adj/adv phrases, was inalienable possession

Mathias M. Lassailly wrote:
>
> Charles wrote :
> > I must now re-examine the whole relative clause issue.
> Could let me know how this develops ? I'm really interested because my
> verb-rooting DEL language works exactly like yours (except that tags are
> prefixed and there is a factitive voice). So I'm curious to know how you
> manage to proceed with factitive and connective clauses.
If yours actually already works, it is ahead of mine.
I see that DEL has 4 basic verb voices, similar to my TOM.
http://members.aol.com/lassailly/newlang.html (DEL),
http://www.catty.com/~catty/lang/tomato.htm (out-dated).

But DEL uses topic/comment structures, TOM doesn't:
it prefers serial verb constructs, and freely exchanges
subject/object to get the pivotal noun between the verbs.
This is one of its relative-clause and preposition
avoidance techniques (there are many):

market go   I    buy    flour
merako vadu meso haceti farino

TOM also has a "stative" form adding the adjectival
ending "-a" to the verb "-i" (active) and "-u" (passive)
endings to make "-au" and "-ai" as in:

saqkola luno ... luno saqkolau ... saqkolai luno
ruddy moon ..... moon is ruddy ... ruddy is the moon

But true causatives would require serial verbs.
I suppose a "causative stative" would be possible
during a lunar eclipse:

luno saqkolau       suno ... suno saqkolai     luno
moon is reddened by sun  ... sun  blood-colors moon