location of the vocative

Started by wm.annis, February 26, 2018, 09:01:31 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

wm.annis

There was some discussion on Discord about the legal positions of the vocative in a larger clause (hard to find canon examples, actually). So I asked Paul about this (Tirea Aean providing some of the examples):

Quote
When you have a polar question ending in srak, can it
be followed by a vocative, or would the vocative be
before the srak?

    Ngaru lu fpom srak, ma <name>?  (etc.)

My guess is that's just fine, given how vocatives are, but
some would appreciate an official declaration.

And then there's:

    1. Ma <name>, nga plltxe nìltsan.
    2. Nga, ma <name>, plltxe nìltsan.
    3. Nga plltxe, ma <name> nìltsan.

That is, can a vocative intrude anywhere, as a stylistic
thing?

Paul's reply
Quote from: Karyu Pawl
Answers are: yes, yes, yes, and yes. All those forms are fine. Vocatives SHOULD follow srak, but 1, 2, and 3 are fine.

Tirea Aean


Plumps


Blue Elf

Good to know this. First part (with srak) is clear and it works the same way as for example in Czech (vocative can go also first in sentence, IMO same as in English, but meaning can be a little different:
Are you well, John? - like How are you/How do you do?, general question to ask about John's state
John, are you well? - you look sick, don't you need any help?? That's probably why Paul moves vocative behind srak).

In second part is missing version with vocative at the end.
4. Nga plltxe nìltsan,  ma <name>.
Here all versions have the same meaning and seems that's just speaker's decision, which one to use. However option 3 looks very uncommon (TBH I'd say even incorrect) and hardly used in real life.
Also option 2 seems less common than 1+4.
Oe lu skxawng skxakep. Slä oe nerume mi.
"Oe tasyätxaw ulte koren za'u oehu" (Limonádový Joe)


Tirea Aean

Quote from: Blue Elf on March 02, 2018, 02:23:15 PM
In second part is missing version with vocative at the end.
4. Nga plltxe nìltsan,  ma <name>.

I pretty much asked the stuff found in OP in the Discord. I excluded that #4 from my pondering, because it's obvious that this #4. is correct. We say stuff like this all the time, a regular sentence with vocative at the end. (although, with that logic, I have no idea why I left in #1 the most common form ever, but left out #4. meh. hrh)

QuoteHere all versions have the same meaning and seems that's just speaker's decision, which one to use. However option 3 looks very uncommon (TBH I'd say even incorrect) and hardly used in real life.
Also option 2 seems less common than 1+4.
Yes, those were my initial impressions too, but as we see confirmed here, none of these are incorrect.

I would have thought #3 is 1% acceptable, but lo and behold, it's apparently just as acceptable as the others. Honestly though, the chances of any of us using that weird word order is probably 1% anyway.
#1 and #4 are already by far the most commonly used forms.

Vawmataw

The Teacher hath spoken.

Irayo ma wm.annis!
Fmawn Ta 'Rrta - News IN NA'VI ONLY (Discord)
Traducteur francophone de Kelutral.org, dict-navi et Reykunyu