Re: CHAT: Nakiltipkaspimak

Tal skrev:

> *grmpf*! One more incorporating language... You're all
> thieves! :) What is it with this new batch 'a 'langers... all
> incorporatin', all active-systems... Not that you are a newbie
> Daniel but geeez...
:) Well. Rinya has been an active language for about two years,
i.e. from the beginning, so you can't say anything about that. :)

Actually I've been on this list for more than two years now.
(I subscribed on Sept 17, 1998.) And I can't remember ever going
nomail. (Which in turn implies that I haven't had vacation for
more than a week in a row for two years. :( ).

As for the incorporating stuff, I've been inspired by the langs
I use in my BA-thesis, Telek and the fact that one of the langs
we talked about in class yesterday was noun-incorporating. So I
thought I'd give it a try.

It's also a kind of reaction against Rinya which is very analytic.

Oh, and Tal, don't be sorry. It _is_ possible that I've subconsciously
_might_ have stolen something from târuven. Happy now? ;)

And if you're still not happy, remember that I have a photo
of you that I just might scan and put on the web somewhere... :D
(Don't worry. I wouldn't. Unless you really want me to. It's a
good picture though.)

> Are "they" putting something into the
> water-supply? (Damn can't say that in târuven as there's no word
> for "put", but wait...) What will be the next "big minds think
> alike" -> "conlangers conlang alike" wave... Matrix-languages? (as
> in C. J. Cherry's Chanur-series)
I know Matt Pearson did something like that in the language for the
tv-series "Dark Skies"...

> > The most impressive thing about it is probably the fact that
> > everything on Pimak (i.e. everything in this mail) is written
> > down on a single piece of paper measuring 21x14 cm. On one
> > side.
> A5? Now that -is- impressive.
Thanks. I could have written more, but unfortunately there were
these four holes in the paper... Don't ask me why... :p

> > EVIDENCE
> > 1-hand-info   -xa
> > hearsay       -li
> >
> > To mark evidentiality is optional.
> So what does it mean when you don't mark evidentiality? That
> you're making a claim, that you assume... is non-marked closest
> to -xa or -li?
I've heard (or should I say "I heard-li" :) that Inuktitut (or
something like that) has obligatory evidence markers. The default
one to use is "hearsay". So when sentences are translated they
come out "I've heard..." or "It is said..." And that's not what
I wanted. I also don't want the 1-hand-info marker everywhere.
So I guess when it's not marked at all, you can't really know
if it's hearsay or personal experience. That's up to context.

> Strange though that such hurried sketches can be so much more
> complete than langs one has worked on for years. Instant
> Language(tm), almost instantly usable.
Yeah. That's what frightens me the most about Nakiltipkaspimak.
This took me about two hours to do. OTOH, there's _so_ much more
to be done on Nakiltipkaspimak (or Pimak for short). It just
seems more complete than it is because I've worked on the syntax.

> The amount of k's and t's sure gives it a special feel...
> inspired by eskimo languages I assume?
Yes, I think so. I've made some small attempts before with
polysynthetic langs, but they've become impossible to pronounce.
-pt-, -kt- and -tk- I can handle. Plus, it sounds really cool. :)
piktinaktuptiktin, tanuktakut. I like it! :)

Haven't got any /q/s though.

> And btw:
> ycavvayrge fales
> y-     cavvayr            -ge       fal   -es
> "they" move.into.position causative water locative
> `"they" are putting something into the water-supply.'
Where does the "something" come from? Does it have something
to do with the transitivity of the verb or?

Daniel