Ov grammar

## Syntax and morphosyntax

The syntax is the most basic thing in learning a language. That can be a tricky part of Ov, so let's get this out of the way. Don't worry, we'll look into this step by step.

### Object

The object (known as COD in French) is the part of the sentence that follows a transitive verb. "Transitive" simply means that it can take an object. In "the cat eats the *mouse*", the mouse is the object and the cat is the subject of "eat", a transitive verb.

### Ergative

Ergative is a declension in Ov, and it is used to mark the subject of a transitive verb. In "the cat eats the mouse", the verb is transitive (it has an object), so "cat" will be marked in the ERG in Ov. We'll see later how.

* **Moir wäisa durëpl =** eat-3S cat-ERG mouse<ABS> **=** *the cat eats the mouse*

Be careful though: without an object, a verb is intransitive (e.g. "the cat sleeps") and the subject is *not* marked in the ERG.

* **Vëitër wäi =** sleep-3S cat **=** *the cat sleeps*

### Absolutive

Absolutive is also an Ov declension. It is used as a complement to the ergative. It marks the object of a verb, but only if it is animate (which roughly means "alive").

* **Moir wäisa durëpl =** eat-3S cat-ERG mouse<ABS> **=** *the cat eats the mouse*

This can lead to interesting precisions: if you were to mark the mouse in the ABS in "the cat eats the mouse", it would mean that the mouse is being eaten while still alive…

The absolutive is shown using a vocalic shift that will be covered later.

### Word order

Ov is VSO – verb, subject, object. This is how the elements must be ordered in a sentence. By comparison, English and French are SVO: when we say "the cat eats the mouse", we know who eats whom because the word order never changes. If the word order was OVS, you would say "the mouse is eating the cat", but it would mean the exact same thing!

In Ov, the word order is not that strict, because the ERG and ABS can highlight the subject and object without the assistance of a precise word ordering. This is why both "VSO" (is eating the cat the mouse) and VOS (is eating the mouse the cat) can be observed, although VOS is nowadays taking the high ground.

However, the verb is always the first element of the sentence, even with additional verbs and auxiliaries. We'll get back to that when we go over the conjugations. For now, you should also keep in mind that Ov favours euphony and epenthesis: things that sound good and things that make things sound good; when in doubt, you will go for what sounds less of a mouthful.

* **Moir wäisa durëpl** → the cat eats the mouse
* **Moir durëpl wäisa** → the cat eats the mouse

Only conjunctions and adverbs are allowed before the verb.

## Noun and adjective morphology

### Harmonies

Nouns and adjectives are distinguished in three classes of consonantal harmony. The last consonant of a word determines which class it falls in. If **<m,n,p,b,t,d,k,g>**, the harmony is plosive. If **<f,v,c,ś,s,ł,z>**, the harmony is fricative. If **<r,l>** or none, the harmony is null.

#### Fricative harmony

* **Peziv** (*ideogram*)
* **Łäcäś** (*jewel*)
* **Caułoi** (*agricultural tools*)

#### Plosive harmony

* **Cyhstyn** (*exploration*)

* **Vyist** (*wisdom*)
* **Lumpbea** (*budget*)

#### Null harmony

* **Śwohr** (*shadow*)

* **Ioura** (*dream*)
* **Y** (*appearance*)

**Note:** by default, the harmonies are always sorted that way: fricative – plosive – null.

### Assonantal endings

Before diving into the core of Ov morphology, it is important to know about this specific feature of the language: the endings are assonantal. This doesn't apply if a given word ends in a vowel; the ending will be appended without anomaly (the plural of « ***keríemca*** » (*potato*), with the « *-s* » plural ending for the fricative harmony, will simply be « ***keríemcas*** » (*potatoes*).

However, if the word ends in a consonant, the last vowel will be reused to avoid stacking consonants. The plural of « ***dëł*** » (*grain*), with the « *-s* » plural ending for the fricative harmony, will be « ***dëłës*** » (*grains*) and not the expected \*~~***dëłs***~~ which would result in a mouthful.

It is always the very last vowel that is retrieved, even if it's part of a diphthong (several vowels pronounced together). Thus, the plural of « ***zaiëc*** » (*award*), with the « *-s* » plural ending for the fricative harmony, will be « ***zaiëcës*** » (*awards*).

You'll find that Ov syncope cancels the work of assonances orally a lot.

**Note:** the letter <ś> becomes <sz> intervocallically: ***läś*** (*light*) → ***läszäs*** (*lights*).

### Gender and numbers

Ov has no grammatical genders. The personal pronouns are hardly ever used, so we will not review them for now.

Ov has four numbers, however: to the well-known singular and plural, you will add the INDID (English "any") and the TOT ("all the").

**Note**: the INDID form can also be used for LPAU in practice ("some", as in a quantity).

These are the regular paradigms for each number, plus ergative, according to each harmony (remember that the order of the harmonies in the examples and tables is always fricative – plosive – null).

**Note:** V always stands for "any vowel" and indicates the assonantal endings.

* **wäi + ERG** = wäisa (*cat-ERG*)
* **lohp + ERG** = lohpot (*hole-ERG*)
* **arvihal + ERG.PL** = arvihalar (*plants-ERG*)

The assonantal endings are marked in purple.

**Note:** the sequence <rVr>, where V stands for any vowel, is not allowed in Ov. Wherever this occurs on morphological grounds, the first <r> will be replaced by <l>.

* **dähr + ERG.PL** = dählär and **not** ~~\*dährär~~ (*plates-ERG*)

### Infixes

There are three kinds of affixes: prefixes, suffixes and infixes. Infixes are added within a word. In the case of Ov, an infix is always added before the first vowel of a word, as seen in adjectival and verbal morphologies.

### Additional declensions

In addition to ERG and ABS, which are considered syntactic declensions, Ov has a set of six semantic declensions: BEN ("for"), INS ("with"), GEN ("of"), INE ("in", "into"), ECTS ("out of") and LOC ("at"). They are distinguished in number and harmony following these regular paradigms.

\* The only assonantal ending in that paradigm.

**Reminder:**

* **dähr + LOC** = dählër and **not** ~~\*dährër~~ (*at the plate*)

### Absolutive and definite plural shifts

Unlike other declensions, the absolutive (marked on the direct object of a transitive verb) is not an ending. Also, it requires an animacy distinction. To summarize: the absolutive declension only marks an animate transitive object.

* **Setes sarranak = like-1S book-PL = *I like books***
* **Setes kgurok = like-1S <ABS>dog-PL = *I like dogs***

The shifts follow this pattern and apply to the first syllable of a word, be it short or long (except diacrited long vowels <é,ó,í> that do not shift).

* **<ea,a> and back diphthongs → o**
* **<ä,e,ë> and front diphthongs → i**
* **<i,u> → ei,ou**
* **<o,ö,y> → oi**

Note: /ɑɪ̯/ is classified as a front diphthong as far as the shift is concerned.

Some inanimate words like ”day” and ”year” function as animate and display a double shift from hypercorrection. Look up the appropriate forms on the words' pages.

The **definite plural** is a case that triggers similar shifts. It is used when there is a specified numeric amount of something, above three.

This shift works the same as the absolutive one (so the pattern applies here as well), except that it applies on the last vowel of the word, and assonantal endings shift along outside the paradigm.

If a noun is both absolutive and quantified above three, only the definite plural shift is used because it is the only shift of the two that causes the plural ending to shift along.

* **Setes kgoirik sök =** like-1S dog<DEF.PL>-PL four **=** *I like four dogs*

Exceptions can be found in the grammar tables. Declensions are never affected by the shifts.

## Adjective morphology

The morphology of adjectives is relatively simple, despite the many adjectival degrees.

The degrees are COMP ("more"), SUP ("the most"), EXT ("so"), ELT ("too") and EMIN ("very"). Because the degrees cannot apply to adverbs, these tend to be used less and less, but remain standard.

Apart from the expected singular and plural outcomes and harmonies, adjectives agree with an OBL, unvariant in number, used as an agreement with a noun in the ERG, INDID or TOT. The degrees themselves use infixes, but the base form uses suffixes.

* **aza + COMP** = ënszaza (*more green*)
* **söz + EXT** = sanszöz (*so worthy*)
* **díä + EMIN.OBL** = dentíäz (very venerable-OBL)

## Verb morphology

This is going to be the actual trickiest part of Ov. The verb morphology is a mess, but don't worry, it all makes sense in the end, and the lesson is full of sentient cats and weird wishes – that should help you make your way through this jargon-heavy article. Good luck!

Ov verbs don't distinguish consonantal harmonies. They are distinguished mostly between a simple tense system (PRE, PAS, FUT) and the six persons known to English (1, 2, 3, 1P, 2P, 3P).

### Active voice

The present tense of the active voice is straightforward, following the paradigm indicated below. You will expect assonantal endings like in nouns.

The past tense uses infixes, as seen also in adjectives.

**Note on verbal assonantal endings:** the pattern is different for each tense:

* the present tense will use the first vowel of the word as its assonance;
* the past tense will also use the first vowel of the word, but because the past tense infix has changed it, it will always be <i>;
* the future tense uses the last vowel of the word as its assonance.

* **nuksar = *to allocate***
* **nuksarus = *I allocate***
* **ninuksaris = *I allocated / I have allocated***
* **nuksarsan = *I will allocate***

This illustrates very well how Ov can get *extremely* assonantal.

### Passive voice

The passive voice is, in fact, the easiest part of Ov verbal morphology, because the paradigm is entirely made of regular infixes unaffected by harmonies nor assonantal endings. The paradigm also ressembles that of the active voice.

* **nonsuksar = *I am allocated***
* **nunsuksar = *I was allocated / I have been allocated***
* **nansuksar = *I will be allocated***

### Moods

Ov has a set of four moods: CAUS (now outdated), NEG, SBJV and IMP (rare, usually supplanted by the subjunctive). All the moods agree with the voice (PASS/ACT) and the subjunctive has PRE and NPRS forms. The pattern is regular.

 **PASS** | or-

* **nënkusaras = *I don't allocate***
* **nuiksaras = *I allocate-SBJV***
* **ornuksar = *to cause to be allocated***

The SBJV is triggered in two situations: on a verb or an auxiliary following an auxiliary, and in verbs introducing a relative clause.

Because the SBJV is often used as an imperative, the actual IMP mood gets used more and more for formal and polite suggestions.

### Relative clauses and verbal agreement

**Important note on auxiliaries:** in Ov, an auxiliary is not just a modal verb; it is any verb put in front of another for any syntactic or modal reason. This conception originates from the agreement rules as seen below. The **glosses** highlight the morphology of each word.

* **iócis nuiksar =** want-1S allocate<SBJV> **=** *I want to allocate*

This section explains the functioning of relative clauses because they generally involve the future tense and are widely regarded as a phenomenon of verbal morphology, especially because the agreement rules within them can get pretty complicated.

It is worth noting beforehand that relative clauses can, in fact, be handled the same way as in English, with two minor exceptions: the verb introducing the clause is in the SBJV and some relative pronouns may differ from their adverbial/interrogative form.

* **iócis ong noivuksar = want-1S that allocate<SBJV.PASS> = *I want that it be allocated***
* **iócis cyhs ler novnuksar = want-1S know-SBJV when(REL) allocate<SBJV.PASS> (and not ~~iócis cyhs \*luś novnuksar~~) = *I want to know when it was allocated***

The more natural way of forming a relative clause is to put the subject in the ERG and the verb *inside the clause* in the FUT. Of course, the ergative doesn't show if the subject is only specified in the auxiliary's ending (as in the first example below).

* **iócis novnuksar = want-1S allocate<SBJV.NPRS.PASS> = *I want that it be allocated***
* **iócir wäisa novnuksar = want-3S cat-ERG allocate<SBJV.NPRS.PASS> = *The cat wants that it be allocated***

While the future tense inside the clause is purely morphological, the tense of the auxiliary remains the reflect of the tense the speaker intends to use; this is why it is important that the noun separates the auxiliary from the verb in the relative clause. The second-to-last example make just as little sense as in English and is used here as a mere illustration.

* **iócson novnuksar = want-FUT.1S allocate<SBJV.NPRS.PASS> = *I will want that it be allocated***
* **ióclin wäisa novnuksar = want-FUT.3S cat-ERG allocate<SBJV.NPRS.PASS> = *The cat will want that it be allocated***
* **iócos ohns wei = want-1S have(SBJV.NPRS.1S) cat-ABS = *I want to have a cat in the future***
* **iócson ohns wei = want-FUT.1S have(SBJV.NPRS.1S) cat-ABS = *I will want to have a cat***

Because an auxiliary triggers SBJV and a relative clause FUT, it is important to keep in mind that relative clauses will trigger SBJV.NPRS at all times. The voice distinction can still be made. Without the future tense, the sentence is clauseless.

* **Ccaras aiviócir novnuksar = know-1S want<SBJV.NPRS>-3S allocate<SBJV.NPRS.PASS> = *I know that he wants to be allocated***
* **Iócis íóc noivuksar = want-1S want<SBJV> allocate<SBJV.PASS> = *I want to want to be allocated***

**Note on perfectivity in relative clauses:** since the past tense is by definition forbidden in relative clauses, as they already trigger the future tense, and given the fact that the past tense is the only vector of perfectivity, the aspect has to be carried on adverbially in relative clauses.

* **iócis novnuksar łël = want-1S allocate<SBJV.NPRS.PASS> then = *I want that it was allocated (I want that it be allocated then)***
* **iócis novnuksar dyr = want-1S allocate<SBJV.NPRS.PASS> then(FUT) = *I want that it will be allocated (I want that it be allocated then)***

At this point, registers of formality also come into play. First off, an agreement of both the auxiliary/-ies and the verb with the person is hardly seen in informal speech. But the informal speech also tends to drop the ERG. Both phenomena can occur separately, but the agreement is much more easily dropped than the ergative.

* Both the ergative and the agreement dropped, very colloquial:
	+ iócir wäi novnuksar **=** want-3S cat allocate<SBJV.NPRS.PASS> **=** *the cat that wants to be allocated*
* Only the agreement dropped, colloquial:
	+ iócir wäisa novnuksar **=** want-3S cat-ERG allocate<SBJV.NPRS.PASS> **=** *the cat that wants to be allocated*
* Only the ergative dropped, unseen:
	+ \*~~iócir wäi novnuksalur~~ **=** want-3S cat allocate<SBJV.NPRS.PASS>-3S **=** *the cat that wants to be allocated*
* Neither the ergative nor the agreement dropped, formal or literary:
	+ iócir wäisa novnuksalur **=** want-3S cat-ERG allocate<SBJV.NPRS.PASS>-3S **=** *the cat that wants to be allocated*

The person is mandatorily specified in the clause verb if it differs from that of the auxiliary.

* iócir wäi naivuksarun **=** want-3S cat allocate<SBJV.NPRS>-2S **=** *the cat wants you to be allocated (the cat wants that you be allocated)*

If you've followed up to this point, you might have noticed that while the suffixal paradigm is the same for the past and present tenses, the future tense paradigm differs quite a bit. This causes the suffixal paradigm of the auxiliary/-ies to align on the past/present tense suffixal paradigm. Using the future tense paradigm is allowed but deprecated.

* **Wäisa ióclin novnuksalur = cat-ERG want-FUT.3S allocate<SBJV.NPRS.PASS>-3S = *the cat that will want to be allocated***
* **Wäisa ióclin novnuksalurun = cat-ERG want-FUT.3S allocate<SBJV.NPRS.PASS>-FUT.3S = *the cat that will want to be allocated***

All these examples would have worked the same with the active subjunctive infix instead of the passive one.

As a conclusion, note that the difference between a single clause and a clause + subclause compound relies much on word ordering.

* **Wäisa ióclin novnuksalur = cat-ERG want-FUT.3S allocate<SBJV.NPRS.PASS>-3S = *the cat that will want to be allocated***
* **Ióclin novnuksalur wäi = want-FUT.3S allocate<SBJV.NPRS.PASS>-3S cat = *the cat will want to be allocated***

#### Clausal focus

Note where the relative ergative is triggered (the underlined noun) in the following sentences. In the first one, the ergative is on the noun that is contained within the clause, while it is marked in the second sentence on the noun that introduces the relative clause. This is called **clausal focus**.

* **Blënkar wondruisztimut tdun gufaivorś vom snyhk ënkok ök oivolgeanak läszccoiëlër = <NEG>touch-3S location-POSSG.3P-ERG.PL logic obvious and even <NEG>be\_there-3P sign-PL <SBJV.PASS>occupy-3P ship-ERG.PL = *there is no obvious logic to their locations and no evidence that the ships are even occupied***
* **Cob ok agyhmym nënkovnovoszok tän maivängäk kcaiëtiuhsëł = so\_far be\_there-3P <CARD>object-ERG.PL <NEG><SBJV.PASS.NPRE>identify-3P twelve <SBJV.NPRS>spread-3P planet-LOC = *so far, there are 12 unidentified objects (that are) spread across the globe***

The clausal focus can be summarized in the following rule:

* a relative clause always triggers an ergative; by default, it is triggered on the first noun contained within the clause (typically in a noun-modifying clause such as the first one above), otherwise it is triggered on the noun that introduces it (typically in a verb-modifying clause such as the second one above).

#### Other clauses

A negative clause can be constructed synthetically with ***rong*** + SBJV.

* Cösös rong seit kgi **→** know-1S REL.NEG <SBJV>like it → *I know that I don't like it*

A causal or resultative clause cannot get verbs to stack since both have to be clearly linked to one another. It is formed with ***kgä*** as a relative pronoun followed by a verb in the CAUS.SBJV. It is interesting to highlight, as shown by the literal translations, how this morphologically confuses cause and result.

* **Ninukis ios am kgä urkuíntiwënkur kgei → <SBJV>give-1S 3M.BEN everything that(CAUS) CAUS<SBJV>leave\_alone-3S 1S.ABS → *I gave him everything so that he leaves me alone***Literally: *I gave him everything so that he leaves me alone*
* **Ninukis ios łour kgä urkahvuitiwënkur kgei → <SBJV>give-1S 3M.BEN so\_much that(CAUS) CAUS<SBJV.NPRS>leave\_alone-3S 1S.ABS → *I gave him so much that he left me alone***Literally: *I gave him so much so that he left me alone*

Unlike other clauses, a causal or resultative clause does not trigger the ERG.

* **Finohlis smeorpbitiävëkkyt łour kgä urcoivypyl ör iem maszz → <PST>spend-1S virtual\_relationship-ECTS.PL so\_much that(CAUS) CAUS<SBJV.NPRS>freeze-3S around time real → *I spent so much time in virtual relationships that the real time slowed down***

Another more literary way (now deprecated in everyday speech because it changes word ordering and gets verbs too close together to not cause ambiguities) is to have ***ułlea*** to introduce a simple subjunctive clause followed by a clause that contains the cause.

* **Ułlea kuíntiwënkur kgei ninukis ios am → <SBJV>so\_that <SBJV>leave\_alone-3S 1S.ABS <PST>give-1S 3M.BEN everything → *I gave him everything so that he leaves me alone***
* Literally: *so that he leaves me alone I gave him everything*
* **Ułlea kohvuintiwënkur kgei ninukis ios łour → so\_that <SBJV.NPRS>leave\_alone-3S 1S.ABS <PST>give-1S 3M.BEN so\_much → *I gave him so much so that he left me alone***Literally: *so that he left me alone I gave him so much*

#### Conjunctions that trigger the subjunctive

It might seem unclear which conjunctions trigger the subjunctive on the clause they introduce. This used to be irregular before the 1971 reform uniformized the rule and made it clear that only conjunctions that denote a change of state (accomplished or ongoing) trigger the subjunctive, whereas mere factual ("reporting") conjunctions don't.

* **Łiovirin eblwan un fa íz → win-2S because be-2S \* good → *you win because you are good***
* **Łiovirin cës äisän fa íz → win-2S but\_now be.SBJV-2S \* good → *you win but now you are good***

"And" and "or" never trigger the subjunctive. Other conjunctions like "if" or "whatever" can, depending on the context.

### Interrogation

Just like prepositions, interrogatives are postposed to the verb.

* **In weis kadyn? → have=2S cat<ABS>-PL how\_many? → *how many cats do you have?***

In yes/no interrogations, an interrogative auxiliary will be used, triggering the subjunctive in the process (just like any auxiliary).

* **Zynyn én wei? →** Q-2S have=SBJV-2S cat<ABS>? **→** *do you have a cat?*

**Note:** another auxiliary, ***fen***, replaces ***zyn*** for formal situations.

Alternatively, a ***z-*** prefix can be added to the verb.

* **Zin wei? →** Q-have=2S cat<ABS>? **→** *do you have a cat?*

The ***z-*** prefix can denote more generic interrogations (not just yes/no questions) if the context is clear enough.

* **Zin wei? →** Q-have=2S cat<ABS? → *why do you have a cat?* (for example)

### Satellite framed verbs

Satellite framed verbs are compound verbs, the same as English's ”give up”, ”hang on” etc.

Only five adpositions can be used to form satellite framed verbs, in which case they are called ”verbal satellites”:

* **unk** (”in”), expresses ”in”;
* **iw** (”out”), expresses ”out”;
* **ant** (”down”), expresses ”down”, ”below”, ”after”, ”behind”;
* **kgan** (”up”), expresses ”up”, ”above”, ”before”, ”in front”;
* **ör** (”back”), expresses ”back”, ”in return”, ”around”.

Just like in English, satellite framed verbs may have a totally distinct meaning from their root. Derivatives are listed on the words' pages.

The satellites can be separated from the corresponding conjugated verb as long as no ambiguity is created.

## Counting and dates

### Digits

Ov numeric system is in base 10. Digits (1 to 9) are as follows.

1. **it** /ɪt/
2. **ät** /æt/
3. **el** /e̞l/
4. **sök** /ɕʏk/
5. **clan** /ɬlɑn/
6. **ef** /e̞f/
7. **ient** /je̞nt/
8. **ker** /ke̞ɾ/
9. **oveś** /o̞ve̞s/

Digits are written using letters in the Ov writing system. This comes from the initial letter of each of them, with a few adjustments.

**i ä l s c f e k o**

An interesting result of that system is that whole numbers tend to be colloquially pronounced directly as their "digit forms" when possible, especially when reading.

Thus 3251 (*lałyryk el nałyryk ät clanoiën im it*) is normally pronounced /lɑçʏɾʏk e̞l nɑçʏɾʏk æt ɬlɑno̞ɪ̯n ɪm ɪt/ but also = **läci** = /læθɪ/.

Epenthesis is possible for unpronounceable clusters..

3548, *lałyryk el nałyhryk clan sökröiën im ker* /lɑçʏɾʏk e̞l nɑçyːɾʏk ɬlɑn ɕʏkrʏɪ̯n ɪm ke̞ɾ/ becomes **lcsk** /lɤθɤɕ(ɤ)kɤ/

Zero is "**ccëś**" /θɪs/ and shown by <ë> ë. It is differentiated orally from "i" using a low tone instead of a high tone, or by infixing <w> before the zero.

* 10 = **ië** /ɪ.ɪ̞̀/
* 11 = **ii** /ɪ.ɪ́/

* 10 = **iwë** /ɪ.vɪ/

* 11 = **ii** /ɪ.ɪ/

### Forming numbers

The numerals are always postposed to the nouns, like adpositions. Be sure to check out how the definite plural shifts work.

Words for numbers between 0 and 19 are unique, with a somewhat recognizable pattern (exceptions are underlined).

1. **ccëś** /θɪs/
2. **it** /ɪt/
3. **ät** /æt/
4. **el** /e̞l/
5. **sök** /ɕʏk/
6. **clan** /ɬlɑn/
7. **ef** /e̞f/
8. **ient** /je̞nt/
9. **ker** /ke̞ɾ/
10. **oveś** /o̞ve̞s/
11. **nanes** /nɑne̞ɕ/
12. **ulän** /ulæn/
13. **tän** /tæn/
14. **sökän** /ɕʏkæn/
15. **clänän** /ɬlænæn/
16. **epän** /e̞pæn/
17. **ientän** /je̞ntæn/
18. **kerän** /ke̞ɾæn/
19. **öfszän** /ʏfsæn/

Then multiples of ten are formed variably with an *-oiën* suffix attached to the root numeral.

1. **äcloiën** /æɬlo̞ɪ̯n/
2. **erroiën** /e̞ɾo̞ɪ̯n/
3. **sökroiën** /ɕʏkro̞ɪ̯n/
4. **clanoiën** /ɬlɑno̞ɪ̯n/
5. **epaiën** /e̞pɑɪ̯n/
6. **ientoiën** /je̞nto̞ɪ̯n/
7. **kroiën** /kro̞ɪ̯n/
8. **ovszoiën** /o̞vso̞ɪ̯n/

After twenty, specific numerals are formed literally with "20 and x".

* 21 = **äcloiën im it**
* 132 = **nałyr erroiën im ät**

By 200, something else changes: the word for "100" is considered to be a noun, thus the digit that indicates how many hundreds there are is postposed to it (plural and definite plural shift are applied to it as well).

* 413 = **nałyhryk sök elwän**

And so on with higher "numeral nouns".

* 8888 = **dalyhryk ker nałyhryk ker kroiën im ker**

### Dates

Dates of the Gregorian calendar are in the following format in Ov: « [month]-INE, [day-number], [day-name] [year] in ».

* Thursday, April 25th 2019 **=** *kohldíttak, 25, kenbahnea 2019 unk*

This does not work the same for original Allwanduirian dates.

## Advanced grammar

### Possession

Ov possession markers are affixal. They can apply either before or after any grammatical paradigm depending on euphony. They follow the consonantal harmonies.

Interestingly enough, Ov also distinguishes indirect possession versus direct possession. The distinction is sometimes referred to as concrete versus abstract possessees, but it is a bit more specific than that.

The former winds up being used more often: it applies on things that that are not held nor owned, nor could be (as in "my son" or "my problems"). The latter applies if the possessive relation is strict (as in "my dog" or "my house", things that actually belong or are held by someone).

Confusing the two can be really problematic, especially if you say "my son" with the direct possession paradigm; the law could want to have a word with you. While this is potentially awkward, using the direct possession where the indirect possession is expected can add a meaning of affection, for example "my friend" (or "my son", within the family circle) which can use both paradigms depending on the context and the intention of the speaker.

Unlike most Ov declensions that allow for assonantal endings, the possesive paradigms include at least one mandatory vowel. For epenthesis, it is allowed to add *-w-* before the ending, but not before the fricative endings that already input *-i-*).

Any feminine form can be made by adding *-ta* to those endings, but this is rare and optional.

More rarely, when the context is clear enough, possession can be shown by a simple *-(V)ł* construct state marker. Its most common use is to emphasize the fact that the possessee, *indeed*, is possessed.

* **U vwäiäł, yplöwts = be cat-CNS, dickhead = *It's my cat indeed, dickhead***
* **U łehndrottał, ouc ea łanteiël í = be wife-CNS, mister E judge VOC = *It is his wife indeed, your honour.***

### Valence

An interesting feature of Ov is that every single verb is potentially transitive, for various reasons. That does not mean there is no intransitive verbs, of course; those are basically the same as in English.

Intransitive verbs used transitively look like romance languages' pronominal verbs in that their object is always a pronoun. That's why they are called **pronominal verbs**. But they are used in various ways unlike them.

Intransitive movement and action verbs used transitively express suddenty, precipitation or violence in the act.

* **płöntös kgei = go-away-1S 1S.ABS = *I suddenly go away / I rush out***
* **płöntös niw = go-away-1S 2S.ABS = *I eject you***
* **cantas kgei wäis kgä = argue-1S 1S.ABS cat-PL about = *I vehemently argue about cats***

Intransitive concept verbs used transitively express forcedness or difficulty.

* **guharas kgei = adapt-1S 1S.ABS = *I deploy painful efforts to adapt / I adapt forcedly***
* **guharas niw = adapt-1S 2S.ABS = *I train you harshly to adapt***

Most verbs may express humility through transitivity, and therefore act as ditransitive (though both objects won't be marked absolutively if it is avoidable).

* **kurfus mäił kgei neweb... = advise-1S act-as-if<SBJV> 1S.ABS 2S.BEN = *may I suggest that you act as if...***
* **pengnus kgei = apologize-1S 1S.ABS = *I (humbly) apologize***

Most verbs can express causativity through transitivity.

* **vëitës kgei = sleep-1S 1S.ABS = *I go to sleep***
* **vëitës niw = sleep-1S 2S.ABS = *I put you to sleep* (figuratively or not)**

### Deponent pronouns

Ov uses grammatical persons unlike any Earth-born language relative to time. Indirect interlocutors are treated very exotically as they are 2S as long as they are present or witnessing the conversation; this is a situation where a pronoun becomes deponent. People absent from the conversation are treated as regular 3S.

 **Second person** | Direct interlocutor
 **Third person** | Absent or indirect interlocutor

If C were not part of the conversation, the structure would be the same as in English. Please note that it is not a discourse practice where you would always directly address the person whom the speech regards for reasons of politeness; 1 may, in fact, address 2S directly even when mentioning a third and present interlocutor - but then, this third interlocutor will be treated as 2S too regardless.

The fact that Ov considers the third person a category for whomever you are not involved with is an unvariant and intrinsical concept of the language. That means that all interlocutors of a given person will always fall in the second person, which is oftentimes cleared up with context - by necessity or by choice. This works without a fourth person, and without conflation of time and space.

This allows for unusual behaviours. The most remarkable one is probably the fact that your own younger self falls into the third person category as well. That is, when referring to anyone in the distant past, including yourself, you use the third person.

Linguists posit that this behaviour was originally motivated by dissociation of a current adult and experienced self from a younger and unexperienced self that was referred to as a deprecated personality, even despised, through social customs or taboos. This may have been later extended to the interlocutors as a mark of respect.

This behaviour is always true when mentioning a teenager or an adult at a time they were a child. The application of this behaviour to adults at a time they were already grown-ups is not codified and varies sociolectally or with speech register. Note that the structures ”you were a shy kid” and ”I was a shy kid” can be true when addressing someone who is still a child or if someone who is still a child is speaking, respectively. Again, the boundaries vary.

Comparably, it is considered extremely disrespectful and/or rude to address a present indirect interlocutor with the third person. An opposite phenomenon is true: referring to someone who is absent with the second person is a mark of respect or social deference.

### Equative vs formal adverbs

Ov can form equative adverbs as well as formal adverbs, also described as type one and type two.

”Move snailily¹” would mean ”move like a snail”; as in English, this is an equative adverb, possibly entailing a metaphor. It could imply ”move very slowly”.

”Move snailily²” would mean ”move as a snail would”. This is a formal adverb, that adds the assumption that a snail would be directly identified as the maker of the verb. It could imply ”move and leave mucus behind you”, or ”move with a shell on your back”, or ”advance by moving the way a snail does”.

In other words, type two adverbs would act non-metaphorically but rather through identification with the adverbee. In Ov, type one adverbs are called ”viliokstyndohrok itit kyhors kgä” (adverbs of metaphor) while type two adverbs are ”viliokstyndohrok ryhpzyś” (literal adverbs).

### Ergative marking in clauses with indirect objects

Ov is indecisive as to mark ergative in clauses with indirect objects. Those are clauses where the subject is linked to the verb with a postposition.

* **Gysyr wäisa gys = play-3S cat-ERG game = *the cat plays a game***
* **Gysyr wäi(sa) warap kyś = play-3S cat-(ERG) ball with = *the cat plays with a ball***

Both cases are remarkably interchangeable. In the administration, the ergative will always be specified but this is not connotated. Neither informal speech or authors tend to show a preference. However, the ergative is never marked with ”kgä”, ”about”.

### Any-

One cannot speak of ”any-” words in Ov without linking them to their construction.

* **lämiot** /læmjo̞t/ (place-INDID) → *anywhere (static)*
* **épblämiot** /e̞ɪ̯plæmjo̞t/ (to-place-INDID) → *anywhere (directive)*
* **lumiot** /lumjo̞t/ (person.INDID) → *anyone / anybody*
* **iod** /jo̞d/ (thing.INDID) → *anything*
* **łasziauś** /xɑɕɑws/ (way-INDID) → *in any way*

As you can see, all the ”any-” pronouns in Ov are formed by the INDID case of their corresponding noun. It's not tricky so far.

* **Bair väi épblämiot = can.1S <SBJV>go anywhere(ALL) = *I can / could go anywhere***
* **Cenäsän kgi łasziauś = fix-FUT.1S it in\_any\_way = *I will fix it somehow / in all sorts of way***

Apart for ***lämiot*** that has its own dative-directive equivalent ***épblämiot***, the ”any-” pronouns have a specific way of forming their dative-benefactive case.

**lumiot** /lumjo̞t/ (**person.INDID**) → *anyone / anybody*

* → **lumiot ś(ea)** /lumjo̞t sɤ/ (**person.INDID for**) → *to / for anyo*

**iod** /jo̞d/ (**thing.INDID**) → *anything*

* → **iod tat** /jo̞tɑt/ (**thing.INDID BEN**) → *to / for anything*

**łasziauś** /xɑɕɑws/ (**way-INDID**) → *in any way*

* → **łasziauś kgä** /xɑɕɑws kæ/ (**way-INDID TOP**) → *for any way of doing it*

* **Nuksun kgi lumiot ś = give-FUT.1S it person.INDID for = *I will / would give it to anyone***
* **Kairas am iod tat = do-FUT.1S everything thing.INDID BEN = *I would change everything about anything***
* **Płotson kcaír ołën kgi mäś łasziauś kgä = grant-FUT.1S <SBJV>manage to it authorisation way-INDID TOP = *I will grant an authorisation to any way of handling it***

Negating an ”any-” word is sometimes seen as the only case where Ov makes use of a double negation, although the additional word, ***kahi*** (which usually translates as ”whole”) is more of an emphasizer than a negator.

* **Bënkair väi épblämiot kahi = <NEG>can.1S <SBJV>go anywhere(ALL) whole = *I can't / couldn't go anywhere***
* **Cënkenäsän kgi łasziauś kahi = <NEG>fix-FUT.1S it in\_any\_way whole = *I won't / wouldn't fix it in any way***

* **Nënkuksun kgi lumiot ś kahi = <NEG>give-FUT.1S it person.INDID for whole = *I won't / wouldn't give it to anyone***
* **Kënkairas am iod tat kahi = <NEG>do-FUT.1S everything thing.INDID BEN whole = *I wouldn't change everything about anything***
* **Płënkotson kcaír ołën kgi mäś łasziauś kgä kahi = <NEG>grant-FUT.1S <SBJV>manage to it authorisation way-INDID TOP whole = *I won't grant an authorisation to any way of handling it***

### Additional details and rarities

#### Optional comparative marking

The ***-l*** comparee affix makes the comparative marking on the adjective optional.

* **U m~~ënt~~ézyn guv wöyszanal → COP sharp eye razor-than → *the eye is sharper than the razor* (literally: *the eye is sharp than the razor*)**

#### Archaic dual form

There is an archaic dual suffix ***-ś*** that is usable in formal contexts. Only words of the plosive harmony ending with VCVC in the plural can take it.

* **tdön → *kind***
* **tdönök → *kinds***
* **tdönökś → *two kinds***

#### rVr structures

rVr (where V stands for any vowel) is phonotactically forbidden; should an inflection yield it (typically 3S conjugations), it will be turned into lVr.

* **kownír = *to abandon***
* **~~\*kowníror~~ = *he abandons*** (theoretically regular but ungrammatical)
* **kownílor = *he abandons***

This applies accross word boundaries as a form of liaison as well, although this wasn't the case before the late 19th century.

* **cyp ör = *to slow down***
* **~~\*cypyr ör~~ = *he slows down***
* **cypyl ör = *he slows down***

#### On V1

Ov strongly enforces VSO word order when there are consecutive verbs, which turns every verb into an auxiliary for the final verb, even if they are not basically connected (example below). This is called a verbal chain (*śtoeaniösan*).

* **If there is a search for it, then I have something I can believe in**

translates as:

* ***Vys mair płä kgi iöps, krohst os sois neízyk ëka kgi iöps***

which is glossed as:

* **if be-there-SBJV search it about, then have-SBJV.1S can-SBJV believe-SBJV something it about**

This literally translates as:

* If there is a search it about, then I have I can believe something about

And, if we cancel the way adpositions work in Ov:

* If there is a search about it, then I have I can believe about something

Finally, by cancelling this word order enforcement, we illustrate how it works:

* If there is a search about it, then I have something I can believe about

Also, keep in mind that auxiliaries trigger subjunctive in the following verb, and since both "have" and "can" are made auxiliaries in this sentence, all the following verbs are subjunctive-inflected. The reason why "have" is subjunctive is different though: this is triggered by the subordinate clause.

#### Some counterintuitive uses of declensions and idiotisms

* *In the following weeks* → **kakplöiësar sömök (week-INS.PL next-PL)**
* *It is 39% more likely* → **u fa lëntyhnean nałripik erroiën im el**
* *It is 10 meters high* → **u fa nähs łitónto oiën (COP-ADJZ high metre-INS.PL ten)**
* *Divided by x* (and other mathematical operations) → **divided x with**
* *In the direction of x*→ **x.INS**
* *We / Us three*→ **śias el gyn** (**1P.TOT three of**)

#### Frequencies

Ov manages frequencies in an interesting way.

* **iér kaktak → time day-INE → *once a day***
* **iér tongnaszttak → time month-INE → *once a month***

* **iérek ät kaktak → time-PL two in-day → *twice a day***
* **iérek ät tongnaszttak → time-PL two month-INE → *twice a month***

* **iérek ät kak ís → time-PL two day out-of → *twice in two days***
* **iérek ät tongnaszt ís → time-PL two month out-of → *twice in two months***What happens here is that the numeral is not repeated, impliedly applying to both nouns. The noun can be pluralized so as to neutralize ambiguity.

* **iérek ät kyk el ís \* → time-PL two day three out-of → *twice in three days***
* **iérek ät tongnaszt el ís → time-PL two month three out-of → *twice in three days***

(\* « **kyk** » is an irregular plural)

#### “u” vs “u fa”

*U fa* is the variant of "*u*" used before a single adjective.

* **U wäi ast → be cat beautiful → *the cat is beautiful***
* **U fa ast → be beautiful → *it is beautiful***

#### Ironic negation

Interronegatives don't exist in Ov, with the exception of ironic negations like “ain't it nice” which are rendered by a negation followed by « **kyś** ».

#### One of them…

The ”one of them” structure is translated with the numeral only. In that case, it is always situated at the beginning of a sentence, overriding the expected word order.

* **ät nonkuk iw → two <PASS.3P>give-out → *Two (of them) are reported***

When the numeral is one, the singulative particle ”ibl” is used.

* **ibl nondruk iw → SGV <PASS.3S>give-out → *One (of them) is reported***

The determiner "other" has its own unvariant singulative form "oił".

#### Narrative style

Where English would say "he claimed" or "said he" in a narrative style, Ov would simply put "so" before a verb in the future tense.

* **Plapla, céd sparan → blabla, so say-FUT.2S → *Blabla, he said.***

#### A neat list of Ov sayings

**O śköblar swahnok unk.**
/o̞ skʏɫ̪ɑɾ ɕvɑːno̞k uŋk/
**There's a sheep in my coffee** = there's something wrong
(can be used with a complement followed by "*kgä*" to mark the topic)

**Amlíliä cyhs blëiszan nev pea slont ol bela mohrwöuszëł.**
/ɑliːʝæ θyːɕ ɫ̪e̞ɪ̯sɑn ne̞f pɤ ɕlo̞nt o̞l be̞lɑ moːɾvʏwsɪç/

**It's better to know for sure it rains on you than to believe it's sunny at the world's tail** = a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush**Swaiësztan víbl aszm öf oun noszëł.**
/ɕvɑɪ̯stɑn viːɫ̪ ɑsm ʏf o̞wn no̞sɪç/

**You're precious as a marble of air in space** = said to someone negligible in appearance but who turns out to be extremely useful, without whom even great things couldn't be accomplished**Urvytín öyswa!**
/urvʏtiːn yːɕvɑ/

**Milk would blush!** = said when something shocking but funny has just been said, typically accidentally by a child**Kuhartsał winilyr!**
/kuːɑrt͡ɕɑx vɪnɪlʏɾ/
**Your heart moved** = You're blushing hard
(the "to move" verb used here is that of changing residence; the possession is expressed through the construct case so the person this adresses is virtually anyone)

**Ar mibkik Temaskasan.**
/ɑɾ mɪbkɪk te̞mɑɕk(ɑ)ɕɑn/
**S/He is in the fogs of the Temaska river** = S/He is not born yet / s/he is to be born
(calqued from a regional french idiom)

**Lar öyf kgi.**
/lɑɾ yːf kɪ/

**The wind keeps it** = Rumor has it**Bair língäs ékglumea.**
/bɑɪ̯ɾ liːŋæɕ e̞ɪ̯klumɤ/

**I can bring my own** = I can play my role.**Ovnel ënkovnel.**
/o̞vne̞l ɪŋko̞vne̞l/

**What's done won't be to be done.****Tdunur zahlyryl yhalcciaus.**
/tunuɾ t͡ɕɑːlʏɾʏl yːɑlθjɑwɕ/

**It makes as much sense as an equatorial winter.****Mulur kgan kgäipi läszsa.**
/muluɾ kɑn kæɪ̯pɪ læsɕɑ/

**The sky opens for me** = I'm very tired/sleepy**Urplinoun dohlírok.**
/urɫ̪ɪno̞wn doːliːɾo̞k/

**You made my words shy** = I'm very flattered
## Irregularities

### Patterned irregularities (-am / -ar / -läm / -ó nouns)

Nouns ending in ***-am***, ***-ar***, ***-läm*** and ***-ó*** (the latter in the plosive harmony only) are irregular, but they follow a predictable pattern. This happens in different ways to all paradigms.

For reference, the regular paradigms are reproduced here.

#### -ar class (null harmony)

* **guhar → guharler** *(adaptation → adaptations)*
* **star → stylyr** *(state → states-ERG)*

#### -am class (plosive harmony)

* **örłam → örłok** *(hero → heroes)*
* **am → on** *(thing → thing-ERG)*

#### -läm class

The word ***läm***, meaning "place", has irregular ERG and ERG.PL. This pattern works for all of its derivations.

 **TOT** | -iat

#### -ó class (plosive harmony only)

* **fyhnkgó → fyhnkgoga** *(electric fan → electric fans)*
* **gönó → gönout** *(omelette → omelette-ERG)*

### Allomorphy

#### Nominal syntactic declensions

Allomorphy is a class of expected irregularities in certain environments. Each case of allomorphy implies a conditional regular transformation.

Note that throughout the phenomena of allomorphy, assonantal endings cannot reproduce long vowels; they are reduced to their short counterpart (ex. 1 and 9).

**Any harmony**

* Occurrences of ‹ii› will be rewritten ‹í› in the plosive and fricative harmonies (ex. 2 and 3), but will be reduced to ‹i› in the null harmony (ex. 4).

**Fricative harmony**

* The NOM and NOM.PL forms of nouns in the fricative harmony turn ‹ea› (considered one vowel phonologically) to ‹a› if followed by the last consonant of the word (ex. 5);
* any occurrence of ‹ss› becomes ‹ś~sz› (ex. 6);
* any occurrence of ‹łs› becomes ‹ss› (ex. 7).

**Null harmony**

* Words ending in ***-ë*** will have their ERG unchanged (ex. 8).

**Examples**

* 1. **płíc → \*~~płícís~~ → płícis** (*coal → coals*)
* 2. **łezki → \*~~łezkiiot~~ → łezkíot** (*friend → friend-INDID*)
* 3. **vorantepłi → \*~~vorantepłiiauś~~ → vorantepłíauś** (*accent → accent-INDID*)
* 4. **ai → \*~~aiior~~ → aior** (*cartridge → cartridge-INDID*)
* 5. **ełorgean → \*~~ełorgeaneak~~ → ełorgeanak** (accuser → accusers)
* 6. **urnës → \*~~urnëssa~~ → urnësza** (*abolition → abolition-ERG*)
* 7. **woł → \*~~wołsa~~ → wossa** (*armpit → armpit-ERG)*
* 8. **eruië→ \*~~eruiëë~~ → eruië** (*arm → arm-ERG)*

#### Nominal semantic declensions

**Fricative harmony**

* This paradigm undergoes various simplifications: ‹sś → ś›, ‹łs → s›, ‹vs → s›, ‹szś → ś›, ‹szs → s› and ‹ss → s› (ex. 9, 10, 11 and 12);
* syncope (removal of a syllable) also happens in szVszV and szVsV environments that both become szzV (in other words, a vowel is removed if between ‹sz- -sz› or ‹sz- -s›, if followed by a vowel) (ex. 13);
* ‹ëë → ë› (ex. 14)

**Plosive harmony**

* Occurrences of ‹ngnk› are reduced to ‹nk› (ex. 15).

**Null harmony**

* Occurrences of ‹blr› or ‹plr› are reduced to ‹r› (ex. 16);
* occurrences of ‹bll,pll› are replaced by ‹bl,pl› (ex. 17).

**Examples**

* 9. **urnës → \*~~urnësś~~ → urnës** (*abolition-GEN.PL*)
* 10. **urnës → \*~~urnëss~~ → urnës** (*abolition-BEN or abolition-INS.PL*)
* 11. **śweł → \*~~śwełś~~ → śwes** (*board-INS.PL*)
* 12. **rav → \*~~ravsaf~~ → rasaf** (*baby-INE*)
* 13. **käszi → \*~~käsziszaf~~ → käszzaf** (*nipple-INE*)
* 14. **vésën→ \*~~vésëntëë~~ → vésëntë** (*enemy-GEN(.PL)*)
* 15. **tungn → \*~~tungnkut~~ → tunkut** (*dessert → dessert-ECTS*)
* 16. **räbl → \*~~räblr~~ → \*~~rär~~ → lär** (*disease → disease-BEN*; this also undergoes the rVr → lVr mandatory change)
* 17. **räbl → \*~~räbller~~ → räbler** (*disease → disease-INE*)

### Adjective allomorphy

**Fricative harmony**

* This paradigm undergoes various simplifications: ‹sś → ś›, ‹szś → ś›, ‹zz → z›, ‹sss → ss›, ‹zz → z› and ‹sztszz → szz› (also ‹sz → z› word-finally) (ex. 19, 20 and 21);
* in the POSI.PL form, if a word winds up ending in ***-zś***, it is infixed with the assonantal vowel (ex. 22).

**Null harmony**

* ‹rz› becomes ‹z› (ex. 23).

**Examples**

* 18. **wém → \*~~wémék~~ → wémek** (*alright → alright-PL*)
* 19. **lougviś → \*~~lougviszś~~ → lougviś** (*advanced → advanced-PL*)
* 20. **zmuräus → \*~~zmuräuszs~~ → zmuräuś** (*allergic → allergic-PL*)
* 21. **yhz → \*~~yhzz~~ → yhz** (*charming → charming-PL*)
* 22. **az → \*~~azś~~ → azaś** (*conscious → conscious-PL*)
* 23. **ohr → \*~~ohrz~~ → ohz** (*broad → broad-PL*)

### Weather verbs

Weather verbs only exist in the third person. This form is irregular, usually displaying metathesis.

* **śök → \*~~śökör~~ → śörk** (*to rain → it rains*)
* **bela → \*~~belar~~ → berra** (*to be sunny → it is sunny*)