Ælis/Topicalisation

    



Ælis has a high rate of topicalisation, also called topic marking or in this case function marking. What this means is that each word in a sentence is preceded by a root word which denotes the word's semantical function in the sentence. In essence, the function marking system in Ælis is equivalent to languages that use a case system, where every syntactical argument informs about its function through morphological marking. There are 8 main function particles in Ælis, divided into three categories. Fasten your seatbelt and assume brace position.

Syntactic functions
Syntactic functions divide sentences into the equivalent of constituents (noun phrase, verb phrase, adverbial phrase, etc.). It is important to note that since words can theoretically have infinite length, the syntactic function markers serve as a means of determining where one word ends and the next one begins. So, the definition of a 'word' in Ælis is: the cluster of root words that accompanies one and the same syntactic function marker. In short: each word starts with a syntactic function marker. Keep this in mind when reading this text. Ælis has 4 of these syntactic functions.

Topic

 * → Corresponding morpheme: hA [ha].

The topic describes either an action, or a state. This distinction, however, is not made within the Ælis grammar itself. In full sentences, the topic will often be translated with a verb, even though the topic itself has no form of conjugation, tense or mood. In essence, the topic is always essive. This means that the topic should be interpreted as a noun phrase that starts with 'there is', 'there are'. E.g.:

Patient

 * → Corresponding morpheme: iA [ia].

The patient is the syntactical object that is affected by the topic. It has no active participation in the process expressed by the topic. It will generally translate to an (in)direct object or prepositional object whenever the topic expresses an action, or the subject if the topic describes a (passive) state. E.g.:

Agent

 * → Corresponding morpheme: lA [la].

The agent is the syntactical object that initiates the topic. The appearance of an agent usually turns sentences into (transitive) actions. E.g.:

Modifier

 * → Corresponding morpheme: iR [ir].

A modifier embeds the entire sentence in a context. It is safe to say that a modifier generally corresponds to what we call an adverbial constituent: it provides information about the time, the place, manner, cause, etc. of the action. It is important to know that modifiers harbour the key to expressing time tenses, since this cannot be done through verb conjugation. E.g.:

Morphological functions
Morphological functions are in-word function markers that inform you about the relationship between different (sets of) root words within one and the same word. There are quite a few of these, but here, we'll highlight the ones that play the biggest role.

Characteristic

 * → Corresponding morpheme: eM [em].

A characteristic provides additional information to the other roots. It is very similar to what we call an adjective: it provides information about size, shape, age, a visual feature, or much more. It can generally be translated which the formula (that) which is.E.g.:

Referent

 * → Corresponding morpheme: vW [væ].

The referent places the remaining roots within the syntactic function in a perspective, or dependent relationship to itself. The referent is possibly the least plausible function to grasp for Western learners, as it corresponds to seemingly irrelevant structures. It is therefore easiest to analytically translate it as "when compared to X". The referent can express a comparative or superlative structure (e.g.: I am big, when compared to you --> "I am bigger than you"); it can express a relative indication in time or space (e.g.: in the front, when compared to me --> "in front of me"); but it can also simply express a possessive pronoun (when compared to me, the father --> "my father"). E.g.:

Structural functions
The structural functions are two functions that carry no meaning at all, but exist solely for the purpose of keeping meaning of other root words and other function markers organised and transparent.

Sentence bracket

 * → Corresponding morphemes: lW [læ] + iW [iæ].

The sentence bracket is a set of two morphemes that allow subordinate clauses to be constructed within the main clause. The opening bracket 'læ' is comparable to the relative pronouns 'that' and 'which', and the closing bracket 'iæ' is used to mark the end of the subclause. The entire sentence bracket will be subordinate to the root word to which it is suffixed, and (since otherwise it would become superfluous), the sentence bracket will in turn contain primary and/or subordinate functions itself. This is the only function that governs and is governed at the same time. E.g.:

Separator

 * → Corresponding morpheme: tA [ta].

The final function is the separator. Is is a fairly important function that makes up for both the absence of punctuation, and the language's asyndetic tendency (which is a fancy way of saying that there is no word for the conjunction and). The separator morpheme has various applications. Firsly, it can be placed between two sentences with the same effect as a comma or full stop. Secondly, it can also appear between syntactic functions to create the following effect:

The third situation in which the separator proves useful is in combination with the two morphological functions discussed above, within one and the same syntactic function. It allows characteristics or referents to be placed before the main component of the word instead of behind it. An example:

The separator is necessary in this case to indicate that the root word [an] belongs to the syntactic function marker [ha], and that it is not an elaboration of the preciousness. After all, the Ælis word for 'house' or 'home' is composed of place+dynamics+none, and literally means place that never moves, or place that doesn't change. Without the separator in this sentence, the unchanging place would be an elaboration of 'precious', and hAeMve4rAaNoW0rA [ha'emveora'anoæ'ara] would mean ''"(that which is) steadily precious". ''Also, through smart use of the separator, multiple characteristics and referents can be added within one and the same syntactic function.

Conciseness
''While the function marking system allows unambiguous sentences to be created, it also produces large and heavy sentences. Therefore, discourse always aims to be as concise as possible.

''

Omission of functions
''While SVO languages usually do not allow the subject or verb to be omitted, Ælis' active-stative morphosyntactic alignment in combination with the function marking system allow omission of any function, without the syntax crumbling. If in a conversation the same things are discussed over a span of several sentences, addressees may assume that omitted words/functions remain the same as in the previous sentence(s) unless otherwise specified. Elliptical omission of this type can strongly cut the length and weight of sentences. A clarifying example: ''
 * Person A: iRaSdA1rAlA1mAiAaNoW0rAiAvW2tE 
 * [irasda'æra laæma ianoæara iavæ'ete] 
 * (MODpast AGme PAThouse PAT-REFyou) 

This sentence doesn't contain a topic, so it doesn't explicitly express an action.   ==> "I (did something) to your house."  ''
 * Person B: hAnE 
 * [hane] 
 * (TOPquestion) 

Person B asks A to specify a topic.   ==> "What (did you do to it)?"  ''
 * Person A: hAdOE 
 * [hadoe] 
 * (TOPfire) 

Person A specifies a topic.   ==> "I set fire to it."  ''
 * Person B: iRaRnE 
 * [irarne] 
 * (MODreason-question) 

Person B asks A to specify a modifier of causality.   ==> "Why (did you do that)?"  ''
 * Person A: iRaReleAnA0rA 
 * [irareleana'ara] 
 * (MODreason-hate) 

Person A specifies a modifier of causality. He doesn't specify who hates whom, but the context provides a plausible option.   ==> "(I did it) because I hate you."

 ''Note that A's first reply ([hadoe]) is the exact same formulation as the very first example sentence of this page, which meant "There is a fire". Only now, the implied meaning is completely altered by the context.

If a speaker wishes to start talking about something completely different, and the other speaker has a reason to falsely suppose a coherence between the two sentences, in spite of the eventual use of a sentence breaker [ta], they can use the formula iRrW2rA [irræ'era], which would literally mean "irrelevantly", or something along the lines of 'by the way or on a side-related note'''.

Omission of function markers
There are some cases where the function markers themselves may be omitted completely. This is the case with short, generic formulations such as thanks or you're welcome, as such utterances appear frequent and are generally unambiguous. For example: while the sentence hAgI4rAlA1tEiA2tE [hagiora laæte iaete] (for you there is total gratitude on my behalf) would be the formal way of thanking someone, colloquial speech will generally abbreviate this to simply gI3rA [gi'ira] (a lot of gratitude) or gI4rA [giora] (total gratitude). Similar expressions without function markers include:
 * nWnA4rA [nænaora] or nA4rA [naora] (Hello/Goodbye)
 * nWnE [næne] (What's up?)
 * dI3rA [di'ira] (You're welcome)
 * iSnE [isne] (What's next?)
 * rEnE [rene] (What's (your) name?)
 * kmERIK [(re)meri] ((My name is) Mary)

Smart function attribution
The power of the function marking system is vested in its flexibility. Although each function plays a delineated role in syntax, many situations allow various attributions of function markers while still expressing the same thing. For example, the sentence "There are men here" can be translated with up to five different function combinations:

A possible trap for Ælis learners is thinking that certain word classes (nouns, verbs, adverbs, etc.) always have the same corresponding function marker. As the table above illustrates, this is clearly not the case. Whenever more than one possible translation presents itself, discourse will prefer the most concise formulation over a longer one. Consider the following sentences:
 * hArEhAvW1nIhAeMkaNAK [harehavæ'ænihaem'ana'] (lit.: There is a name, which, when compared to me(♀), is Anna --> "My name is Anna"
 * hArEkaNAKiA1nI [hare'ana'ia'æni] (lit.: The name Anna is for me(♀) --> "My name is Anna"

While both sentences are grammatically correct, preference is given to the latter utterance as it contains about 30% less root words.