Re: The disappeared conlang (and: Character sets)
| From: | Jeff Jones <jeffsjones@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Tuesday, January 22, 2002, 23:50 |
|---|
On Tue, 22 Jan 2002 18:11:41 -0500, John Cowan <jcowan@...>
wrote:
>Patrick Dunn wrote:
>
>> Prurio modo viri qui in arbore pilosa est.
PrsAct1S AblS GenS RelMasNomS Prep AblS FemAblS Prs3S
I.itch like man who in tree furry is
but I would have thought viro (AblS) for viri
>Eh? Scratchily men who are in a hairy tree ... (where's
>the main verb?). Or reading pilosi for pilosa,
>Scratchily men who are in a tree are hairy.
>Doesn't mean much to me either way, except for a general
>suggestion of fleas.
If only Cicero, Catullus, and Caesar were this easy! Translation is not my
strong suit, which brings me to:
ObConLang: After not being able to parse the Tyl-Sjok text in the last
relay, I realized that 'Yemls had some ambiguities.
I wonder if there are any standard ways of dealing with
1. when a verb may have 1 or 2 objects, how to tell if there are 2 object
phrases or just one
2. when both the main verb and the verb in an object clause allow a
variable # of objects, how to tell which verb an object belongs to
Jeff
Reply