Re: Introduction to Kerla

Rob Haden <magwich78@...> wrote:

>>>
Syllable structure is CV(R), where V is any vowel or diphthong, and where R
is a member of the set {l r m n s c}, or CVS, where S is a voiceless stop,
followed by sV.
>>>
Will "lenpo" become "lempo"? "Lesca" > "Lecca"? etc. (Xth time this question
is asked re. conlang with "simplified" phonotactics ;-)

>>>
- All perceivable objects/entities will be basic arguments
- All perceivable actions/activities will be basic predicates
<<<
Is "cause" "the cause" or "to cause"?
Ever thought of having inalienable features? Like "smell", "name", "abode",
"spouse"?

>>>
- The zero predicate implies equivalence between two or more arguments
<<<
How do you make compound words?

>>>
- All roots/primitives will have 2 syllables and end in a vowel of the set
{a e o u}
- The vowel i is the plural radical, and as such, it will not be allowed in
the creation of basic root/primitive forms
<<<
No root with "i"? How is it that a genuine "creolanger" sacrifices one of
the major phonems of a language on the altar of such futile feature as
plurality ;-)?

>>>
- All roots/primitives will be created using a computer program, and then
perhaps "tweaked" by the creator(s).
<<<
I used Excel (with the "random" function).

>>>
All modifiers follow their heads, and agree with them in number and case.
<<<
What cases? Why inflect adjectives for number if verbs apparently don't?

>>>
There is no distinction between "adjectives" and "relative clauses" -- "the
big house" = "the house that is big."
<<<
sounds familiar.

>>>
Embedded/subjunctive clauses (as in "I think that she is pretty") simply
take the object position of the main verb.
Locational/motional predicates are used as equivalents to English
prepositions.
>>>
If you use verbs as prepositions like you say below, how will you
disambiguate the following?
Man say girl go-to school
"The man says that the girl goes to school"
"The man says 'girl' and goes to school".
How do you say "from" in "The wall protects the city from the enemy"?

>>>
If a head is the object of a relative clause, the structure is Head-Verb-
Subject-Resumptive Pronoun.
<<<
No subordinating pronoun?
dog see man
"the dog sees the man"
dog see man
"the dog that sees the man"
dog see man him
"the dog that the man sees"

>>>
There is at least one case in Kerla - the genitive, or possessive, case.
This case is marked by the suffix -n.  However, this case is not used for
partitive phrases such as "six of the houses."  (There may also be an
accusative case, but I have not decided yet.)
<<<
Again, how do you make compounds? will the case suffix be stuck to the last
of the components?

>>>
Currently, the number of predicate inflections resembles the verb paradigms
for most creoles.  There are markers for anterior (i.e. past) tense,
irrealis (i.e. subjunctive) mood, imperative mood, non-punctual (i.e.
progressive) aspect, passive voice, and intransitivity.  Unfortunately, I
haven't decided on the final forms for these yet.
<<<
Very unfortunate indeed. Reading your dry description without one single
concrete example does not lure comments unless the reader "was there and did
that" already. Frinstance, if you refer to creole verbs I take it for
granted that the verbs are not inflected and the mood etc. are expressed
with auxiliaries.

>>>
Kerla will use only suffixes for derivation.
<<<
Why? Since Kerla is headfirst, why not make it prefixing?

>>>
But I hope what I have so far is of some interest.
>>>
It's difficult to say with no concrete example to flesh it out. I have the
feeling you want to make a creole-inspired, easy grammar with the
"universally pronounceable" CV(S)CV touch---but you still keep some
eurostuff (plural, suffixes) at the same time. You didn't say whether it's a
priori (me/te/se is european though) and whether it's naturalistic (the
banning of "i" in roots makes it doubtful).
This being said, it's great to welcome a new conlang. Congratulation!

Mathias