Yes, it's in there. Good idea to provide multiple versions of it.Re: linguistic jargon
I'm pro-conventional linguistics jargon. But I agree, I should include some tweets defining the key definitions. (For example, I think the word "describer" found in the wiki is less useful than "adjective")
By toki pona is all phrases, I mean, to contrast with languages that inflect, e.g. run, ran, running, amo, amas, amat, amorum, etc. I'm not even sure what language that amo stuff is. Spanish I think. The alternate to inflections is phrases. To oversimplify, languages have 3 ways to express an idea-- make up a word for it, glue a chunk of sounds to another word, string a bunch of words together. So thats lexical, morphological and periphrastic solutions to problems. toki pona more radically than any other language relies on the last solution for solving all challenges.
Re: intro with template
In twitter world, there really isn't a first message, just tweets close to each other. I can expect a twitter reader to have read the last 1 or 2 messages, but not necessarily the whole stream. Frankly, it is a bizarre medium to write for. After I finish proofing, then I wire these tweets up to a scheduler and they get tweeted once or twice a day until they've all been broadcast.Re: function words.
Function words are semantically bleached, tend to be a closed lexical class, tend to not stand on their own, e.g. "the", "in", "for", "how", "do" in English questions, etc. They contrast with content
words, which are semantically rich, e.g. "fish", "equivocate", "fragile". UPDATE
: D'oh I wrote this late at night and wrote the 2nd part backwards
li, e, pi and la, in normal linguistic jargon are either particles or clitics. The decision about if it is one or the other usually hinges on diagnostic tests, like can you insert a word in between the potential case ending/particle thingy or not. I haven't been clever enough to come up with many diagnostic tests. I know li is not a verbal affix because modals can be inserted in between li and the verb. e and pi always attach to the head of the noun phrase and you can't insert anything in between these and the noun they attach to. Prove me wrong!
Then I can call them particles. Otherwise, e and pi look like clitics.
mi lukin e jan. -> mi lukin e .... jan. No matter what I put in the blank, it's just not the same sentence, not in the way that the following is the the same thing.
mi lukin e jan -> mi lukin e jan lili. <-- The head of the DO stays the same.
re: What are unmarked complements?
mi tawa tomo ante.
mi kama tomo mi.
jan Kipo is analyzing these as modals + intransitive verbs. I'm not entirely convinced, I think either tawa/kama are verbs that are taking an unmarked complement OR they are predicates of motion (to use Paynes jargon). And from time to time we see people write stuff that sort of looks okay with out the "e", such as
? mi toki ilo.
I'm talking about computers
If this was a ordinary human language, it would have moving parts and jan Kipo (or me) would be able to say, "hey, here are the six characteristics of intransitives and this set of phrases meets all of them" or "rephrase this as a question and it become obvious that x, y, and z", but toki pona is so limited, there's not a lot of obvious diagnostic tests.
>Will typical Twitter reader understand this?
Dunno the underlying problem is actually hard. One the harder chapters in the linguistics text book I'm reading is on valence, i.e. how do languages cope with verbs that semantically seem to need more than just two participants (subject and object). In toki pona, we have managed, correctly or incorrectly to put tertiary things in all these slots with X's:
X1 la S (en X2) li V X3 (pi X4) e DO Prep X5 (another Prop X6 ... etc)
Why things end up in the X slots as opposed to the S or DO slots, is a hard question.
>> #tokipona Grammar. en in a li or e phrase implies mixture. jan li lape en kalama. He talked in his sleep.
>I never knew this about en. Thanks.
I don't know how canonical it is, but it makes sense. It makes even more sense with adjectives. moku pi loje en laso.
>Why would I say ona jan - human person?
Exactly, it means something like s/he, but not "he/she/it (that animal over there)". I would use something like that, but thats just because I like modified pronouns. I can't just drop them altogether like they do in Chinese, so might as well make them useful.
> #tokipona Grammar. In a predicate sentence, tan, tawa can indicate motion. mi tawa tomo pali. mi tan tomo pali.
What do you mean by predicate sentence? Maybe when tan or tawa are used as a verb?
"My father is a dentist" i.e. my father is an example of the class of people known as dentists.
"Pork is the other white meat" A=B. These can be reversed without changing meaning.
"The other white meat is pork" B=A.
There are more subcategories. Like I said earlier, jan Kipo prefers to analyze these as intransitive verbs, I don't buy it yet. For example, in a equative predicate sentence, the arguments can be reversed and it means the same thing. But this can't happen in intransitives
mi kon. I breathe.
? kon mi. Air is me.
>maybe add that most TP words can be used in any POS?
>What are the 4 formal grammars? May be too much info for Twitter?
jan Kipo's, morpheme addict's, the one on wikipedia which has been through multiple iterations. I wanted people to know they exists. I probably should try to work in what a formal grammar is.
>>#tokipona Grammar. o hortantive/optative
>Making Twitter users use the dictionary a lot, aren't we? Sorry, I'm an engineer not a linguist!
Yeah, you're right, that is one is a bit over the line. Function vs content is a valuable framework, imho, but commands and demands are just commands and demands.
>> #tokipona Grammar. noun + verb can behave like participles. waso tawa = running bird, ostrich.
>I know tawa defaults to a preposition, but when I see it after a noun, I think of tawa as an adjective: waso tawa - moving bird
Participles are adjectives made out of verbs. I'll rewrite it to say adjective since the distinction between an ordinary adjective and a participle isn't important.
> #tokipona Grammar. X li Y. This is a simple predicate meaning equivallents or subclass. X is Y. or X is a Y.
Maybe mention zero copula here?
On this issue, I agree with jan Kipo. toki pona doesn't have a zero copula. It's a piece of misinformation that is in the wikipedia article. Russian has a zero copula. (And if you don't like imaginary things, the other word for it is juxtaposition)ya pilot
(russian). I'm a pilot. The phrase works by setting the two next to each other.
toki pona on the other hand, has an invariant particle. (invariant to time, person, number and all other know semantic categories and anyone could imagine)
Thanks for the proof reading!