Re: A Sample of Acadon

On Sat, 10 Jun 2000 21:14:21 -0700, AcadonBot <acadon@...> wrote:

>> It looks like it's pretty easy to tell at a glance which words are nouns,
>> verbs, adjectives, and adverbs, for the most part. Then we come to "fro
>> qale antropaeo", where it looks like "which" is modifying "mankind" as an
>> adjective. Having pronouns that look like adjectives can be confusing.
>
>In general, the high frequency words are not marked for
>part of speech. "Mo" is I, not a noun.  "Mi" is me, not a verb.
>Quale/Qale is which, not an adjective.
>
>In general, the learner will need less help on the part of
>speech of the 200 most common words or so. But after
>that, p-o-s marking is, IMO, more valuable.
(Sorry for not snipping out the rest of the text when I posted my original
reply; I intended to, but I don't know why I forgot....)

I presume then that there's a distinct word for "which" as an adjective? I
can understand one-syllable words like "mo" and "mi" being exceptions to
the general pattern of word endings, but I still think "q(u)al" would be
preferable for the pronoun. (Alternatively "q(u)alo" would be fine, since
pronouns fill more or less the same grammatical slots as nouns.)

Alternatively, something that might work just as well would be to be a bit
more liberal with the definite article than English is, allowing it to be
used with words like "antropaeo". If "q(u)ale" is always followed by an
article or a pronoun, the reader would realize at once that it can't be an
adjective....

--
languages of Azir------> ----<http://www.io.com/~hmiller/languages.html>---
hmiller (Herman Miller)   "If all Printers were determin'd not to print any
@io.com  email password: thing till they were sure it would offend no body,
\ "Subject: teamouse" /  there would be very little printed." -Ben Franklin