Re: Strong/weak verbs

On Aug 15, 2007, at 7:40 AM, Lars Finsen wrote:

> I have been following the discussion about strong and weak verbs
> with considerable interest because the Urianian verb the way I have
> it today is very sketchy and I would like to do quite a bit more
> work with it. The Indoeuropean verb is very entertaining material
> for a conlanger I think, but I find the rather introductory volumes
> that I have at my disposal don't give them the treatment I need. So
> where do you go usually to study the Indoeuropean verb in somewhat
> more detail (please)?
My book of choice would be Sihler's _New Comparative Grammar of Greek
and Latin_. It does emphasize Greek and Latin, but gives examples
from lots of other IE languages too. It's very detailed and a little
dense -- I find it takes a while to get through. Also, it's the only
large PIE work I've looked at; there might be better ones out there,
or at least better for your purposes.

http://www.amazon.com/New-Comparative-Grammar-Greek-Latin/dp/
0195083458/ref=sr_1_1/104-0723940-3539968?
ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1187406837&sr=8-1

>
> I have been thinking that the Urianian verb could actually be
> simplified because they monophthongised at an early stage, losing
> some of the ablaut distinctions. The rest of it might have been
> lost due to analogies. Still I think ablaut adds some charm and I
> think I will retain these remains now, at last in some dialects,
> and maybe add some prenasal raising or similar stuff, taking care
> to be not to imitative of course...
It can be challenging getting the right balance of inspiration from
other languages without imitating them too much, although it depends
on your esthetics and philosophy regarding your conlang. Some
conlangs I've come up with were intended pretty much as imitations,
and in those cases borrowing features liberally is perfectly fine.

Reply