Barxaw: Register, lexical intensification and comparatives

In Barxaw, my isolating conlang, intensity of verbs and adjectives is lexically coded - thus, running, running fast and running slow are separate lexemes, as are speaking, shouting and screaming. We notice from the second English tuplet that this is not unusual in English either.

In Barxaw, however, many such lexemes form pretty long hierarchies:

to know (in the sense of 'to have knowledge'), to be able to:
sep < ìpe < máw < nòtè < ram < léc < kudò

It turns out sep is the lowest in most registers. However, in slightly formal registers, ipe is the lowest, and in some ram is the lowest. In the case of {sep, ... kudò}, the higher the register, the more 'inflation' there is to the value of the verb (or adjective or even some nouns). {sep, ... kudo} is thus a verb set that decreases in value - in Barxaw, this is known as pék èn da màt ús ús - the words that shrink. (pék = word, èn = plural + class marker, da = plural pronoun for that class, màt ≃ do, ús ús = shrink, literally "small small")

An example of pék èn da màt o ko - words that grow (o, ko = big, the k in ko comes from a morphophonological thing where o ends in a 'lost consonant' that reappears in hiatus) - is "need"
wan - témì - nuh - pò' - síg - ŋím
Thus pò is the usual 'baseline' intensity, but in higher registers, nuh, then témì, then wan replace it, and pò becomes increasingly intense.

Short sketch #3: Dummy objects

Imagine a language where verbs are made more 'intensive' by adding an object of some kind.

Giving glosses, where "dummy" stands for "some dummy of some kind"

hear.2pl   = we (do) hear 
hear.2pl   it.acc = we listen 
hear.2pl   dummy.acc = (this) noise is annoying us

However, when introducing a real semantic object, this language does not permit the dummy to be the same case as the real object, and demotes it to some other case:

*hear.2pl throbbing gristle.acc dummy*.acc   ----> hear.2pl throbbing gristle.acc dummy.dat 

The same process repeats when an indirect object is added, etc. Different dummy cases have different hierarchies and will be demoted along different paths.

Sometimes, a dummy is repeated in different spots to increase the intensity:

rain.3.sg.  =  it rains
rain.3.sg it.acc = lit. "it rains it", ~it rains intensely
rain.3.sg it.acc it.instr = lit "it rains it with it", ~it's pouring down
rain.3.sg it.acc it.instr it.comitative = it rains it with it and it too, ~this rivals the deluge.
it.nom rain.3.sg. it.acc = the subject dummy probably works to make the rain somewhat more specific, such as "right now, right here, it rains intensely". In combination with a previously established location or timeframe or both being somewhat topical, it would be more likely to pertain to that location or time or both.

As for describing persons, adding such objects could be used both for positive or negative effects:
play (pertaining to instrument).3sg dummy.acc = he/she plays (his/her instrument) intensely well.
 give.3.sg dummy1.dat = put out
give.3sg dummy2.dat = he/she is slutty; the verb is only interpreted as referring to sex when with a dummy dative.

These dummies originate as nouns, often specifically differently strong profanities. This idea occured to me after I heard my brother use "satan" - a common Swedish curse word - as an intensifying particle after 'basa' (to emit bass tones), as in "an basar satan" to describe the volume of the bass sound emitting from an amplifier and its speakers.