> Thanks, Philip.
>
> A couple of things occurred to me as I reread my deathless prose from 2003.
> In that version of the Language Code, I have:
>
> M morphology
> a agglutinating (+/-)
> i isolating (+/-)
>
> I think that these features can be replaced with a single feature, Green
> (short for Greenberg). This feature is the ratio of morphs to words and is
> expressed as a real number. For example, Miapimoquitch is 2.43. That is, on
> average there are 2.43 morphs per word. I think this is a more accurate
> reflection of the agglutinating/isolating dimension and isn't too hard to
> figure out, given some amount of text. Joseph Greenberg, of typological
> fame, proposed this (and other ratios) as a measure of morphological
> typology.
>
> Also in this version of the Language Code, I claimed that English has 24
> consonants and 9 vowels. For the record (which is also in the archives) this
> is not correct, and should be more like 14 or 15 for American English and
> 19-22 for British English. Consult the archives for a nice little discussion
> of this.
>
> Dirk
>
> On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 8:55 AM, Philip Newton <philip.newton@...>
> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 3:42 PM, Dirk Elzinga <dirk.elzinga@...>
> > wrote:
> > > Many years ago I proposed a "Language Code," which was intended to
> > provide a
> > > typological profile for a given constructed or natural language. It
> > should
> > > still be in the archives somewhere.
> >
> > Here's Take 4:
http://archives.conlang.info/ge/suezhae/qhuevhunwhian.html
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Philip
> > --
> > Philip Newton <philip.newton@...>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Miapimoquitch: Tcf Pt*p+++12,4(c)v(v/c) W* Mf+++h+++t*a2c*g*n4 Sf++++argh
> La----c++d++600
>