OK, I'm de-lurking for a bit here, so I thought I'd present to the conlang members a little tidbit from my conlang. This particular tidbit demonstrates some of the nuances my conlang has. Here's how the Ebisedi (the speakers of my conlang) might translate the following English sentence: The woman sees the man and goes outside to meet him. TRANSLATION: pii'z3d0 fww't3 biz3tau' keve luy's kul3 loo'ru zotww' co'mu. man seen woman and go she outside look him ORG PERF- RCP CONJ PERF- RCP-CVY RCP PERF RCP INCID DELIB [IPA (Kirsch) pronunciation of the translation: pi:'z@dA Fu":'t@ [log in to unmask] k&V& lu.y's kul@ lo:'ru zotu":' co'mu (Note: apostrophe ' here indicates high pitch.) ] a) For those of you who aren't familiar with my conlang, the verb _fa't3_, "to see" is rather idiomatic: the seer is placed in the receptive case (RCP), and the thing/person seen is placed in the originative case (ORG). (Instead of the other way round, as one might expect.) _fww't3_ is the perfective incidental of _fa't3_. Therefore, the first three words mean "the woman sees the man" or "the man is seen by the woman". The perfective form of verbs are always used by default; the Ebisedi always anticipate that an action/event would be completed, even if they are speaking of the future. This is true even if the action is currently going on: although there is a progressive aspect in verbs, that aspect is not used unless the speaker thinks/knows that the verb will be interrupted, or will be incomplete. (So a progressive verb might be understood as "while doing <verb>, <something else> happens".) b) The conjunction "keve" is usually translated as "and", although it actually means "and then", "subsequently", or "... on the one hand, and on the other hand: ...". c) _kul3_ is in fact not a pronoun, but a particle-like word with dual inflection, that refers to something in the previous clause. In this case, its first inflection is receptive (RCP), and therefore refers to the woman, the receptive noun in the previous clause. Its second inflection is conveyant (CVY), and is its function in the current clause. d) _loo'ru_ is the receptive form of _loo'ri_, which fundamentally means "the countryside" or the "open land". Depending on context, it could mean "countryside", "country (as in, the land of a nation)", or, as is the case here, simply "outside". e) _luy's kul3 loo'ru_ therefore means "she (the woman) goes outside". (She being in the conveyant case marking her as the moving object in the action.) The verb _luy's_ is in the deliberative form: it indicates purpose in the woman's going. The next phrase, _zotww' co'mu_, explains this purpose: to meet the man. We could also use the consequential form of the verb and write the last part of the sentence thus: ... lay's kul3 loo'ru zotww' co'mu. PERF-CONSEQ The consequential verb would give a slightly different nuance: the woman is caused to go outside because she saw the man. I.e., it is the consequence of seeing him that she went outside. Here, the emphasis is on the causal relationship between seeing him and going; whereas when we used the deliberative verb, the emphasis was on the purpose of her going out, that is, to meet him. f) _zotww'_ means "to look at", or "to look in the direction of"; the thing seen is placed in the receptive case (RCP). In this context, it means "to meet" (idiomatic usage). g) _co'mu_ is the masculine singular receptive of the intimate pronoun _jumi'_, and refers to the man in the first part of the sentence. In this case, the use of the intimate pronoun implies that the woman and the man are intimate; either a close friendship or they are spouses. If we were to use the distant pronoun _jhidi'_ instead: ... lay's kul3 loo'ru zotww' chi'du. (_chi'du_ is the masculine singular receptive of the distant pronoun _jhidi'_) Then it would imply that the relationship between the woman and man is superficial and formal. h) the phrase _lay's kul3 loo'ru zotww' co'mu_ is actually grammatically two separate clauses; the verb _zotww'_ is not grammatically related to the verb _lay's_. In fact, we could just as well treat it as a separate sentence and write: ... lay's kul3 loo'ru keve k3l0' zotww' chi'du. go she outside and she looks-at him PERF CVY RCP - CVY-ORG PERF RCP The particle _k3l0'_ is usually dropped since it is clear that the woman is the one doing the looking; and the conjunction _keve_ is not necessary here, either. And so we arrive at the translation given at the beginning. It is perhaps more accurate to understand the entire sentence as "the woman sees the man, and goes outside, and meets him" rather than "the woman sees the man and goes outside to see him". However, it still retains the original English meaning. T -- Let's eat some disquits while we format the biskettes.