just for fun
How about a short grammar lesson?
Tagalog, or Filipino, has only three tenses. Instead, because otherwise it would be too easy, it has a rather elegant but still confusing system that changes verb meaning. It's like the passive voice on steriods. Instead of subjects, and direct and indirect objects, Tagalog has a system of focuses which are determined by markers.
For example, if the verb is actor focused, the person doing the action will have the "ang" marker and the object will have the "ng" marker. Or if the verb is object focused, the actor will have the "ng" marker and the object will have the "ang" marker. In practice, the meaning created by combinations of markers and different verb conjugations is similar to the meaning created by combinations of prepositions like "by" and "for" and "to" with word order, the passive voice, actually using different verbs in English.
Take for example the root word "bili", which means "to buy". Ignoring any time aspect, my language tutor and I (well mostly my language tutor) came up with 17 different ways to conjugate the verb. These are all infinitive forms.
bumili - focus on actor
binili - focus on object
bilhan - focus on location of action
makabili - focus on actor, shows ability (e.g. "can buy")
mabili - focus on object, shows ability
pabilhin - focus on actor, shows causation of action (e.g. "caused someone to buy")
magpabili - focus on causer, shows causation of action
mapabili - focus on object of action, shows causation of action
ibili - focus on recipient/benefactor (e.g. "bought for someone")
maibili - focus on the recipient/benefactor, shows ability
ipabili - focus on the object, shows causation and ability
maipabili - focus on the recipient/benefactor, shows causation and ability
ipangbili - focus on the instrument used to complete the action (e.g. "bought with the use of money")
maipangbili - focus on the instrument, shows ability
mabilhan - focus on the location, shows ability
mapabilhan - focus on the location, shows causation and ability
makapagpabili - focus on the causer of the action, shows causation and ability (e.g. "I was able to cause them to buy something.")
Additionally:
- pagbili and pamimili are gerund forms of the verb
- magbili and several of its derivatives mean "to sell", but they are rare
As you can imagine this can get confusing, but it has its advantages. Namely, it's easy to figure out what is going on. It can be hard, though, to figure out who is involved, and in what ways.
Tagalog, or Filipino, has only three tenses. Instead, because otherwise it would be too easy, it has a rather elegant but still confusing system that changes verb meaning. It's like the passive voice on steriods. Instead of subjects, and direct and indirect objects, Tagalog has a system of focuses which are determined by markers.
For example, if the verb is actor focused, the person doing the action will have the "ang" marker and the object will have the "ng" marker. Or if the verb is object focused, the actor will have the "ng" marker and the object will have the "ang" marker. In practice, the meaning created by combinations of markers and different verb conjugations is similar to the meaning created by combinations of prepositions like "by" and "for" and "to" with word order, the passive voice, actually using different verbs in English.
Take for example the root word "bili", which means "to buy". Ignoring any time aspect, my language tutor and I (well mostly my language tutor) came up with 17 different ways to conjugate the verb. These are all infinitive forms.
bumili - focus on actor
binili - focus on object
bilhan - focus on location of action
makabili - focus on actor, shows ability (e.g. "can buy")
mabili - focus on object, shows ability
pabilhin - focus on actor, shows causation of action (e.g. "caused someone to buy")
magpabili - focus on causer, shows causation of action
mapabili - focus on object of action, shows causation of action
ibili - focus on recipient/benefactor (e.g. "bought for someone")
maibili - focus on the recipient/benefactor, shows ability
ipabili - focus on the object, shows causation and ability
maipabili - focus on the recipient/benefactor, shows causation and ability
ipangbili - focus on the instrument used to complete the action (e.g. "bought with the use of money")
maipangbili - focus on the instrument, shows ability
mabilhan - focus on the location, shows ability
mapabilhan - focus on the location, shows causation and ability
makapagpabili - focus on the causer of the action, shows causation and ability (e.g. "I was able to cause them to buy something.")
Additionally:
- pagbili and pamimili are gerund forms of the verb
- magbili and several of its derivatives mean "to sell", but they are rare
As you can imagine this can get confusing, but it has its advantages. Namely, it's easy to figure out what is going on. It can be hard, though, to figure out who is involved, and in what ways.
posted by ben at 4:41 AM
3 Comments:
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Your list of verb forms made my head swim... But I forced myself to slow down & (at least try to) understand what each of them meant... I can't imagine trying to actually conjugate verbs in Tagalog (being somewhat of a perfectionist & liking to sound competent even-when-speaking-a-foreign-langauage, I'm not sure I'd ever speak b/c I probably wouldn't be able to figure out how to say what I wanted to say before the conversation was far gone).
My TESOL background (which included a little bit of study of sociolinguistics) makes me curious about the connections (if any) that you see between this formation of language & the culture. Language (both the structure of it & the words that it does/does not contain) often reflects both the surroundings & the culture of its users... So, just wondering if there is perhaps a focus-of-life or attitude-towards-life in the Filipino culture that this language pattern either reflects or serves... I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts.
Well, I would say that the lack of lots of the complicated tenses found in English is relevant. Time here is a rather inexact thing.
In terms of the focuses though, it's hard to say, especially because it's easy to speculate on connections and hard or impossible to link them to reality. That is, you can say whatever you want but it's hard to prove it.
For example, you could say that this system makes Filipinos a lot more aware of social relationships, which they certainly are, in certain ways. But it's hard to say if that is really related to the language. And it's hard to say HOW that's related to language if it is.
Not that sociolinguistics isn't worthwhile or interesting, mostly I'm just in a contradictory mood. Sorry :)
Post a Comment
<< Home