To declare the existence of something in Pangasinan, we use the word wala. To declare the non-existence of something, we use angapo.
- Walay andeketa pusa ed dalanan. There’s a black cat in the street.
- Angapoy andeketa pusa ed dalanan. There’s no black cat in the street.
- Walay priton pusit ed lamisaan. There are fried squid on the table.
- Angapoy priton pusit ed lamisaan. There aren’t any fried squid on the table.
Piece of cake. You should notice that there’s a -y suffixed onto our target words. That -y is a focus marker, it tells you when the noun in focus is coming up. In this case the nouns in focus were andaketa pusa and priton pusit.
You may have noticed that we use the preposition ed to specify a place in Pangasinan. In English, we have specific prepositions like on, in, at, and to… In Pangasinan we can use ed for all of those; it’s a general-purpose location preposition.
If you want a more general locations like here and there, there are a couple of options. Here are the location adverbs:
- dia here (near the speaker)
- ditan there (by the listener)
- diman there (far from speaker and listener)
Note that it’s a three-way distinction, which corresponds to 1st person, 2nd person, and 3rd person. It’s different than the two-way here/there system in English.
So now you can use these location words in your existence and non-existence sentences.
- Angapoy andeketa pusit dia. There are no black squids here.
- Walay priton pusa diman. There’s some fried cat over there. (DISCLAIMER: Pangasinan speakers do not eat cats. Language learning has to be surprising sometimes.)
Hooray, now you can declare existence (and non-existence) of objects and specify locations!
But wait, there’s more! If you are really committed to the preposition ed, you can feel free to use it with dia, ditan, and diman; there’s no change in meaning. One thing you should know, though, is that the forms contract. Here are the contractions:
- edia (ed + dia)
- edtan (ed + ditan)
- edman (ed + diman)
I’m told that you can switch corresponding forms out freely, that there’s not a meaningful difference between walay bastosa ugaw edman and walay bastosa ugaw diman.
There’s one more thing. The existence verb wala loves the location adverbs so much, that it contracts with them. Check it out.
- wadia (wala + edia). Wadiay narasana aso ed abong. There’s a hungry dog here at the house.
- wadtan (wala + edtan) Wadtan so narasana aso ed abong. There’s a hungry dog there at the house (near you, listener).
- wadman (wala + edman) Wadman so narasana aso ed abong. There’s a hungry dog over there (far from both of us).
You’ll notice that wadtan and wadman both end in consonants, so it’s impossible to add the focus suffix -y to the end of that word. Instead, we use the other focus marker so.
As far as I know, it’s just wala that has contractions; if there are angapo contractions I’m not aware of them yet.
To summarize, there are a few ways to declare the existence of, for example, a big house over there, you’d say it like this:
- Walay balega abong diman.
- Walay balega abong edman.
- Wadman so balega abong.
You can deny the existence of that big house over there with angapo; just remember the word angapo doesn’t want to make a contraction.
- Angapoy balega abong diman.
- Angapoy balega abong edman.
That’s all for now, here’s a summary.