Healing

http://sites.google.com/site/psalmofdreams/Home/introduction-to-babel-grammar/ordeal-finished----for-now

Notebook Entry: Ordeal Finished – For Now

I am so happy to be back with Puey. I am so sore that I can barely move. Mother knit back together my legs and white ankles and the bones of my wings and was good enough to kiss the wing bones back into their place, but I have lost a great deal of blood. Puey’s been carrying me around. I don’t think that I ate at all while I was with my Mother somewhere upon the marges of Etsèrjoir the Starscapes. Puey has brought me milk and honey and loaves of manna bread and I think I might have eaten just a little too much. Puey says that I’m even more anæmick than normal right now, so I’ll just have to rest.
Grandfather Pátifhar has written the necessary letters to Puey’s side of the family and quieted them down. Rumor has it that they were going to try and send Ixhúja and Siêthiyal after me, but I think that would have just been a mistake. Mother would finds Ixhúja … curious. I do not know what Mother would do with her. And as for Siêthiyal, I think Mother would just find her quite cute and try to make a dancer out of her, even if it kills her. Right now Mother is with Father and Grandfather Pátifhar. I think my parents are going to leave the fleet for a time and let the rest of us continue with the War. I wish to have more sympathy with my Mother, I understand that she sacrificed so much just to bear me, but the pain I’m feeling now reminds me that she is not a Mortal and does not understand all that she is doing. Perhaps she never will. I do not know whether the Immortals are truly capable of change. I think they can, otherwise we would not have attained the Flower, but still, they may not learn in grasp information the way that the rest of us do.
Tonight Puey is going to unbind m wings and get me out of this corset. I only want him to see what’s happened to my feathers. I know he’ll be gentle, but I’m so very embarrassed.
Mother did manage to surprise both me and Puey when he came for me in the middle of the night. I don’t know when she did it, it had to be while I was fainting from another bone braking and blood letting session, but she wrote up a few sheets of grammar for me and Puey to read while I rested. Sometimes I forget that Mother also had a great deal of trouble with Language, or at least, when she took Mortal form, of speaking in the way that we mortals do. I shall copy her notes below while Puey rubs my wings tonight and begins to unbind them and squeeze me out of this too tight clockwork corset.

My Children,
More than one hundred million years ago, when I was a young maiden and dwelling with Grandfather Pátifhar beside the forest, he also took it upon himself the task of trying to teach me to speak in the words of language. I could record all that he told me, rememberance like all else is perfect with me, but I shall try to summarize some of his earliest lessons for you. He told me that Babel is a language of fhtóte, of affixes, little participles that come before and after words. He told me that Babel is a language that is qòli and khmùtangur, that is agglutinative as if with glue. There are a few hundred possible affixes which may modify the participle, and a far smaller number for the personal pronoun and relative pronoun. The lrànkhus prefixes can indicatate conjunction, honorifics that refer to the speaker’s attitude, the number of something, the subject and object of a predicate, different types of possession, and locations and indirect objects. Suffixes can indicate case, common descriptions, colors, all manner of syntactic participles, aspect, modals, verbals, basical adverbs and interjections, derivational substantive endings, deictiξ, location, relative time, emphasis, clause makers, and ending conjunctions.
My children, I learned that an implied –Y- is added between tnòntha vowels for all affixes. So tsena-, a singular prefix plus the word óqla, flowers is written and pronounced tsenayóqla, a single flower. Óqla plus the construct case suffix –olkha becomes óqlayòlkha, of the flowers. Tsenayóqlayòlkha is simply a combination of tsena- and óqla and -olkha.
With so many affixes it would seem possible to create very very very long long long jhùfhra sentences. For instance this sentence is completely grammatical:

Jongarfhuitheupíyayantunajhworòxhrie khyeqhiirusqruniipìyipoa.
These great dragons here, in sight, like to approach delicious young maidens.

Such beings like Stars and Dreamers and Raven himself, who do not need to breathe in order to speak, feel completely comfortable in pronouncing sentences with all of the khmàlon affixes just piling upon each other. From a practical point of view, tough, the above sentence by most mortals would be pronounced something like:

Jongar-fhui-theupíya-yantun-ajhwor-òxhrie khyeqhiir-usqrun-iipì-yipoa.

That is, they would be pronounced almost as if the affixes were separate words which just happened to be strung together and should happen to receive the correct musical tone as if they quite long words.

I have noticed in your lexicon, child, that certain affixes are marked with a little Star like so – * –. You do that to indicate that this affix may appear in conjunction with others of its own catageory or family. For instance, it is possible to say janyalyiikhayóqla twice three flowers even though both janya- and lyiikha- are level three prefixes. However, it is ungrammatical to say, I suppose, lworanyawthá for oh beloved and loved ones! Entire categories or tribes you can mark with the star in your grammar, such as the leven two swètwan suffixes for adjectives, and leven three suffixes for colors, and the leven six suffixes for modals, and the level eight suffixes for adverbs and conjunctions, and the level nine suffixes for derivational substantives, and the level fourteen suffixes for clause markers.
However, my child, noe that only one participle at a time may receive these affixes. For instance one can say I go to the Starscapes by creating khniy-Etserjoir-oxhrie. However, if one wished to say I go to Eilasaîyanor and Jaràqtu and the Starscapes one cannot say khniy-Eilasaiyanor-ontet-Jarqtu-yontet-Etserjoir-oxhrie. One would have to use a full participle meaning going. One way to express that would be Khnixhthènteqhe’ Eilasaiyanorutakhòntet Jaraqtuyòntet Etsèrjoir pú, or even Eilasaiyanoroxhrieyòntet Jaraqtuyòntet Etsèrjoir pú.
There are some instances where the grammatical function of a Babel word is not marked by an affix. This may happen in the experiencer case, the vocative case, and the absolutive case. Sometimes the musical pitch of the experiencer case changes for depending on how it is being used.

The Abrupt Form of the Vocative Case

Puiyè! Jeûr! Xhthènteqhe qiêlutakh!
Puey! Jeûr! Come to Þe hills!

The unmarked vocatives take a falling accent on the final syllable of a participle and a circumflex upon the diphthong. A final rising accent, however, does not change. This is considered the sùnta, the abrupt form.

The above example is the abrupt equivalent of:

AîPuîye! AîJeur! Xhthenteqheyétyai qiêlutakh!

The Irrealis Experiencer – Another Abrupt Form

Khneuqrauyelónge púxhmi’ Éfhelinyè jhentajhkhuyériyalwòs!
Be my teacher, Éfhelìnye, an you love me!

This is equivalent unto:

Khneuqrauyelóngeyétyai púxhmi’ Éfhelinyè jhentajhkhuyériyàlwos!
Ør
Khauqrauyelónge jitexhmi Éfhelinyè tajhkhuyériyàlwos khleit!

The musical pitch for unmarked irrealis is the same as that of the unmarked vocative, that is, the unmarked irrealis take a falling accent on the final syllable of a participle and a circumflex on a diphthong. A final rising accent, however, does not change. This is also considered the sùnta, the abrupt form.

Khmír!
Love!
Jaê!
See!
Koaselóngè!
Love!

To form an irrealis without affixes is considered slightly rude in the presence of adult units. Natheless, it is sometimes done in emergencies or in extreme situations, or when addressing pets and plantimals and small children and little Princesses who have not yet grown their angel wings, yes, they may hear the sùnta forms and be reminded that they are growing.
When addressing a toy, one may say something like this:

Xhekìt aîTetratríxe!
Shut up, Tetratríxe!

Usually one would say
Khaûxhekit aîTetratríxe!
Xhekitétyai’ aîTetratríxe!
Xhèkit khrúje’ aîTetratríxe!
Xhèkit khrúje yories aîTetratríxe!

Unto an elder you both must say, should the need e'er arise:
Xhekitafhuxhlitei’ aîPápo Pátifhar!
Respectfully, be silent, Grandfather Pátifhar!

But a child may hear:

Tsuwò khleinajársòlkha’ Éfhelinyè!
Bind your wings, Éfhelìnye!

Tsùwo is another participle meaing ones who link or bind

Question Experiencer – Another Abrupt Form

It is possible although a little silly to create a question by raising the tone.

Takoaselónge jitt teir?
Dost thou love me?

This is equivalent unto:
Takoaselóngeyájhei jitt teir?

An unmarked question also takes a final rising musical tone or circumflex if the participle can withstand it.

Khmír?
Loves?
Jaê?
Sees?
Koaselóngé?
Loves?

Interjection Experiencer – Yet Another Abrupt Form

Also by changing the twuîlwa musical tone, almost any participle can me made into an interjection. The pitch accent follows the same pattern as the unmarked irrealis or vocative. This is also considered a sùnta abrupt form.

Patifhárù! Oh the holy words that are spoken!!
Ayèn! By the Æons!
Sqakhàn! Those stones!

I shall now write about the khmuîthno, the experiencer case for a time. Abbá Thiêfhilos was quite adament that I understand the various uses for the experiencer case, for it deamed it to be the strength and wings of the sentence.

In the sentence below the subject is in the experiencer case:

Xhajhyakhnaôlutakh xhthènteqhe Puiyusoâkhwe.
Puîyus always goeth to many places.

We that Puiyusoâkhwe is in the experiencer case because it can take an aspect marker. We call such useage of the experiencer the khyèqa, the subject experiencer for an monivolitional subject. If the sentence had been:

Xhajhyakhnaôlutakh xhthènteqhe Puîyus.
Puîyus goeth to many places.

Then the subject, Puîyus, would be in the absolutive case.

This following sentence uses the experiencer in what I was taught is called the khwèlipe, the predicate experiencer. There are actually two janyakhwèlipe in the sentence:

Tuînamat tnarlkhurlùlkha’ Eiyuláriye xúyaswaôrengit wthá.
One gives this person the name Eiyuláriye

Both tuînamat and Eiyuláriye, one of your names, are in the predicate experiencer. The predicate experiencer is applied in statements that involve naming, chosing, appointing, making something to be, thinking, or regarding someone or something as or to be someone or something. The predicate experiencer after such participles quite often tends to be names or titles, but sometimes it can be a word with the suffix –exhyeu which is so often used for purpose clauses.

Tnarjhwèkhmat lwánolùlkha khelenathayèxhyeu Puîyus.
Puîyus paints Þe castle for its being red;
Puîyus paints Þe castle red.

The participle Tnàrjhwekh, tnarjhwèkhmat could be defined then as those who paint someone or something to be someone or something.

If one compares these sentences:


Xhthelkhòrlamat wtháyejikh qtiên Pìpra.
Xhthelkhòrlamat wtháyejikh qtienèxhyeu Pìpra.

The first sentence hath qtiên as an khwèlipe predicate experiencer, while the second ina purpose clause with the suffix -exhyeu. The meaning of the first example is The Fallen Star sends men as empty away, or, the Fallig Star sends men away empty. The second example means, The Shooting Star sends men away to be empty. These two sentences, I feel, mean almost the same thing, and one who speaks in language is just as likely to say one as the other. The words I have used above are Xhthèlkhorl, xhthelkhòrlamat, those who drive away someone or something. And qtiên, those who are empty, as well as Pìpra, falling Stars, fallen Stars, shooting Stars, and one of mine own names.

Predicate experiencers are often used with the word jhkhùnwo, that is those who make a sound, a noise.

Jhkhùnwo Qwatríxe.
Qwatríxe makes a sound.
Jhkhùnwo xhìqtakem Qwatríxe.
Qwatríxe makes Þe noise Tick tock.

The verbal suffix –okhoam regularly takes the predicate experiencer.

Puiyùsokhoam Jaraqtuyùntur Éfhelìnye.
Éfhelìnye idenifies Puîyus as a Jaraqtun.

The participle lyèrnewo, lyèrnewim regularly takes te predicate experiencer. It means, those who see, consider someone or something to be someone or something.

Lyèrnewo sqàkhan xhroe xhmùpta qé.
They consider Þe scurrying rocks to be gold.

Pajelyèrnewim Khwofheilyàyejikh tyaqájaxing pú.
I consider Khwofheîlya to be a slave.

Other participles that also take the predicate experiencer are khyeqhíxhnoa, those who approximate someone or something to be someone or something and sáqhíre, sáqhíreqhe, those who enscribe someone or something to be someone or something and jèton those who consider, deem someone or something to be someone or something.

Khyeqhíxhnoa qielàxhmikh lwíji wtsoîse kúxing.
He approximated Þe hill to be 62 wtsoîse in height.

Sáqhíreqhe fhairotuyùlkha joîkhmír khleit jin jin.
I enscribed Þe book, ‘I love you.’

I’ve never quite understand numbers, but your Grandfather Pátifhar made me learn that wtsoîse are the span of two extended arms, about 2 and ½ cubits in length.

Participles that mean appont, select, elect, recognize often take the predicate experiencer to show unto what rank or degree something is being appointed. Such participles include khmemòsefhau, those who recognize, khnàtha, khnathelónge, those who appoint, set, place, fhoyeîto, those who adjudge, deam, pronounce, jùti, those who are excellent, who judge, and khriîne, khriînemat, those who put, place, install, appoint to (honors), put aside candy for an emergency, and qoxhwàrnyun, qoxhwàrnyuma, those who mark, elect, designate, arrange, promise, betroth, and qwìni, qwìnini, those who reveal, disclose and sàrosa, saròrosa, those who elect, select by alliance, and tewáratha, tetewáratha, those who are excellent, judge, and tìxhra, those who choose, selent, and tlhàna, tlhatlhánga, those who are excellent, judge, and wtseî, those who announce, declare, appoint, xhìfhtu, xhèfhtu, those who appoint, and xhnòsan, xhnòsama, those who appoint, put up, place someone or something in an high position, and xhràrxhnen, xhrarxhnèntu, those who appoint, set, arrange, and xhrelínger those who select and xhthiîfhta, xhthiîfhtamat, those who choose, select.

Khriînemat stélar Éfhelinyèyejikh Puîye.
Puey appointed Þe Princess Éfhelìnye.
Khriînemat Éfhelinyèyikh stélar Puîye.
Puey appointed Éfhelìnye as a Princess.
Qoxhwàrnyuma Fhólùsejikh Jaraqtuyùntar Pátifhar.
Pátifhar marked Fhólus as a Jaraqtun.
Tlhatlhánga poe’ Éfhelinyèyejikh akhairikhuyiîlii pú.
I judge mine Éfhelìnye to be a wee Star.
Fhoyeîto Tetratríxeyejikhòntet Qwatríxe janyàxhraxam fhanxhiyìxhna pú.
I pronounce Tetratríxe and Qwatríxe to be a pair of altogether annoying wind up toys.

I used the word Akhíkhra, akhaîrikhu for to describe my Daughter, one of the words for a Skydancer. Xhràxam are wind up toys, and for some reason they are considered sentient animate in gender. Fhànxhi means those who are pesky, who annoy someone or something, and the little suffix –ixhna means well, in a good fashion, clearly, perfectly, altogether, stark.

One also finds these participles using the predicate experiencer: Fhroê, those who paint, and Khlájar, those who paint, dye, color and Tnàrjhwekh, tnarjhwèkhmat, those who paint and wtsí those who are dyed, tinted, painted, colored and xhmòsqri, those who are covered in woad, painted.

Wtsí lwánolùlkha’ áxha Puîyus.
Puîyus paints Þe castle red.

Your Grandfather Pátifhar also taught me that in the ur … qoe construction, the participle or tòngqa personal pronoun after the qoe is also in the predicate experiencer.

Khníjur ur qoe qúraxing Puîyus.
Puîyus made Þe viceroy king psing.
Koaselónge’ ur qielàxhmikh qoe tsenatheupíya kú.
He made Þe maiden love Þe hills.
Khniêr ur kúxhrejor qoe tsenastélar Puîyus.
Puîyus made Þe princess kiß him.

Actually I think I shall amend that last sentence to:

Khniêr ur kúxhrejor qoe stélar tlhatlhàmaxúng Puîyus quja koaqing jiînxhemet qráyiingtayuqeiyàfhtong qir oâqe tùntha tùntha xhroe tàntha quja kexhexhnixing.
Puîyus made the princess kiss him even though she desires to abide with her true Mother during the expanse of being outside of time for ever.

The sentence is far better. Tlhám, tlhàtlham means those who are willing, fain, will or want someone or something and here I’ve made it negative with the suffix -axúng, and jiînxhe, jiînxhemet means those who abide, remain, endure, dure, dree, and you can see the koaqing prefix that marks it as something habitual, because she is wont to stay with me, and the suffix –afhtong on the word for mother means true, faithful, loyal, and tùntha, tùnthar means those who are eternal, for ever, outside of time, and it can be reduplicated to mean those who last for ever and ever, and tàntha means those who desire or want someone or something and the modal tàntha xhnir means wants to, or desires to.

Predicate Experiencers in Relative Clauses

Xhthènteqhe lwánol khelenathayèxhyeu Puîyus wtsàtim.
Puîyus, who is green, goeth unto the castles, which are red;
A green Puîyus goeth unto red castles.

This example contains two relative clauses. Relative clauses always take the form of X who is Y, where first comes that which is being described and then follow the descriptions. The first relative clause is lwánol khelenathayexhyeu, which is unto the castles which are red. Note that the suffix for the locative case is only added to the last word of the phrase. In a similar fashion Puîyus wtsàtim means Puîyus who is green. Since Puîyus is in the absolutive case, and it taking no affix, wtsàtim also does not need to take any affix at all. The suppletive and marked singular form is used since as a name Puîyus imples singleness. Babel words which do not have suppletive singular forms do not need to take the tsena prefix or –ing suffix on relative clauses that modify a personal name since one can usually imple the singleness of the phrase. Puîyus khelènatha means Puîyus who is red or red Puîyus and probably not the many Puîyus who are red. Puîyus tsenakhelènatha is not ungrammatical, but not a common way to express singularity.

Predicate Experiencer after Conjunctions

I’m going to paint a little box because it’s pretty

·aiqhor Ond, also, eke, ptoo, only, even; both …ond
+ xhnoe Ond, also, eke, ptoo, only, even; both … ond; until, zo
+ aqhus Ond
·ontet Ond, connects substantivë clauses; both … ond; … but also
+ xhnoipe Ond, connects substantivë clauses; both … ond ; … but also
+ fheil (Either) … ør

The level fourteen suffixes can yoke together a coule of words. +aqhus means and while –aiqhor and +xhnoe mean and, also, too, only, even, both … and, although xhnoe can also conjoin clauses and mean until, so. –ontet and xhnoipe means and, both … and, …. but also while +fheil means or, either …. Or, although it can also conjoin different clauses. For the present discussion, that’s a very pretty box, isn’t that, these conjunctions connect words in the same clause. In the construction X-aiqhor, xhnoe, aqhus, ontet, xhnoipe Y means X and Y while X fheil Y means X or Y. Y is considered the object of the same fhtóte affixes that are inflected upon X.

Xhthènteqhe qielutakhòntet lwánol Puîyus.
Puîyus goeth to Þe hills ond (to Þe) castlen.

This sentence can also be restated as:
Xhthènteqhe qielutakhòntet lwánòlutakh Puîyus.
Xhthènteqhe qielutakhaîqhor lwánol Puîyus.
Xhthènteqhe qielutakhaîqhor lwánòlutakh Puîyus.

Locative phrases after –ontet and –aiqhor and the others carry the potential for ambiguity.

Xhthènteqhe lyiikhaxhnalwaqielutakhòntet lwánol qúra.
Þe viceroy king goeth to his three hills ond castlen;
Þe viceroy king goeth to his three hills ond (his three) castlen.

The sentence could mean either of these.
Also, consider this ambiguity. Possessive pronoun prefixes plus a conjunction:


Teiqhalwánolòntet qiêl
His castlen ond his hills, ør
His castlen ond Þe hills.

Babel has no separate word that means X or Y or possible both or X among others, X and the rest. One must use the khleîxhme, the ingeminate case.

Xhthènteqhe qielutakhòntet lwánol lwánol pfhu púsa.
I wended towards Þe hills or the castles or possibly both.
Xhthènteqhe qiêlutakh aqhus lwánol pfhu púsa.
I wended towards Þe hills ond the castles among other things.
Subject Dropping

No, let’s put that into a box

Subject Dropping

A complete Babel sét sentence consists of a predicate. Isn’t that box lovely? The predicate may have objects in the appropriate case and subjects in the right case.

Wtsátim Puîyus.
Puîyus is green.
Jaê Puîyus.
Puîyus looks about.
Tsèfheir Puîyus.
Puîyus carries something somewhither.

Note, my little ones, that in the last two xhméja sentences that the language of beasts supplied an object complment or a location in order to complete the sense. Babel does not always require that as such can be implied from context.

Babel does not telick or volitional sentences that lack a subject, that is, pure predicate sentences unless it is an unmarked irrealis or a form of the deferential mode or ól, which is already inflected for the subject.

Wtsátìm!
Be green!
Wtsátimopaingakh.
Forgivë me, but I am green.
Wtsátimopaingakh púsa.
I myself am green.
Ólakh.
I exist.
Ólakh qé pi.
I indeed exist.

In poesy and music, the subject is occasionally omitted when it is obvious. This is seen as an extremely informal use of language, as Babel really likes both a predicate and a subject, and there can be some confusion with non-marked irrealis moods. Your Grandfather Pátifhar used to chastise the youth of the generation when I dwelt among mortal men for our informal use of language.

Xhthènteqhe Puîyus.
Puîyus goeth.
Ùtakhi Khatlhantikhùlkha.
Enters Khatlhàntikh.
Í xhmir Eilasaîyanor.
Goeth towards Eilasaîyanor.
Seîjae’ Éfhelìnye xhroe.
Sees Éfhelìnye.

This reminds me of a song from when I was only a few eternities of age.

Ólakh per jaê Jhàsqewa xhroe kùxha kae khnirlìyejikh.
I see Raven kißing Þe girls.

But musical tone distinguishes Þe following sentences:

Ólakh per jaê Jhàsqewa xhroe. Kùxha khnirlìyejikh.
I see Raven. Kißes Þe girls.

Ólakh per jaê Jhàsqewa xhroe. Kuxhà khnirlìyejikh!
I see Raven. Kiß Þe girls!
Ólakh per jaê Jhàsqewa xhroe. Kuxhá khnirlìyejikh?
I see Raven. Kißes Þe girls?

The first meaning is the most likely. The second is extremely informal. The third is possible, but easily distinguished by tone.

Babel has two sets of redundant pronominal inflexions. One of them inflects to show the subject and sometimes the object, and the other set is used for the indirect object. Pronominal supplementation oftwhen has the connotation of the predicate’s being humble, meek, shy, or bashful, thus pronominal supplementation is often called the humble construction or the humiliative construction. The exact rendering of it, however, does not always have to include the word humble. For instance, both sets of sentences below are grammatical:

Jaê khleit jin.
I see you.
Joîjae khleit jin.
I see you. I humbly see you.
Jiîkhmír Puiyùsejikh jin.
I love Puîyus.
Khmír Puiyùsejikh jin.
I love Puîyus. I humblye love Puîyus.

Qiêl Puiyusàswaor.
Khniêqiel Puiyusàswaor.
Puîyus hath hills.
Khmùqrau tepoxhmi kú.
Qraû tepoxhmi kú.
He teaches something to us.

However, the following sentences, wherein the pronominal prefixes indicate subject and object but either a subject or an object is missing, I was taught were ungrammatical.

Joîkhmír.
Love ya.
Jiîkhmír Puiyùsejikh.
Love Puîyus.
Khmùqrau kú.
Teaches us.

These jhùfhra sentences are certainly understandable, the meaning is clear because of the redundancy pronouns. And yet Grandfather Pátifhar and the Vestal Virgins who taught me told me that there was always a missing element unto them, even though from time to time one finds such sentences in songs and poetries and sometimes in very informal situations. I have heard you, Éfhelìnye, and sometimes Akhlísa and her Sisters saying such pàsqo sentences and using just redundancy pronouns and leaving out the subject, but I do not believe that such language is considered the Emperor’s Babel.

I should note, that sometimes in rapid speech one uses the redundancy pronoun and then realizes that one has to change the number or person of the object or subject. The result is that sometimes the predicate, object, and subject don’t quite agree.

Jiîjae kúyejikhing … kúyejikhul lwánòlaloi pú … tepu …
I … we (pú … tepu) saw him (jii·) … them in Þe castle …

Syntax

Babel has

Sorry

Syntax!!!

Babel has four parts of speech: the participle, the personal pronoun, and relative pronoun, and the particle. Participles can be substances or ideas or actions or descriptions. They can take tense and number and be modified by particles, or inflexions. Tòngqe personal pronouns and relative pronouns are a small group of words that point out other objects, and they can only take a few inflexions. Participles carry out all grammatical functions, of vocatives and honorifics and causitives, and adverbial prepositions, and cases, and deictics, and inseperable possession, and syntax markers, and emphasis, and clause markers. Particles either preceed or follow the participle they modify, and they may only be used in a certain order. They are affixes, suffixes and prefixes, but some of them can be separated from their modifier.

Úxha Puîyus.
Puîyus is blue.
Jaê’ okháxei xhroe’ Éfhelìnye.
Éfhelìnye sees the birds.

The construct case in the last example is made up of two elements, okháxei and xhroe which marks the construct case. It is all considered a single inflexion, a single word, even though it is written as two words, and pronounced that way also, for as a single word it would be pronounced as okháxeîxhro-e or something of the sort.

Predicates come first, then objects, then subjects.

Babel employs reduplication for emphasis, repetition, or for the superlative sense.

Khniêr khniêr Puiyòsejikh Éfhelìnye pajetlhatlhamaxúngatser jaiqráyiîngta.
Éfhelìnye kept kissing Puîyos even though her honored Mother does not desire it.

Stélar xhmoe’ Éfhelìnye xhmoe.
Éfhelìnye is a princess.
Popaingate stélar xhroe’ Éfhelìnye.
Éfhelìnye seems to be a princess.
Sopaingate stélar xhroe’ Éfhelìnye.
Éfhelìnye becomes a princess

[Scribbled on the side of the page]
Did I already talk about how singleness is discussed? Puîyos may have some difficulty in understanding the distinction between a participle plural and singular and massive participles. Singleness can be expressed in the absolutive case ending –upwar as well as the affixes tsena- and -ing. Tlhèfho are viceroy kings, but tsenàtlhefho and tlhèfhoxing is a king, Jhpaîpa khlopetèsqral are pious and obedient ballerinas while tsenajhpaîpa khlopetèsqral or jhpaîpaxing khlopetèsqral is a pious and obedient ballerina.

So, for to review:

PREDICATE EXPERIENCERS!!!

Predicate experiencers are not really marked for case. Predicate experiencers may follow another predicate experiencers. Let’s use examples.

Aîra’ Eiyuláriye kexhetlhi Kàrijoi.
Kárjoi hight her Eiyulárie.
Khlájar ijótlha xhroe’ áxha kúxing.
He paints the whispering mountains red.

The conjuctive particles are able to imply an unmarked case.

Eûxi’ Éfhelìnye xhroe xhnoipe Fhermáta xhroe = Eûxi’ Éfhelìnye xhroe xhnoipe Fhermáta
The dance of Éfhelìnye and of Fhermáta = the dance of Éfhelìnye and Fhermáta.
Qir ójo xhnoipe qir ijótlha = qir ójo xhnoe ijótlha.
In Þe water ond in Þe whispering mountains = in Þe water ond whispering mountains
Kó kus í xhnoike kus khníjur = kó kus í xhnoike khníjur
Hee who came ond he who sang = hee who came ond sang

The particles for the vocative and irrealis cases may be unmarked by changing their rising or rising-falling musical tone to a falling one.

Puiyùs! Éfhelinyè! Qìr poâ ì!
Puîyus! Éfhelìnye! Come here!

And in such wise did mine Abbá, your Grandfather Thiêfhilos instruct me in whilom days many, many generations ago.

Thus my Mother wrote out for me, and so I copied out into my notebook.