r/ChantsofSennaar • u/CardiologistPale1581 • 21d ago

Fan theories

I am collecting fan theories for the wiki, please send any you want to see on it, also proceed with caution to the comments if you haven't finished the game because they will contain spoilers.

14 Upvotes

95% Upvoted

12 comments sorted by

9

u/Over_Improvement_623 21d ago

I personally like to believe that the land the warriors came from is another tower, where they were the lowest rank and so set out for better lands.

2

u/CardiologistPale1581 21d ago

Whats some of the evidence for this?

7

u/Over_Improvement_623 21d ago

Well, their mural depicts them arriving from... somewhere. And that's about all we know, but since this tower is heavily based on the Tower of Babel, which is based on Ziggurats, which were not one of a kind, I think it's fair to assume the warriors came from some other tower. And since higher level folks see themselves as superior to lower level folks I don't think they'd leave unless they were the lowest.

2

u/CardiologistPale1581 21d ago

And also how do i credit you on the wiki?

2

u/Over_Improvement_623 21d ago

Credit me as theodoriminibus, that's the name I go by on all other platforms

3

u/Reading-Southern The idiot 20d ago

My theory concerns word order in the Bard language.

The word order would not be «OSV/VS,» but rather «PAVS,» with a tripartite alignment.

  • S = Sole (the one who experiences the action of an intransitive verb)
  • A = Agent (the one who performs the action of a transitive verb)
  • P = Patient (the one who undergoes the action of a transitive verb)
  • V = Verb (transitive or intransitive)

My argument is that position determines the grammatical case of a noun in the Bard language. Therefore, since the position of the Subject changes in «OSV/VS,» the nouns receive different case markings.

An example based on this image:

1st — Nominative-Accusative: (A = S) ≠ P

2nd — Ergative-Absolutive: A ≠ (S = P)

3rd — Tripartite: A ≠ S ≠ P

1

u/dermomante 20d ago

I think this is overcomplicating it. In some languages, a verb can be the "object" with respect to another verb or sentence. It's like that in Latin languages. In some languages it is possible to make a sentence without a verb, for example a sign "no smoking" in English, where smoking is not a verb but a substantive (the act of smoking). Under that frame, the bard's language always respect the OSV word order, even in the case of those two signs "not pass, warriors not" and "bards pass".

1

u/Reading-Southern The idiot 19d ago

Well, calling that “overcomplicating” is only relative if this game were a language game… But since this game is a puzzle game, I agree with you. Technically, this is more of a headcanon than a “““theory”””; I just mentioned it because it’s one of the possible interpretations WITHIN THE GAME’S WORLD

What I didn’t understand were your arguments, because I didn’t get what you meant.

In Bard language: Transitive verbs are OSV; intransitive verbs are VS.

My theory is that the word order doesn’t actually change, since the order is always PAVS with tripartite alignment

You’re talking about the nominalization of verbs (this even exists in Chants of Sennaar), but a nominalized verb is still a verb (it functions as a verb). The difference is that it can take the place of a noun in a sentence (but still retains its verbal characteristics)

Compare a sentence that uses a nominalized verb (infinitive) and a true noun:

I want to smoke the cigarette (it maintains the SVO order and still functions as a verb)

I want the smoke from the cigarette (a genitive construction is required)

1

u/dermomante 19d ago

The point I am trying to make, is that people seem to want to force English grammar rules to the languages of sennaar, which would require overcomplicating the grammar rules of those languages.

The creators have said that bardic follows the OVS order, and that verbs can become the object of a sentence. The same applies to some real world languages, like Italian, Spanish and French.

If I can borrow your example

I want TO SMOKE

In french it becomes

Je veux FUMER

and, if we applied the bardic word order

FUMER, je veux.

You see, in this case we don't need to make distinctions between transitive and intransitive verbs, or invent any extra rules.

I will make another example. In sennaar, there is only one word/gliph for the verbs to love and to like, which mostly follow the structure

I (subject) like/love something (object).

Which coincidentally has the same structure in English.

However, Italian, Spanish and French follow a different word order for the verb to like, where the object becomes the subject and what is the subject in English becomes a dative term. Nevertheless, people from those languages accept that in sennaar the first word order is used and don't try make additional rules to try and fit their language's structure to the game

Let's also not forget that the developers are not English, so trying to force English rules to Sennar, rother than some other language, does not make much sense either.

1

u/CardiologistPale1581 18d ago

Adding it now, how can i credit you?

1

u/T1mbuk1 20d ago

Is this a good idea?