Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

my grammar (and a little of Word Order Indicating Tense)

From:# 1 <salut_vous_autre@...>
Date:Friday, December 31, 2004, 0:07
>as for dropping of arguments, there are some language like Japanese where >you can drop the subject, object etc if they're obvious without marking on >the verb, and without any verbal agreement, so for instance you could say: > >have car > >for "I have a car", "you have a car" etc if the subject was obvious, or: > >"I have" > >if the object (for instance car) was obvious. If your language freely >allows the dropping of arguments like the subject or object without some >marking that this has happened then I don't think your system is workable. >But since this isn't the case....
Is it a dropping of argument in something like - Do you have a car? - I do "You do what?" would ask someone who arrives and didn't heard the question Does a language need a capacity to drop arguments? I can't find an example ef that kind of thing in French - As-tu une voiture? (Do you have a car?) - J'en ai une (I have on) In french it needs a pronoun to replace the word car ("en") So I think I can make my conlang without having to think to these droppings _____ I will come back on a few mistakes or changes I've made in "my grammar"
>Vocalic change: > >V1 -> V2 > >i -> I u -> U e -> 2 A -> o E -> E~ a -> a~ O -> O~ @ -> @ (unchanged)
I forgot the A -> o I don't need these and it lead to ambiguity with de A and the O Also I will add "6 -> 6" and "y -> y" it's a little useless but they were missing
>4: the question form simply inverts the subject and the pronoun > >VOS a question about the past OVS a question about the present OSV a >question about the futur
What have I said? invert the subject and the object, I meant
>5: There are 7 aspects, represented by the first consonant of each verb >(there can have a vowel before or it can beggin the verb) > >perfective: f S x inchoactive: pp\ ts kx cessative: >pf tS qX perpetual: p_h t_h k_h progressive: p t k >iterative: liguo-labial plosive, post-alveolar plosive, and [q] (all >voiceless)
I said "perfective: f S x" but it is "perfective: f S X" I said 7 aspects and I only gave 6 I forgot the last one after writing the iterative I forgot the "Habitual": p\ s x
>9: the stress is always on the last vowel of the word wich is not a schwa
I should say "a schwa, an open schwa or a [y]
>"You probably didn't want to beggin to be eaten by them" > >Q not a question T past As inchoactive V passive M potential Af >negative > >"dza'g6:n pi' ga~' "
Mistake: I kept the first person subject instead of the segond person It is "dza'g6:n te' ga~' " I'll work on the adverbs, adjectives, and stuff But there's something I don't know Does a language needs to have a way to distinc definite and indefinite I've heard that some languages don't have a definite indefinite distinction (latin?) How can this works? it simply lets the ambiguity or is there a equivalent grammatical way to do this in these languages?


Tristan McLeay <conlang@...>