subject of matrix clause) nominalizations(?)

do.with.eyes+leave.behind ‘overlook’

cast.a.glance+locative LS:side ‘quickly look away’

-koko LS:time on nominalizations forms temporal adjuncts

clause-PST-NOM-VOL = ‘pretend that ’ (?)

things in the topic position need not be arguments of the clause, but if they are must be the S

conditional be.without (kaka-? kakan-?) 'verbalizer' + 'nominalization' TOP clause expressing like N is something that is supposed to happen/should happen/would be good if it did happen, but the speaker does not have control over, and C is a sort of response if N does not materialize ‘If the women aren't coming, I'm not going back.’ ‘If the plane doesn't come, what do we eat?’ ‘If he doesn't listen, we'll hit him in the head.’

NB. no real need for a sort of くれる・あげる contrast since the verb already agrees with the beneficiary (i.e., not really clear what two benefactive applicatives would do)

"beneficiary possessor raising" where the verb agrees with the possessor of the beneficiary (commonly 1SG) and the possessee is expressed with the -co E case 2SG-cook-MID-1SG.POSS mother-E/OBL IMP ‘Please cook for my mother’ has the connotation that the action is something the speaker should do, should have done, is culturally expected to do, etc, so is highly affected as a beneficiary

possessive classifier for carried things (includes clothes)

indirectly possessed nouns can still be directly 'possessed' in constructions specifying the purpose of the thing, for example basket-3POSS fish-E ‘basket for fish’ (NB. does the head noun actually agree with the 'possessor'? seems wrong to me.) ↳ instead of this it's probably just another use of the E case i.e. basket fish-E

-woto nominalizer, appears only on controlled nominalizations, means the undergoer is controlled by the subject of the matrix clause

not + inferred evidential ‘no sign of …’ (exact form this construction takes is still up in the air)

certain (many?) nominal verbs can appear with aspect marking which is sort of like the ser/estar distinction in spanish i.e. unmarked is a characteristic and aspect marking makes it an event on the TIMELINE

interal experience predicates mostly H tone + end in -kii some kind of alternation between internal experiences and things that cause the experiences (feel cold → cold wind that causes one to feel cold; be scared → something scary)

morphological negation: neg prefix (after person inflection) + negative polarity clitic (after O) negative polarity clitics: - =NEG - =EMPH.NEG (absolutely not) (?) (- ends with regular =NEG, with FUT ‘no chance of, will never happen’) ↳ just regular =EMPH (i.e. =NEG=EMPH) instead? - =PROHIB - =AVERS - =ONLY (nothing but) - =EVEN (not even) (?) (in ES chains, "even without …, even if you don't …")

precautionary/aversative NEG-root-NOM-(POSS)-E=AVERS ‘in case; lest’ lest-clause is not necessarily undesirable, but if the precaution was not taken the result would be undesirable for example ‘I'm bringing a bag in case we find any crabs’ ⇒ finding crabs is desired, but not having a bag if we did would be undesired ‘Step back lest you slip and fall’

agent of passives marked with the conjunction for 'because'

polite imperative framed without reference to an agent, i.e. uses a bare root, probably nominalized, something like exist-FUT get.brought."ashore"-NOM-3E ART boats ‘Please bring the boats ashore’ (“There will be bringing ashore of boats”) (most formal) ↳ maybe more than just mere politeness this construction is used for more like future (i.e. not immediately fulfillable) imperatives maybe + -Q (“Will there be bringing ashore of boats?”) — does otseqon allow -Q with future? even if not maybe it's okay in this case because it's not a question but a request or, perhaps more likely, it's + -inferred evidential-Q (“Does it seem like there will be bringing ashore of boats?”) or -reported evidential-Q

no agent agreement + benefactive (usually 1SG) (middle? not quite sure where this one falls) ↳ maybe what i'm aiming for is better captured with a construction like action(unmarked for aspect) + ES-give-1SG.E(=IMP?)

imperative clitics (most casual) - male to male - casual female speaker (no marking) - casual male speaker - speaker is a boy (or ボクっ子) (consider merging this with above) - neutral (more polite; more female in casual contexts)

NEG also used in "as if to"

catch a word with the dictionary

it exists ↔ a thing

otseqon politeness two axes: casual↔polite and humble↔respectful when speaking respectfully, respectful language is used to talk about others and humble to talk about oneself note that there are cases where you use respectful/humble without using polite language, because polite is a bit cold and distant, for example when talking to one's parents one would refer to them respectfully and oneself humbly but would not use polite language (as this would seem to distance oneself from them), or some people even casually tend to use respectful terms to seem polite without seeming overly cold the following semantic domains tend to have suppletive vocabulary for respect/humility: - cooking & eating - drinking & smoking - bathing - posture & motion - boating (sailing & kayaking) - talking & speech acts - understanding & the senses - possessive classifiers / verbs of giving and receiving a respected participant is made to be the sole participant of a clause using means like -CAUS-REFL when the respected participant is the S and a special -HON.PASS morpheme when the respected participant is the O. a humble participant is generally not framed as the agent except when accepting the blame for failures, using means like untransitivized roots and (tentative) instead of the middle using -CAUS-HUM.PASS (maybe or maybe not the same morpheme as -HON.PASS above) there is also a ‘participant is respected’ morpheme, which is reduplicated for plurality politeness is indicated morphologically with politeness prefixes and suffixes, and possibly some constructions that are different when being polite (imperatives?)

possessive classifier for ingredients, raw materials (also tools? anything used for preparing something else?)

qoi (kui) ロマン

VだけV like pattern

actional classes kind of apply to ideophones/expressives i.e. reduplicated being states/multiplicative processes, and other classes like Q, ES, etc make sense

proximative-desiderative

V-PROX-PST action narrowly averted

ES-make ‘so, therefore’ doing.so ES-make ‘だから’

polite words for tomorrow/overmorrow/more than 1 day after tomorrow are FUT + polite forms of the equivalents for yesterday

two types of perception complements: relative clause ‘I saw the man leaving’ 1-3-see-PFV TI man TI leave-IMPF nominalized ‘I saw the man leave’ 1-3-see-PFV TI leave-PFV-NOM-3E as suggested by the english glosses the distinction is somewhat like the latter views the event as punctual and completed, while the former suggests the perceiver saw some internal composition → it's not clear if this just boils down to PFV vs IMPF or how it differs though perhaps it's at least part the COMPLETION aspect, or more outcome-oriented

get.caught.with.the.hands

periphrasic causative tends to imply effort on the part of the causer and/or unwillingness on the part of the causee

precautionary/aversative clause without another clause means something like " might (as a result of something they are doing right now or in the future)" 1SG-NEG-fall=AVERS ‘I might fall’ (perhaps it doesn't use -NOM-E when occuring with another clause after all) ↳ maybe this is sit/stay + normal precautionary construction (which is thus always nominalized) (1SG-sit DAT NEG-fall-NOM-1SG=AVERS)

mergers in respectful vocabulary come + go make/do + say (also applies to grammaticalized echo forms) eat + drink/smoke possessive classifiers (undecided)

"direct" evidential really encompassses all information in your *information territory* (e.g. if your father went to canada, even if you didn't directly see it happen and only heard from him that he was going to canada, you would use the direct evidential) distinction in the words for ‘know’ aligns with this. you use understand/わかる for things in your information territory and know/知る for things outside of your information territory. you understand what you are going to do today. you understand that your dad went to canada. you know that betelgeuse is 500-600 light years away. you know that mexican free-tailed bats can fly over 100mph. your senses are considered part of your information territory. interesting i guess this means if you measured the speed of a mexican free-tailed bat yourself you could say you understand/わかる that it flies over 100mph. (i wonder if you could say that about mexican free-tailed bats in general or just that particular bat.)

bring → come + having(i.e., the possessive classifier for carried things) …

mata ‘get eaten (neutral)’ → ‘food, meal’; tokara ‘get eaten (resp)’ → ‘food, meal’ → hattokara ‘buckwheat flatbread; meal’

know/understand + PFV ‘learn, come to understand’ but be.knowing is generally HAB (unmarked for aspect) and not IPFV (perhaps IPFV is like ‘be learning, be coming to understand’ – wait, this doesn't really make sense: it would be habitually be coming to understand…. okay, so IPFV is ‘know (be knowing)’, but again implies a sort of temporary/non-characteristic, estar-like state… actually, maybe that's normal—is knowing an innate, characteristic state?)

the 3 gentlemen (or 3 lords?) served with every meal: buckwheat flatbread, horseradish sauce, pickles

some stative verbs have different english glosses with unmarked vs IPFV e.g. IPFV ‘fresh (fruit, blood, scar, etc), still new, recent’ HAB ‘lively, vigorous, energetic, brisk, strong’ IPFV ‘be ready, be prepared (animate, i.e. not “the dinner is ready” but “i am ready, let's go”)’ HAB ‘be clever, be resourceful’

nominalizations sort of take over some of the uses of abstract nouns e.g. love-NOM, love-NOM-LS:way

and.then + now,already (もう) ⇒ sentence introducing 'so, then, thus'

ES+possessive classifier → ‘(DAT) comes into the possession of S by means of (main clause)’ ↳ actually wait this doesn't use ES at all since the O of the main clause = S of the possessive classifier really this is just a subtype of the switch-subject causative-resultative

not.exist+LS:lumbar ‘baseless, groundless’

independent pronouns following an undergoer-oriented transitive tend to contract and cliticize somewhat, e.g. like iro → =yo

aux ‘hold’ basically the difference between pairs like look at/watch, figure out/know, take/hold indicates the continuing state resulting from an ES on like P,ES verbs (where PROG means the P is in progress this means like the resultant S is in progress)

sentence-initial ‘and’ like the SAANICH ‘accompanying’; initial ‘but’ like SAANICH ‘contemporaneous’, ‘and but’ like the combination

REP evidential extends to the addressee, i.e. if the addressee knows something directly the REP evidential isn't used, even if the speaker only knows it indirectly (i.e. generally if the addressee told the speaker, then REP isn't used)

optative? or ‘if … positive.emotion’

ASSUM evidential also like ‘I wonder …’

iro ‘1EXCL.SG’ irotari ‘1EXCL.PL’ iroiro ‘all of us.excl’ iroirotari ‘every last one of us.excl’

pa ‘OPT’ (?) (< apa ‘good’ (?))

negative polarity clitic mepa (NEG-OPT) ‘have to …, must …’ < grammaticalized from ‘if not X it would not be good’ ↳ if it's NEG+apa‘good’ then i guess it would be meepa or something idk

hanging/covering/かける posture

OPT+Q ‘isn't it better if …?’ (perhaps this involves negation somewhere)

EVEN+OPT permission (～てもいい)

maybe the VだけV construction is like V-NOM-LS:extent V or maybe it involves ES? V ES-be.bound(?) ES-V

maybe instead of ‘hold’ described above being an auxiliary verb there are certain actionality-deriving suffixes or something accordingly both ‘know’ words would mean like learn/figure out (P,ES) and know+hold would be ‘know’

? ‘～なくてもいい’

NEG- -NOM-TR ‘なかったことにする’

perhap not.exist when used as a negation strategy is an aux instead of taking a nominalized argument (or both exist)

find; find+hold → watch something kind of like “see, with intention”

actionality derivations - redup iterative applies to most things that aren't S,S or M,x, derives an M,- (? or M,M or what) where M repeats the ES/P/EP/Q ↳ ah, this would also apply to M,Q or M,ES to make it M,M - -ta ‘hold’ P,ES → S,S where S = the S entered by the ES ↳ see the "resultative telic verbs" table in the Abui aspectual classes thing pg 15 - -xx ‘go’ S,ES → P,P (?) where P = process of ES ↳ amended to P,EP - -xx ‘come’ S,ES → P,ES where P = process of ES - -xx ‘become’ S,S → -,ES (?) where ES enters S P,P → -,EP (?) where EP enters P

need a derivation (?) for sitations like S,ES to S,S e.g. sleep (for sleep-PFV as ‘slept (temporally delimited) (e.g. “after he slept …”’ instead of ‘fall asleep’) at least some of these could be inherently weak S,(ES S) at least for verbs denoting S/ES into a state likely to be reverted later (e.g. sleeping)

"clear out" a door (i.e. the old "open, connecting" verb is probably much better thought of as like 'clear out') also like cleared.out+LS:stomach → get hungry, etc

‘almost’ ES-get.near,approach (that it follows the main V is more obvious given the english phrasing "he tried to X and got near")

middle with an object means “less affected” e.g. be.blunt → be.blunt-VOL x ‘make x blunt’ be.blunt-MID x ‘make x blunter’

diffuse-TR ‘squeeze out’ have.flavor-TR ‘season’

what if the difference between ‘go’ and ‘come’ is more of an actionality one like ‘go’ is 〈P,EP〉 (be going to …, leave for …) and ‘come’ is 〈P,ES〉 (be coming to …, came to …) (or possibly actionality in addition to the deictic(?) difference; if deixis is also involved then you would have ones like go+finish 〈-,ES〉 ‘went to …’ come+go(?) 〈P,EP〉 ‘start coming to …’) or ‘go’ could be some weird actionality like 〈P,EP ES〉 uh… ↳ maybe there's a verb like ‘travel’ ‘take a trip to …’ with that actionality (tends to occur in EVCs with go/come, implies like “go, will come back”)

active-intransitive / ""job-like antipassive"" -derived verbs pattern with “scheduled activity” verbs

V ‘use (as an instrument); go alongside (prolative)’

(non-control?) middle on verbs with an inanimate subject ~ ‘… easily; susceptible to …’

(aux) wait NEG- =NEG (=IMP?) ‘don't … yet’ ("not yet" prohibitive)

REP also subordinating conjuction for hypothetical conditionals

perhaps -DAT person suffixes are only for animates (inanimates are just null-conjoined) (naturally, extends to DAT argument of verbs, explaining the partially/fully extended (in)transitives) ↳ doesn't explain partially/fully extended (in)transitives at all since middle, causative of a transitive, etc always derive a partially extended one regardless of animacy; non-controlled nominalizations also always have -DAT agreement perhaps this is still salvageable by restricting the idea to direct possession (or ofc by changing one of the above things)

ES,S verbs + PFV + PST ⇒ effectively sort of like PFV S, that is, the ES happened but no longer holds, so something like get.feel.cold+PFV+PST ⇒ ‘felt cold (for a while, but no longer)’

intransitive ‘go’ ⇒ get.left.for ↔ destination

core semantics of hang/cover probably involve something like ‘minimally supported by the Ground’ ↳ or actually more like ‘minimally supports itself against the Ground’

lie/wedge: covers humans and animals that are lying down, positioned in the branch of a Y shape, things wedged in the Ground, and damaged Grounds. the core semantics here appear to be ‘surrounded/supported by the Ground on multiple sides’, but that doesn't include the lying human posture. perhaps the link here is that lying in bed one is sort of surrounded by the Ground.

leaning human posture → “hang”? perhaps it means like ‘weight is entirely supported by the Ground’

supine/prone also apply to containers (upright/upside down)

‘lie’ or general exist for ‘be in a container’ … probably lie, since it's surrounded

lean on → hang+LS:body

suffixes derived from tie/untie meaning the absolutive argument expands over an area or is concentrated into an area cut+untie ‘cut in two’ escape+untie ‘spread out’ (the cigar smoke is spreading out) open.the.arms+untie ‘stretch out (the arms)’ clench.hand+tie ‘clench hand’ hang/cover+tie ‘hang up non-extended piece of cloth’ hang/cover+untie ‘hang up/cover with extended piece of cloth’ X+tie ‘pile up, bring together’ X+untie ‘spread out, disperse’ Y+tie ‘wrap’ Y+untie ‘unwrap’ pack/unpack (stuff in/unstuff)

word for ‘moving along its line of force’ ~ to flow ~ 流れる

"in total" word that occurs with numerals also like the だけ in VだけV, できるだけ also a clitic(?) meaning ‘only, just’ and/or maybe ‘to the extent of, enough to …’

‘destination’ (< ‘go’) possessable with ‘carry’ posscl

koto/nonspecific article can (optionally) appear in EVCs with cumulative subjects (i accompany him NREF ES-go store) (i wonder if this also appears in ‘make’ periphrastic causatives to signal that the causer takes part in the action alongside the causee) also optionally found in EVCs where the object of the first verb phrase denotes an NP that is an accompaniment to the subject argument in carrying out VP2. Such an accompaniment can be a true instrument or it can be an emotion, a state or a condition (https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.562.3017&rep=rep1&type=pdf page 12)

likely moving the ‘wedge’ and ‘hole’ type stuff out of the basic locative construction entirely ‘lie’ likely means ‘Figure is indistinguishable from its base’ ↳ ‘be in a container’ subsumed by general ‘exist’

nominalization also used for extracting the dative argument be.made.of(-3DAT?)* ti wood na ti desk ‘the desk is made of wood’ be.made.of(-3DAT??)-NOM(-3DAT??) ti wood na ti desk ‘the wooden desk’ ↳ that is to say, nom = dative pivot ↳ for common materials the word for the material also means made of that material e.g. stone → made of stone, tree → made of wood, etc
 * also ‘material’

multiple words for ‘friends’ mainly based on idiomatic activities done together (we fish side by side, we go to the same destination (we have the same goal) (仲間), we eat together, etc)

dual/plural clitics for 3rd person animate argument?

considering removing the -DAT ‘BEN’ alternation entirely (use either benefactive applicative or verb for give)

だけ-like focus particle (→ tentatively =kʼo (★ or perhaps =tokʼo)) does not really mean "only" at all, closer to "nothing more than" note that if P is the most likely alternative than P=kʼo is ‘only P’ e.g. pecan ate buckwheat=kʼo ⇒ pecan ate only buckwheat (⇒ pecan ate nothing more than buckwheat) | pecan just ate buckwheat (⇒ pecan did nothing more than eat buckwheat) in downward-entailing environments this does … interesting … things not clear if it combines with normal ‘even’ to yield an NPI like だけでも or just occurs on its own like that other uses: - numeral=kʼo ‘N in total’ - “as much as possible” - V:VOL=kʼo V ‘V as much as S wanted’ - V:POT=kʼo V ‘V as much as S could’ - what=kʼo NPI ‘anything’ - in questions makes a negatively biased question "did pecan even eat buckwheat=kʼo?" note that this is close to synonymous with "did pecan even eat anything (what=kʼo)" this is in fact also the case for other contexts e.g. "i'm surprised he ate buckwheat=kʼo" ~ "i'm surprised he ate anything"

to recap, the current state of the focus particles: - =tokʼo above - additive/scalar (“least likely” reading in downward-entailing contexts) - regular exhaustive - ‘nothing but’ only (triggering negation on the verb) - =EMPH (if that counts) - verum? ↳ - contrast?

think/feel/思う verb is possessed ‘heart’ or something

LS:stolen_things; eat+LS:stolen_things → ‘eat stolen things’

‘plopped’ allophone [ǃ¡] of /ǃ/ sounds a bit rough, akin to the trilled allophone [r] of /r/

word for ‘very likely’ / ‘very unlikely’ (i.e. something like ~ not unexpected, both ends of the scale, as opposed to the middle, where it could go either way, something like ‘possible’ or ‘maybe’)

“benefits” posscl also used for pets

ES,S fall asleep/sleep; S,(S or -) ‘have slept (for the night)’

lots of words with clicks are species names / names for mythological entities

figure out how to express ‘dare … (do X)’, ‘(do X) … in vain’ perhaps VP clitics or something

coordinate compound buckwheat + fish(?) ‘meal’

species names often related to ideophones (e.g. unreduplicated form of an ideophone → species/monster which does that noise)

contrastive focus particle (groups with the other focus particles), entails that there is some alternative A to the focused proposition P such that A is more likely than P (or "more believed" than P) and A is false this may or may not be the verum particle, except that entails not not P, but not P is not really an alternative to P

other uses of the verum particle: not P is more likely/expected than P situations like "he thought he would do poorly but he actually [did well]=verum" (not doing well is more expected) acceptable in out-of-the-blue contexts if not P is more likely: serious or/Q works.correctly=VERUM ‘wow it actually works’ (not working is more expected)

‘autocausative’ applies to intransitives, volitional/potential pair: posture-AUTOCAUS → assume be.quiet-AUTOCAUS → keep quiet often solitariness or by/for oneself get.eaten-MID-AUTOCAUS → eat alone run.away(-MID)-AUTOCAUS → escape by oneself ↳ sometimes also indicates spontaneity, "it broke by itself (break-AUTOCAUS)" with nominals is like ‘false X’ father-AUTOCAUS → stepfather teeth-AUTOCAUS → false teeth bumblebee-AUTOCAUS → /Bombylius major/ some other lexicalizations, when used without aspect marking grow-AUTOCAUS → weed pop.out-AUTOCAUS → grasshopper potential: get.hurt-POT.AUTOCAUS → hurt oneself by accident get.tired-POT.AUTOCAUS → exhaust oneself

possible that the autocausative is morphologically complex, i.e. it could just be -CAUS-VOL/POT.MID or something (in either case, it's probably identical to the honorific autocausative idea)

haC+苦しい → lonely

autobenefactive suffix

reciprocal also means ‘together’ e.g. eat-VOL-RECIP → eat together lie.down-VOL-RECIP → lie down together catch.up-POT-RECIP → to accidentally arive somewhere at the same time as each other

‘consider it to be …’ “causative” e.g. be.good → consider it good, find it to be good it might be good if this were some other suffix or combination of suffixes, possibly built off a potential suffix (or yet another meaning of the potential transitive, for example S,S verbs + pot tr; be.good-POT-RECIP ‘to like each other’) ↳ perhaps instead a "potential causative", since the A is not directly involved in the action, pot tr seems wrong pot caus would have other meanings e.g. "accidentally allowed …"

1-get.find-POT posscl → i found an (x) (i came into possession of an (x) by finding it)

goal/ben(?) applicative derives a spray-load type alternation on many verbs, e.g. 1-put ti fish na ti bucket ‘i put a fish in the bucket’ versus 1-put-GOAL ti bucket na ti fish ‘i filled the bucket with fish’; this is just a result of the U argument being the more affected one, and the dative argument being less individuated similar alternation with posscls where theme = U entails change of physical possession/location whereas goal = U entails change of ownership

the "instrumental" "applicative" is really more of a derivational affix that derives something adjective like, e.g. "write" > "for use in writing" which characteristically means "pen(cil)" and transitively means "write with" (this does mean the instr + tr combination is somewhat non-compositional since it can hardly be described as "made it to be for use in writing") ↳ it sort of still is, really all this means is that the "target" (causee) of the TR doesn't change with the syntactic O introduced by -instr

(1) frictionless (2) low viscosity (3) without hesitation or delay (e.g. say without hesitation)

gently sloping ↔ easy actually does this even make sense they dont really have slopes 🤔 ↳ how about hard/easy to break (i.e. like easy ↔ brittle)

stop/no negation word perhaps means something like "X is not true at the topic time" giving rise to implicatures that X was true (→ stopped) or will be true (→ not yet) im thinking its somewhat like ～なくなる but also ～てない and also "no", not really emphatically quit/cease/止まる ↳ possibly this is not used for "no" at all, except for like declining things? i.e. not used to answer negatively to e.g. "did you see him" but perhaps used to decline "do you want tea", although it could answer negatively in a "not yet" sort of way, like to "have you eaten (yet)"

do.with.eyes+hit → find

be.empty/have.a.hole.in + TR → empty, make a hole in, clear out, open (door)

how to deal with when the undergoer has higher animacy than the actor and is effectively the mover/initiator/has control over the action ↳ is it time to resurrect the "higher ranking object" suffix → the animacy hierarchy is a hierarchy of volition / who can control whom or who can act on whom

word for ‘separate distinguishable part of something’ e.g. behead, open a jar (decapitate a jar) ↳ also take fruit off a tree (typically with largeish fruit)

to board (a boat) ~ to load (cargo onto a boat)

construction describing the effect of an action: "no effect (in vain)", "with drastic (often destructive) effect", "with precise, intended effect" etc probably a type of the Event=S₂ manner construction

to identify ~ specific

tʼee /Pagrus major/ common food fish commonly eaten with buckwheat groats as a late-night meal

manner construction could work like V[main clause]-NOM(event extraction) ES-V[manner] or come to think of it also as V[manner] ES-V[main clause]-NOM not clear if this coexists with the V V[S=Event] manner construction maybe it puts more emphasis on the manner (“long have we waited…”)

directional ‘takes place over an area’ (ends up kind of similar to 回る)

get.worn+DIR:up ‘indoor clothing’, +DIR:down ‘outdoor clothing’

rain+hold ‘be wet (from the rain)’

もう-type adverb when used with states implies some kind of change of state in the past (もう PFV-get.clean ti room ‘the room is clean now’)

maybe the optional past tense behaves like a temporal adverbial (i.e. it can be in any of the adverbial positions)

‘relatedly’ conjunction that kind of functions like a semicolon in english

verb for slip through cracks (also a euphemism for have passed away (get.blown.away is another candidate ← maybe better))

run+LS:mouth ‘to have a crack, to have a tear’ (i.e. pulling-apart type tears and not holes)

‘naka’ DP coordinator

音を立てる → take.out+sound (except that would be transitive, maybe it would be intr be.visible+sound or be.visible NREF sound)

put(hanging/covering)+義務 ‘義務付ける’ (LS or koto secondary predicate? (im not sure it makes sense for 義務 to be a noun anyway maybe a verb have.as.a.義務—or something like be.obligated.to, which would logically have the transitive meaning something like 義務付ける anyway))

stomach ↔ true motives

立ち食い

‘extract from tight fit’; ‘pull plant up by the roots’

snap/get.torn verb means something like "sudden (punctual) split/tear of a flat flexible object with fibers/a grain" ↳ + incremental version

split hard round object without grain (?)

cut into surface (?), scratch

break off at base (e.g. tree branch, banana from bunch (no bananas but that sort of idea), squash from vine, maybe including break plant off at base (not pull up by the roots)) (?)

‘pee in the ocean’ "every little bit counts" (somewhat ironically)

do.with.hand+show ‘point at’

the problem of potential unaccusatives: "it is breakable" some options: - bare roots (i.e., get.broken) never have a potential interpretation; separate vocabulary for some common ones (get.broken vs be.fragile), analytic constructions for others - habitual (characteristic) can have a potential interpretation: PFV-get.broken "it broke", get.broken "it gets broken / it is breakable"

(of a child) to have a tearstained face

do.with.eyes+touch ‘aim at’ (?)

go east / go against the line of force (prevailing east-west trade winds); go west / go with the line of force

adverb ‘the speaker has only belated perceived or realized a fact; surprising and unexpected; also かしら’

words describing certain states or types of people ↔ that type of person: be.guilty ↔ be a guilty person (habitual)

remove.one.by.one 〈M,Q〉

be.in.discord, be.in.conflict, be.in.friction.against.each.other

X-cum-Y, serve roles X and Y simultaneously → be.Y's.cum X

add(superadd?)+LS:words ‘exaggerate’

emphasis particle ⇒ "generic focus" i think somewhat ambiguous between contrast and scalar ⇒ i EMPH say so ‘it is I who should say so’ ⇒ you EMPH interested in horticulture? ‘are you (also?) interested in horticulture’

infer+only ‘as if to…’

one of the exclusive focus particles ~ adverb ‘always’

POT + PST + tʼoko → “in vain” (“only managed to …”)

type of spear fencing with a spear in each hand ↔ bisexual (colloquial)

“name signs” assigned at birth; either a sign/combination of signs that can be read the same as your spoken name or a unique sign usually given along with your spoken name when introducing yourself

ŋǀa- adverbial ‘do concentratedly; do focused; do intently’; “loaned” from the signed register facial adverbial with the same meaning, consisting of the eyebrows drawn together and the mouth open with the tongue tip between the teeth as if to pronounce a [θ] or [ǀ]

vantage point → viewing+seat

‘understand, accept’ sign ASL 'A' handshape starting below/nestled beneath the earlobe with the ball of the thumb pointing forward/up and moving so the inner side of the thumb is in contact with the mentolabial sulcus and the ball of the thumb faces towards the opposite side from where the sign started

signs with purely facial bases agree using an "auxiliary" before the sign consisting of the initial handshape of the sign moving from the area denoting the A referent and after the sign consisting of the final handshape of the sign moving to the area denoting the O referent

significant/meaningful↔intentional/volitional

dyed↔get.wet

“take turns doing X” (occurs with a coordinated subject)

that=MAX ‘to that extent’, ‘that is all (when finished speaking)’

gap between waves, interval between waves

‘looking for a place to get out of the rain’

‘by "reading"’ instrumental (very broad definition of "reading", seeing X and understanding that Y such that Y=read(X)) ↳ +take → to read and understand; to sense from external clues; 読み取る

‘to pass the night doing X’ derivation

to cause, to bring about, to pull upright

word for person, generally only used with a modifier (relative clause) indicating the type of person; contains the classifier LS for person

some kind of like, divination through chess-like or go-like board game, something like the friction between wills reveals fate

sakura → mayflies (how do we get mayflies in otseqonistan though)

want to collect certain spirits that will tend your grave when you die wait otseqons dont have graves

some kind of iamitive/perfective/resultative/something ‘merely resulted in (something less severe than expected)’ (済む)

meet+TR ⇒ ‘expose to’

listen+standing(posture) ⇒ eavesdrop

X-VOL ES-NEG-X-POT=NEG ‘didn't (even) manage to …’