|
footnotes to the 1999 language description
section 3 Now that Unicode support is widespread– in other words, now that I have it on my own computer– I use plain old eng for the velar nasal consonant. However I still use n with crossed tail in my handwriting. I would urge others (if there were any others) to use eng (codepoint 014B in Unicode). I could also sympathize with the use of 019E or 0235, although the appearance of 0235 in most fonts is like a hideous misshapen parody of my n with crossed tail.
section 6 Vorlin adjectives are somewhat similar to active participles of stative verbs. For example roda can be considered a contraction of rodenda, a participle that means "engaging in the act of being red." -oz, -uc, -iz and -oza, -uca, -iza should be considered equally valid variants. In other words one can say -oza or -oz.
section 11 Delete the final item about sentence chains. Also delete this sentence from section 1: "This document does not address important issues such as the handling of quotations and parenthetical phrases, the types of conjunctions and exactly how they operate, etc., because those elements of the design are not completed." The fact is, Vorlin syntax is already more than adequate and does not need any more complexities! Conjunctions: wan = "and" but it can only be used to join nouns. Whether it should be viewed as a conjunction or a preposition is unclear. If I were going to revise the document I would add a fairly intense reminder that Vorlin syntax is beautiful just as it is. I would include a link to Pike's Kalaba-X essay which proves that a syntax much more restricted than Vorlin's is sufficient to do everything a language has to do. The syntax of Vorlin is a carefully crafted compromise between flexibility and rule-governedness.
|