> Gary Shannon <fiziwig@...> wrote:
>
> While parsing some sentences, it occurred to me that the
> sentence: "The ball is not blue." can be interpreted two different
> ways:
>
> the ball is-not blue.
> the ball is not-blue.
>
> Which way do your conlangs handle this?
Good topic! Senjecas is rather simple:
gelos modhros esa ne
ball blue is not
This works for either interpretation. One might also say:
gelos vmodhros esa
ball blueless esa
But that sounds rather stilted.
>
> Another random question about "and":
>
> "Go to the store and buy some bread."
>
> can be interpreted as two commands:
>
> "Go to the store."
> "Buy some bread."
Again Senjecas is rather simple. Independent sentences cannot be
linked with the coordinating conjunction "and."
tus kweridemom o ate.
you store to go.
tus vargenom kwerye.
you bread buy.
"tus" is necessary because the imperative form (-e)is also used for
the 1st and 3rd "imperatives" also.
>
> But in the following case, that doesn't work because the two
> separate commands do not convey the intention of the original
> compound sentence:
>
> "Do not open the cage and let the tiger out."
>
> "Do not open the cage."
> "Let the tiger out."
tus kolkom twive me.
you cage open not.
tus dhkeyem pausa me.
you tiger release not.
"me" is the negative for the imperative and the subjunctive.
"dhkeyem" is the now extinct Caspian tiger, Panthera tigris caspica.
"tyunges" is the Siberian tiger, Panthera tigris siberica.
>
> "Do not let the tiger out and lock the cage before you leave."
>
Again, simple in Senjecas:
tus dhkeyem pausa me.
you tiger release not.
tus pera tus per likwa kolkom arge.
you before you FUT leave cage lock.
Charlie