WORD ORDER | This Video Enjoyed You 

I no longer know how to pronounce sandwich. It sounds wrong the way I say it now

Wow, i didnt notice that!

Sanguage ;)

Except in German, there he pronounces sandwich like I do in English.

@@joshuahillerup4290 Germans tend to pronounce all the recent loanwords from English and French like speakers of English and French do.

"This video enjoyed you"

IKEA BIRD No2 this video this enjoyed you

This video this you enjoyed.

You enjoyed this this video

This is what happens in my language LOL btw, sorry if your nightmares are back

В советском союзе местоименные никогда не использовалось после глаголов, кроме как в музыке и стихах .

Why use many word when few do trick?

Beat me to it

In Soviet Russia, the sandwich eats you

Someone had to say it. But in Soviet Russia, say it had to someone.

#Justiceforthedoobeedoo

doobleedoo

Who are Thes & Wich and why did they ate the goat? Are they T-Rex's or smth??

It's the sand which ate the goat.

@@markschultz2897 i don't like sand it's coarse and rough and irritating and it gets everywhere!

Mark Schultz *wich

@@dondeestaCarter whoosh

This is soviet Russia

This video ejoyed *I. It's still the subject. (and yeah I know it's a joke. I'm just saying.)

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

Sergej Radošević Maybe free word order like slavic? Dunno

There are a small minority of languages that don't strictly show a preference for S, O, and V in any particular order - usually, they follow animacy, focus, or thematic rules (theme being the main topic of wider discussion, and focus being the main topic of the particular sentence). The subject would tend to still be towards the beginning of the sentence, but because of a wider trend (focuses and themes tend to be the subject, which also tends to be animate), and it may be up to the speaker where V and O fall. I'm not sure that they account for the missing 2.5% entirely, but there could be other similar situations (like how German is V2 - "Ich lese eine Zeitung im Raum" or "Ich lese im Raum eine Zeitung" or "Eine Zeitung lese ich im Raum" or "Im Raum lese ich eine Zeitung" all mean "I'm reading a newspaper in the room." The default is SVO, but as long as the verb is second and the subject is adjacent to it, the other arguments can go almost wherever the speaker wants, like to put more focus on the newspaper or something).

@@zozzy4630, that makes sense. Thank you for taking time and explaining it to me. (Something new learning I am every day :) )

Dark linguists, show me the forbidden seventh word order.

@@i_teleported_bread7404 Vertical word order. You pronounce the subject, object and verb simultaneously rather than in order as horizontal word orders would suggest.

I learned that ASL sentence structure was either Topic-Comment or SVO? Can I see an example of OSV?

@@realeuphoniism It's always OSV. Sign-language, I know. Table Cup-on-top-of. It's not SVO.

lol

technichally, yoda doesnt use OSV, because the writers take the whole predicate and front it, but in english the predicate often includes the main verb like "he is running fast" turns into "running fast he is" in yoda-speak, causing the verbs to bookend the sentence

@@isaiahsamuels9827 I'd say that is OSV since grammatically the verb in the sentence is "is," not "running." "Running" is kind of acting like an adjective in that context.

@angeldude101 "run" is most certainly the main verb. the sentence is about the act of running and the detail that it is fast, not the quility or being of running (whatever that would be) which is what one would need to conclude in order to say that "is" is the main verb, rather than an auxiliary rendering the main verb as a participle in accordance with english grammer rules for expressing the continuous/simple present.

@@isaiahsamuels9827 "run" is _semantically_ the main verb, but "be" is _grammatically_ the main verb. If you use a conjugation without an auxiliary, it becomes "he runs fast" which then gets Yodafied into "fast, he runs." Still OSV (assuming O can just be an adverb). You would never have Yoda say "runs fast, he."

In Latin laughs

i understand don’t

Polish nods in agreement

Laughs in Hungarian

cries in english

Yeah, its like math.

This is true of any subject.

Polish can have all 6 orders. Though SOV is the most common or natural (though I've seen sentences where I personally found other orders more natural)

@Tòochi im not 100% sure but i think you can either mark the subject with wa and object with o or mark the subject with ga and object with wa, which is used in a similar way to passives in english

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topic-prominent_language Oops, I dropped something.

@@adapienkowska2605 *SVO

Yeah, as long as sentences and clauses end with predicates or verbs, the order is very free since the particles decide which part do what. But interestingly, since relative clauses directly modify nouns without any marker, it made OVS and SVO appear to exist in Japanese. サンドイッチを　食べた　ヤギが　逃げちゃった… Sandwich-OBJ eat-PAST goat-SUBJ run-away-UNINTENDED-PAST The goat who ate the sandwich ran away ... ヤギが　食べた　サンドイッチは　もう　だめ　だ！ Goat-SUBJ eat-PAST sandwich-TOPIC already no-good COPULA/DECLARATIVE The sandwich that the goat ate is no longer good!

Very interesting. I always found that little 'pas' curious, since, in Spanish, we negate exclusively using 'no' and it precedes the verb. My first impression was that it was a little bit silly. But after some further thought, I realised that we do the same in Chile, at least in uneducated speech. So for example, one could say "yo no fuí nah a la escuela" I did not go to school (emphatic). It comes from "nada", which means nothing. What about "pas", what is its etymology?

@@pablomunoz3119 'pas' comes from Latin 'passus', meaning a step or pace, so 'ne ... pas' literally means 'not a step.'

Why did my French teacher never tell us thissss! That's a really interesting way to show formality, and I always found the dropping of one of the particles confusing and irregular, but now it makes some sense

How does it feel To conlang like you do

He has German heritage. I think he's half or quarter German.

@@qwertyTRiG thanks to two world wars most people in English speaking countries stopped speaking German as not to face discrimination (during the war being seen as part of the enemy, after the war because there were no large German communities anymore mostly economically(of course you hire the guy that's better at the national language) ) . So heritage doesn't really mean anything anymore

@@theultimatefreak666 He has said before that because of his german father he decided he wanted to learn german. So I guess heritage does mean something

The horror!

I agree, yhe sandwich ate the goat!

Yeah that’s Hindi word order for ya. Apka naam kya hai? Your name what is?

Another example, The boy the book reads

ヤギがサンドイッチを食べた yagi ga sandoitchi wo tabeta

Wow, thats amazing!

That cool. I'm working on a similar project about a fictional world.

Slow I am, please explain this, you must

@@ajinkyatarodekar9099 My work-in-progress conlang's grammar so far is as follows: Words are broken into two main groups, within which parts of speech are specified. I like to use Ithkuil's terms "formative" and "adjunct," although the language is nothing like Ithkuil. If you're not familiar with the idea of a stack, it's a way to store a sequence of items, which can be "pushed" onto it or "popped" off of it. Think of it as a stack of books, pancakes, etc, where the Last thing In the stack (on top) is the First to be taken Out (hence, LIFO). Saying a formative (nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs) pushes it onto the stack, and saying an adjunct (postpositions, case markers, subordinating conjunctions) causes the stack to be traversed downward until two appropriate items are found. These are then joined together and the one higher on the stack is popped off. E.g. "the house near the lake" = "house lake near," since the first two words are pushed onto the stack and the postposition (near) finds its object (lake) to connect to the thing the phrase modifies (house). It's also VSO: "the man opened the door" = "opened man SUBJECT-MARKER door DIRECT-OBJECT-MARKER". First, "opened" is pushed onto the stack, then "man." The subject marker finds a noun (man) and a verb to link it to (opened) and does so, popping off "man" in the process, so only "opened" remains. Saying "door" and then the DO marker does the same thing as adding the subject did: push "door," then pop it off and connect it to the verb. Of course the grammar carries plenty of edge cases and some exceptions to make speaking easier, but this youtube comment's getting a little long!

Your project sounds cool. Even I am making a conlang for my novel- in -the-making! As per the rules me and my friends have set, its gonna be an abugida with the word order like Yoda. 😂

@@aresharesh8671 Are you inspired by Fith ?

@@lexuanhai6999 Funny you mention it. I only heard about Fith after coming up with the basic principles of my conlang, but there are definitely resemblances!

Undeniable G.O.A.T.

I'm trying to, develop a naturalistic word order for my conlang, but this goat this is dummy thicc, and the clap of its asscheeks keeps alerting the guards

ƭƕlkc

Most of the time it would be incorrect, but in the rare case where it's important that it was the sandwich that was eaten, not something else, it could be correct. "The goat ate, unfortunately, the sandwich," could only be used in the sense that there were many things the goat could've eaten, but the goat picked, unfortunately, the sandwich.

@@joeradford1055 That's what I imagined, like: "I thought that the goat had eaten the mango, but the goat ate, unfortunately, the sandwich."

@@joeradford1055 why there would one not say "the goat ate the sandwich unfortunately"?

@@sohopedeco and here it would more likely be: "I thought the goat had eaten the mango but unfortunately it had eaten the sandwich".

it doesn't sound flat out wrong but it definitely sounds awkward and I don't think you'd ever see it in any actual book, I agree that "I thought the goat had eaten the mango, but unfortunately, it had eaten the sandwich" or "I thought the goat had eaten the mango but it had unfortunately eaten the sandwich" would be more natural

"We don't want no textual perverts enjoying a video a little too MUCH! We're RESPECTABLE townsfolk here!"

Theodor Zhitnikov Yeah, I always find it easier to go from a more restrictive word order to a freer one than the other way around

The main part follows SOV, however the auxiliaries stay in second place where the verb normally is. That's how I'd describe it.

the SVO, VOS, OVS, etc format is supposed to be simplified. It's just a very general description of how a language organizes its bits.

they tend to call it V2 word order which overrules SVO

There is also a minor VSO order in describing scene setups, particularly in setting up certain jokes, aka "Stehen zwei Leute auf der Straße."

@@fuuryuuSKK isn't that just a omited "Es"?: "Es stehen zwei Leute auf der Straße." (that isn't a rhetoric question, i don't know.)

Not really. People who speak Esperanto natively will generally stick with SVO word order. Other orders are mostly just for poetry.

No such thing as fully free wordorder. All languages use it for something and fall into conventions. It's not random whatsoever. Meaning you can't just use any in Esperanto, conventions will arise in speaking communities and ignoring them would be tantamount to neutering expression.

@@skyworm8006 Oh, yes, I said the factors (of Theme First Principle, Animated First Principle and Verb-Object Bonding) would encourage SVO or SOV order. But there is great latitude for people to learn Esperanto "their way", in imitation of features of their language, and still be understood. Esperanto syntax will often express no preference. In English you yell "Help me!" In German you yell "Help to me!" In Esperanto you may hear both in a crisis.

German also has SOV order.

@@SchmulKrieger Wrong. The sentence is "Ich habe einen Apfel" and not "Ich einen Apfel habe", where "habe" is the verb and "einen Apfel" is the object.

the more I look into Norwegian dialects, the more it seems like learning Norwegian means learning 10+ different languages...

Ketamine, I must find. Feed an addiction, I must.

😂😂😂😂😂

HBon111 General linguistics or a specialized field of it? It's what I'm planning on doing, I'm just unsure of my focus.

@@the_biblioklept2533 I don't know how it works where you live, but in Canada you start learning about the general field, and then the option of specializing is available as a graduate.

Why Soviet?

ABDEFGHIKLMNOPRSTUVW aȶ

OSV is also possible! Technically correct Yoda speak is.

Well, English also actually does that, just in a little bit more complex way. "The goat ate the sandwich" may also be expressed as "The goat did eat the sandwich" Then you treat "did" as the main verb and keeping it in mind, make it VSO: "Did the goat eat the sandwich?" and you get a perfect English question.

@@kpc211 huh it does. Never thought about that. In German they just do it without auxiliary verbs making it more obvious so that's probably why I never noticed it in English.

FINNALLY

Why Soviet?

I know right

The agglutinative nature of the language isn't a requirement here. Most Slavic languages aren't (they add suffixes, but they often also modify the original word) and have the same feature. The language just has to have noun cases.

Můžeš prosím mi dát příklady kdy se používá SVO, OSV a podobně? Dokud jsem nečetl ty komenty že ve slovanských jazycích je ten Free Word Order. Tak bych si to nikdy o češtině neuvědomil. Omlouvám se za moji trochu horší češtinu. Ale v ČR jsem šel do školy až do 3 třídy. Od 3 jsem studoval v anglii kde se čeština někde ve veřejných školách neučí. Dekuji

@@darkwolfcz434 Nemusíš se omlouvat, pořád máš češtinu na skvělé úrovni:) Zkusím uvést příklady: SVO: *Petr koupí mouku.* (Petr will buy the flour.) This is the default form, no particular word gets extra focus. OVS: Mám vzít mouku? - Nemusíš. Mouku koupí *Petr.* (Should I get some flour? - You don't have to. *Petr* already gets some flour.) Here, the main focus is on *who* gets the flour. SOV: Petr mouku *koupí.* Ale musíš mu ji zaplatit. (Petr *will* get the flour after all. But you will have to pay him.) Here, the focus is on whether the flour will be bought. Petr probably doesn't feel like searching the supermarket shelves. OSV: _Mouku_ Petr *koupí.* Ale pro vajíčka si dojdi sám. (Petr *will* get the _flour_ after all. But the eggs you go get yourself.) This construction implies that Petr will get you only the flour. Which is made explicit by the second sentence. The verb-first constructions work mostly as questions or need to be a part of more complex sentences. VSO?: Koupí Petr mouku? (Will Petr get some flour?) Basic question with no special focus. VOS?: Koupí mouku *Petr?* (Will it be *Petr* who will get the flour?) This question may imply the wish that it should be Petr who gets the flour, for his superior flour-buying skills. VOS: Tak koupí mouku *Petr.* (So let *Petr* buy the flour!) In this emphatic sentence, the act of buying is the thema and who will do it is the point of focus. But also the extra "tak" particle makes the verb-first construction look less weird. To oversimplify it, SVO is the default. Any deviation from that introduces some narrow focus. The first component of a sentence is what links it to the preceding sentences, while the last component is the new information, or what links the sentence to the sentences that follow. This of course may be overridden or reinforced by explicit focus markers or by prosody.

this video this enjoyed this you this?

"Come and get one in the yarbles, if you've GOT any yarbles, you eunuch jelly, thou!" --CLOCKWORK ORANGE (movie) Could "you" and "thou" be a doubling?

@@Dracopol Not really. Thou is repeated for emphasis; its position next to the verb is not important. It sorta reminds me of something done in French where the emphatic form of a pronoun is used redundantly, i.e. "*Moi* j'ai vu ce film hier." "Tu l'aimais, *toi* ?" Like in the sample you provided, these are said with a pause, effectively separating them from the verb phrase. This is not framing, and the word order of French is not going to change.

I think it's pretty much the same thing for spanish

@@nicolasglemot6760 really that's interesting

Most Slavic languages (except Bulgarian, if I am not mistaken) do that. "Koza zjadła kanapkę" vs. "Kanapkę zjadła koza" (both mean the sandwich - kanapka - got eaten by the goat - koza) and "Kanapka zjadła kozę" vs. "Kozę zjadła kanapka" (both mean the goat - koza - got eaten by the sandwich - kanapka) Koza - (what?)the goat Kozę - (whom?)the goat Kanapka - (what?)the sandwich Kanapkę - (whom?)the sandwich Actually, English is also like that, but only with personal pronouns. If you say "Her I like" - my guess is that it will be understood correctly, and not as "She likes me".

@@kpc211 Yeah English used to have declension but it's mostly disappeared. It's only in some pronouns nowadays, which makes sense since they get used to much. It's why "thee I marry" works too, since when "thee" was in use, it was the second-person equivalent of "me" or "her". The literary canon is probably what's kept that understandable, since most people who study English tend to read at least a little bit of Shakespeare or someone else who used it. And it's great to have those Slavic examples. Declension works differently in different languages, so more examples helps any conlanger with deciding what cases to have.

Is the second instance of Subject an overt pronoun, or just indicative of agreement on the verb?

@@colleenforrest7936 Well, I admit that I was confused by your previous reply to me. This more succinct reply is easier to handle. So then, is the "it did" part like a grammatically necessary part of this phrasing, or is it more just reinforcing the rest of the sentence but is otherwise unnecessary? Like how in English, some old-timey dialogue may include something like "I sawr it wit' me own eyes, I DID" to reinforce the sentence, but would still be fine as "I sawr it wit' me own eyes."

@@SovairuSorry about the long windedness :) A bit like your "old timey" phrase, yes. The SB phrase is redundant, in that the sentence can be understood with out it, but it does add a little color to the phrasing. Like what's being said is not just me saying it, but its a time honored Truth. Does that make sense?

@@colleenforrest7936 Ah, alrighty. I see now.