Lili (2023)

Old version (it really sucks) https://conlang.fandom.com/wiki/Lili

New version text:

Introduction (messy, will rewrite eventually)
Note: Lexicon is unstable, may change at any time. The grammar is the more important part.

Anyway, I'm creating this conlang mainly (but not only) based on the concepts of "logical conjunctions" and "logical disjunctions". I will explain better now.

"Logical disjunction" uses the formula: Sentence 1 OR Sentence 2 = New Sentence

"Logical conjunction" uses the formula: Sentence 1 AND Sentence 2 = New Sentence

Logical disjunction is: "If Sentence 1 OR Sentence 2 is true, then New Sentence is true"

Logical conjunction is "If Sentence 1 AND Sentence 2 are both true, then New Sentence is true"

Basically, logical disjunction makes sentences more ambiguous (since they can mean one OR the other information) and logical conjunction makes sentences less ambiguous (since both one AND the other information must be true simultaneously). In my conlang's grammar, logical disjunctions are called "ambiguations" and logical conjunctions are called "disambiguations".

Example of an ambiguation:

Sentence 1 = My sister is smiling

Sentence 2 = My brother is smiling

New Sentence = My sibling is smiling

Formula: "My sister is smiling" OR "My brother is smiling" = "My sibling is smiling"

"My sibling is smiling" could mean "my sister is smiling" OR "my brother is smiling". If "my sister is smiling" OR "my brother is smiling" is true, then "my sibling is smiling" is true.

Example of a disambiguation:

Sentence 1 = I'm eating an apple

Sentence 2 (granted, it's more like a concept added on the first sentence than a stand-alone sentence, but it's still valid) = The apple (that is being talked about) is red

New Sentence = I'm eating a red apple

Formula: "I'm eating an apple" AND "The (that) apple is red" = "I'm eating a red apple"

"I'm eating a red apple" means that "I'm eating an apple" AND "the apple (that is being talked about) is red" are both true at the same time. Disambiguations usually either disambiguate a sentence, or simply add more information to it.

Since my conlang won't ever be fully developed (at least, not by me), but it will always stay as a mere idea or concept, the lexicon is arbitrary and I mostly just type random letters to make a new word. The important thing in my conlang is not the lexicon, but the "grammar" (i.e. the central idea of my conlang that is being shown... that's why the lexicon is not important).

Now I will talk about my conlang's grammar, which is mostly based on the relationship between "A" and "B". What are "A" and "B", then? I'll make a simple example in English. Consider the sentence "I like apples". If you translate it to my conlang, "A" would be "I" (the first person singular pronoun) and "B" would be "apples". But it's not all. "A" and "B" have a certain relationship with each other. What is this relationship? Of course it's "like". "A" and "B" are both called "operands", and they are connected with each other through something called "operator", which in this case is a word that means "like" but obviously in different sentences it will be a different word that means something else. Operands and operators are the only parts of speech in my conlang. There is no grammatical distinction between nouns, adjectives, verbs, adverbs, conjunctions, prepositions, particles, etc. There are only operands and operators. Every word is separated by "separators", which are not words, they are just letters that separate every word. The separators are the following:

Default separators: l/i

Open parentheses: r/a

Close parentheses: n/u

Therefore, the letters "l", "i", "r", "a", "n" and "u" cannot appear within the lexicon. As a consequence, there is no standard way to use spaces in my conlang. Consider the English sentence "your conlang is so weird". Imagine it could be freely written as "yourcon langisso we ird", "yo urcon langi sso weird", or ANY other combination of spaces and it will mean exactly the same thing with no chance of it meaning something else. My conlang is exactly like that! Another rule is that words in their basic form must always end with a vowel (we'll see why later).

Now I can give the first example (NOTE: the lexicon is arbitrary, and I just type random letters. I want to show the grammar, the lexicon is not important. It will never be a fully developed, speakable conlang anyway):

I eat an apple = cel voboti sote

ce: I (operand "A")

vobo(t): to eat (operator that connects "A" and "B")

sote: apple (operand "B")

As you can see, the words are separated by the default separators. Now you might be wondering why the operator ends with that additional consonant. Here are the suffixes that must go after every operator. They are mandatory. Also if you are wondering how everything is pronounced, don't worry, the phonology is explained later in this document, with IPA.

-t: default order, verbal sentence

-c: default order, nominalizes A

-p: default order, nominalizes B

-k: default order, nominalizes the operator

-ts: reverse order, verbal sentence

-s: reverse order, nominalizes A

-f: reverse order, nominalizes B

-x: reverse order, nominalizes the operator

Examples with the example given before, only changing the suffix.

-t suffix: default order, verbal sentence

cel voboti sote = I eat an apple

-c suffix: default order, nominalizes A

cel voboci sote = I (who is eating an apple)

It's impossible to translate this in English in a way that can be used in a colloquial, every-day conversation, but basically it's just "I" (the first person singular pronoun) with more information, i.e. that the speaker is eating an apple.

-p suffix: default order, nominalizes B

cel vobopi sote = The apple(s) that I eat

-k suffix: default order, nominalizes the operator

cel voboki sote = The act of me eating an apple

-ts suffix: reverse order, verbal sentence

cel vobotsi sote = An apple eats me/I'm eaten by an apple

-s suffix: reverse order, nominalizes A

cel vobosi sote

I (who am eaten by an apple)

-f suffix: reverse order, nominalizes B

cel vobofi sote = The apple that is eating me

-x suffix: reverse order, nominalizes the operator

cel voboxi sote = The act of an apple eating me

HIDDEN OPERANDS:

Hidden Operand A:

voboti sote = [Unspecified subject] eat(s) an apple

Hidden Operand B:

cel vobot = I eat

Both operands hidden

vobot = [Unspecified subject] eat(s) (i.e. there is an act of eating going on, but the subject and object are both unspecified)

Some other examples:

vobok = An act of eating

vobop = Something that is being eaten

voboc = Someone who is eating (roughly corresponds to an "eater", though it does not necessarily imply habitual action, unlike English)

voboki sote = An act of eating an apple

vobopi sote = An apple that is being eaten

voboci sote = Someone who is eating an apple

("ösfo" means "soul")

ösfol vobof = soul eater (hehehe)

And so on... It's never possible to hide an operator, however.

Okay, I hope you understand the pattern. Now, phonology!

Phonology
Phonology (standard ortography on the left... IPA on the right. Obviously, lol. And yes, the numbers 8 and 16 are intentional, I'm kinda obsessed with powers of 2)

Vowels (8):

a: /a

e: /ɛ

ë: /e

i: /i

o: /ɔ

ö: /o

u: /u

ü: /y

Consonants (16):

b: /b

c: /ʃ

d: /d

f: /f

g: /g

j: /ʒ

k: /k

l: /l

n: /n (m as an allophone before "b" and "p")

p: /p

r: /r

s: /s

t: /t

v: /v

x: /x

z: /z

The sound "m" is only found as an allophone of "n" before "b" and "p" but is still written as "n" ortographically. I don't want to make "m" as a separate phoneme, because it could cause extreme ambiguity since "n" before "b" and "p" would be pronounced as "m", and "n" is a very important phoneme/morpheme/sememe in my conlang since it's one of the separators. The letter "r" is also a separator. There is no gemination at all in my conlang.

There is also a "letter" that is "summoned" by writing/typing the following three letters: "h", "q", "w" (which are not found in standard ortography) in any order. "hqw", "hwq", "qwh"... or whatever. It is a click consonant (the only click consonant that is ever used in) that is pronounced "kǀ" (IPA alphabet) and has a very precise function: to introduce words that are used in foreign languages. For example:

cel begëtiq wh Tekken

I like/love Tekken

ce: I (operand)

begë(t): to like/love (operator)

Tekken: Tekken (the fighting game) (operand)

Yes, separators (any separator... so, "i", "a", "u", "l", "r" and "n") are required before the opening "hqw" and after the closing "hqw". If the foreign word is the last word of the speech, there is no need to close the word with another "hqw" (although it is not wrong to do so). But if the foreign word is not the last word of the speech, then the closing "hqw" is required. For example:

ce: I (operand)

begë(t): to like/love (operator)

[open parenthesis]

je: you (operand)

de(p): (in this case since there is "-p" suffix it means it nominalizes B, so it acts like an English genitive, but if there was a "-t" suffix, so, a verbal sentence, then it would act like the verb "to have" in English) (operator)

[open parenthesis]

["hqw" thingy that introduces the word 'Ferrari' since it's a foreign word]

Ferrari (operand)

["hqw" thingy that closes the word 'Ferrari']

fo(c): explanation: "fo" is an operator that links a subject to a verb. Or, more accurately, it transforms A + operator, into A + fo + B (B is the operator of the "A + operator" sentence). "to" is the other operator similar to "fo", it basically links a verb to an object. It transforms operator + B, into A (the operator of the other sentence) + "to" + B (which is the B of the other sentence).

züdü: fast (operand)

cel begëta jeldepaq wh Ferrari qwhi foci züdü = I like your fast Ferrari

Note: the LONG "formula" for linking a noun with an adjective was A (noun) + fo (operator) + B (adjective), and then nominalize A. Like this:

vüxü = car

fo(c) = as said before "fo" is an operator that links a subject to a verb. Or, more accurately, it transforms A + operator, into A + fo + B (B is the operator of the "A + operator" sentence).

züdü = fast

vüxül foci züdü = fast car

However, this often makes things unnecessary long. There is a shorter way to use adjectives: when adjectives are operators, describe the noun A. B is an unused slot, but since it's possible to hide operands, it's fine. "fo" is grammatically valid, but unnecessary. Shorter version:

vüxü = car

züdü(c) = fast (it's an operator that describes A... with the -c suffix it nominalizes A)

vüxül züdüc = fast car

Much shorter! Also, you can put an "i" at the end, for euphonic purposes, it's not grammatically wrong to say "vüxül züdüci".

NOTE: "fo" cannot be used as the verb "to be" with nouns, only with adjectives (because adjectives can be used as operators directly without any equivalent of the verb "to be"). For "to be" with nouns, use the operator "ge". "ge" cannot be used with adjectives, since, using it with the adjective "red", for example, would mean "I am the redness" instead of "I am red".

ce: I (operand)

ge(t): "to be" (operator, verbal)

bote: human

cel geti bote: I'm a human

Examples:

vüxül züdüt = a car is fast

vüxül züdük = the speed of a car (note: 'speed' here does not mean 'how fast or slow', in the sense of a measure of how fast or slow something is, but the property of being fast, like... 'fastness'... so it excludes the possibility of 'slowness', it's a bit complicated but I hope you get what I mean)

züdüfi vüxü = a fast car (note: when a reverse order suffix like -f is used, what is left of the operator is still A, and what is right of the operator is still B, it just changes the order of A and B within the meaning/definition of the operator, so vüxü (the car) is B, because it's to the right of the operator)

Introduction
Lili is a constructed language based on two things mainly:

-Ambiguation and disambiguation

-A grammar based on "the relationship between A and B". It's a surprisingly simple method that produces a complete grammar, and apparently nobody but me has ever thought about it before O_O

(Note: Lexicon is unstable, may change at any time, and I create the words mostly just typing random letters, lol. The grammar and philosophy behind my conlang is of course the more important part, rather than the lexicon)

Ambiguation and disambiguation
I'm creating this conlang mainly (but not only) based on the concepts of "ambiguation" (which is basically logical disjunctions) and "disambiguation" (which is basically logical conjunctions). But since I don't like "logical disjunction/conjunction" as words I will call them "ambiguation" and "disambiguation" because they sound a lot cooler IMHO. will explain better now.

"Ambiguation" uses the formula: Sentence 1 OR Sentence 2 = New Sentence

"Disambiguation" uses the formula: Sentence 1 AND Sentence 2 = New Sentence

Ambiguation is: "If Sentence 1 OR Sentence 2 is true, then New Sentence is true"

Disambiguation is "If Sentence 1 AND Sentence 2 are both true, then New Sentence is true"

Basically, ambiguations make sentences more ambiguous (since they can mean one OR the other information) and disambiguations makes sentences less ambiguous (since both one AND the other information must be true simultaneously).

Example of an ambiguation:

Sentence 1 = My sister is smiling

Sentence 2 = My brother is smiling

New Sentence = My sibling is smiling

Formula: "My sister is smiling" OR "My brother is smiling" = "My sibling is smiling"

"My sibling is smiling" could mean "my sister is smiling" OR "my brother is smiling". If "my sister is smiling" OR "my brother is smiling" is true, then "my sibling is smiling" is true.

Example of a disambiguation:

Sentence 1 = I'm eating an apple

Sentence 2 (granted, it's more like a concept added on the first sentence than a stand-alone sentence, but it's still valid) = The apple (that is being talked about) is red

New Sentence = I'm eating a red apple

Formula: "I'm eating an apple" AND "The (that) apple is red" = "I'm eating a red apple"

"I'm eating a red apple" means that "I'm eating an apple" AND "the apple (that is being talked about) is red" are both true at the same time. Disambiguations usually either disambiguate a sentence, or simply add more information to it.

Since my conlang won't ever be fully developed (at least, not by me), but it will always stay as a mere idea or concept, the lexicon is arbitrary and I mostly just type random letters to make a new word. The important thing in my conlang is not the lexicon, but the "grammar" (i.e. the central idea of my conlang that is being shown... that's why the lexicon is not important). The idea is to make "ambiguations" and "disambiguations" as easily as possible, unlike many languages that, for example, force you to specify gender, or some other stuff that you don't care about specifying. In some ways the idea is similar to that of Lojban, but Lili is comfortable with ambiguity, not just with vagueness (unlike Lojban that is uncomfortable with the kinds of ambiguities that are allowed in Lili).

Relationship between A and B
Now I will talk about my conlang's grammar, which is mostly based on the relationship between "A" and "B". What are "A" and "B", then? I'll make a simple example in English. Consider the sentence "I like apples". If you translate it to my conlang, "A" would be "I" (the first person singular pronoun) and "B" would be "apples". But it's not all. "A" and "B" have a certain relationship with each other. What is this relationship? Of course it's "like". "A" and "B" are both called "operands", and they are connected with each other through something called "operator", which in this case is a word that means "like" but obviously in different sentences it will be a different word that means something else. Operands and operators are the only parts of speech in my conlang. There is no grammatical distinction between nouns, adjectives, verbs, adverbs, conjunctions, prepositions, particles, etc. There are only operands and operators. Every word is separated by "separators", which are not words, they are just letters that separate every word. The separators are the following:

Default separators: l/i

Open parentheses: r/a

Close parentheses: n/u

Therefore, the letters "l", "i", "r", "a", "n" and "u" cannot appear within the lexicon. As a consequence, there is no standard way to use spaces in my conlang. Consider the English sentence "your conlang is so weird". Imagine it could be freely written as "yourcon langisso we ird", "yo urcon langi sso weird", or ANY other combination of spaces and it will mean exactly the same thing with no chance of it meaning something else. My conlang is exactly like that! Another rule is that words in their basic form must always end with a vowel (we'll see why later).

Now I can give the first example (NOTE: the lexicon is arbitrary, and I just type random letters. I want to show the grammar, the lexicon is not important. It will never be a fully developed, speakable conlang anyway):

I eat an apple = cel voboti sote

ce: I (operand "A")

vobo(t): to eat (operator that connects "A" and "B")

sote: apple (operand "B")

As you can see, the words are separated by the default separators. Now you might be wondering why the operator ends with that additional consonant. Here are the suffixes that must go after every operator. They are mandatory. Also if you are wondering how everything is pronounced, don't worry, the phonology is explained later in this document, with IPA.

-t: default order, verbal sentence

-c: default order, nominalizes A

-p: default order, nominalizes B

-k: default order, nominalizes the operator

-ts: reverse order, verbal sentence

-s: reverse order, nominalizes A

-f: reverse order, nominalizes B

-x: reverse order, nominalizes the operator

Examples with the example given before, only changing the suffix.

-t suffix: default order, verbal sentence

cel voboti sote = I eat an apple

-c suffix: default order, nominalizes A

cel voboci sote = I (who is eating an apple)

It's impossible to translate this in English in a way that can be used in a colloquial, every-day conversation, but basically it's just "I" (the first person singular pronoun) with more information, i.e. that the speaker is eating an apple.

-p suffix: default order, nominalizes B

cel vobopi sote = The apple(s) that I eat

-k suffix: default order, nominalizes the operator

cel voboki sote = The act of me eating an apple

-ts suffix: reverse order, verbal sentence

cel vobotsi sote = An apple eats me/I'm eaten by an apple

-s suffix: reverse order, nominalizes A

cel vobosi sote

I (who am eaten by an apple)

-f suffix: reverse order, nominalizes B

cel vobofi sote = The apple that is eating me

-x suffix: reverse order, nominalizes the operator

cel voboxi sote = The act of an apple eating me

HIDDEN OPERANDS:

Hidden Operand A:

voboti sote = [Unspecified subject] eat(s) an apple

Hidden Operand B:

cel vobot = I eat

Both operands hidden

vobot = [Unspecified subject] eat(s) (i.e. there is an act of eating going on, but the subject and object are both unspecified)

Some other examples:

vobok = An act of eating

vobop = Something that is being eaten

voboc = Someone who is eating (roughly corresponds to an "eater", though it does not necessarily imply habitual action, unlike English)

voboki sote = An act of eating an apple

vobopi sote = An apple that is being eaten

voboci sote = Someone who is eating an apple

("ösfo" means "soul")

ösfol vobof = soul eater (hehehe)

And so on... It's never possible to hide an operator, however.

Okay, I hope you understand the pattern. Now, phonology!

Phonology
Phonology (standard ortography on the left... IPA on the right. Obviously, lol. And yes, the numbers 8 and 16 are intentional, I'm kinda obsessed with powers of 2)

Vowels (8):

a: /a

e: /ɛ

ë: /e

i: /i

o: /ɔ

ö: /o

u: /u

ü: /y

Consonants (16):

b: /b

c: /ʃ

d: /d

f: /f

g: /g

j: /ʒ

k: /k

l: /l

n: /n (m as an allophone before "b" and "p")

p: /p

r: /r

s: /s

t: /t

v: /v

x: /x

z: /z

The sound "m" is only found as an allophone of "n" before "b" and "p" but is still written as "n" ortographically. I don't want to make "m" as a separate phoneme, because it could cause extreme ambiguity since "n" before "b" and "p" would be pronounced as "m", and "n" is a very important phoneme/morpheme/sememe in my conlang since it's one of the separators. The letter "r" is also a separator. There is no gemination at all in my conlang.

Other stuff
How to make longer sentences than just two or three words? It is fairly simple, actually. The default formula (i.e. if you don't use any parenthesis) is that everything before the last operator is considered as "A", the operator is... well, the operator, and the very last word is considered as "B". But this order can be changed using the parentheses. Example: "I want a red apple"

ce: I

gebo(t): to want

sote: apple

fo(c): (copula, in this case it nominalizes A since there is -c suffix)

odü: red

Now, if we don't use any parenthesis, and therefore we say: "cel geboti sotel foci odü", it probably won't mean what you want to say. Since "A" is everything before the last operator and "B" is the very last word, "A" will be "I want an apple" and "B" will be "red". Connected through an operator that is basically a copula (that nominalizes "I want an apple"), the sentence without parentheses will roughly mean something similar to "I want an apple (which is a red fact)". So we need to open a parenthesis.

The correct sentence is: "cel gebota sotel foci odü". If you forgot, "r/a" are the separators that open a parenthesis. So, now "A" is just "I" (the first person singular pronoun) and "B" is "a red apple". The two are connected with an operator that means "to want". So the sentence means "I (operand A) want (operator) a red apple (operand B)" and is therefore correct.

Since "fo" is unnecessary, "red apple" can just be:

sote: apple

odü(c): red (nominalizes "apple")

sotel odüc = red apple

odüfi sote = red apple (if you are more comfortable with "adjective + noun" order as it is in English)

Some more examples:

cel gebot = I want (something) (i.e. "I have a desire")

cel geboti sote = I want an apple

cel gebopi sote = the apple that I want

cel gebop = what I want (i.e. "the thing that I want"... a hidden B is nominalized)

cel gebota odüc = I want a red thing (not necessarily ANY red thing... just something red that is being unspecified)

cel gebopi sotel odüt = The apple that I want is red

cel gebopi odüt = the thing that I want is red

cel gebok = My desire

cel geboki sote = My desire for an apple

cel geboka sotel odüc = My desire for a red apple

cel geboka odüc = My desire for something red

geboka odüc = The desire for something red

Note: "geboki odüc" means "red desire", while "geboka odüc" means "desire for something red". Let's see the grammatical structure of both.

geboki odüc = red desire

gebo(k) = (operator, nominalized... so... "desire")

odü(c) = (operator, A is nominalized)

An operator is surrounded by the operands A and B. Even if the operands are hidden, this structure is still implied. So

A (hidden) + gebo(k) ("desire") + B (hidden) = "desire" (or, more technically, "the desire A feels for B"... but since both A and B are hidden, it could easily be translated as just "desire")

Now... remember the structure of the sentence without parentheses? This thing... A + operator + B, in the context of the second operator, is simply "A".

So... A ("desire") + odü(c) ("red", A is nominalized) + B (hidden/unusable operand).

The resulting meaning is therefore "a red desire".

Now, let's do "geboka odüc", which means "desire for something red".

gebo(k) = (operator, nominalized, so... "desire")

odü(c) = (operator, A is nominalized)

Now, as said earlier, the structure is this:

A (hidden) + gebo(k) ("desire") + B

What's the difference here? B has changed. It's no longer a hidden operand, but rather, B is whatever is inside the parentheses, since a parenthesis has been opened. What is the content of B now? Let's see.

odü(c) = (operator, A is nominalized)

Of course, since that is an operator, it implies that there are two hidden operands around it.

A (hidden operand) + odü(c) (operator, A is nominalized) + B (hidden/unusable operand)

So... odüc by itself just means "something red". Whatever is A is the red thing, but since A is hidden, it is not specified what is the thing that is red, so it just means "something red". If there is an operand behind it, then that word is A, and that thing is red, e.g. sotel odüc = a red apple.

So, the structure of the sentence "geboka odüc" ("desire for something red") is:

(note that "gebo" as an operator means A desires B)

A (hidden operand) + gebo(k) ("desire", nominalized) + B (odüc = "something red")

If the operator suffix was verbal, it would had been "gebota odüc" = "someone wants a red thing"), but since the desire here is what is being nominalized, "geboka odüc" means something like "the desire for a red thing". I hope it's not too complicated, I'm not too good at explaining, lmao.

And so on...

This is basically the idea behind my conlang. Mostly "ambiguation" and "disambiguation". And the relationship between A and B (the "operands"), connected through an "operator".

Example sentences, just to experiment around, haha!

cel voboti sote = I eat an apple

cel vobota sotel odüc = I eat a red apple

cel voboti züdüt = I eat fast

Actually... that last sentence needs more explanation, since it basically contains what in English would be called an "adverb". Alright. It may sound grammatically incorrect at first, but it's not. Here's why (let's analyze the structure):

"cel voboti züdüt" means "I eat fast". Not necessarily habitually like English would imply, though. It could also be "I'm eating fast". Structure analysis:

cel (A) + vobo(t) (operator) + (hidden B) means "I eat [something unspecified], basically "I eat/I'm eating".

Now, "züdüt" is an operator here, and guess what A is, since there are no parentheses? Right, whatever comes before it. So, "cel vobot" ("I'm eating") is A here.

A ("I'm eating") + züdüt (verbal sentence operator) + B (hidden/unusable operand)

So... "cel voboti züdüt" literally means: "I'm eating" is fast. Unlike in English, the same word can describe nouns and verbal sentences alike in my conlang. So, just like a car can be fast, so can "I'm eating". There's no grammatical distinction between adjectives and adverbs in my conlangs.

Funny variation: "cel vobota züdüc" = "I'm eating something fast".

Some other words (randomly typing the letters now, as I said before, lexicon is not important):

füso = hug

xüxö = sad/sadness

je = you

sëco = happy/happiness

dege = (default order) therefore, (reverse order) because

cel geboti vüxü = I want a car

cel sëcot = I'm happy

cel geboti füso = I want a hug

jel füsotice = you hug me

cel gebota jel füsotice = I want you to hug me

cel gebota jel füsoticen degetsa cel xüxöt = I want you to hug me because I'm sad

You may have noticed an "unusual" letter so far... the "n"... that means the parenthesis has been closed, let's analyze that last sentence.

cel gebota jel füsoticen degetsa cel xüxöt = I want you to hug me because I'm sad

A = ce = I

Operator = gebo(t) = want

B = since after "gebo(t)" the parenthesis has been opened (since there is an "a" after it rather than an "i"), then B is whatever is contained in that parenthesis, which is closed after that next "ce". The content of this B, then, is... "jel füsotice", which means "you hug me". So, this is what is being wanted by A (which is "ce" which means "I", the first person pronoun).

That "dege", since it's reverse order (due to the suffix -ts) means "because". So... A (cel gebota jel füsotice = "I want you to hug me") + operator ("dege(ts)" = "because") + B (cel xüxöt = I'm sad). So... "I want you to hug me because I'm sad". I hope my explanation is understandable, lol.

Anyway, more example sentences!

cel gebota vüxül züdüc = I want a fast car

geboki züdüc = a fast desire

geboka züdüc = a desire for something fast

geboka züdük = a desire for speed/fastness ("wish for speed", lmao)

cel sëcoti degetsi füso = I'm happy because of a hug

sëco = happiness (grammatically, this is an operand)

sëcok = happiness (grammatically, this is an operator)

cel sëcok = my happiness (note that grammatically, there is no possessive adjective in the conlang sentence here, it's the same sentence as "I'm happy", just that "happy" is being nominalized, so it's like... "the happiness that I feel")

sëcoki degesi füso = happiness due to a hug

sëcoki degefi füso = a hug that causes happiness

füsol degeca sëcok = a hug that causes happiness (same as before, just with a different word order)

füsol degeci sëco = a hug that causes happiness (same as before, just that "happiness" is an operand instead of an operator)

sëcoki degesi vüxü = happiness due to a car

sëcoki degesa vüxül züdüc = happiness due to a fast car

cel gebota jel sëcot = I want you to be happy

cel gebota vüxül odüc = I want a red car

jel gebota cel sëcot = you want me to be happy

Etc I hope you understood, lol.

From an individual to a group
The operator "koze", when nominalized (with suffix -k, as we have seen), turns A (a noun) into something meaning "the collection of all [A]'s", or something like that. Like "human" to "humankind". Either the operator or the operand can be nominalized, both are grammatically correct, and the meaning likely does not change.

bote: human

botelkozek: humankind (operator is nominalized)

botelkozec: humankind (operand is nominalized)

Like
There are five ways to say "like" to compare something to something else: ske, skë, sko, skö, skü

"You smell like a goat"

je: you

efpo: to smell (in the sense of "emanate a smell", not in the sense of "perceiving a smell")

bükco = goat

Now, the operator "efpo" means "A smells like B" so the word "like" is not needed in this specific case.

jel efpoti bükco = you smell like a goat

But the word "like" can also be used.

ske = "like" in the sense of "also", not in the sense of "in the same manner/intensity". Like "you play basketball like my brother" in the sense of "you play basketball, and so does my brother", NOT in the sense of "you play basketball in the same way as my brother does"

jel efpoti sketi bükco = (something like) you emanate a smell, and goats emanate a smell too

skë = "like" in the sense of "in the same manner" AND/OR "with the same intensity", it's an ambiguation of the next three versions of "like".

jel efpoti skëti bükco = you smell like a goat (whether in the sense of "same smell" or "same intensity" is not specified)

sko = "like" in the sense of "same manner".

jel efpoti skoti bükco = you smell like a goat (in the sense of "you smell in the same manner as a goat" i.e. the smell is the same, though not necessarily the intensity)

skö = "like" in the sense of "same intensity"

jel efpoti sköti bükco = you smell like a goat (in th sense of "you smell with the same intensity as a goat" i.e. the intensity of the smell is the same, though not necessarily the smell itself)

skü = "like" in the sense of "same manner AND intensity"

jel efpoti sküti bükco = you smell like a goat (in the sense of "you smell in the same manner AND with the same intensity as a goat")

Expectations
"To expect" in English has two meanings: "to want", and "to think something will happen". They are translated as "cesü" and "keco" respectively. This "to want" is not the same as the normal one, because this is more like something you desire in a more demanding way, like... while desiring it, the speaker demands that thing from someone.

ce: I (operand)

cesü/keco: (operators)

fteü: answer (operand)

cel cesüti fteü = I expect (want/demand) an answer

cel kecoti fteü = I expect (think that will happen) an answer

Emotions and tones of voice
The operator "üto" means "A is said in an emotion/tone of voice B"

Example:

cel voboti sote = I'm eating an apple

cel voboti sotel ütoti sëco = I'm eating an apple (happy tone)

sëcol ütotsa cel voboti sote = I'm eating an apple (happy tone) (same sentence as before, but with a different word order)

cel voboti sotel ütoti xüxö = I'm eating an apple (sad tone)

ütoti sëco = (happy tone) (without saying anything) (it's therefore kinda like an exclamation of happiness)

sëcol ütots = (happy tone) (same thing as before, just with different order)

Meat
üjvü means "meat". As an operand, it just means "meat", as an operator, it means "meat of the animal A" (when nominalized).

For example, "zgego" means "chicken", so "zgegol üjvük" means "chicken meat". With the reverse order it would be "üjvüxi zgego".

Note that either the operand or the operator can be nominalized, they're both grammatically correct and the meaning does not change.

zgegol üjvük: chicken meat (operator is nominalized)

zgegol üjvüc: chicken meat (operand is nominalized)

Habitual aspect
bëtü as an operator is the habitual aspect. Added to a sentence (A), it indicates habituality.

cel voboti sote = I eat an apple (note: tense/aspect is actually unspecified here, the meaning may vary according to the context, and it can indeed be habitual as well)

cel voboti sotel bëtüt = I habitually eat apples

bëtütsa cel voboti sote = I habitually eat apples (same sentence as before, with different word order)

bëtütsa voboti sote = [unspecified subject] habitually eat(s) apples

bëtütsa voboki sote = the habitual consumption of apples

Topic marker (maybe it's not the best way to call it... I may change the name)
opto, as an operator, is a topic marker. It broadly means "A (as opposed to B)". For example (tëje means "orange"). In English, this meaning is usually achieved through tone/stress/emphasis, while the sentence stays the same.

cel vobota sotel optot = I eat an apple (as opposed to something else)

cel vobota optotsi sote = I eat an apple (as opposed to something else) (same sentence as before but with different order)

cel vobota sotel optoti tëje = I eat an apple (as opposed to an orange)

cel optoti voboti sote = I (as opposed to someone else) eat an apple

Vocative
"vo" is an operator that means "B is something that is said to A".

Examples ("tete" means "mom").

tetel vota cel sëcot = "Mom, I'm happy!"

cel sëcoti votsi tete = "I'm happy, mom!"

tetel vot = "Mom!"

votsi tete = "Mom!" (same as before, just with different order)

Word order
Lili has a SVO word order (OVS if you use the reverse order), and the only exception is that SOV (VOS if you use the reverse order) is allowed if and only if the object is a pronoun. Example:

cel füsoti je = I hug you (SVO order)

ce = A (operand) = I

füso(t) = (operator, verbal) = hug

je = B (operand) = you

The reason why SOV is allowed when the object is a pronoun is that personal pronouns, when operators, mean "A (subject) does B (verb) to the operator"

E.g.

cel jeti füso = I hug you (SOV order)

ce = A (operand) = I

je(t) = (operator, verbal) = you

füso = B (operand) = hug

Reverse order:

jel füsotsi ce = I hug you (it sounds like "you are hugged by me") (OVS order)

füsol jetsi ce = I hug you (VOS order)

Note: personal pronouns, as operators, not only create a SOV word order, but in certain circumstances allow for certain types of alternate sentence structures, but that will be explained in a different "lesson".

Negation
zü as an operand means "nothing/nobody", while as an operator, it's a negation (of A). It can negate either the whole sentence, or specific parts of it. Example:

cel vobot = I'm eating

cel voboti zü = I'm not eating (lit. "I'm eating nothing")

cel voboti züt = I'm not eating (lit. "I'm not eating")

cel sëcoti züt = I'm not happy

zütsa cel sëcot = I'm not happy (same sentence as before, just with different order)

cel voboti sote = I'm eating an apple

cel voboti sotel züt = I'm not eating an apple

cel züci voboti sote = It is not me who is eating an apple

cel vobota sotel züc = I'm eating something that is not an apple

zütsa cel voboti sote = I'm not eating an apple

cel vobota sotel odüc = I'm eating a red apple

cel vobota sotel odücu züt = I'm not eating a red apple

cel vobota sotel odüci züc = I'm eating something that is not a red apple

cel vobota sotel foca odül züc = I'm eating an apple that is not red (it seems like in this case, "fo" is needed)

cel deti vüxül züt = I don't have a car

bëtütsa cel füsotu züt = I don't usually give hugs

Permissions and prohibitions
These operators mean "A (subject) [verb] B (object)"

gozbo = compel

cteo = encourage

stodü = permit, allow

zveze = discourage

gdeü = prohibit

cei cteoti kpeze = I encourage criticism

ce = I

cteo(t): encourage

kpeze = criticism

(impersonal construction): hide the subject. Example (dzüge means "drug(s)")

igdeüti dzüge = drugs are prohibited (note: you can start any sentence with "i" for euphonic purposes, the meaning does not change)

dzügei gdeüts = drugs are prohibited (different word order)

igdeüpi sote = forbidden apple

igdeüti sote = apples are forbidden

sotei gdeüts = apples are forbidden (different word order)

sotel odüci gdeüts = red apples are forbidden

sotel odüci gdeütsa xüxöfi bote = red apples are forbidden by a sad person (or "by sad people")

sotel odüci gdeüsa xüxöfi bote = red apple(s) forbidden by a sad person

cel vobota sotel odüci gdeüsa xüxöfi bote = I'm eating a red apple that is forbidden by a sad person

cel vobota gdeüpi sote = I'm eating a forbidden apple

botei gdeüca sotel odüc = person who has forbidden red apples (or "people who have forbidden red apples")

botei gdeüca sotel odücu xüxöt = the person who has forbidden red apples is sad

ikpezei gdeüts = criticism is forbidden

botei gdeüci kpeze = the person who has forbidden criticism

botei gdeüci kpezel geboti füso = the person who has forbidden criticism wants a hug

füsoi gdeüts = hugs are forbidden

sëcoi gdeüts = happiness is forbidden

füsoki bükcoi gdeüts = hugging goats is forbidden

füsoxi bükcoi gdeüts = it is forbidden for goats to give hugs (or "it is forbidden to be hugged by a goat"... it's not specified actually who is guilty if such thing happens)

füsoka sëcofi boteni gdeüts = hugging happy people is forbidden (the "i" in "boteni" is there for euphonic purposes, the meaning is unchanged, "boteu" can also be said and it means the same thing, see example below)

füsoka sëcofi boteu gdeüts = hugging happy people is forbidden

xüxöfi botel füsoka sëcofi boteni gdeüts = it is forbidden for sad people to hug happy people

füsoka xüxöfi boten stodüts = hugging sad people is allowed

deki vüxül gozbots = having a car is mandatory

deka vüxül odücu gozbots = having a red car is mandatory

deka odüfi vüxün gozbots = having a red car is mandatory (here the order is "adjective + noun" like in English, but the meaning is the same as the previous sentence)

füsoca sëcofi boteu gdeüts = the ones who hug happy people are forbidden

füsoci bükcoi gdeüts = the ones who hug goats are forbidden

füsopi bükcoi gdeüts = the goat(s) that are hugged are forbidden

Singular, plural etc
Some operators to indicate singular, plural etc

Note: here in the examples, A is being nominalized, but it's not a mistake to nominalize the operator in this case. E.g.

bükcol epsec = many goats (A ("goat") is nominalized)

bükcol epsek = many goats (the operator ("many") is nominalized... so it's like... "a multitude of goats")

---

spe = singular

pse = plural

epse = paucal (i.e. "a few")

opse = superplural (i.e. "a lot")

ftü = collective (used to make generalizations)

pso = a group of [A]'s close to each other physically (or temporally, in some words that indicate events rather than objects, like "hugs")

psü = a disjointed group of [A's] not close to each other physically (or temporally)

epso = a group of a few [A's] close to each other physically or temporally

opso = a group of many [A's] close to each other physically or temporally

epsü = a disjointed group of a few [A's] not close to each other physically (or temporally)

opsü = a disjointed group of many [A's] not close to each other physically (or temporally)

---

bükco = goat(s)

bükcoi spec = a goat (one goat)

bükcoi psec = goats (more than one)

bükcol epsec = a few goats

bükcol opsec = many goats

bükcoi ftüc = goats (in general)

bükcoi psoc = a group of goats (physically close to each other)

bükcoi psüc = goats (more than one goat is spoken of, but not close to each other)

bükcol epsoc = a group of a few goats (physically close to each other)

bükcol opsoc = a group of many goats (physically close to each other)

botei psoci kpezeti ce = a group of people (physically close to each other) is criticizing me

botel opsoci kpezeti ce = a group of many people (physically close to each other me) is criticizing me

botel opsüci kpezeti ce = many people criticize me (not a group of many people physically close to each other... it could be simply that it's often the case that many people criticize me... but it's not a compact group of people close to each other that is doing so)

botel opseci kpezeti ce = many people criticize me (it's not specified whether it's a group of people close to each other, or if it's the other meaning... it's an ambiguation of the two sentences above this)

bükcoi ftüci vobot = goats (in general) eat

bükcoi ftüci efpoti je = goats (in general) smell like you

jel füsoti cel opsot = you're hugging me a lot (literally "the event 'you hug me' is happening many times within a short time interval")

"fo" and "to"
"fo" is an operator that links a subject to a verb. Or, more accurately, it transforms "A + operator" into "A + fo + B" (this new B is the equivalent of the operator of the "A + operator" sentence, but it's grammatically an operand this time).

"to" is the other operator similar to "fo", it basically links a verb to an object (sort of). It transforms "operator + B", into "A (the operator of the other sentence) + "to" + B (which is the B of the other sentence).

Examples of its usage:

cel vobot = I eat

ce: I (operand)

vobo(t): eat (operator)

That is the same thing as saying "cel foti vobo"

cel foti vobo = I eat

ce: I (operand)

fo(t): the operator that is being explained in this lesson

vobo: meal (act of eating)

voboti sote = [unspecified subject] eat(s) an apple

It's the same thing as saying

vobol toti sote

I hope you understand, lol.

Weather
Since saying stuff like "it rains" etc are impersonal sentences, just an verbal operator will suffice.

ejde = rain

kevo = snow

etc

ejdet = it rains

kevot = it snows

etc

I will make more words for the weather eventually.

cel sëcoti degetsa ejdet = I'm happy because it rains

cel sëcoti degetsi ejde = I'm happy because of the rain

Other words for the weather:

zügde = sunny

zügdet = it's sunny

gzëvët = it's cloudy

Degree of adjectives
"oze" means "a bit", and "ozo" means "a lot". They can be used as operands or operators. Examples of possible usages:

A (subject) + operator (predicate/adjective) + "oze/ozo" (in this case, "oze/ozo" could be either operands or operators, both are correct)

cel depi vüxül züdüt: my car is fast

cel depi vüxül züdüti ozo: my car is very fast (here, "ozo" is an operand)

cel depi vüxül züdüti ozot: my car is very fast (here, "ozot" is an operator)

cel sëcot: I'm happy

cel sëcoti ozo: I'm very happy

cel xüxöti oze: I'm a bit sad

cel sëcoti ozot: I'm very happy

ozotsa cel sëcot: I'm very happy (different order, but same meaning)

Verbal tense/aspect markers (I'll likely change it soon and make it more regular instead of so random)
bëtü: habitual

ëbze: present (equivalent of "to be [verb]+ing" in English)

pse: past

etsü: immediate past (equivalent of "just [verb]+ed" in English)

vdü = future

osko = immediate future (equivalent of "about to [verb]" in English)

doe = habitual past

östo = habitual future

MORE TO COME IN THE FUTURE! I'm kinda lazy now, lol. These are all operators that specify the tense/aspect of the sentence A.

cel voboti sote = I eat an apple (unspecified tense, actually. It may be understood by context in the conversation)

cel voboti sotel bëtüt = I habitually eat apples

cel voboti sotel ëbzet = I'm eating an apple

cel voboti sotei pset = I ate an apple

cel voboti sotel etsüt = I just ate an apple

cel voboti sotei vdüt = I'm going to eat an apple

cel voboti sotel oskot = I'm about to eat an apple

cel voboti sotel doet = I used to eat apples

cel voboti sotel östot = I'll habitually eat apples

Of course, the order of the tense/aspect marker can be changed. It can be put at the beginning of a sentence, e.g.

oskotsa cel voboti sote = I'm about to eat an apple

oskotsa cel vobota sotel odüc = I'm about to eat a red apple

oskotsa cel vobota sotel odücu ütoti sëco = I'm about to eat a red apple (said in a happy tone)

oskotsa cel vobota sotel odücu ütota sëcol ozoc = I'm about to eat a red apple (said in a very happy tone)

oskotsa cel vobota sotel odüci opsek = I'm about to eat a lot of red apples

With
"with" can have many meanings. In the sense of instrument, it's translated with the operator "üste"

Examples ("jvoge" means "fork")

cel voboti üsteti jvoge = I eat with a fork

oskotsa cel vobota zgegol üjvüku üsteti jvoge = I'm about to eat chicken meat with a fork

In the sense of company (e.g. "I want to stay with you") it's translated with the operator "küzvo" (if it's a verbal sentence, then küzvo means "A is with B")

cel küzvoti je = I'm (being/staying) with you

cel gebota cel küzvoti je = I want to stay with you

gebota cel küzvoti je = [I] want to stay with you (I suppose here it's clear from the context that who is desiring the thing is "me")

gebota cel küzvota cel tetef = [I] want to stay with my mom

In the sense of "A mixed with B" (e.g. "chicken with potatoes"), it's translated with the operator "xete"

("poteto" means "potato", apparently if Lili was a real language it would just be a loanword, lol)

zgegoi xeteci poteto = chicken with potatoes

zgegoi xeteti poteto = (verbal sentence, so it's kinda like... "this is chicken with potatoes" or "this chicken is with potatoes", or something like that)

xüve is an ambiguation of "küzvo" and "xete" so it can mean either "A is with (in company of) B" or "A is (mixed) with B", but NOT instrument (e.g. I'm eating with a fork).

zgegoi xüveci poteto = chicken with potatoes

cel xüveta cel pepef = I'm with my dad

Other examples:

cel voboti zgegol üsteti jvoge = I'm eating chicken with a fork

cel vobota zgegoi xeteci poteton üsteti jvoge = I'm eating chicken (mixed) with potatoes with [instrumental] a fork

cel vobota zgegoi xeteci poteton üsteta odüfi jvoge = I'm eating chicken with potatoes with a red fork

küzvoki jel degeta cel sëcot = your company/presence makes me happy

üsteki jvogei gdeüts = using a fork is prohibited

If A, then B (and other logic)
"ofo" is an operator that means "if A, then B"

Example:

ejdeti ofota cel sëcot = if it rains, I'm happy

"üzbo" is an operator that means "if and only if A, then B"

cel sëcoti üzbotsa ejdet = I'm happy if and only if it rains (i.e. if it does not rain, I'm not happy)

"dege" means "A, and therefore B"

ejdeti degeta cel sëcot = it rains, and therefore I'm happy

"ozbo" means "if A, then B (A is false, but not necessarily B)"

ejdeti ozbota cel sëcot = "if it rained, I would be happy (it's not raining... and I may or may not be happy now but if I'm happy, then it's for reasons unrelated to the rain)"

Work in progress, I'll add more stuff soon.

What I'm planning to add (in total, including the things I have already added):

"if A, then B" (unspecified whether or not A or B is true)

"A (is true), therefore B"

"if A, then B" (A is false, and it's unspecified whether or not B is true)

"if A, then B" (A is false, and B is false)

"if A, then B" (A is false, and B is true for reasons unrelated to A)

"only if A, then B" (unspecified whether or not A or B is true)

"only if A, then B" (A is true, it is unspecified whether or not B is true)

"only if A, then B" (A is true for reasons unrelated to B, and B is false)

"only if A, then B" (A is true, because B is true... if B is true than A is necessarily true as well)

"if and only if A, then B" (it is unspecified whether A or B is true)

"if and only if A, then B" (A is false, therefore B is false)

"if and only if A, then B" (A is true, therefore B is true)

"and" and "or"
"e" is an operator that means "and", and "o" means "or". "kce" means "or" in an interrogative sense (yes/no question), and "kco" means "or" in an interrogative sense ("pick one" kind of question).

sotel eti tëje = apples and oranges

sotel oti tëje = apples or oranges

cel gebota sotel eti tëje = I want apples and oranges

jel gebota sotei kcoti tëje = do you want apples or oranges?

ejdeti ota kevotu ofota cel sëcot = if it rains or snows, I'm happy

Ditransitive verbs (may change the rule if I find out that it's problematic)
Ditransitive verbs like "to give" (which I may call "pütsü"... again, I just type random letters to make new words, lmao)... I'm unsure what rule I should have. For now I'll do it like this: with the generic SVO sentence structure, perhaps the default is that it's not specified which of the two objects is referred by the object, but it can be inferred by the context, so that a sentence like

cel pütsüti ovde (I - give- book)

Might mean either "I give [something] to the book", or "I give the book [to someone]". In this context the latter meaning is a lot more likely. And it makes sense to keep the sentence ambiguous by default since Lili is based on ambiguation and disambiguation. In order to disambiguate, I'll create a new operator, "dzë", which introduces the possibility of two objects. In the case of "pütsü" the first object (A) is what is given, and the second object (B) is to whom is that given. For example:

cel pütsüta ovdei dzëti je = I'm giving a book to you

cel pütsüta jei dzëtsi ovde = I'm giving you a book

Since operands can be hidden, the sentence can be written as:

cel pütsüta dzëtsi ovde = I'm giving a book [to an unspecified recipient]

Which is similar to the sentence:

cel pütsüti ovde

The difference between the two is that "cel pütsüti ovde" can technically mean "I'm giving [something unspecified] to the book", even though it's unlikely that it will mean that in any given conversation, but technically that meaning is not excluded from the "possible" meanings, whereas "cel pütsüta dzëtsi ovde" is unambiguous when it comes to specifying that "book" is the thing given rather than the recipient.

cel pütsüpa ovdei dzëci je = the book that I'm giving to you

cel pütsüpa ovdei dzëci je nodüt = the book that I'm giving to you is red

"üzdü" means "to take from". It's unspecified whether it's a consensual taking, or stealing, but of course, being Lili, it can be disambiguated with words I'll create in the future. It means "A takes B1 from B2" (again, without "dzë", by default it's unspecified if B is B1 or B2 but it should be often clear from the context).

cel üzdüti ovde = I stole/took a book (or "I'm stealing/taking a book" or "I'm about to steal/take a book" or "I habitually steal/take books" etc. tense and number are by default unspecified... and in this case whether it's theft or consensual taking it's also unspecified)

Sexual orientations and fetishes (WARNING: dark humor ahead, lol)
"zoge" is a sexual orientation in the sense that "A wants to have sex with B" (or "A fantasizes about having sex with B"... or merely a sexual attraction... there can be disambiguation about the different meanings but not now since I'm lazy right now), while "ftofe" means that "A has a fetish about B". Someone who has a foot fetish for example doesn't want to have sex with a foot (in the same sense of "wanting to have sex with a woman"), merely that the foot plays some important factor in getting aroused... I guess... and "özvë" is an ambiguation between "zoge" and "ftofe" so it can mean either of the two. ("gëvë" means foot)

zogeki bükco = sexual attraction towards goats

zogeki ctëse = sexual attraction towards children (pedophilia)

zogeki fsüxöf = sexual attraction towards dead beings (necrophilia)

zogeka fsüxöfi bükco = sexual attraction towards dead goats

zogeka fsüxöfi ctëse = sexual attraction towards dead children

ftofeki gëvë = foot fetish

Since "özvë" is an ambiguation you can say stuff like this:

özvëka fsüxöfi bükco = sexual attraction towards dead goats

özvëki gëvë = foot fetish

It's obvious that when it comes to feet, it's a fetish, since it's impossible to have sex with a foot, since it's not a complete living (or dead, LMFAOOO) being.

cel pepef = my dad

cel pepefi zogeta fsüxöfi bükco = my dad is sexually attracted to dead goats

I'll soon make words for normal orientations like heterosexuality, homosexuality, bisexuality, asexuality etc but not now since I'm lazy, lol.

Imperative
ëfpe (operand) is the imperative, and it replaces the subject in a sentence. In keeping with the spirit of Lili, whether it's an exhortation, order, asking for a favor etc can be disambiguated, but I'll create those words some other day.

Examples:

ëfpel vobot = eat!

ëfpel voboti sote = eat the apple!

ëfpel vobota odüfi sote = eat the red apple!

ëfpel füsoti ce = hug me!

ëfpel sëcot = be happy!

ëfpel füsoti cel bëtüt = hug me (habitually)!

vëxö is when you ask for a favor and zgöxe means it's an order, for example:

vëxöl füsoti ce = (please) hug me

vëxöl füsoti cel züt = (please) don't hug me

zgöxel vobot = eat! (it's an order)

(xüfso means "scared"... actually, as an operator, it means "A is scared of B")

ëfpel füsoti cel züti degetsa cel xüfsot = don't hug me, (because) I'm scared (i.e. "I'm scared, therefore don't hug me")

ëfpel füsoti cel degetsa cel xüfsotu züt = don't hug me because I'm scared (i.e. "You can hug me for other reasons, but don't hug me if the reason is that I'm scared)

ëfpel füsoti cel degetsa cel xüfsoti züt = hug me, because I'm not scared

Interrogative
The operator fü turns A into a yes/no question

jel voboti poteto = you're eating potatoes

jel voboti potetol füt = are you eating potatoes?

fütsa jel voboti poteto = are you eating potatoes? (different word order)

fütsa voboti poteto = are [you] eating potatoes?

"se" means "yes" and "ko" means "no". "zgü" is an ambiguation between "yes" and "no". I may add another possible answers but for now this is okay.

Other possible questions (varies according to the hopes and expectations of the speaker):

fü: (hopes and expectations both left unspecified)

sfü: (hopes that the answer to the question will be "yes")

kfü: (hopes that the answer to the question will be "no")

efü: (expects that the answer to the question will be "yes")

ofü: (expects that the answer to the question will be "no")

sefü: (hopes and expects the answer to be "yes")

kefü: (hopes that the answer will be "no" but expects it to be "yes")

sofü: (hopes the answer to be "yes" but expects it to be "no")

kofü: (hopes and expects the answer to be "no")

Example:

sofütsa jel ëvzot: are you okay? (told to someone who appears to be not okay but the speaker hopes they're okay... as perhaps there's that possibility)

Pronouns (first attempt, work in progress)
Note about gender: currently in so-called "western society" there is some sort of debate about the nature of gender and there are two main "worldviews" (or perhaps "definitions", if one considers the nature of this debate as merely lexical rather than ontological), one which I call "biological binary gender worldview" which says that gender is defined by one's genitals (i.e. if one has a penis he's a male and if one has a vagine she's a female), already determined at birth and cannot change in one's life, and the other main worldview is what I call "transgender worldview" which says (if I'm not mistaken) that gender is self-defined, and non-binary (neither male nor female) is also possible. I think saying that one worldview is true and the other is false would be an absolutist imposition that would restrict freedom and would be contrary to the generally relativistic spirit of Lili, so within Lili's philosophy, both worldviews/definitions will be considered as equally true (though a specific individual may freely say that one is true and the other is false, according to one's own preferences and intuition). This is why gendered pronouns will be differentiated between "paleo-pronouns" and "neo-pronouns". Paleo-pronouns will be unspecified whether it's one or the other worldview and function like the "Twitter bio pronouns", so third person female singular paleo-pronouns (like she/her in English) may be a "biological woman" or a "transgender woman", whereas neo-pronouns will be able to disambiguate if needed. Paleo-gender will lack non-binary because it's not an ambiguation as non-binary is possible is one worldview but impossible in the other one, but it will be available in neo-genders. As a relativistic person myself who believes that a lot of things are subjective, I wouldn't like imposing one or the other worldview in the grammar (especially considering Lili is based on ambiguation and disambiguation), but an individual may be free to believe one is true and the other is false, no problem. I suspect Lili would (if completed... which will never happen, LMAO) be able to accomodate both worldviews and let people express themselves with an accuracy (or lack thereof) greater than that of English or any natural language. Actually, since I'm a devil's advocate and I love experimenting with ideas (even bizarre ones) I'll also propose a third possible worldview, that says males are anyone who can impregnate a female, females are anyone who can get impregnated by a man, and anyone who can neither impregnate or get impregnated (e.g. pre-pubescent children or sterile people) will be considered genderless. In any case, new worldviews can be added just by creating new words that refer to those worldviews, and ambiguations can be created to hide which worldview one is operating in. Anyway, here are the grammatical paleo-genders in Lili: male, female, animate (ambiguation of "male" and "female"), inanimate, concrete (ambiguation of "animate" and "inanimate"), abstract, universal (ambiguation of all the other ones). Singular pronouns in Lili (I'll work on the plural ones separately):

ce = I (animate)

je = you (animate)

cte = he/she (animate)

cto = she (female)

ctü = he (male)

ctë = it (inanimate)

ectö = he/she/it (concrete)

üctö = it (abstract)

ctö = he/she/it (universal)

More coming soon! Pronouns may also vary not only according to gender and number but also according to formality level (e.g. informal, formal, honorific, derogatory etc)

Example texts
cel voboti sote = I eat an apple

cel vobota odüfi sote = I eat a red apple

cel sëcoti degetsa cel vobota odüfi sote = I'm happy because I eat a red apple

jel teteti ce = you're my mom (note: "tete" as an operator means "A is B's mom", while as an operand is just means "mom/mother")

tetel vota cel sëcoti degetsa cel vobota odüfi sote = Mom, I'm happy because I eat a red apple!

cel sëcoti degetsa cel vobota odüfi sote nu votsi tete = I'm happy because I eat a red apple, mom!

cel geboti füso = I want a hug

cel gebota üjbofi füso = I want a long hug ("üjbo" means "long" in the sense of duration)

cel gebota lüjbofi füso = I want a long hug (the letter "L" just like the letter "i" can be used for euphonic purposes and doesn't change the meaning of a sentence)

jel füsoti ce lüjbot = You're giving me a long hug/you're hugging me for a long time

cel ëvzot = I'm fine

tetel eti pepel vota cel ëvzot = Hey mom and dad, I'm doing fine (Total Drama Island reference, yes, LMAO)

Dialogue 1 (very short)
1: fütsa geboti füso? (do [you] want a hug?)

2: se (yes)

Vocabulary (work in progress) (43 words so far) (will order alphabetically eventually)
NOTE: since Lili's grammar is weird, the vocabulary here will explain the meanings of a word differently depending on whether it's an operand or an operator. Operands will be explained "normally", while operators will be explained in terms of their relationship between A and B. If, for example, "operator" is not found within the explanation, then that means that word cannot be used as an operator. Same logic for when "operand" is missing from the explanation.

ce: (operand) I; (operator) A (subject of the verb) does something (transitive verb expressed by the operand B) to "I (me)" (which is the object of the verb expressed by the operand B). Basically, as any personal pronoun, when used as an operator, turns the word order of the sentence to SOV (VOS when used in reverse order).

vobo: (operand) meal (the act of eating, NOT the food itself); (operator) A eats B

sote: (operand) apple

ösfo: (operand) soul

gebo: (operand) desire; (operator) A wants B

odü: (operand) 'redness'; (operator) A is red

begë: (operand) appreciation, love (even romantic... this word is a bit vague); (operator) A likes/appreciates/loves (even romantically)/has a positive opinion on B

je: (operand) you; (operator) A (subject of the verb) does something (transitive verb expressed by the operand B) to "you" (which is the object of the verb expressed by the operand B). Basically, as any personal pronoun, when used as an operator, turns the word order of the sentence to SOV (VOS when used in reverse order).

fo: (operator) explanation: "fo" is an operator that links a subject to a verb. Or, more accurately, it transforms "A + operator" into "A + fo + B" (this new B is the equivalent of the operator of the "A + operator" sentence, but it's grammatically an operand this time). See the dedicated lesson for a better explanation.

to: (operator), to is the other operator similar to "fo", it basically links a verb to an object (sort of). It transforms "operator + B", into "A (the operator of the other sentence) + "to" + B (which is the B of the other sentence). See the dedicated lesson for a better explanation.

züdü: (operand) 'fastness', (operator) A is fast

de: (operators) A has B (verb 'to have', in a possessive sense)

vüxü: (operand) car

ge: (operator) A is B. NOTE: here the copula is intended to say that A is B when B is a noun (well, the semantic equivalent of one, at least, since in Lili there are no adjectives, grammatically speaking lol), NOT an adjective. For adjectives, using that adjective as an operator suffices. Or "fo" can also be used in the case of adjectives, though it's unnecessary.

bote: (operand) human

füso: (operand) hug; (operator) A hugs B

xüxö: (operand) sadness; (operator) A is sad

sëco: (operand) happiness; (operator) A is happy

dege: (operator) "A, therefore B"... of course, in reverse order it's "A because of B"

ske, skë, sko, skö, skü: (operators) look at the lesson 4.6 ("like")

efpo: (operand) smell, odor; (operator) A smells like B

bükco: (operand) goat

üto: (operator) A is said in emotion/tone of voice B

zgego: (operand) chicken

üjvü: (operand) meat; (operator) meat of the animal A

bëtü: (operator) A is an event that occurs habitually

opto: (operator) A (as opposed to B) (look at lesson 4.11 "topic marker")

tëje: (operand) orange (the fruit)

vo: (operator) B is something that is said to A (see lesson 4.12 "vocative")

tete: (operand) mom; (operator) A is the mother of B

zü: (operand) nothing/nobody; (operator) negation of A (see lesson 4.14 "negation")

gozbo: (operand) compulsion; (operator) A compels [object unspecified by default] to do B

cteo: (operand) encouragement; (operator) A encourages [object unspecified by default] to do B

stodü: (operand) permission/allowance; (operator) A allows [object unspecified by default] to do B

zveze: (operand) discouragement; (operator) A discourages [object unspecified by default] from doing B

gdeü: (operand) prohibition; (operator) A prohibits [object unspecified by default] from doing B

kpeze: (operand) criticism; (operator) A criticizes B

dzüge: (operand) drug

ejde: (operand) rain; (operator) "it rains"

kevo: (operand) snow; (operator) "it snows"

ovde: (operand) book

beskö: (operand) act of studying; (operator) A studies B

ofo: (operator) if A, then B

fsüxö = (operand) death (as a state, NOT as a transition between life and death); (operator) A is dead

ctëse = (operand) child (young human)

ëvzo = (operator) to do/be fine (e.g. "I'm doing fine", "I'm fine")

pepe = (operand) dad/father, (operator) A is the father of B