Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: 'Yemls Grammar

From:Jeffrey Jones <jsjonesmiami@...>
Date:Monday, September 26, 2005, 6:55
On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 23:55:01 -0400, Jeffrey Jones <jsjonesmiami@...>

>On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 11:08:40 -0700, Sylvia Sotomayor <terjemar@...> >wrote: > >> Hi, >> I looked. > >Hi Sylvia, >Your comments are timely -- this is the last night I'll have regular >internet access. And my computer will be going into storage tomorrow. > >> I like the way you define all your terms, even if the definitions are >> sktetchy. I need to do more of that. > >I do try to define things, because I sometimes make up my own terms or >misuse existing terms or because not everybody reading it will know the >terms. > >> I also like that 'YemIs has incorporation. I hope you'll let me know >> when you have something more to put into that section. Incorporation is >> one of the few cool things I haven't put into Kelen, so I have to >> experience it vicariously through other conlangs. :-) > >The reason I haven't said much is because I don't know enough about >incorporation in general to figure out how it works in 'Yemls. When/if I >come up with anything less vague, I'll definitely let you know, when I can.
I just reread the grammar, and I'm surprised I was able to say even that much. I still don't understand natlang incorporation very well. But in 'Yemls, let's say we have words for hunt, with Argument Structure A P c, and for tigers, with a single argument (the subject). If (tigers) is incorporated by (hunt), we have (hunt-tigers), with *proposed* Argument Structure A - c. In this proposal, the P argument for (hunt) is deleted, not just the redundant subject argument of (tigers). No arguments have been added. Now, the P-argument could be restored with the {A} prefix (I think). Then you could say something like "I hunt-tigers Fred." Just my current thoughts. I don't when I'll get back to all this ... Jeff
> >>-Sylvia >> >>On 9/20/05, Jeffrey Jones <jsjonesmiami@...> wrote: >>> If anybody besides Tom C has looked at this, I've uploaded some more >>> material and made some changes. I expect that will be it for a while. >>> >>> Happy Conlanging! >>> -- >>> Jeff Jones >>> >>> On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 19:22:52 -0400, Jeffrey Jones ><jsjonesmiami@...> >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > For those who don't mind the appearance of upper/mixed case letters :) >>> > here's a partially complete updated grammar of 'Yemls: >>> > >>> > >>> > Most of it's morphology so far, but that includes some recent >additions, >>> > like the distinction between indefinite and definite perfectives, and >one >>> > or two temporal point of reference suffixes. These single-mora
>>> > each take the place of some hypothetical adverb. The suffix to make >>> > nominoids act like static verboids has been modified. >>> > >>> > Incidentally, one of the things that helped me clean up the pages was >>> > settling on grammatical terms, although the ones I used may be >completely >>> > non-standard. >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Nameless >>> > {i: ViDf d But YOSELTfTV-i.} "I saw that person who has never to this >day >>> > sung for me." >>> >>========================================================================= >>> >> >> >>-- >>Sylvia Sotomayor >> >> >>========================================================================= >=========================================================================


tomhchappell <tomhchappell@...>Incorporating Agents vs. Patients in Verbs (was: 'Yemls Grammar)