Re: Singular Pluralities
From: | Christopher Wright <faceloran@...> |
Date: | Sunday, July 28, 2002, 3:35 |
Christophe Grandsire sekalge:
>having a plural form identical to a singular word of different
>meaning [...]
>But I suppose there are already conlangs out there which
>do that ;))) . Right?
We-ell*...Sturnan has a few words ending in -eis that have a plural of
-ei, which is the infinitive marker for verbs. It causes me some
confusion. Fortunately, -eis words are few in number. I _am_ learning!
Ambiguity is the soul of language, and Sturnan's heart is bigger!
Now for my newest project, Tallefkuel, I have to make that devilish yet
plausible. Perhaps after the counselling sessions remove my horror at the
inventory and orthography, I can start on a horrible grammar. After that,
I'll deliberately fail at applying this grammar to individual words.
Welcome back. (Yes, it's not saying much, but "A man who speaks doesn't
know; a man who knows doesn't speak." Perhaps I should talk more often.
"Better to keep your mouth shut and look like a fool than to open it and
remove all doubts." On the other hand, "'Do you know what happened to the
boy who asked too many questions?' 'No, what?' 'Sodomy non sapiens. He
probably got answers, and serve him right.'")
(After much deliberation: ) I hope you had a _good_ week.
You're left-handed? It's a good thing you're not Lithuanian. I'd be
forced to glochidiate you.
Laimes,
Wright.
*It's not like I'm a redneck or anything. That is, in order to be a
redneck, I'd need to be from the Piedmont and preferably get a car from
my father as a gift...if only I can move it off the concrete blocks. No,
I'm merely a yokel.
Replies