Archive for the ‘grammar’ Category

Relative Clauses in Dairwueh

Saturday, September 17th, 2022

 I have previously given a short introduction to relative clauses in Dairwueh. Let's up the ante a bit.

Resumptive pronouns in relative attributes

Since the relativizing verb does not carry (much) information about the syntactical role that the referent has in the subclause, resumptive pronouns are often used. Some dialects and varieties of Dairwueh have a resumptive pronoun stem ner- (from a historical nez, the fricative popping back in some forms). Most use the neuter pronoun stem, but inflected for gender - the capital literary form specifically uses the t-stem version of the nominative and accusative.

A peculiar thing about the resumptive pronoun is that it can even be used for the subject of a subsequent subclause, as if this were how to form two subclauses in English:

the man who plays the guitar and he sings.

Weird restriction

Consider an utterance like 'don't reject applicants for being too boring'. In English this cannot be rephrased as 'don't reject applicants who are too boring', since this alters the meaning significantly. A strict reading has the rephrasing signify that no one that is too boring must be rejected, whereas the first only means that boringness must not influence the decision.

In Dairwueh, use of the irrealis form of the subordinating verb is used, among other things, for this particular structure.

The irrealis form can also be used to communicate a purely irrealis subclause, e.g. 'those who would do so-and-so'. To enforce the "purely irrealis" reading, a resumptive pronoun is used. To enforce the purely 'for being X' reading,the subordinate verb may be irrealis instead of infinitive - or in some varieties, a demonstrative pronoun is placed before the relative verb.

Finally, the irrealis form of the relative verb can also express an indirect question: I wonder the men who will sing -> I wonder whether the men will sing.

Use of the interrogative pronoun before a relative subclause requires irrealis in some dialects, and requires irrealis for present tense in many dialects.

Adjectives have a similar function as well when using the irrealis participle marker e-...-šis on them.

Happy birthday to Koa!

Saturday, September 17th, 2022

This week on September 13th we had the world's first ever Koa Day celebration, including not one but two cakes: one improvised by Callie and me, and the other rather more artfully facilitated by Olga.




Someone also sent flowers! It was quite a lovely feeling for Koa to be seen/acknowledged/appreciated like this after so many years of my sort of being in the closet about it.

ALSO, and perhaps most importantly, there is now a Koa birthday song! It's just a direct translation of the American song, but still. Unsurprisingly we've got an extra syllable at the start of each line which means we have to start with an 8th note triplet, but it still works:

Pai Náute Lolo
Pai náute lolo la se
Pai náute lolo la se
Pai náute lolo, X mila
Pai náute lolo la se

The syntax here is so straightforward I think we can dispense with the interlinear, but I did want to say something about náute. Since nau means "give birth to, bear," the most accurate translation of "birth" from the point of view of the offspring would in fact be panáute: the occasion of being born, not the occasion of giving birth (way more on that here). In terms of actual usage, though, it's a needlessly granular distinction to have to make...and would throw off the meter even more, so clearly aesthetics are going to have win out here.

It does raise the question, though, of whether it's ever actually a helpful or meaningful distinction -- súsote "kisses given" vs pasúsote "kisses received," -- since all the arguments are represented in the instance being described regardless of which way way around you turn it. My instinct is maybe not, at least in a real human language. Not that it should be forbidden where it happens to add meaning, but also not prescribed.

The Secret World of Conlanging – An Overview of Tolkien’s “Secret Vice”

Thursday, September 1st, 2022

Robin Rowan is a senior undergraduate student studying Spanish at Arizona State University online and previously earned a BA in History from Auburn University. As a life-long science fiction fan, she has always been fascinated by the concept of conlangs. When a general requirement course in linguistics called for a final project there was no question as to what the topic would be. After the course ended, she decided to expand the project to give a greater overview of conlangs from the perspective of a non-conlanger. Robin currently resides in Alabama but has lived in Tennessee, Illinois, and California, and has travelled extensively in Europe and the Middle East. After graduation Robin plans to earn her TOEFL certificate and continue her travels.

Abstract

This essay provides a brief overview of conlanging from the perspective of a non- conlanger. It clarifies what a conlang is from this same perspective and places conlanging in a historical context, especially as regards what has motivated people to create conlangs and the disdain with which some people have viewed such efforts. The terminology of conlangs is presented with a concise examination of several conlangs and their histories regarding how and why they were created and by whom. These include Esperanto, Klingon, and Láadan. Research included academic sources, internet search, and personal correspondence among others. The usefulness of conlangs as a means to study the nature of language and communication, as well as how conlangs create authenticity and depth in television, movies, and literature, is explored. While there may or may not ever be a true “universal language” constructed language, the value of conlanging and it’s popularity can be expected to continue.

Version History

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License

Things I would like to research or develop

Monday, August 29th, 2022

A while ago, in a post I said something like "more research required" regarding a particular feature of Swedish grammar. This made me think of things I'd like to research, but which I probably never will. These would all be at least somewhat original research.

Linguistics

A variety of tiny syntactical and typological questions that have occurred to me over the years:

  • Does the Swedish relative pronoun or relativizer "som" permit exceptional coordination over gaps?
  • How uniform are the rules for partitive-vs-accusative among speakers of Finnish?
  • What case do speakers of Swedish prefer for the complement of a copula in contexts where the subject of the copula is a non-subject syntactically? ("We will let you be you").
  • How does congruence and number work in coordinated-over-gaps compounds in Swedish?
  • Do speakers of English naturally prefer the accusative for complements of the copula? I am pretty sure that examples like "it is difficult to be me" and a few others showcase that accusative in fact is the natural case that everyone prefers, and that most "it is I"-speakers have a cultivated and artificial case selection that fails whenever a single complication arises. The test could be one of "select the correct case" with sentences with a gap, and measuring response times. Needs to start out with simple clauses and progress into increasingly long ones, with some of them there only to be able to calibrate for expected response time. Comparably complex structures also need to be used.
  • Syntactical differences between standard Finland Swedish and middle  Ostrobothnian.
  • Figuring out the full set of sound changes of Björkö dialect. (Conlang idea: apply all these sound changes to late proto-norse and create a 'fully björkö' dialect.)
  • How common is it for existential statements to have quirks in terms of congruence, case marking, word order, ...)
  • To what extent are 'than' and 'as' (and 'än' and 'som' as element of comparison) objectively speaking prepositions in the grammars of speakers of English and Swedish - even among those who claim they exclusively are conjunctions.
  • To what extent can we find evidence that the rule against definite form after 'denna/detta/dessa' in prescriptivist Swedish is made-up to spite southern and southwestern Swedes?
    • Swedish has two patterns for forming "this": "denna" and "den här". (Both are further inflected for gender and number.) 'Den här' is always followed by the definite form of the adjective as well as the definite form of the noun. 'Denna' is - in prescriptive usage - followed by definite adjectives but indefinite nouns.
    • In texts predating the middle of the 18th century, you find variation on this: both the definite and indefinite noun are used in the nominative. (Other cases only take the definite.)
    • 'Denna' is predominantly used in the south and southwest, 'den här' is predominantly used everywhere else.
    • "denna + indef" quickly gains ground in books printed in the "den här"-area towards the end of the 18th century, and basically becomes mandatory in writing in the 19th century, but "denna + def" never goes extinct in the south and southwest.
    • There seems to be at least some 18th century correspondences between publishers that hint at this actually being an intentional change to turn southern Swedish "wrong".

Theology


  • It is my firm belief that even many apparently philosemitic Christian clergymen in their sermons plant the seeds for antisemitism. The research would require the following steps:
    Finding a corpus of sermons and sermon-like texts that in one way or another discuss Judaism and the Jews, and their role and their beliefs from a Christian p.o.v. In this corpus, statements that misrepresent Jewish beliefs in ways that may lead to negative perceptions about Judaism, and statements that use Jews as a negative example - when similar negative examples can be found within Christianity itself - have to be found, and the "actual" fact about Judaism needs to be verified. (Examples: does Judaism teach that all who are born non-Jewish will automatically burn in hell? I have heard this claim from Christians. I know it is false. It is often presented in order to prop up certain Christian dogmas and to make Christianity seem the compassionate alternative.)
    • The way in which such mistaken statements nurture antisemitism needs to be evaluated in some way, and the effect on listeners - both believers and non-believers alike - need to be estimated. 
    • Some measure as to how common this is would either reassure me that it's just a few bad apples, or confirm my own experience that it's fairly common.
  • it would also interest me to research the use of fabricated Jewish traditions to prop up Christian theology. It is not entirely uncommon for Christian preachers to claim that there is an ancient Jewish tradition about so-and-so, and this tradition explains some detail in the NT or even later Christian traditions. Sometimes it might hold up, most of the time it doesn't.
  • It would greatly interest me to find examples of humour in the Bible, in the Talmud, in the midrashes and targums, in the baraitha literature, and even in more general literature from ancient Mesopotamia - that have failed to be identified as humour. I am convinced that the cultural gulf between modern humans and those of antiquity is so great that we may fail to appreciate just how some of the statements in the literature mentioned above very well may been intended as jokes to convey some point. Many Jewish scholars - and even fairly "average yeshiva-level" students seem to be aware of some of these jokes, but secular scholars often seem to fail to spot such jokes. I am not saying this is a universal problem, but I get the impression that there may be a fair share of humour that no one's identified as such. It is not inconceivable that greek philosophers as well have jokes that have been missed.

Music

  • Tymoczko has (and possibly other theorists have) identified that modulation and chord progressions are very similar phenomena. He doubts that listeners could manage keeping any kind of track of a third similar level. Using, say, pentatonic scales embedded in diatonic scales embedded in uneven extended meantone chromatic scales could provide a way of creating exactly that structure. Extended meantone chromaticism could also be used for extending the chord_progression-modulation complex to a chord_progression-modulation-metamodulation complex.
    • What kind of notion of "keeping track of" do we have in mind?
  • To what extent can listeners appreciate functional harmony using isoharmonic triads that are not predominantly 4:5:6 (and its utonal version). Do they need to be rooted at powers of 2? Does 8:11:14 do a better job  than 6:7:8, 7:9:11, 7:10:13 or 9:11:13 because 8:11:14 is rooted at 2³? How important is root motion of 3/2? (I believe the tritone substitution G7 > F# shows that a root motion of a fifth is not necessary.)
  • Can asymmetric chords in the wholetone scale help facilitate a functional tonality in it?
  • Temperaments such as mavila warp familiar relationships. Can this warping be 'eased in' by modulating into successively more warped regions of a very warped temperament while fully maintaining the relationships - i.e. the relation between root and third still feels as though it passes through the cycle of fifths in the same way?
  • Figuring out how to use sushalf sharp4-chords as an extension to normal harmonic praxis? (Notice the half sharp - not♯.)
  • Can we somehow formalize the "similarity" between the use of chords in functional harmony and jins in maqam. Can we further develop a notion of "functional melody"??

 Maths and CS

  • How well can games make players get used to weird geometries and topologies?
  • Can a player discern things about the geometry of a game from hearing warped intervals in the music? 
  • Comparing the complexity of a variety of geometrical problems in different types of geometries.

Design of things

  • A string instrument with plastic frets ('fishing line'). The frets are attached to two beams that are easy to attach to the neck. At least one of the beams needs to be small enough to fit under the strings.

Software design:

  • Some cursed versions of gomoku.
  • Improve my pitch perception practice app
  • Some basic topology/geometry toolkit, especially with the intention of visualizing some of the topologies and geometries present in microtonal theory
  • A set of scripts that utilize some sound change applier and git to make managing multiple a priori conlangs easy.
  • An AI for writing microtonal harmony and counterpoint.


A Conreligious Practice: Alphabetic Thread Manipulation

Monday, August 22nd, 2022

Among some of the more ritualistic Bryatesle-Dairwueh religions, a devotional practice involving strings of wool and the hand has developed.

Strings (regionally, this varies from ribbons of about half an inch width to actual strings) are wrapped around the hand in order to imitate the shapes of letters.

Words are written through repeated application of this. This is done in order to emphasize important words in a prayer or meditation. Very few would write an entire sentence this way, but sometimes, groups collaborate in writing full hymns on their hands.

Varieties

The first  main difference is between ribbon-users and string-users. Naturally, ribbons and strings behave slightly differently, with ribbons not permitting quite as sharp 'turns', thus leading to significant differences in the notional 'fonts' they use.

Not a single tradition tolerates both ribbons and strings; they all are strictly one or the other. All manner of justifications for their favoured type exist. Their opinion of the other group is not violently hostile, but always somewhat negative. However, negative opinions may exist between different groups that share the ribbon (or string), and sometimes over purely technical details: linen vs. wool, blue vs. red, patterned or plain ribbon, woven or crotcheted ribbons, single thread or three threads? All threads of the same colour or different colours?

Ribbon-users tend to have different colours on the two sides, and they may consider which side is visible to be of some importance. Ribbons can also use folds that are difficult to form with strings. Strings can have tighter loops.

Weaving beneath and above fingers, forming angles, using the palm, etc are all parts of this. Both sides of the hand are used in some varieties, whereas in some, only one side is used.

In some traditions, letters are also tied with strings around the hands of the dead, usually one letter on top of the other, so that the outermost letter is the first letter of the word. Which words are used tends to vary strongly.

Really strict beliefs

Although these practices are far from universal, in some areas they are considered important. Special importance is ascribed to the letters tied on the hands of the dead, and they are often considered passwords for the afterlife. (The tradition, however, rather seems to have originated as a way of conveying messages to angels and relatives and God himself, rather than as passwords.)

This of course may cause problems for people who lose a hand or who have lost fingers. Losing a hand in such a way that the hand is physically 'available' often leads to performing this ritual before burying the hand. Some traditions are strict about which hand the letters should be formed on, and so losing 'the other hand' may be less important. In traditions where which particular hand it is doesn't matter so much, it still happens that people bury the first hand with letters in case the other were to be entirely lost in the future.

Loss of fingers may also cause issues, and grafting wooden sticks into the hands of the dead as a solution occurs. Entire wooden hands are often sometimes used.

Further developments

Hand-shaped growths on trees sometimes get similar words tied o nthem. These are not of a sign-post nature (signposts are either cut out or chiseled or some other method), but purely ritualistic. Such growths are sometimes also buried as a message to the other side.



Detail #431: A Strategy for making Unreliable Morphology

Sunday, August 21st, 2022

Consider a system - maybe case, something else - where -n is e.g. a case marker. However, it is also a marker similar to the -n in English a/an.

Thus

I bought an car (an = acc)
a car is parked in my spot

but

I bought an apple
an apple a day keeps the doctor away

So, the only situation in which the case is visibly marked is whenever 'a' stands before a consonant. One could imagine a similar thing for, say, some marking on verbs (maybe plural marking or some tense marking on some verbs).

Real Language Examples: Traces of the Old Swedish Case System in Modern Swedish

Saturday, August 13th, 2022

övermåttan - exceedingly, over the measure(acc)
an example that well describes this essay.

Traces of the Old Swedish Case System in Modern Swedish

This article is mainly written as a potential source of inspiration for conlangers, especially those whose focus lie with naturalistic constructed languages. This comes with a caveat emptor: claims here may be incorrect. I have gone to some effort to verify stuff, but mistakes may have slipped by. With some additional effort on the part of the reader, it could perhaps suffice as a scholarly source. However, paradigms for Old Swedish, Old Norse and Old English are largely taken from wiktionary. Information about the extant or recently extinct case systems in dialects are hard to find reliable sources for.

I know of no previous list of all remnants of the case system in Swedish, and writing this has been kind of annoying. Every time I've thought I've had it entirely covered, an expression I haven't used for years rears its head, some expression in the newspaper catches my attention, I say something and realize one second later that it's yet another example, I hear someone speaking dialect come up with yet another example, ...

Swedish, much like English, has lost the old Germanic case system rather thoroughly. Both languages retain one case distinction - nominative vs. genitive, where the nominative mostly has taken over all the roles of the dative and accusative, but also partially some roles that the genitive previously has had. This is an interesting opposite to modern German (and Älvdalska) - where the genitive was lost but the others kept.

Unlike English, however, Swedish does keep a fair few traces of the dative and accusative, as well as a somewhat more robust trace of the genitive's previously wider function. Whether to consider the genitive a case or not in English and Swedish is tricky, but there may be slightly stronger reasons for doing so in Swedish.

Let's first quickly review the case system of modern Swedish, and contrast it with the case system of Old Swedish. The developments should be familiar to anyone with any knowledge of English historical linguistics. Several of my statements below are from this source.

Old Swedish and Case 

Old Swedish had a typical Germanic four case system: nominative, dative, accusative, genitive. The case system was never fully distinct, i.e. some case syncretism has always existed, at least for some cases in some genders. Oftentimes, only adjectives and articles would mark for case (much like modern German!), and these markers seem to have survived for longer than markers on the noun itself. The syncretism naturally also had less of an impact in any noun phrase were multiple words had different patterns of marking present on them, as the actual intended case in some sense could be triangulated from the noun and adjective markers.

    Morphology 

A complication that is shared with German, is that case morphology on adjectives varies by certain parameters (strong vs. weak, which mainly correlates with indefinite vs. definite). In addition, case morphology for definite nouns differed from indefinite nouns, and you get a wild variety of declensions with their own peculiarities. Definite nouns and indefinite adjectives carried the main load of case morphology.
 
There is an appendix at the end detailing the Old Swedish nominal and adjectival morphology. A detailed knowledge of it is not necessary to understand the remainder of this article. Besides, throughout the decline of the case system, it is fairly likely all manner of modified versions existed for short time-spans or regionally. Besides, we do also find changes between Old Norse and Old Swedish, where nouns change conjugation or whole conjugations change a bit. Largely, the system was preserved, but details did change.

The adjective morphology was in some sense simpler than the nominal morphology - almost all adjectives behave the same way all the time, using the same morphemes, etc.

Syntax

Much like in pretty much all other Indo-European languages ever, each preposition took some particular case, and the cases also sometimes affected the meaning of the preposition. It is hard (or expensive) to come by information on this. We should probably talk of adpositions rather than prepositions in Old Swedish and Old Norse, since they were much more frequently used as postpositions than they are today. Today, this nearly exclusively survives in a few fixed expressions.

Genitive expressions were originally head-initial, but this probably changed during the course of Old Swedish. Remnants of the postposed possessor still occurs with possessive pronouns even in the written language, but is increasingly considered dialectal. Swedes in Sweden really don't like anything actually conservative in the written language ever, and thus this will probably go extinct soon enough.

In properly old Norse, we find quirky case. I have not been able to find any source on whether this survived into Old Swedish. English of course has one neat retention: methinks.

We find in Old Swedish that the genitive can be used as an adverbial case, i.e. it is not restricted to adnominal and adpositional usages. Many modern retentions of the old genitive in fact reflect such usages, and this is often evident with a variety of adverbs pertaining to time or manner.

Modern Swedish and Case

Morphology

Modern Swedish has nominative vs. oblique solely in the pronouns - with possessives formed either as genitives or as possessive adjectives. This is somewhat similar to English. The noun is - like in English - simpler, having the nominative and the genitive, which is nearly invariably marked by -s*. The pronominal oblique is used after prepositions, before postpositions and as objects of verbs.

Nouns generally, but not always, correspond to the historical nominative form. A few exceptions where historical obliques won out exist. Modern nouns have one case-like marker:

-s is a clitic that goes on the last word of the NP that is the possessor. Thus "kungens halspastiller" ('the throat lozenges of the king'), kungen av Danmarks halspastiller ('the king of Denmark's throat lozenges'). A few conservative speakers and writers may prefer an older order where "the king's of Denmark throat lozenges" hold.**

The possessive suffix goes on the end of any inflected form of the noun, in an invariant form. It may not go on a stem if the stem deviates from the nominative. Nouns that already end in -s have a phonological rule that deletes the suffix. (I.e. we don't do any of that silly -s's-stuff.)

* The sole exceptions are marked by zero, and are nouns whose stem end in -s. The -s suffix can be attached after definite suffixes and numeral suffixes as well, giving e.g. sg: hus / huset-s, pl: hus / husen-s, sg: bil-s / bilen-s, pl: bilar-s, bilarna-s.

** (The canonical example is 'kungens av Danmark bröstkarameller', i.e. 'chest candies', but this just sounds weird to English speakers. Apparently they were aniseed-flavoured with some beetroot for colour.)

As for -s going on the final word of an NP, this means that something like

mannen som kom ins skor gnisslar
the man who came in's shoes squeak

is entirely acceptable in colloquial Swedish. SAG claim that some words, however, do not tolerate -s on it even in such positions, and include some personal pronouns in that class. Rewording seems the only reasonable solution in such cases - omitting the -s is not permissible. 

Syntax

In some varieties of Northern Swedish, the definite form sometimes is used in a way that seems as though it might be influenced by the Finnish accusative and partitive, or that in some other manner strongly deviates from the way it is done in Swedish. My dialect has some traces of this, but as it is strongly restricted by the lexicon (only a semi-closed class of nouns do this) and by semantics, rather than by syntax and semantics, I hesitate to call it a case as far as my dialect goes. It may be that it is more case-like in dialects further north. However, even then you have to account for how the definite seems to operate in any syntactic position even before the -s genitive.

The -s genitive is nowadays used besides adnominal and complemental possessives, as a stand-in for nouns (Peter's book was boring but Elof's was interesting), and with some restrictions with some prepositions.


The Case System in the Modern Swedish Pronouns

Morphology


I you (sg) he she it itcommon reflexive we you (pl) they
nom jag
du       
han
hon
det
den
--
vi
ni
de
acc mig
dig
honom
henne
det
den
sig
oss
er
dem
poss
min
mitt
mina

din
ditt
dina
hans
hennes
dess
dess

sin
sitt
sina

vår
vårt
våra

er
ert
era
deras

 

Itcommon is a gender that emerged in the 18th century, into which non-humans nouns that previously were masculines and feminines were moved. In modern Swedish, it is called 'utrum reale', sometimes just utrum or reale. Conservative dialects often retain the three-gender system.

As you might see, there are large similarities with English. Unlike English, however, the possessive pronouns for my, your, the reflexive, our and your (pl) have gender congruence. For this reason they're not considered case forms, but some form of possessive adjectives. NB: terminology on this varies from author to author.

Swedish also lacks the my/mine-distinction. "Mine" in some sense has some case-like properties that differentiate it from "my", thus presenting English with a two-genitive system. (I am here thinking of 'of mine' and such).

It, and itcommon sometimes get the genitive form dens, dets, but these are considered substandard or wrong. "Hons" as a possessive of "hon" does occur in some speakers idiolects, and of course anything like "jags", "hons", "hans", "vårts", etc can occur if you create a relative subclause for a genitive noun and force "jag", "han", "hon", etc to be the final word of the subclause, e.g. something like

the guy who talked faster than I's book
snubben som talade snabbare än jags bok

However, these will probably feel somewhat off to a significant number of speakers. (My personal view is that -s in Swedish and -'s in English are postpositions that go after an NP. These are ok for me in spoken Swedish, but not in written Swedish.)

Swedish has had a who/whom-distinction (ho/vem), but the oblique form has won out and hardly anyone even recognizes "ho" anymore. The last time it was used in print was in the 1940s in a hymn book for certain hymns from the early 19th century. The third person plural pronoun is nowadays in colloquial Swedish mostly "dom", with the de/dem-distinction still surviving in Finland. I am unaware if any colloquial speakers have any kind of three-way distinction between de/dem/dom. (Imagine how cool it would be to discover some Swedes having a tripartite alignment with 'dom' for intransitives or something like that!)

Historically, "han" was both the nominative and accusative. "Honom" was exclusively dative. Many dialects and almost all colloquial Swedish retain "han" for the accusative (and dative as well). I am unaware whether any speakers of any colloquial variety retain "honom" exclusively for the dative - this would be interesting. Some dialects have further analogized the masculine situation and merged "henne" into "hon", sometimes with even greater loss of oblique forms of the pronouns (tho' the obliques may be retained as emphatic forms; here, my dialect is weird, having emphatic nominatives and emphatic accusatives, yet being on the way to turning the accusative and emphatic accusative into optional adornments).

Examples by type

As mentioned, examples of the case system survive in fossilized phrases in Swedish. This strives to be an exhaustive list of such examples.Each type of example probably also has dialectal examples en masse in a variety of dialects. Because my dialect is a subtype of middle Ostrobothnian, this will be overrepresented.

1. Fossilized expressions with case morphemes

i ljusan låga - in bright flame
mitt på ljusan dag - in the middle of bright day
sova i godan ro - sleep in good calm
i gladan håg - "in a glad mind"

till väga - by (some) means, by way of ... mostly in the expression 'hur skall vi gå till väga' (how shall we go about something/by what means shall we proceed) and similar.
av daga - 'off/from day' - in the expression 'taga av daga' - to kill. ('to take away from (the) day')

i sinom tid - in its time

Basically often used to mean "after some time".

allom bekant - familiar to all
androm till varnagel - for others as a warning.

"Androm till varnagel" has probably been extinct, but saw a slight renaissance after being used in the title of a book.

ana argan list - suspect angry cunning

gammal i gårde - "old in the farm", i.e. experienced

man ur huse - "man out of house"

Mostly in the expression 'gå man ur huse', which expresses something so popular or controversial that people come out in the streets to protest or acquire the thing.

dra sina färde - pull one's voyage - to leave.

fara å färde - danger on voyage, 'danger skulking about'

med vett och vilje (normally 'vilja') - with knowing and will, 'knowingly and willingly'

till viljes - to will, i.e. "göra någon till viljes" - do someone to will, "to appease someone"

se i syne (sometimes generalized, giving höra i höre) - see in sight, but figuratively 'hallucinate a sight'.

se i andanom - to see/perceive "in spirit", apparently sometimes used for 'in one's imagination'.

med råge - with excess. "Råga" was the historical nominative, which is lost in the standard language (but retained in dialects).

2. Genitive usage in expressions of time and with prepositions

tids nog - 'soon enough'

Essentially "time.GEN enough".

There are a number of expressions where the genitive or the nominative are used, with a slight difference in meaning. Generally, the genitive will signify the most recent such, whereas the nominative will signify the upcoming one. Some of the forms are morphologically slightly exceptional - generally keeping an extra vowel that would be lost in the possessive genitive.

i morse - this morning
i kvälls - last evening
i lördags - last saturday (works with any weekday)
i somras - last summer
i höstas - last autumn
i våras - last spring
i vintras - last winter
i julas - last christmas
i påskas - last easter
?i pingstas - ?last pentecost
?i midsomras - ?last midsummer
*i fastlagstisdags - last lent tuesday
*i januaris - last january

I think I might have encountered reanalyzed use of these, i.e. people using "somras" as a shorthand for the nominative "(senaste) sommaren" when signifying the most recent summer, thus enabling things like "höstas var trög, våren blir säkert bättre" ('last autumn was slow, the spring certainly will be better'). My impression is that this is very marginal.

My dialect has this strange form for yesterday morning:

i gåron måronen (c.f. standard Swedish 'i går morse')

I am inclined to believe -on is a retention of some case marker, but sound changes seem to have garbled it a bit, and it thus becomes difficult to figure out what exact case it might have been. Also, it's been a bit difficult to find morphology for "igår" (yesterday), since this only seems to survive as a set phrase in all the cognate languages.

I am not sure how to feel about the fact that the above examples all have -st instead of -s in my dialect, whereas possessive genitives and the next examples all have -s in both the standard language and my dialect. This might suggest it originally was some other type of derivative morphology in the above examples.

Several somewhat established "places" and methods of movement and miscellanous fixed phrases still take the genitive after 'till':

till sjöss - by sea
till havs - by sea
till lands - on land,
till skogs - in the woods,
till fots - by foot,
till båts - by boat,
till hjuls - by wheel
till hands - available ('to hand')
till råds - for an advice ('to advice's')
till sängs (in bed, into bed)
till låns - for a loan, as a loan, borrowed
till livs - for nourishment (not 'alive')
(slå någon) till döds - (beat someone) to death
till nöds - "to need", often used to express 'as a last way out, as a sufficient but not really good substitute'
(alla) till lags - 'vara alla till lags' signifies 'satisfying everyone's demands'.
(illa/väl) till mods - being in a bad/good mood.
till  bords - aboard
till äventyrs - to adventure, more specifically 'unexpectedly'
tillbaks / tillbaka - back, in return.
till ords - in word(s).
(ta) till bruks - 'ta till bruks' signifies putting something to use.
till gårds - in(to) the yard.
till undantags - for an exception.
till vardags - for everyday use.
till buds - on offer.

"Till råds" is used in somewhat different ways in different expressions, mainly expressing the notion of 'consulting someone': ta till råds ('take for an advice'), fråga till råds ('ask for an advice'), etc.

?till stads - in (the) town (dialectal?)
?till bys - in the village

Literally "in (the) village", but idiomatically always used in the sense of 'being someone's guest' (dialectal?). "Vi var till bys" - 'we were on a social call, we were visiting someone'.

+till vagns - by wagon
?till peds - by bicycle
?till cykels - by bicycle,
?till sparks - by kicksled

I believe "till vagns" is extinct in the wild. The last two I'd use in dialect, but not in the standard language. Other prepositions, mainly nowadays turned into compounds:

utomlands - abroad
utom laga tid/laga bot/... - beyond legally mandated time/legal fines/...
inombords - on the inside
utombords - on the outside
med ens - at once, "immediately", literally "with one's"
motvalls - adjective signifying 'contrarian', "against the embankment'

medsols - "with sun's", i.e. clockwise
motsols - "against sun's", i.e. counterclockwise


Further, the 'hundreds of', 'dozens of', etc is formed using the genitive on the numeral no matter what syntactical role the NP has. However, the number has 'tal' (number, cognate with 'tell') as a suffix, which in turn is in the genitive. The noun itself is in the nominative, unless it is a possessor.

tiotals - 'tens of'
dussintals - 'dozens of'
hundratals - 'hundreds of'
tusentals - 'thousands of'
tiotusentals ...
hundratusentals ...
miljontals ...

Other obliques as object or after prepositions:

i min ägo - 'in my possession'
i hennes närvaro - 'in her presence'

Närvaro has been lexicalized as a nominative by now, so e.g. "närvaro är obligatorisk": presence is mandatory.

komma i delo - 'to get into a strong disagreement'

Del signifies 'part', but here, 'delo' simply is 'apart' or somesuch.

sätta å sido - put aside. "Å" is a semi-fossilized preposition in Swedish.
utan återvändo - without return
till salu - for sale
till fullo - fully ('to full')
till yttermera visso - to outermore wit ("in addition", "also")
till godo - for benefit, for gains, to (some kind of figurative or literal) credit
av ondo - of evil
i lönndom - in secret
till spillo - (something goes) to waste
i så måtto - to such an extent, to the extent, to what extent ('in so measure')
över måttan - exceedingly, 'over the measure'.
fatta posto - to occupy a position (c.f. the second meaning of 'take post')
under någons domvärjo - beneath someone's sword of judgement, "under someone's jurisdiction".

Some of these also appear in compound verbs: åsidosätta (put aside), tillgodogöra (to compensate, literally "to make for a benefit"), saluföra (literally "sale-lead", to market, to sell, to mongle).

3. Old genitive forms in certain types of expressions

Towns and villages whose names end in a vowel in some contexts get a suffixless genitive:

Åbo Hovrätt - Turku court of appeals
Vasa stadshus - the town hall of Vasa ('Vasa town house')
Visby mur - wall of Visby (Visby wall)

In other contexts, the -s is expected, e.g. "Åbos nyaste misstag" - the newest mistake of Turku.

The plural genitive marker -a appears on "lag" (law) in some expressions:

i laga ordning - in lawful order
laga förfall - lawfully valid excuse
i laga kraft, i laga tid, med laga stöd, med laga rätt - in lawful validity, in lawful time, with legal support, with legal right.

4. Ackusative (or oblique) forms that have become their own lexemes

Besides the already mentioned närvaro and ägo, another -varo word qualifies: tillvaro ('existence', especially in the sense of focusing on the quality of said existence).

Other examples include:

ande / anda

Ande signifies the spirit of a being. Anda is rather 'the spirit of a moment, movement, time'.

fura / furu

Fura is a specimen of pine, furu is pine, the material.

Apparently, several types of tree and wood have, at least dialectally, such pairs, e.g. björk/björke (birch), rönn/rönne (rowan), asp/aspe (aspen), en/ene (juniper), ek/eke (oak), where the -e-variant is the wood material, and the e-less-variant is the actual tree.

dag / dager

In Old Swedish, 'day' was nom: dagher, acc: dagh, dat: {dæghi, daghi}), gen: daghs. Dag nowadays means 'day', dager means 'daylight'.

mosse / mossa

These are cognate to English 'moss'. A mosse is a type of swamp, mossa is moss.

grädde / grädda

Cream, cream of the crop/the social elite.

Although this is not an example of case, a similar development has happened with the distinction between trä ('wood', as in the material) / träd ('tree', as in the plants) , where a former definite form ('träð') has become a new indefinite singular form with a slight change in meaning, and we thus have the historically 'double definite' "trädet" (the tree), vs. "trä(e)t" (the wood).

5. Datives and obliques in place names

Topononomy will be overrepresented in prepositional phrases, and it's likely for oblique forms to feed back into the nominative for this reason. Several places have retained the plural dative - as their only form, replacing the nominative - for this reason, here present either as -om or -um:

Sundom - strait (sund is cognate to 'sound')
Husom - house (hus is an obvious cognate)
Pörtom - pörte is a type of house with a smoke hatch rather than a chimney
Bodom - hut ('bod')
Husum - house, again. -um and -om might have been in free variation
Kvänum - seems disputed, probably rather *Kvädnhem, so the qued home, from the name of a river.
Lerum - clay? (Unlikely?)
Vattjom - ?
Skedom - spoon?
Torrom - ?
?Salom - halls?
Skadom - damages
Lökom - onion?
Mjällom - in modern Swedish, mjäll is dandruff. I doubt this is the correct etymology.
Östmarkum - east land ('mark')
Västmarkum - west land ('mark')
Arlom - ?

The singular dative -e may also have survived, but since -e can appear in nominatives as well (an old masculine marker), this is harder to spot on a map. I imagine Tjärne, Höje, and several -inge may have such an origin, but it is hard to weed out false positives with this.

The singular oblique -a also appears:

Grundsunda - shallow strait.gen
Kasabacka - pile hill.gen
Bergsboda - mountain hut.gen
Ytterboda - outer hut.gen
Tobacka - ? hill.gen
Alberga - Alder mountain.gen
Vänoxa - friendly ox.gen (?) - I bet there's some other etymology there
Kårkulla - ? hill.gen
Torsholma - Thor's islet.gen
Björnholma - Bear islet.gen
Västansunda - west strait
Aspa - aspen.gen?
Fjälla? - mountain.gen
Stavsudda - staff ness
Haga - hedge or meadow (from hage). Cognate to The Hague.


-u/-o are also an oblique form that may be present in at least a few place names:
Korpo, Nagu, Sagu, Sorpo?

It is conceivable that some toponyms ending in -an are historical accusative adjectives, but since -an also is a nominalizer in more modern Swedish, this is hard to be sure of. Whether Långu outside of Stockholm is a dialectally altered "Långö" (long island), or an oblique form is hard to tell. I am not aware of many islands whose names are just adjectives, (whereas such names seem fairly common for lakes and rivers).

Pedersöre, Örebro, Öresund may contain a dative of "ör" (c.f. Helsingör, Lappörarna, Bockören, Kungsör, Skanör) . Linde probably has a dative suffix. Sörberge and Norrberge might well be a dative as well (but might also be a reduced "-berget"), in the vicinity of those you also find some -ede (which might be dative of -ed), and Svedje (which might be a dative of "sved", but not of "svedja"; who knows.) Näse looks very much like a probably dative of "näs" (rather than a nonsense form of "näsa"). However, this too could be a reduced definite form.

6. Adjectives and adverbs that are really datives or -o obliques

ånyo - anew
förvisso - for certain, ("for wit")
åsido - aside
redo - ready - might be a case form

lagom - suitable, to a proportional/suitable extent, quantity or quality'. Definitely a dative form of lag ('law').

stundom - sometimes. Plural dative of 'stund', i.e. 'a while' (c.f. German Stunde, "hour").

bråttom - requiring haste, from bråd ('haste, sudden').

enkom - cognate to 'änka' (widow), apparently from an adjective derived from 'one'. It describes something that is 'as if made specifically for' some person, purpose or thing.

7. A single example maintaining the previous double genitive -s- and other non-prepositional genitives

In older Swedish - much like cognate icelandic forms today, the genitival -s- went both on the stem and after the definite suffix for definite nouns of the appropriate declension.

Today, this is seen exclusively in the phrase dagsens sanning, the truth of the day.

Some "naked s-genitives" can be found in adverbial roles:
sams: (from the cognate of 'same'), signifies 'in agreement'.
ens - one's - 'even' (mainly in negative clauses or questions, in Finland more widespread than that).
dags ('(it is) time'), from the cognate of 'day'.
strax? ('Soon').
nyss? (new's, signifying 'a moment ago').


8. In compounds

This is one type of position where you actually find a near-productive survival of the case system. Swedish compounds are somewhat tricky with regards to morphology - sometimes, there are linking morphemes (-s-, -e-), sometimes, the stem is used, sometimes the nominative, and sometimes something else. -s- and -e- do look a bit suspicious given what we know of the modern as well as historical genitive (-s-), and -e having been both a masculine nominative marker and a dative marker. I am inclined to think they originate with the historical cases, but their distribution has over time come to reflect the nominal conjugations ever decreasingly.

Some of these are place names: Stugu-näs (cottage.obl-isthmus). Others are verbal compounds, some nominal compounds, some adjectival:

vattumannen - waterman (aquarius)
vattustark - water strong (e.g. too dilute) (dial.)
vattupass - water level (dial. or arch., nowadays often vattenpass),
vattukanna (dial.) - water pitcher

Water is normally vatten in Swedish, and -u is clearly the oblique case form.

skadeanmälan ('skada' , the modern nominative, is a survival of the historical oblique, whereas skade is a survival of the old nominative) - damage report
högskoleprov (skola is similar to skada) - literally "high school (entrance) test", but högskola signifies polytechnics or universities.

sagotant - fairytale-aunt, i.e. some aunt that reads fairytales for children
sagofigur - fairytale-character
sagovärld - fairytale-world
sagotimme - fairytale-hour (the time for reading fairytales at kindergarten)
sagobok - fairytale-book
sagoväsen - fairytale-being, ...

människobarn - human-child,
människoformen - the human shape
människosläktet - the human species

sidospår - side trace, side track
sidojobb - side job
sidoväg - byway
sidoskåp - side cupboard

vargavinter - wolf winter, i.e. a very cold winter
ulvakläder - wolf clothes, in the inversion "får i ulvakläder" (sheep in wolves clothing), that sometimes is used to express someone projecting an exaggerated threat)

mannaminne - "man-memory", a time unit roughly corresponding to the time the oldest generation has been alive

syndaflod - sin flood, the deluge
syndaskrollon - the sin fold (harmonica).

barnatro - child's faith, i.e. the naive and uncomplicated acceptance of religious claims by a kid,
barnavård - child care

 (but barnkläder, barnskötare, barnläkare)


kvinnorättsfrågan (women's rights question)
kvinnokläder (women's clothes)
kvinnosakskämpe (women's issues fighter),

jordavarelse - earth being, earthly creature
jordalivet - earthly life
 

(but jordklotet - earth sphere, jordägare, "earth owner")

varuhus, varubod - warehouse, warehut?

salutorg, saluhall, saluföra - market square, market hall, to sell

nämndeman (from 'nämnd', dative?) - committee member

backstugusittare - "hill cottage sitter", a social class in Sweden and Finland in the 18th and 19th centuries. (Don't believe wikipedia when it claims it was a "social class in Sweden"! Swedish wikipedia editors are notoriously unaware of Finland.)

legosoldat - mercenary (from lega, nowadays leja - to employ)

hövdingasäte - seat of a chieftain

nådaår - year of mercy

Dialectal and archaic vocabulary can be added ad nauseum: väga-kant, väga-arbejtar, väga-lag, vattu-drag, vattu-rör, vattu-täkt, vattu-svensk, +tunnebindare*,

* This is weird, because -e there might just be a linking morpheme.

9. Dialectal retentions

Some northern dialects (especially Dalarna, Älvdalen, and occasional places north of there) may have preserved three cases - and intriguingly, at least Älvdalska has lost the genitive, doing the exact opposite of the majority of mainland Scandinavian.

My own dialect is claimed by some speakers to have had a feminine dative pronoun ('hennar') in use as an actual dative until rather recently. Nowadays, we're going in for the Norrlandic loss of case distinction in pronouns, though. Some dialects may well keep a henne/hennar distinction, and I would not be surprised if some dialects maintain "honom" as the dative pronoun, using "han" for nominative and accusative.

10. "Accusativism"

Undoubtedly, there are several examples in Swedish where the oblique forms have replaced the nominative - skola (from old Swedish skoli, obl. skola), skada (skadi, skada), låga (logi, loga) are three examples. Since -a is identical to the feminine marker, these are hard to spot unless one is aware of them. -e in compounds can, however, be an indicator: högskoleutbildad, högskoleansvarig, skadeanmälan, skadeförsäkring, (however, misleading examples can be found, such as stugetak) .... Ape/monkey - apa - seems to have gone through the same shift even earlier, but we still get apesläktet, the ape family, in some older works.

The loss of Old Norse -R for many nouns may also be a result of a more widespread accusativism (c.f. nom: maðr acc: man, modern Swe: man), ved from {veðR, veð, veði, veðdar}. Whether the F-Swedish dialectal vederlider (for F-Swedish vedlider, for standard Swedish vedbod) originates with nominative veðr or genitive veðar is hard to decide.

Eastern Swedish dialects (i.e. in Finland) have largely undergone accusativism, retaining the oblique case for most nouns at the expense of the nominative, giving a striking difference that is hard to explain as the result of sound changes. The word to the right is the dialectal version expected in large areas in Finland (with possible further vowel changes in the first syllable)

påse - påsa
stake - staka
backe - backa

kaka - kako
ruta - ruto
låga - lågo

In some parts of Ostrobothnia, the adjective as well keeps the masculine accusative morpheme - "en godan kako". (My dialect has replaced the comparative marker -are with the accusative marker instead, so in my dialect, that would signify a 'tastier cake', not a tasty one. Apparently, speakers near the geographical boundary between -an-as-masculine-marker and -an-as-comparative manage to keep trace of what variety you speak.) In southern Finland, the masculine nominative -er on adjectives survives and has often spread quite a bit.

11. Adjectivified genitives

enahanda, mångahanda, allehanda, varjehanda, tveggehanda, tveggedel, tveggeskafta, treggehanda(!), laga, ...

'Tvegge' and 'tregge' themselves are genitive forms, so 'tveggedel', despite not ending in -a, has a genitive component.

All the 'handa'-adjectives signify the amount of variety something exhibits: "enahanda" means uniform, boring, monotonous. Mångahanda, allehanda, varjehanda - of many/all/every varieties/variety.  Tveggehanda, treggehanda - of two/three types. Tveggedel - two-parted. Tveggeskafta - two-handled/with two shafts.

(d)jävla, (d)jäkla, jädra - genitives of curses, i.e. 'of the devil' with a variety of bowdlerization.


12. Finnish loans from Swedish

It seems Finnish has historically preferred borrowing the oblique form (and basing the Finnish nominative off of it). Thus, many of the Finnish loans do the same a# -> u#-shift. Whether this is due to the dialects doing it first or due to the obliques being more frequent for many words is hard to tell, but given the timespan over which this seems to have been going on, it makes sense to think it's also been a Finnish phenomenon for a longer time than our accusativism has been. Maybe Finnish affected the Finland-Swedes into this accusativism? We do also find exceptions, such as Swedish påse/Old Swedish posi ≃> modern Finnish pussi.

Appendix: Old Swedish Case Morphology in Tabular form

Dove, a feminine noun, here with some of the alternative suffixes omitted (-om/-um, -umin/-omen, etc seem to have been in free variation). Modern Swedish genitives and nominatives are also included for comparison:
dūva (dove), f:

sing indefsing defplur indefplur def
nomdūva (duva)
dūvan (duvan)
dūvur (duvor)
dūvuna(r) (duvorna)
accdūvudūvuna
dūvur
dūvuna(r)
datdūvudūvunni
dūvum
dūvumin
gendūvu (duvas)
dūvunna(r) (duvans)
dūva (duvors)
dūvanna (duvornas)
  
 
As we can see, acc/dat/gen are conflated in the singular in the indefinite singular. There are, however, some other conflations, each marked by colour coding. Notice that 
posi (sack) conflates acc and gen in the plural wih acc/dat/gen in the singular.
posi (sack), masc:

sing indefsing defplur indefplur def
nomposi (påse)
posin (påsen)
posar
posarnir
accposa
posan
posa
posana
datposa
posanom
posom
posonom
genposa
posans
posa
posanna  
 
For some nouns, nom-acc-dat are conflated in the indef. sg., and nom-acc are conflated everywhere. Some other conflations may occur, e.g. acc/dat-conflation or dat/gen-conflation. Neuters conflate nom and acc, sometimes nom-acc-gen.

The -r- in modern 'duvorna' (and other similar nouns) is probably an orthographical innovation to make the forms more consistent. It is pronounced in but a few dialects.

Adjectives

There are 48 slots in the adjective paradigm. Luckily, there's a lot of syncretism, but ... first: the strong and weak adjectives. Weak adjectives tend to be used with definite nouns: the strong man, the strong one.  Here, I used "strong" to emphasize that there is no semantic significance to the names strong and weak: they could just as well be called red and blue adjectives or medieval and oily adjectives. Strong adjectives are used for indefinite nouns, and for complements. Exactly when they started operating as complements - or if it's west Germanic that has lost congruence on complements - is unclear to me.

The strong adjectives have this pattern or something very much like it:


masc sg        
fem sg     neut sg            
masc pl        
fem pl        
neut pl




nom -er, -
-  
-t
-ir, -er
-ar
-  




acc -an
-a
-t
-a
-ar
-  



dat -um, -om
-(r)i
-u, -o
-um, -om
-um, -om
-um, -om




gen -s
-(r)ar
-s
-(r)a
-(r)a -(r)a




In modern Swedish, this has simplified to nothing for reale sg, -t for neuter, -a for plurals.

The weak ones are like this:


masc sg        
fem sg     neut sg            
masc pl        
fem pl        
neut pl




nom -i/-e     -a      
-a
-u, -o -u, -o -u, -o



acc -a
-u, -o
-a
-u, -o -u, -o -u, -o



dat -a
-u, -o -a
-u, -o -u, -o -u, -o



gen -a
-u, -o -a
-u, -o -u, -o -u, -o



In modern Swedish, these have become -a. For all forms. Except masculine nouns can take -e, and there are some other complications in how -e is used.


Appendix II: additional examples to incorporate

till synes

Detail #430: Split-prominent languages

Wednesday, August 3rd, 2022

An idea that I suspect exists in the real world is split-prominent languages. Languages which for some verbs (or some constructions) favour a topic-comment structure, and for some verbs (or constructions) favour a subject-prominent structure.

If I knew more about Japanese, I would maybe know whether it qualifies, but that's where I'd search first.

Tanol: A Reference Grammar

Monday, August 1st, 2022

Harry Cook is an undergraduate in linguistics with German at the University of York. He’s been conlanging since 2014, beginning at the age of 13. Within linguistics his interests focus on morphophonology, morphosyntax, historical linguistics, and dialectology. His other interests include writing, music, astrophysics, ale, and history. These interests typically feature extensively in his conlanging and worldbuilding. Harry began his current world building project in 2018 and has at least a decade’s worth of work left to complete. Tanol represents the first major milestone in his project, a project which Harry hopes will gain him some notoriety within the art of conlanging.

Abstract

A full reference grammar of the Tanol language.

Version History

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License

Some thoughts on conlang families and typology

Wednesday, July 13th, 2022
This post details some thoughts about typology, and then comes up with some ideas for Dairwueh-Bryatesle-Sargaĺk. Or, to be long-winded about it:

Some thoughts on typology, relative (and other) pronouns and Dairwueh, Bryatesle and Sargaĺk in light of Indo-European and Uralic 

1. Typological preamble

I have sometimes come across the claim that a very conservative and thoroughly Indo-European feature that has survived in all branches since day one is the interrogative pronouns are also relative pronouns thing. It turns out this is wrong, but it's still interesting enough to spin an idea off it.
 
If anyone is not familiar with the gist of the idea, English has several obvious examples of this:
the man who bought the car
the areas which Caesar conquered
at the time when she arrived
 
Not all languages with relative pronouns have these correlations with interrogative pronouns, c.f. Hebrew, where relative pronouns and interrogative pronouns do not overlap at all.

Even then, of course, the overlap in IE languages is not complete - both English and Swedish have interrogative/relative conflation to some extent, but counterexamples exist: c.f. English 'the house that I bought', Swedish "bandet som hon spelar i" ("the band that she plays in", som being a cognate to English 'some', actually). Some "non-Q-root interrogatives" sometimes also work as relatives, sometimes not. In Swedish, some speakers dislike using "när" as a relative adverb ('when') which is an exceptional interrogative due to not having a historical "qw"-root, and prefer using 'då' ('then', quite clear a cognate and not interrogative as all) as a relative adverb for times, and even more strongly, people prefer "där" over "var" (there, where).

It turns out that this structure might go back to fairly early Indo-European, but must have been lost in several branches and later re-emerged in Germanic and Slavic, for instance, through Latin influence. Many languages in the "near-IE" sphere have also been influenced by the Latinate construction, possibly with Germanic or Slavic vectors of influence: Finnish has began to use mi-interrogatives (which are mainly for non-human referents) as a relativizer, in addition (in some dialects instead of) the joka-relativizers.
 
Joka is, in the singular nominative identical to 'each', but in the other cases they are distinct. First of all, as a determiner it is not (necessarily) inflected for case: joka mies, joka miehen, joka miehellä, (each man, each man's, by each man) ..., although there is also an inflected form jokainen/jokaisen/jokaisella which can be used independently or as a determiner. 

As a relative pronoun, 'joka' is inflected for case, but the root is jo-, and -ka is a suffix that goes after the case suffix or vanishes: mies, joka ... (the man who ...), mies, jo-n-ka ... (the man whose ...), mies jo-lla ... (the man with whom ...), miehet jo-t-ka ... (the men who ...). Apparently, some eastern dialects maybe retain the -ka, but my sources on this are a bit unclear. I am, alas, rather unaware of how relativization is handled in other Uralic languages.
 
Here we actually get a slightly disconcerting thing: Sihler's New Comparative Grammar of Greek and Latin suggests PIE had a relative pronoun yoh-. Why do tantalizing hints at Indo-Uralic jump out at every corner? Why!?!
 

3. Specifics of relativization

I like the overlap with four different types of pronouns that we find here: "each"-quantifiers, some-quantifiers, demonstratives and interrogatives. I also can see a reasonable grammaticalization path for each of these into being used as a relativizer, and it's also possible to find a slightly less demanding grammaticalization path if they start out as something more general and turn into relativizers AND this-or-that on the other hand.

Now, we can take the basic idea "formal conflation of so-and-so with relativizers as a stable feature in a language family".  So-and-so doesn't even have to be pronouns - it could be some auxiliary, it could be some type of pronoun, it could be some conjunction. Relativization happens in many different ways in different languages, but I have decided to go for relative pronouns as one of the strategies present in all BDS languages.

4. Stable features in families

It's clear Indo-European does have some rather stable features over times: the three gender system (say I, writing in one of the languages that has lost it and speaking another that has reassembled it natively), verbal prefixes that are largely overlapping with prepositions, -a as a feminine marker (somewhat less stable), ... so, having a few stable features in Dairwueh-Bryatesle-Sargalk (as well as others in Cwarmin-Ŋʒädär) might very well lend these groups a more "family"-like type of grammatical style.

It is conceivable, however, that this is a type of survivor bias! Proto-Indo-European probably had quite a large amount of features. Just by random chance, we'd expect a handful of features to survive in multiple branches: us thinking of these features as resilient or somehow "characteristic" features of a family might be a mistake. They may very well be features that just have survived the elimination lottery.

4. Implications for Bryatesle-Dairwueh-Sargaĺk

So, as a kind of tribute to Indo-european, I will have a 'similar' correspondence as the one we just ... well, partially debunked or threw on the trashheap or whatever. After a way too long post, here's the nugget:

In BDS languages, relative and reflexive pronouns greatly overlap, and this goes back to proto-BDS.

I think this might require some reworking of Bryatesle, Dairwueh and Sargaĺk.