When the Verb Carries Its Own Arguments

Seventh article in an RCI LinkedIn series on the impact of language in technology. Builds on the predecessor Listening to Spanish Again, the series-aperture observation What Technical Vocabulary Refuses to Carry, the lineage-discovery story I Thought I Was the First, and the three technical deep-dives so far: Two Be-Verbs for Two Kinds of Equals on ser/estar, Three Stances Toward a Statement on mood, and One Verb, Two Computations on aspect. First-person voice; the fourth of the technical articles. Subject: clitics, the most novel mapping on the syntactic axis among Inflexión's six mappings between grammar and semantics.

Published on LinkedIn 2026-05-21, https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/when-verb-carries-its-own-arguments-ramon-rodriguez-clwyc and https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:ugcPost:7463062079399333890/.

Dámelo.

That is one word in Spanish. The translation is four words in English: give it to me. The four English words can be reordered in conversational ways. Give me it is a little awkward but legal; to me, give it is poetic, almost ungrammatical. The Spanish word cannot be reordered in any conversational way. Lome dá and medálo and lomedá are not Spanish; they are typing errors.

The Spanish word dámelo is the vos imperative dá, from dar, "to give", with two object pronouns attached as enclitics: the indirect-object clitic me, the recipient, and the direct-object clitic lo, the thing. The order is fixed by the grammar: indirect before direct. Substitute the indirect and you get dáselo, where se replaces me and signals a third-person recipient instead of first-person, "give it to him/her/them". Substitute again and you get dámela, where la replaces lo and signals a feminine direct object instead of a masculine one, "give it to me", where it is feminine. The morphology of the call IS the structure of the call. The verb carries its own arguments, in a strictly determined order.

This is the most novel mapping in Inflexión on the syntactic axis, the one with the smallest analogue in English and the largest payoff if the reader can see what is going on.

The fixed Spanish clitic order

Spanish object pronouns attach to a verb in a grammaticalised sequence. When multiple clitics co-occur, they appear in this order, and only this order:

se before te, second person, before me, first person, before lo / la / le / los / las / les, third person.

Within third person, indirect, le/les, comes before direct, lo/la/los/las. There is one exception: le/les before lo/la/los/las triggers a phonological rule that turns le into se, the "se-by-le" rule that Spanish-speakers internalise without naming it. That is why give it to him is dáselo and not dálelo: the le that would otherwise appear becomes se when followed by lo.

The order is not negotiable. Lome dá is not a stylistic choice; it is not Spanish. The discipline runs through every speech act in the language. Me lo dio, te la mandé, se me cayó, and Spanish-speakers obey it without thinking, the way English-speakers obey the before the noun rather than after.

What programming languages do with arguments

Mainstream programming languages route function arguments by position, the order in which they appear at the call site, matched to the order they appear in the function signature, or by keyword, as in f(name="x", value=5), where the argument label is in the call. Both work; neither is grammaticalised. Position is just whatever order the function-definition author wrote; keyword is just whatever names the function-definition author chose. The discipline is enforced by the language's parser, not by an underlying grammar that speakers internalise from infancy.

There is a small adjacent thing in some languages: currying, in functional languages, where applying a function to fewer arguments returns a partially applied version of the function. Dámelo and dáselo are something like applying dar to a sequence of clitics one at a time: each clitic added is one slot filled. But mainstream currying does not have positional ordering enforced by the language's grammar; it just goes left to right through the formal parameters in whatever order the function was defined.

Spanish has the system for routing arguments by morphology natively, by virtue of having clitics. Most programming languages do not.

The Inflexión move

In Inflexión, the clitic stack on a verb specifies the routing of arguments through a function call. The verb names the operation; the clitics, in their fixed Spanish order, fill the positional slots of the function in the order Spanish grammaticalises.

The white paper's worked example is a banking transfer:

La función transferir, que toma una cuenta_origen, una cuenta_destino y un monto, es ...
Transferíselo.

The function transferir is defined with three named arguments: cuenta_origen, the source account, cuenta_destino, the destination account, and monto, the amount. The call Transferíselo is the vos imperative transferí, from transferir, with two clitics attached, in the fixed Spanish order se-lo. se is the third-person indirect-object clitic, "to him/her/them"; lo is the third-person direct-object clitic, "it". The argument routing is positional, but positional in the Spanish-grammaticalised sense: lo, the direct object, maps to the direct-object slot of transferir, the monto, the amount; se, the indirect object, maps to the indirect-object slot, the cuenta_destino, the destination. The remaining argument, cuenta_origen, is bound from context.

A Spanish-speaker reading Transferíselo in code does not have to consult a function signature to know what got routed where. The clitic positions encoded the routing; the routing follows the grammar the speaker has been using since childhood.

A reader who does not speak Spanish is at the largest disadvantage of any of Inflexión's six mappings. The clitic system is the part of the language with the smallest English equivalent. The article you are reading is, frankly, the hardest of this series for the LinkedIn reader who does not speak Spanish to feel.

Why this is the most novel mapping on the syntactic axis

The other five mappings have analogies. Number agreement maps to scalar versus collection, and programmers know lists and scalars. Mood maps to evaluation strategy, and programmers know eager, deferred, and effectful. Aspect maps to eager versus lazy, and programmers know map versus imap. Diminutive scaling maps to numeric and cost annotation, and programmers know variants of the same operation that trade cheap-fast against expensive-thorough. Ser / estar maps to immutable versus mutable, and programmers know const and let.

Clitic ordering does not have the same kind of analogy. Programmers know positional arguments and keyword arguments, but neither captures what clitic morphology does. Clitics route arguments by their grammatical category, person crossed with role, in fixed Spanish order, attached to the verb itself as part of one phonological word. This is closer to how some natural languages encode case, like Latin, Finnish, Russian, than to how any mainstream programming language encodes argument-passing.

For a Spanish-speaker, this is the easiest of the six mappings to use. The rules are completely automatic. For a reader who does not speak Spanish, it is the hardest of the six mappings to learn. The rules are unfamiliar at the syntactic level. Inflexión is, in that sense, more accessible to its substrate language's native speakers than to its potential international audience, in this one specific place. That is a feature of the design, since the language is meant to read as Spanish, rather than a defect; it is also a fact worth being honest about.

A future installment will address the further dimension of clitic placement: whether the clitics appear before the verb, proclitic as in me lo dio, he gave it to me, or after it, enclitic as in dándomelo, dármelo, dámelo, with the same meanings in different positions. The current mapping covers ordering; placement carries syntactic meaning the current mapping flattens, and a future revision will address it as a separate semantic dimension.

What's coming next

Two technical articles remain in the immediate plan: diminutive and augmentative scaling, the most playful of the six, where the cultural register of cinquito and buscazo meets numeric and computational scaling, and number agreement, the structural type system that runs through articles, nouns, adjectives, and verbs in lockstep, and maps to scalar versus collection.

After the six mapping articles, the series turns to the empirical question hinted at in the formal paper: whether a programming language whose surface syntax is morphologically denser than English actually gives large language models a cleaner substrate to work with. That is a question for a separate article, and a separate experiment, once the runtime exists and there is real Inflexión code for an LLM to read.

For now: Dámelo. Three morphemes; one phonological word; one function call; argument routing the verb itself carries.

Inflexión is a hand-built esoteric programming language whose semantics flow from the grammatical features of Rioplatense Argentine Spanish. The full design paper is at roderickc.com/inflexion. The companion methodology paper, on Babel, the runtime that generates esoteric programming languages from parameter sheets, is at roderickc.com/babel.