Dairwueh and Bryatesle: Subjects with adpositions and nominative postpositions

There are constructions in Dairwueh and Bryatesle where adpositions mark subjects. This is especially common in subordinate clauses, but not entirely unusual in main clauses either. Let us start out with the ones that work in both sub- and main clauses.

This essay has probably sat in the drafts folder for eight years by now so I figure it's time to publish it even though it's a bit rough.

1. The Dairwueh preposition 'teu'.

'Teu' has several uses, but the meanings nearly all derive from 'kind of'. A kind of, the kind of, some kind of, this kind of. It is very common when making categorical statements: teu darat tsem [...]

Its nature as a preposition is clear from the following facts: 

• its complement is in the locative-instrumental
• it can be coordinated with certain other prepositions
• it can take a preprepositional.
  
• The preprepositional argument marks the use for which the kind(s) are meant - e.g. kaubeng teu dorule = health kind-of food ~ types of food intended for  health
• It also marks a supercategory of which the thing is in a category "salar teu balin" - animal kind-of horse 'an animal, specifically a kind of horse'

2. Dairwueh burn and melt/dissolve

Not even in modern times does Dairwueh normally distinguish 'dissolve' from 'melt'. However, in chemistry and other contexts where the difference has some significance, the subject of 'dissolve' is often marked by the preposition yil (sometimes lo or əre), whereas melt tends to be reflexive. Similarly,  chemists tend to distinguish two types of burning by marking the subject with a preposition.

A fire with visible flames has a normal subject, chemical corrosion uses yil or lo.

 3. Bryatesle 'few'/'little'

In Bryatesle, 'few' operates syntactically as a postposition.  It normally takes the accusative case, with the ablative used when expressing the sense of 'too few'. They are also found in coordinations with the following postpositions or in similar positions

• with, without (as in 'in association with')
  
• full of
• instrumental adpositions

It cannot stand as the subject of a transitive verb, but can be the subject of an antipassive construction.

4. The Bryatesle 'associative preposition'

Although Bryatesle primarily has postpositions, the grammaticalization path that lead to the associative preposition caused it to end up on the other side. The associative preposition simply is a marker of metonymy. Not necessarily mandatory whenever metonymy is involved, but quite often used for that purpose.

5. Sometimes in comparisons

In both Bryatesle and Dairwueh, it happens that both the comparanda are marked by the comparative marker.

6. Presence of vocatives

The presence of a vocative in a clause can cause the subject to be marked by adpositions in both Bryatesle; primarily the postposition '(+abl) gyner'.

7. In some subordinated coordinated structures where subjecthood is unclear

8. Resumptive pronouns

Resumptive pronouns in relative subclauses almost always have the postposition 'gyner' in Bryatesle.

9. In subclauses specifying the place or time of something.

10. The Dairwueh preposition 'ne'.

This preposition can be used with subjects and objects, but has several functions, and is not triggered by things "outside of" the NP, unlike the previous examples.

 

So, in what way are these subjects and not adverbs that just are topicalized?

The main reason would be their syntactical effects. I will list the very subject-like ones first:

• Permit reflexive reference
• Cannot be coordinated with adverbs
• Can be coordinated over gaps with subjects
• Have subject-like scope
• Undergo raising like subjects do
  

However,  things that may look non-subject like include

• They block congruence on verbs
• The presence of an adpositional subject requires an adposition also in the complement of the copula in Bryatesle
• The preposition blocks the use of genitive for definite subjects in Dairwueh, and the neuter-ergative is blocked in Bryatesle.
•  Explicitly transitive verb forms are nearly never permitted
• The Bryatesle 'few', for instance, requires a detransitivized verb whenever the English corresponding sentence would have 'a few ...' be the subject of a transitive verb.

Tense in Sargaĺk

Sargaĺk's tense system (ignoring the topic of aspect) has a few complications:

Different basic underlying systems for different verbs
Some verbs in Sargaĺk have a past-present-future system going, e.g. 'to be', 'to go', 'to snow', 'to prepare for a fishing excursion', 'to remember', 'to remain', 'to vow'. Some verbs have a past vs. non-past system, and some have a non-future vs. future system. Further, some verbs have hodiernal and even hesternal forms.

The poverty of marking
If we count all forms distinguished or permitted by at least one verb, we reach about a dozen tenses:

hodiernal non-past, hodiernal past, hodiernal future, hodiernal non-future, hodiernal present, hodiernal future, hesternal, regular future, far future, regular past, far past, present, wide present

Despite this, there are only these morphemes in use:

-mab-:

future  or non-past, when reduplicated it can indicate hodiernal or crastinal future, depending on the verb.

-nek'-

past or non-future, when reduplicated it can indicate hodiernal or hesternal past, depending on the verb.

The hodiernal non-past or non-future is often unmarked with a tense marker, but this does differ with some verbs. 

A few verbs do not form the basic tenses by suffixes, but by stem suppletion, e.g.

non-past sab, past kasa: raise, heighten, lift
non-past rorn, past jita: sleep
future: ingar, non-future nasan, grow, turn, (become)
future: p'ulk, non-past: uluŋ, cease, give up, give in,

These verbs distinguish the greatest number of tenses: both stems can combine with both the future/non-past and with the past/non-future marker. The resulting samnek'- signifies hodiernal past, whereas kasnek' signifies a hesternal past, kasmab signifies a hodiernal fuure, samab signifies a crastinal future. Reduplication leads to far past or future tenses.

Aspect

Aspect has certain dedicated markers; however, derivative morphology sometimes interacts with aspect markers - either by making them superfluous, or by causing other particular markers to be used. Aspect is somewhat lexical.

Comparative Linguistics
In Dairwueh, '-mab' has a cognate in 'maptə', soon (perfective), and 'maviŋa' tomorrow. 'Mab' thus clearly relates to future spans of time in Dairwueh.

-nek' has several cognates in both Dairwueh and Bryatesle - ynykt is yesterday evening in Bryatesle, usually in the ablative definite ynykənt, 'a duration during last evening)'. There's also an adverb 'any(k)tmin', which signifies at some indeterminate time during the last few days. In Dairwueh, you get ənken 'yesterday', as well as -ənk suffixed to numbers signifying 'days ago', and the adverb nəkne, 'a while ago'. For both languages, there's thus evidence indicating that -nek relates quite clearly to a time during the previous day.

Detail #442: An Obvious Split Alignment

Consider a system whereby any VP with exclusively third person arguments form your average nominative-accusative (or even erg-abs or whatever) structure. However, whenever a first or second person is involved, the system is inverse instead. Thus, the inverse and the direct markers also are, in some sense, a person marker: they signal the presence of at least a first- or second-person participant in the VP.

However, let's imagine further that even the presence of an indirect object in the first or second person triggers this. Let's, however, still have the inverse alignment be the only role-assigning marker even in that case.