Apple sentences (Zaslon)

This content pertains to version 9c of Ŋarâþ Crîþ.
It is now outdated as the current version differs from this version.

A translation of 「りんごを食べたい58文」 (“58 ‘I want to eat an apple’ sentences”) by Zaslon, used to help develop grammar.

1. 私はりんごを食べる．

Yes, the original sentences use U+FF0E (fullwidth full stop) as a period instead of U+3002 (ideographic full stop).

If we want to make it clear that the action is habitual (as this sentence was interpreted by Ziphil’s translation into Shaleian), then we can use the following:

2. 私はりんごを食べた．

Now we use past tense. With the direct subject suffixes, this implies the perfective aspect as well.

3. 彼はりんごを食べている．

If we wanted to distinguish the progressive action from other interpretations arising from the imperfective aspect, then we can say the following:

Note that the original sentences distinguish between he (「彼」) and she (「彼女」), but Ŋarâþ Crîþ makes no such distinction.

4. 彼女はりんごを食べ終わっている．

We use the terminative prefix ⟦er-⟧. Note that this is different from the cessative prefix ⟦car-⟧.

I wanted the terminative prefix to be ⟦ar-⟧ by analogy with NCS6 ar to, toward, but that would have made it homophonous with ⟦car-⟧ in perfective forms.

5. 彼女はりんごを食べ終わっていた．

The default aspect is perfective in the past tense, so in order to express the past imperfective, we need to use the inverse affixes.

6. 私の妻はりんごを食べたことがある．

We use the verb ⟨ŋačat⟩ to cross to indicate the experiential aspect.

7. 私の妻はりんごを毎日食べる．

The speaker is talking about one particular person, so the subject is singular, but everything else is generic as the sentence describes a general fact about that person.

8. 私と私の妻は昨日りんごを食べた．

It’s coordination time! Ŋarâþ Crîþ has special versions of coordinating clitics that are fused with pronouns. In this case, ⟨=’cjo⟩ means and I.

9. 私と私の妻は6日前にりんごを食べた．

We use ⟨=’po⟩ to indicate the duration between the event in question and ‘now’ (as implied by the third-person generic argument).

10. 彼らは明日りんごを食べる．

The verb is now in the present perfective.

11. 彼らは6日後にりんごを食べる．

Same business as Sentence #9.

12. 彼女らは3日間りんごを食べている．

The original source has the note （食事としてりんごだけを食べている）, translating to (they ate only apples for their meals).

Note that this is a valid way to translate the sentence:

but implies that the process of eating apples for their meals has a goal.

13. 彼女らはりんごを5分間食べ続けている．

The original source has the note （りんごを食べる所要時間に5分かかっている）, translating to (the time taken to eat the apples is five minutes). I interpret this remark to mean that ‘they’ in Example #12 have been eating apples for five minutes continuously, while ‘they’ in Example #11 have not been eating apples for three days without breaks (rather, when they ate something, what they ate was apples).

5 minutes is approximately 7.89 cenðor. Round that up to 8.

14. 彼は常にりんごを食べている．

The original source has the note （四六時中ずっとりんごを食べている）, translating to (he eats apples all day and all night).

⟨šinen ðês⟩ means at all occurrences of some event, or more simply, every time, as in he is eating apples every time he returns from school. Therefore, it is not the appropriate term to use here.

Interestingly, Ziphil’s translations into Shaleian skip #12 – 14.

15. りんごが3つある．

It is entirely possible to omit ⟨von⟩ in this case.

16. りんご達がテーブルの上にある．

In this sentence, the relational ⟨il⟩ is used predicatively.

17. 誰かがあのりんごを食べてしまった．

The original source has the note （その結果，あのりんごは今はない）, translating to (as a result, that apple is no longer here).

For comparison, Ziphil’s Shaleian translation uses the present tense and continuous aspect, focusing on the fact that the apple is no longer present.

18. 誰かがこのりんごを食べそうだ．

The original source has the note （推量）, translating to (inference). In Ŋarâþ Crîþ, this concept is expressed with the auxiliary verb ⟨cenmirat⟩.

19. 誰かがこのりんご，そのりんご，あのりんごを食べたそうだ．

The original source has the note （伝聞）, translating to (hearsay).

This is awkward to translate into Ŋarâþ Crîþ because Japanese has a three-way demonstrative distinction while Ŋarâþ Crîþ has only two.

Ziphil’s Shaleian translation omits sentences #18 and 19.

20. りんごがひとつもない．

A straightforward translation from the Japanese sentence.

21. 私はりんごを食べない．

The original sentence translates to I do not eat apples. Ŋarâþ Crîþ has no single negative marker. Instead, we use a suppletive negative here.

22. 私はりんごを食べられない．

The original sentence translates to I cannot eat an apple. It has the note （りんごがないので状況的に食べられない）, translating to (can’t eat an apple in this situation because there are none to eat).

23. 私はりんごを床に落とした．

We use the causative prefix on the verb meaning to fall to derive to drop. Since ⟨cjašit⟩ is semitransitive, its dative argument stays as is in ⟨docjašit⟩, while the nominative argument becomes an accusative argument to make room for the cause.

24. りんごが床に落ちた．

This time without the causative.

25. りんごは食べられない．

The original source has the note （りんごの性質として，可食でなくなった）, translating to (in terms of the apple’s characteristics, it has become inedible).

26. 私はりんごを食べたい．

TODO: should the object be singular or generic in this case?

27. 私はりんごを買いたい．

The same matter as with Example #26.

28. このりんごは汚い．

⟨genat⟩ is used specifically for food or water.

29. このりんごは綺麗ではない．

⟨iširit⟩ can be translated as not un-.

30. あのりんごは食べられそうだ．

Nothing truly new here.

31. あれはりんごではない．

Unlike its antonym ⟨varit⟩, ⟨cor⟩ is a relational. A similar situation occurs with the verb ⟨censit⟩ and the relational ⟨ema⟩.

32. これはりんごではなくみかんだ．

We use two independent clauses chained together.

33. あなたはみかんを食べるか？

The object is in the generic number because this is asking about a general fact about a listener.

34. はい，私はみかんを食べます．

⟨vil⟩ is the short numeral for one, but it also functions as an interjection.

35. あなたはみかんを食べないのですか？

As usual, a roundabout way to get around the lack of negation in Ŋarâþ Crîþ.

36. ええ，私はみかんを食べません．

⟨vil⟩ asserts that what was questioned is true, working more like Japanese はい than English yes.

37. あなたはみかんを食べたかった．ですよね？

To create a tag question, the tailp ⟨šan⟩ is used. Note that a tag question ends with a question mark but does not begin with the headp ⟨ša⟩.

38. いいえ，私はみかんを食べたくはありません．

This answer indicates merely the lack of desire to eat a tangerine, not a desire to avoid eating it. The latter would be expressed as:

39. あなたはりんごもみかんも食べないのですか？

To refrain from eating apples or tangerines is to not eat either fruit. To refrain from eating apples and tangerines is to eat at most one of them.

40. いや，私はりんごを食べます．

Which matters here.

41. 私はみかんを食べない．だから，みかんは食べられない．

The original source has the note （受け身の否定）, translating to (negation of a passive).

42. りんごは食べることができない．なぜなら，りんごは綺麗ではないから．

The second clause in the sentence is a so-clause that has been insubordinated.

43. りんごは汚い．一方で，みかんは綺麗だ．

⟨fenrat⟩ means clean in general, such that it can act as the antonym of both ⟨velcit⟩ and ⟨genat⟩.

44. みかんを食べましょうよ？

The original source has the note （勧誘）, translating to (invitation).

45. いいえ，お断りします．

This is the canonical way to turn down an offer.

46. あそこでみかんを食べろ．りんごは食べるな．

Or more concisely:

47. りんごを頂いても宜しいですか？みかんは差し上げます．

I might have misinterpreted this sentence. I’m not that good with Japanese honorifics.

48. 私は「りんごは食べるな，みかんを食べろ」と言った．

We use a direct quotative particle because we are quoting direct speech.

49. あなたはりんごを食べろと言うのですか？

We now use an indirect quotation. The quotation marks are still necessary.

50. 貴様はりんごを食べたいと言った．

The personal deixis inside an indirect quotation is the same as that outside of the quotation.

51. 私はりんごを食べたいと言った覚えがない．

Here, ⟨rjotat⟩ is used to mean fail to.

52. あなたは確か「私はりんごを食べたい」と言ったはずだ．

We return to direct quotation here.

53. 私はもしかしたらそう言ったかもしれない．

For the demonstrative pronoun, we use ⟨fetja⟩, which refers to an idea or speech, rather than ⟨ela⟩ or such.

54. あなたは絶対に私に対して「りんごを食べたい」と言った．

The past ending ⟦-þ⟧ and the assertive tailp ⟦þal⟧ dissimilate into ⟨-s tal⟩.

55. 彼は私にりんごを食べさせる．

When the causative of ⟨mênčat⟩ is taken:

• The causer of the action takes the nominative case.
• The nominative argument of ⟨mênčat⟩ (i.e. the one eating) now takes the accusative case.
• The accusative argument of ⟨mênčat⟩ (i.e. the thing being eaten) now takes the dative case.

56. みかんは私に食べられていない．

We use ⟨aliþ⟩ something other than for this purpose. This noun is used as the possessee in a possessive construction. In our case, the possessor is a first-person pronoun, so we can simply use the possessive clitic ⟨=’pe⟩ without specifying the possessor explicitly.

57. りんごは彼によって私に食べさせられた．

This turns out to be surprisingly straightforward since Ŋarâþ Crîþ does not have a passive voice.

58. ここには何もない．

⟨eši šino ceła⟩ would assume that other things exist but are somewhere else. This is probably true, but we avoid assuming that anyway.