Advanced patterns and nesting

01Nested declarative clauses

When we think about what others think, or know what others know, we nest tha/tho clauses:

Two levels

Structure:

mia tha [thia tha [shia to wepu] tho phaelo] tho shelomu
    └────────────────────────────────────────────┘
              └─────────────────────┘

Each tha has its own tho. They nest like parentheses.

Three levels

This is grammatically correct but approaches the limit of comfortable processing. In practice, speakers break complex nestings into separate sentences:

Both express the same meaning; the second is easier to follow.

02Nested interrogative clauses

Wondering about wondering:

Each pha pairs with its own pho.

03Mixing complementizer types

Different complementizer types can nest within each other:

Declarative inside interrogative

Structure:

mia pha [thia tha [shia to wepu] tho sano] pho phaelo
    └───────────────────────────────────────────────┘
              └──────────────────────┘

The tha/tho pair is inside the pha/pho pair.

Interrogative inside declarative

Quotative inside declarative

Declarative inside quotative

04Relative clauses containing complementizers

Relative clauses (whu) can contain embedded clauses:

Relative clause with tha/tho

Here, the relative clause contains an embedded declarative. The structure:

[whu mia tha [___ towe nai] tho sano] miona

The head noun miona closes the relative clause and supplies the missing subject inside the embedded statement: the gap a relative clause leaves may sit inside a complement frame, as it does here. The tha/tho pair is fully contained within the relative clause.

Relative clause with pha/pho

Here the gap is the asker: the missing subject of thilou, supplied by the head noun.

Relative clause with sha/sho

05Complementizers containing relative clauses

The embedded clause can itself contain a relative clause:

tha/tho containing relative clause

Structure:

mia tha [[whu nophi kealo] miona to wepu] tho sano

The relative clause whu nophi kealo modifies miona, and the whole noun phrase is subject of the embedded clause.

pha/pho containing relative clause

sha/sho containing relative clause

06Multiple embeddings at the same level

A sentence can contain multiple embedded clauses that are not nested:

Coordinated embedded clauses

Different embedding types in sequence

In every one of these patterns the embedded clause is the object of a main verb; that is where Phi puts embedded thought.

07Processing strategies for complex structures

When encountering or producing complex nested structures:

For comprehension

Track the openers: each time you hear tha, pha, or sha, note that a clause has opened. Each tho, pho, or sho closes the most recent unmatched opener of the same type. The verb after the outermost closer is the main verb. Then build meaning from the inside out: understand the innermost clause first, and see how it functions in the next level out.

For production

Start with meaning: what do you ultimately want to say, and what is embedded inside what? Open in order, beginning with the outermost structure, and close in reverse order: the last opened clause is the first closed. Before you finish, count that each opener has its closer.

Simplification strategies

When a structure becomes too complex, break it into sentences, expressing each level separately. Refer back to established information with pronouns. Sometimes a different organization is simply clearer; reorder.

08Limits of nesting

Grammatically, Phi places no limit on nesting depth. Practically, human processing limits apply: one or two levels of embedding are comfortable, three is challenging, and four or more is difficult for anyone.

Beyond two levels, consider restructuring. The grammar supports complexity, but communication serves understanding.

09Examples of maximal complexity

For the ambitious learner, here are grammatically correct but demanding examples:

Three-level mixed nesting

Relative clause with nested embedding

Quotation of complex content

10Summary

The advanced patterns show the regularity of Phi's complementizer system. Nesting is unlimited: each opener pairs with its closer, regardless of depth. The three types can nest within each other, and relative clauses can contain complementizers or be contained by them. Through all of it, the opener-closer matching keeps the structure parseable.

In practice, prioritize clarity over complexity. The system supports whatever depth meaning requires, but simpler expression usually serves communication better.

There is a reason to learn these depths even so. When it matters exactly whose belief, whose question, and whose words are in play, the frames can say it: a doubt stays a doubt, and borrowed words stay visibly borrowed. However deep the nesting goes, each closer steps the sentence back out one level, until the last thought standing is your own.