Piedmontese

Nouns

It may be surprising, but there are no plurals for some 95% of male nouns, only those ending in -L take a plural -J end. There are also a good number of invariant female names, like la/jë stra or la/le fior. Basically all is decided by context. You can always tell a foreign import: it's got a plural form (unless it ends in -L or female ending in vowel, when not truncated before the last Latin syllable, as in stra from strata = road).

Prefixed Schwa

Schwa is written Ë. When certain words follow another that ends in consonant they get a Schwa to avoid collision. These words are those beginning with:

• S+consonant (la Spagna / an Ëspagna)
• Any consonant+n (në fnoj / set ëfnoj) with the exception of the group GN-

Verbal structure

The reason names are that simple is that our brains are too busy with pronouns and verbs to have free CPU for gender/number declination, methinks :))))

Expressing a subject

We have a pronoum nobody else is using, the verbal pronoum. Plus... pronounized articles.

So you can have a LOT of expressed subjects, depending on how much you want to underline things. Since we have this constant doubt about gender/number and the verbal pronoun is non-gendered, usually female subjects add a pronounized article. The verbal pronoun is mandatory, but forbidden in interrogative (with the exception of 2nd plural, where it's mandatory) and imperative forms.

"She does" can translate as:

1. Chila a la fa (pers. Pron/verb pron/pron.art.) very clear, much attention on the subject, not much on the action itself
2. Chila a fa (pers. Pron/verb pron) equilibrium, both subject and action have the same relevance, gender is expressed
3. A la fa (verb pron/pron.art.) gender expressed, the action is more important than the subject
4. A fa (verb pron only) no gender expressed, weakly defaults to male, only dealing with the action itself.

Version 4) is non-gendered, and it's quite rare when the subject really is a female, although formally correct.

Some verbs always require an euphonic pronounized article.

Example: I have

• I l'heu

Tenses

We have no past tense anymore (last written occurrences are from the end of the XVIII century and declinate much like Old French), so now verbal modalities are: 1) indicative 2) imperative (present only) 3) conjunctive 4) conditional

Let alone imperative, all modes have the following tenses: 1) present 2) future 3) imperfect 4) present perfect

Interrogative forms

All forms have an interrogative version, in which an enclitic interrogativ pronoun is appended, and the 2nd singular has the original latin stem. So

Example, to want

Affermative, interrogative

• I veuj / veuj-ne?
• It veule / veus-to?
• A veul / veul-lo(a) (yes, the third singular interrogative is alse gendered)
• I voroma /vorom-ne?
• I veule / I veule?
• A veulo / veul-ne?

Fine? No... you can also make a weaker interrogation by simply using a question mark at the end of the affermative form, as in most languages.

Negative imperative

Affermative followed by a negation (pa or nen, pa is stronger)

Phonetic varieties

Equivalent forms

Many verbs can be rendered in equivalent forms. Example: I have

• I l'hai = I l'heu

This is hell, because since it happened before future tenses where formed by adding a terminal +have auxiliary, we basically ALWAYS have two equivalent forms for all future tenses... Example: I will have

• I l'avreu = i l'avrài

We all mix them, depending on what sounds better, I cannot give a rule for choosing one or another and I'm not aware of any particular meaning in choosing one form or the other.

Mobile EU

All EU (pron like in french) can exist only in tonic position. When they loose this position they become O.

Example: To die

• Mi i meuiro -> present indicative
• Mi i moirerìa -> present conditional