Good evening, afternoon, or morning to you, people of r/conlangs. Today's Saturday, and that means it's time for another typological paper! Once again, there will be some prompts for you to discuss in the comments.
The Cross-Linguistic Function of Obligatory ‘do’-Periphrasis (Jäger)
This paper, submitted once again by u/PyrolatrousCoagulate, talks about how various languages handle 'do'-periphrasis, as in English 'I did not eat the apple.' The author of the paper classifies those languages into four different types that differ in that each one of them applies periphrasis in a different manner. If you want to learn more about this typology, check out the paper! Now onto the prompts:
- How does your language handle 'do'-periphrasis? Which type does your language belong in, if any?
- Is there any morphological material that requires 'do'-periphrasis?
- Is 'do'-periphrasis conditioned lexically?
- Does 'do'-periphrasis mark any grammatical information in itself? E.g. interrogativity or imperativity?
- Describe how your language's "equivalent" of 'do' behaves semantically and syntactically!
Remember to try to comment on other people's languages
Submit your papers here!
So, that's about it for this week's edition. See you next Saturday, and happy conlanging!