Hello! (This isn't a conlang presentation but rather a wordy question with examples showing my thought process in trying to understand the fusion of these two topics. In short: is it feasible?)
*proximate / obviative (my mistake in the title)
---------------
I've been experimenting with direct-inverse marking to distinguish between proximate and obviative pronouns in the 2nd and 3rd persons, (some influence from a few Nilo-Saharan languages in marking the 2nd person obviative in addition to 3rd).
I've also been investigating logophoricty in some West African languages, with a specialized set of pronouns for different referents than the speaker in indirect discourse.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(*update: I now see that I had this idea backwards. In languages with logophoricity, logophors refer to the quoted speaker, and regular pronouns refer to a different referent. Thus, logophors are often reflexive. I'll leave the original post unedited to highlight my errors).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| Examples: | ("that" omitted for brevity). |
|---|---|
| "He said he knew it'd happen." | He said he himself knew. |
| "He said he.(different) knew it'd happen." | He said [some other guy] knew. |
| Or when someone's scolding two brothers, "You said you'd be careful!" | Both scolded as a group using 2nd person plural ~ "Y'all said it." |
| "You said you(prox/obv.)'d be careful!" | Where proximate could refer to scolding the elder brother, and obviative the younger. ~ "You(specific) said it." |
With more than two people involved, parents using the proximate could refer to the eldest child by default, and obviative for all ages below. Or for groups in general, the natural leader of the group vs. followers.
Would it be possible to use proximate and obviative forms as logophors? Rather than just animacy, to distinguish between age, status, perceived importance, etc. of the referents in indirect speech?
| Proximate Logophoric | He said he(different) knew | Someone said the king knew |
| Obviative Logophoric | He said he(different) knew | Someone said the peasant knew |
| Proximate Reflexive | He said he himself knew | The king himself said he knew |
| Obviative Reflexive | He said he himself knew | The peasant himself said he knew |
However, I've also wanted to make a topic-prominent language, so maybe the topic could be proximate and the focus be in the obviative? I'm unsure.
Inverse marking:
|||| |:-|:-
... keep reading on reddit ➡
The utility of layer 2 solutions in scaling ETH in its current iteration is obvious. But once ETH transitions to POS and sharding is possible, will there still be a role for layer 2 solutions (which seem to be mostly about scaling)?
On a related question, is there a good resource comparing the various layer 2 solutions?
TL;DR at bottom.
Apes are trying to crash the manipulated market by removing enough physical that it can't continue.
Meanwhile investors/speculators are out there treating Paper Silver as if it was Physical Silver in the belief that they can trade their paper for physical either at any time, or at a set time soon to arrive.
In the additional meanwhile, the Basel III freight train is barreling down the tracks -- next stop June 28 for the EU, which includes some number of bullion banks in the LBMA and COMEX.
Basel III makes paper silver either unprofitable, or completely out of the question, meaning that a lot of unallocated silver holders are also now out in the cold.
This means that for those of them who want to maintain exposure to silver prices there are 2 options:
-
Buy physical -- stressing the limited supply even further.
-
Buy silver ETFs to track the price -- many of whom will have to buy physical due to no easy paper for them any longer either. 100% silver ETFs also either buy remaining physical, or stop issuing units.
TL;DR Basel III may lead to a lot of paper silver holders suddenly having no option but to invest in a very limited supply of physical silver if they want to remain in silver at all.
In my language Sacfërh Narastes there is a system of obviation, and I was wondering whether it was an odd choice to mark the proximate as I know that many languages mark the obviate. It just didn’t seem like it made logical sense to me, because the whole point of having this system is to background things, so why give it its own special morphology?
That’s how I thought anyway, someone more knowledgeable please tell me I’m wrong lmao
As usual, in this thread you can ask any questions too small for a full post, ask for resources and answer people's comments!
You can find former posts in our wiki.
Official Discord Server.
The Small Discussions thread is back on a semiweekly schedule... For now!
FAQ
> What are the rules of this subreddit?
Right here, but they're also in our sidebar, which is accessible on every device through every app. There is no excuse for not knowing the rules.
Make sure to also check out our Posting & Flairing Guidelines.
If you have doubts about a rule, or if you want to make sure what you are about to post does fit on our subreddit, don't hesitate to reach out to us.
> Where can I find resources about X?
You can check out our wiki. If you don't find what you want, ask in this thread!
> Can I copyright a conlang?
Here is a very complete response to this.
Beginners
Here are the resources we recommend most to beginners:
For other FAQ, check this.
Recent news & important events
State of the Subreddit Address
At the end of every year for the past few, the head moderator has been writing a quick summary of the last 12 months and addressing some issues. You can check out the 2021 SotSA here!.
Segments
We've gotten some lovely submissions for Segments #04. The call closed a week ago, but you can keep your eyes peeled for a post from u/Lysimachiakis linking to the new issue! We plan to have it up after this SD thread goes live but before the next one does.
Best of 2021
u/roipoiboy recently hosted the Best Of 2021 awards on the subreddit! Congrats to the winners!
If you have any suggestions for additions to this thre
... keep reading on reddit ➡My understanding is that unions exist due to the perceived asymmetry in negotiating power between workers and employers because generally any one individual worker needs their job in a given moment more than an employer needs that job slot to be filled. Whether or not this is true in all cases, wouldn't UBI essentially bridge that gap in negotiating power?
Because everyone would be able to survive at least on some level without work, they'd presumably have significantly more leverage over the terms of their employment than they would otherwise - seeing how they would no longer actually "need" the job.
Through UBI, you'd be able to accomplish the intended objective of unions without dealing with the free-rider problems can crop up in unionized workspaces. What are your thoughts?
This is the grammar and phonology of my original Draconic language, Katherqh. I’ve been working on this for almost a year now, and though not exhaustively complete, it’s done enough to where I feel I can showcase it like this.
The document’s formatting isn’t the most exact, so please forgive me for that.
Any criticism, good or bad, would be tremendously appreciated. Thank you all so much for reading!
I don't want to step on anybody's toes here, but the amount of non-dad jokes here in this subreddit really annoys me. First of all, dad jokes CAN be NSFW, it clearly says so in the sub rules. Secondly, it doesn't automatically make it a dad joke if it's from a conversation between you and your child. Most importantly, the jokes that your CHILDREN tell YOU are not dad jokes. The point of a dad joke is that it's so cheesy only a dad who's trying to be funny would make such a joke. That's it. They are stupid plays on words, lame puns and so on. There has to be a clever pun or wordplay for it to be considered a dad joke.
Again, to all the fellow dads, I apologise if I'm sounding too harsh. But I just needed to get it off my chest.
CNBC: South African Covid variant appears to ‘obviate’ antibody drugs, Dr. Scott Gottlieb says. https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/05/south-africa-covid-variant-appears-to-obviate-antibody-drugs-dr-scott-gottlieb-says.html
Was a response to THH.
TL;DR at bottom.
Apes are trying to crash the manipulated market by removing enough physical that it can't continue.
Meanwhile investors/speculators are out there treating Paper Silver as if it was Physical Silver in the belief that they can trade their paper for physical either at any time, or at a set time soon to arrive.
In the additional meanwhile, the Basel III freight train is barreling down the tracks -- next stop June 28 for the EU, which includes some number of bullion banks in the LBMA and COMEX.
Basel III makes paper silver either unprofitable, or completely out of the question, meaning that a lot of unallocated silver holders are also now out in the cold.
This means that for those of them who want to maintain exposure to silver prices there are 2 options:
-
Buy physical -- stressing the limited supply even further.
-
Buy silver ETFs to track the price -- many of whom will have to buy physical due to no easy paper for them any longer either. 100% silver ETFs also either buy remaining physical, or stop issuing units.
TL;DR Basel III may lead to a lot of paper silver holders suddenly having no option but to invest in a very limited supply of physical silver if they want to remain in silver at all.
