Re: "Sentient"

Ajin-Kwai wrote:
>
> How far do y'all deconstruct cultural assumptions about subjective reality
> when deciding on the 1) grammatical structure 2) lexation 3)lexical choice
> 4) anything else, when working on your languages?  Have you ever had the
> experience of reading a direct translation of a natlang, where nothing
> seems to make any sense (motives, cause/effect, rationality, etc.)? Are
> any of your conlangs like this?  Unfortunately, many of the cultures and
> languages that could give us wonderful insight into the possibilities are
> disappearing or assimilating.  Maybe some constructed languages can
> provide new insights :)
        I tried to do that with Notya, which has a structure unlike any other
language, and still may be human enough to be understandable after some
training.

        The main idea of Notya is: no nouns, no verbs, nothing that looks like
them, but roots and four suffixes to give the "grammatical" relation
between the root and the other words, as well as its "activity"
('static' or 'active', but nouns can well be active and verbs static).
Yes, only four suffixes are enough to all the relations generally
covered by nouns, verbs, cases, pre/postpositions, etc... Add to that a
lot of context-depending constructions, and you have it. If you want
more about it, I can talk more tomorrow. But today I'm really busy (I
have my presentation this afternoon!).

--
        Christophe Grandsire

        Philips Research Laboratories --  Building WB 145
        Prof. Holstlaan 4
        5656 AA Eindhoven
        The Netherlands

        Phone:  +31-40-27-45006
        E-mail: grandsir@natlab.research.philips.com