copyright © 1997-2000 Dennis Paul Himes


One or Two Sentences

In these examples I will first write the Gladilatian, then a morphemic analysis of the Gladilatian, then the English translation, and possibly some notes. In the morphemic analyses words in parentheses are used for descriptions of the morphemes, words without parentheses are translations of the morphemes, and dots are used to separate morphemes in the same word. The implied "to be" is in square brackets.

Nrau mehyohot mset.
(Topic-of-sentence).(nominalizer) [is] associated-with.gladifer.(abstractor) language.
This is an example of Gladilatian.
This is the sentence written in Gladilatian near the top of the main Gladilatian page.

Fmu mehyohot hyamset u.
I [am] associated-with.gladifer.(abstractor) user-of.language someone.
I speak Gladilatian.

Napu mzafmu nyfyhyaehna u?
You [are] directed-to.I (question).potentially.user-of.sight someone.
Can you see me?
This means "can you see me?" in the sense of "are you able to look at me?". "Can you see?" in the sense of "are you not blind?" is Napu xvehehna nyfyvuhu? , literally "are you able to be aware using sight?"

Fmu rletnapu hrnuzlahrmu hyaxryna hluryt.
I [am] three.thirty-six.eighteen using.kiss giver.
I give you 126 kisses.
Note that rletnapu modifies hyaxryna and not hluryt.
Xryna actually means "affectionate touch" and not "kiss". Gladifers do not kiss. To denote a human kiss a gladifer would include the prepositional hyavrene, "using the mouth". In that case the two prepositionals modifying hyaxryna would have to be joined by a conjunction so that one does not modify the other, i.e. za rletnapu we hyavrene.

Xa rzou we mrslotu fmawesnekmlomuk.
Because which.thing therefore not.functioning.thing [is] my.(plural)
Why are my batteries broken?

Wesnau hyarek mnekfyxfa.
(Plural) [are] using.cake (imperative).potential.eater.
Let them eat cake.
Rek is actually more general than "cake". It means any sweet baked food.

U fohrakfzofrekfa mrou. Fozmrsrefa mek mlele.
Something [is] at.unique.more.past.position no.(nominalizer). At.(relative).future.position (topic-of-previous-sentence) [is] explosion.
In the beginning, there was nothing. Then it exploded.
The first sentence is an example of how u as a complete independent phrase is used to express "there is/are/was/were". hrakfzo, "uniquely more", is the standard way to express "most".

Mrxrtfmu matxme fmu za mrslzynofla we hnfe hyaryk wnek.
not.verified-by.I having.thought I [am] both not.very.possibly.pregnant and Terrestrial using.Gladilatian-mouse-like-animal exchanger.
I don't know, but I think I bought a pregnant mouse.
1) "not.verified-by.I having.thought I" is a little less literally translated as, "I, having a thought (or thoughts) which I'm not sure of".
2) A ryk is a small furry Gladilatian animal, and hnfe ryk or "Terrestrial ryk" is the standard way to describe a mouse.
3) My translation actually says "I exchanged something for a pregnant mouse.". To make it explicit that it was money which was exchanged za mrslzynofla we hnfe hyaryk would be replaced by za za mrslzynofla we hnfe hyaryk we xvehalat This illustrates the difference between the prepositions hya meaning "using for the sake of using" and xve meaning "using as a tool". In an exchange, the item acquired is marked by hya and the item given by xve.
4) Zy, which means "possibly", is perhaps better translated as "possibly not". Modifying it by the state sl "very" emphasizes the chance that it is not true, and modifying it by the states mrsl "not very" emphasizes the chance that it is true, which is what the English "I think" does.
5) The phase "I think I bought a pregnant mouse" is ambiguous. My translating interprets it as "I bought a mouse and I think it's pregnant." To say "I bought something and I think it's a pregnant mouse" the states mrslzy would modify ryk To say "I did something and I think it was buying a pregnant mouse" the states mrslzy would modify wnek.

Xou mep za hasr fetflyxyk memzyk nyeap we mep fetxmona nrotsneksnyry mnatzlefa u fna mnatmrou wo rlethek mnatmrxohot u rletweslaxva xvemset fmu.
True.thing [is] which-are-intrinsically both idle with-respect-to.brain associated-with.birth contemporary-child-in-birth-family and which-is-intrinsically with-respect-to.air same.small.thick composed-of.substance thing exactly-one-of composed-of.nothing or for-the-benefit-of.self composed-of.not.true.ness thing for-the-benefit-of.(plural).dream user-of.language I.
True, I talk of dreams; which are the children of an idle brain, begot of nothing but vain fantasy; which is as thin of substance as the air.
1) This was written by William Shakespeare. Mercutio says it in Romeo & Juliet.
2) Using xou as one of the independent phrases of a sentence means that the speaker is affirming that the other independent phrase describes reality.
3) There's no need to add the plural attribute we to nyeap, since it is the nominal in a relative phrase attached to weslavxa.
4) A slaxva is not quite the same as a dream, but it's close enough that the two words often get translated to one another.
5) Note that "user of language" is xvemset here, where it means "talker", and hyamset when it means "speaker of this (as opposed to another) language".
6) This has a more complicated structure than most of these examples. Here is an analysis of it, using the following notation:
[] independent phrase
{} prepositional phrase
<> relative phrase
() conjunction
[Xou] [{{<mep (za [{{hasr fetflyxyk} memzyk} nyeap] we [{<mep [{{fetxmona} nrotsneksnyry mnatzlefa} u]> (fna mnatmrou wo {rlethek} mnatmrxohot)} u])> rletweslaxva} xvemset} fmu].

Mnefmu mrxou xa napu we mrhry srefmu.
desired-by.I not.true.thing [is] because you therefore future.I
Please don't kill me.

Mrsnau fetwefyuxy fetwehfena snranau.
no.sentient.(nominalizer) [is] with-respect-to.(plural).ant with-respect-to.(plural).name remembering.(nominalizer)
Nobody remembers the names of ants.
Somewhat literally, "No one is a remembering one with respect to the names with respect to ants.", although fyuxu is really Gladilatian creature similar to an ant. A Terrestrial ant is a hnfe fyuxu, but the difference is not relevant to the proverb.
I had a lot of problem figuring out if the proper form is mewefyuxy (associated-with.(plural).ant) or fetwefyuxy. It hinged on whether a name was intrinsicly something which only exists in its relationship to its referent, or if a name is something which exists in and of itself and also has referents. Fet is used in fetwehfena because remembrance only exists in its relation to something remembered. I decided that gladifers would consider a name without a referent to not really be a name, and thus they would use fet. Compare this with mset, "language". A language can be a language without any speakers, so "language of the gladifers" (i.e. "Gladilatian") is mehyohot mset.
Note than when I wrote "only exists" I meant "only exists as such". For instance, fonat, "mother", takes fet (as in fetMrenep fonat, "mother of Mrenep") because even though a gladifer exists whether or not she's a mother, she exists as a mother only if she is a mother in relation to another gladifer.

You can go to the main Gladilatian page, go to my homepage, or mail me.