Grammar

Tonesu sentences are built from role-marked phrases rather than strict word order. Each participant wears a particle prefix that tells you its role — so word order can vary freely for emphasis without ambiguity.

Notation: Written Tonesu has no hyphens. latoli is the word; la-toli is the analytic parse showing particle + root. Analytic forms appear in breakdowns only.

Core sentence frame

la-{agent}   {verb}   lo-{patient}

Default order: Agent – Verb – Patient (AVP/SOV)

latoli  kaseka  lotosu

The scholar examines the theory.
(parse: la-toli · ka-seka · lo-tosu)

Particles

Short, phonologically distinct syllables. They never merge with roots ambiguously.

Particle	Role	Notes
`la-`	agent / perspective anchor	who acts; also the stance-holder in epistemic clauses
`lo-`	patient	who or what is acted upon
`ro-`	instrument	the tool or means
`pa-`	location	where the action occurs
`ne`	relation / recipient	who receives; also the copula for relational states
`ta`	time reference	temporal anchor
`ka`	action marker	marks the verb/predicate
`na`	proper name marker	signals an identifier, not a compound noun
`da-`	domain marker	marks a conceptual domain reference
`go`	causal frame	"because of / from"
`du`	result frame	"resulting in / so that"

Where a particle overlaps with a primitive root (pa, ne, ka, go, du, no) the overlap is always transparent — the particle meaning is derived from the root meaning.

Nouns can also carry a scope prefix (a-, i-, u-, o-, e-) before the noun root to specify whether the referent is abstract, particular, foundational, collective, or emergent. Scope prefixes combine with role particles: la-i-toli = the specific scholar (as agent). See Scope prefixes.

Modifiers precede their head

Modifiers always come before the thing they modify — no exceptions.

nuno toli      →  many scholars        (quantity before noun)
voki           →  act with care        (quality-motion compound)

Predication: `la-X Q` vs `lo-X Q`

This is one of the most important distinctions in Tonesu. Both forms predicate a quality of an entity — but they make different claims.

Decision rule: Can X exit this state? → use lo. Is Q part of X's constitution? → use la.

The minimal pair — same noun, same quality, different claim:

lali  vo   →  a person has worth          (intrinsic — la)
loli  vo   →  the person is valued        (contingent — lo)

la-X Q — intrinsic property (X constitutively possesses quality Q)

lali   vo     →  A person has worth.             (inherent; cannot be revoked)
larakimu  hafe  →  The engine has a thermal limit.  (structural property)

lo-X Q — contingent state (X is currently in state Q; this can change)

loli   vo     →  The person is valued.           (social esteem — contingent)
lopa   havo   →  The room is warm.               (current temperature)

Causal frame: `go` and `du`

Use go to state a reason and du to state a result:

go {lami  kasikipast}  du {layu  to  lofesi}

Because I sent the signal, they know the warning.

Negation

no- prefixes any root or compound to negate it. Scope covers the entire base form.

node      →  noha       →  noru       →  nonefe
(no-de)      (no-ha)       (no-ru)       (no-ne-fe)
non-decay    cold          incoherent    free-standing

no also acts as a contrast coordinator between two parallel constituents:

lali  vo  no  laze    →  the person has worth, not ze

And as a sentence-initial minimal negative in response to a polar question.

Pronouns

Form	Meaning
`mi`	I / me (speaker)
`tu`	you (addressee)
`ze`	he / she / they / it (third person, any referent)
`yu`	they / we (group)

ze is a unified anaphora — it refers to the most salient discourse entity regardless of type (person, proposition, machine). The predicate's semantics usually makes the referent type clear.

Questions

tosi (knowledge-seeking signal) marks a question. Its position determines the type:

Polar question — tosi at the end:

latoli  kaseka  lotosu  tosi

Does the scholar examine the theory?

Content question (WH) — tosi replaces the unknown element:

latoli  kaseka  tosi

What does the scholar examine?

Epistemic framing

Tonesu has explicit grammar for marking the source and confidence of a claim.

Form	Meaning
`lami to {prop}`	I know/believe that… (speaker's calibrated confidence)
`lasource si {prop}`	source signals/outputs that… (attributed claim)
`(prop)`	reportedly / inferred — not directly asserted
`~(prop)`	approximately reportedly…

Copula

There is no "to be" in Tonesu. Use predication directly:

lalibe  ne  zode

The child is tired. (lit. the-child [relation] organism-decay)
(parse: la-libe · ne · zo-de)

For strict definitional identity: helms (X helms Y = X is by definition Y).
For functional equivalence: helm (X helm Y = X is understood as Y).

Special sentence particles

Particle	Use	Notes
`he`	vocative	`he naX!` — direct address
`ya`	attention signal	`ya, [clause]` — attend to this
`rufe`	exclusive scope	`rufe, [clause]` — only / solely this
`ke`	pivot	`ke, [clause]` — advancing a claim after implicit denial

Purpose frame

wi attaches a purpose or goal clause:

layu  katoki  wi [katosuki]

They study in order to understand.

A complete example

laze  losi  kasikipast  wi [kafesi  neyu]

She sent the message to warn them.

Token	Parse	Role
`laze`	la-ze	agent: she
`losi`	lo-si	patient: the message
`kasikipast`	ka-si-ki (past)	action: sent
`wi [kafesi neyu]`	wi [ka-fe-si · ne-yu]	purpose: to warn them

Because every participant is role-marked, word order is flexible — the particles carry the meaning, not the position. Default is Agent – Verb – Patient; topic-fronting is free.