Re: Articles, determiners, quantifiers, whatever...

Hi everybdoy,

First, I want to apoligize because it was very harsh to call some conlangers
"unimaginative". I was very fustrated by my research... Besides, a conlanger
is always imaginative otherise they wouldn't imagine a conlang.

(Note: I'm getting used to use the epicene "they".)  ;-)

Now, my first collective answer...

==================
Sally Caves wrote:

> Try Teonaht's split nominative definite article?  I'm not sure how
> "imaginative" it is, but the article carries weight in determining whether
	[---CUT---]

il teonaht ry ravvo. il preole fy an.

(I'm no sure about my conjugation...)

Yes, it's imaginative enough. But I was looking for more.

> Also try Matt's Tokana; at least from what I remember of his first edition,
> his third person pronouns were the same as his articles, both called
> "determiners," functioning most efficiently in this respect.  I wish I'd
> thought of that!  :)
I put Tokana in my growing list of conlang to review thoroughly. And I liked
his "determiners" too. Maybe will I rip off this idea in a future conlang...

But that's still not enough!

================
Rik Roots wrote:

 > The Gevey object "status" system includes features which in English would
 > be rendered through articles - though the similarities are only
 > approximate.
	[---CUT---]

(Gevey has been in my bookmarks for a long time. I got caught by the script.)

I wouldn't say I've understood everything but I like the case declensions...
Another idea to rip off.  ;-)  But that's not enough either.

=====================
David Peterson wrote:

 > The only language I have with "articles" is Kamakawi, but these articles
 > are directly related to the subject status markers.  So, if you go here:
	[---CUT---]

That's a pity you didn't say more about these articles which turn into tense
markers. The idea sounded promising. Any way, Kamakawi isn't what I was
looking for, even if more about its articles is explained. That's not enough...

================
I said that that isn't enough because like on all the sites I visited, only
"a" and "the" are explained in most cases.

I've found "all" in Teonaht lexicon, "all" and "every/each" in Gevey lexicon
but no explanation on how to use them. That was what I was looking for: a
very large explanation with absolutely everything that can be used as article.

In Shaquelingua, the quantifiers contain a lot of things: simple case
marking, unspecified quantity, indefinite number (if in one word, including
zero), indefinite article (sg./dual/pl.), definite/demonstrative article
(sg./dl./pl.), generality article (untranslatable), indefinite quantity,
indefinite partitive (a part of), interrogative article... They can also
mean "lack of", "contrary of", "too much", "too many", "not enough" (in
quantity/number)... and, last, there are possessive quantifiers too.

I call each item of the list an "aspect" and these aspects can be combined
according to rules. (The HTML page of the previous version is over 30
screens high --15" screen-- with lots of tables, examples... and space!) I
simplified everything but it's still a huge nightmare and I was looking for
ideas on how to organize it.

Now, I guess I'm all by my own to face the hideous monster.  ;-)  Don't
expect to see me until monday or tuesday...

See ya,

================
Remi Villatel
maxilys@tele2.fr
================

Replies