Re: My nameless tougue (was Re: New to Language Construction)
|From:||Adrian Morgan <morg0072@...>|
|Date:||Friday, March 17, 2000, 6:55|
Shreyas Sampat wrote:
> The generic 'tanu' <which I'm considering
> cutting out> marks a tendency or a
> statement that is usually true but may have
Yes, I would feel very uncomfortable with a
grammar that assumes something to be absolutely
true unless otherwise indicated. It depends on
the culture, of course, but if we had such a
construct in English I would regularly find
myself in very deep trouble just by being a
little lazy and not adding the generic. If your
culture is not big on, for example,
philosophical discussion, this is less of a
> The imperfective 'fa' marks actions of a duration
Why is it that the word 'imperfect' is such an
overloaded term in grammar?
> Retrospective 'mo' marks actions of continuing
> relevance or future relevance, implying 'there
> is a reason you, the listener, should know this'
> or 'there is a reason the agent does/did/will
> do this that will reveal itself in the fullness
> of time.'
This suggests the language of a story-telling
culture. Am I right?
> Well, that's the end of it. I'm pondering
> whether to add a negative affix, or use a
> prefix or some floating modifier.
More affixes? Sheesh!