Dans un courrier dat=E9 du 01/06/99 06:56:51 , Charles a =E9crit :
> > > In my experiments it seems impossible to have part-of-speech termina=
l
> > > vowels and SVO order without eventually gravitating to adjective-nou=
n.
i meant "in my opinion", which is not jap or else's. pidgin is not God. no=20
auxlang will please 10 billion earthlings so keep your WO if it fits you.
> =20
> > switching adj-noun means that you link inversion and attribution (like =
in
> > Chinese and English). in the same time you make a hierarchy ranking
> > attribution as secondary, derived word order and i feel it's not=20
accurate.
> > maybe you can systematize children's language :
> > house its door hurt john his head.
> =20
> That's genitive-noun, which I like, and often leads to adjective-noun
> by a process of "grammaticalization", if I got it right.
>
i think so. cf. Dutch "Jan z'n kop" and English "John's head".
=20
> > dog ADJ it red TOP it nice =3D the red dog is nice
> > friend my his sister she nice =3D my sister's friend is nice
> > sister my friend she nice =3D (ditto)
> > where integrative ADJ makes "it red" attributive like "his sister" is,=20
and
> > resumptive TOP closes substuff.
> > it seems strange, but that how attributive really works in children's=20
> heads :
> > actor comes first, then attribute.
> =20
> That works well with adjective-noun, where there is almost a feeling
> of pre-limitation and post-attribution of both nouns and verbs.
> Attempted example: "My red dog biting your sister is just playing."
>
dunno. maybe. just fits short sentences i guess.=20
=20
> > this has nothing to do with verb-noun
> > difference. either verb is noun's attribute or noun is verb's attribute
> > because it's unaspectivized (that's my favourite rabitting-on subject) =
:
> > "gone the car" =3D "the car gone" =3D the car is gone (as my little cou=
sin=20
> says :
> > "partie, la voiture !").
> > that's why i think your "reversive" language is a good basis for childi=
sh
> > auxlang.
> =20
> Well, it has to be easy enough for me, a much tougher task.
> =20
i'm always amazed of english's lack of topicalisation. how do you manage tha=
t=20
?
> > > By using an inverse-transitive voice or doing French-like compoundin=
g,
> > > root+preposition+root as in salle-a-manger, it could work well maybe=
.
> > >
> > that's basically what i did with "kases" (remember ? ;-)
> > but you may try with real prepositions made from real verbs.
> =20
> I may abandon compounds as unneeded anyway. I like the Tok Pisin
> "haus xxx" construction better than what I was thinking about earlier,
> letting little prepositions get in the middle of compounds.
these "prepositions" are usually reminiscent of either first or second=20
component of the compound as either item or function.
> As for cases/prepositions, I do like using a real verb instead of a
> closed-class particle e.g. "... concerning xxx" vs. "... about xxx".
> And it wouldn't be too horrible to try a more consistent VO style,
> adjs follow nouns, adverbs follow verbs, etc.
you can manage same with OV, N-Adj, Adv-V, etc. and convert japs to your=20
auxlang. don't forget a "suspensive" relief verb form though.
The main point for me
> is whether there can be a super-productive set of -r- type infixes:
> =20
> > > > let's say :
> > > > i : verb
> > > > o : substantive
> > > > a : adj =3D attributive to a substantive
> > > > e : adv =3D attributive to a verb
> > > > -r- : nomen agentis
> > > > -k- : noun of action
> > > > -s- : genitive
> > > > -t- : and (resumptive)
> > > >
> > > > bone fishi =3D to fish well
> > > > bona fishi-r-o =3D the good fisher
> > >
> > > Hey, I may have to steal this -r- and -k-, at least;
> > > what would be the most productive set of these?
> =20
> > mapping
> > like indonesian : around 10. mapping like i would ("kases") : around 50 =
(
> all
> > most frequent roles in their main aspects used in derived words). if yo=
u=20
> are
> > willing to use long words and avoid ditransitives by means of serial=20
verbs=20
> :
> > you need 4.
> =20
> How?! I can see the 50, what are the 4 and the 10? Do you mean "case role=
s"
come on, make it simple :
(1) i give sthg > (2) sthg is-given by me
(3) fact-of-giving sthg > (4) fact-of-being given
(1) i receive sthg > (2) sthg is-received by me
(3) fact-of-... > (4) fact-of...
now if your verbs don't refer to words' function or result, then you may add =
:
(5) i use-function of sthg > (6) sthg's function is-used by
(7) sthg's function aims at sthg > (8) sthg is aimed at by sthg's function
(9) to make sthg > (10) to be made by
(11) to apply on > (11) to be applied sthg
etc.
wait a minute ! i'm describing you Tunu, so i'd better stop here. conlanging=20
is not auxlanging.
=20
> > funny that Marcos and you both like root+root+suffix pattern.
> =20
> The lexical information naturally comes out faster than the grammatical,
> sorted by topicality. Then the POS vowel is held as long as necessary
> until the next word is ready, much prettier than "... uh ...".
>
you may be right. i didn't think of "slow" grammatical utterance. i'll have=20
to ponder over it.
Mathias =20