|From:||Padraic Brown <elemtilas@...>|
|Date:||Sunday, January 12, 2003, 19:59|
From: "Sarah Marie Parker-Allen"
> This list also illustrates a problem
> I have, in that by using LangMaker, my words
> have a lot of meaningless
> spring zhoshra
> seagull zhoskei
> universe, cosmos zhoslka
> library zhosllei
> See? All start with the same root, "zhos,"
> but aren't connected to each other.
Not so fast!
You can always english it around so that these
"unconnected" words become in fact connected.
Take the root zhos- to mean "beginning, origin"
the other roots then modify zhos- and complete
zhos + ehra = origin + time = beginning of the
year, or Spring (assuming that Spring _is_ the
beginning of the year in this langauge!)
zhos + ekhei = origin + bird = bird from the
place of origin (the Sea being the origin of life
and the world)
zhos + lka = origin + complete = origin of all
things, the Universe
zhos + ellei = origin + wisdom = place where
Voi là, the words are all of a sudden a lot less
> And I'm pretty sure I was short on sleep the
> day I came up with this list
> grammatical genders:
> adult male
> adult female
Those all make sense: there are clear
distinctions between m/f adult humans; which
become less clear in children; practically
disappear in babies, not to mention that the
distinction between human and animal is next to
nonexistent in babies.
> inanimate (general)
An old favourite.
> diminutive/informal familiar
These generally aren't grammatical genders. But
hey, it's your language!
These two make a little less sense, as number is
generally not considered a grammatical gender.
> collective personages-plural
Giving plural forms their own separate genders is
a bit confusing to me. Are women as a group (or
for that matter a group of women) a different
gender than a single woman, then?
Percumion farfer, ec nasteros em purfelos, polim ed siramet.