Re: Re : Using numberless substantives

Dans un courrier dat=E9 du 20/06/99 21:58:59  , Paul a =E9crit :


>  more sensible imho than either of my guesses.
you said it.

>  My exact comment on reading this was /H@lr:q/, if i've transcribed
>  a long syllabic _r_ correctly! :-) Is a more lengthy description of
>  these mutations available?
> =20
nope, that's all what's left in stock. i've tried sometimes plenty of others=20
and sometimes none for years, but now consider these 6 ones the only ones i=20
need (but badly need because tunu has very few root words). how does your=20
conlang deal with that ?

>  > --------
>  > No value judgement implied, just curiosity.
>  > -------
>  > do you hint it's darn stupid, you loony euroxcentric ? ;-)
> =20
>  I meant "no value judgement between which of my guesses I'd have
>  prefered your conlang to conform to", and I resent your implications
>  of a negative interpretation of the word loony :-)
ok, let's settle the argument here. and you can even visit the tunuans and=20
leave them live and raw. one time.

mathias