|From:||Doug Ball <db001i@...>|
|Date:||Wednesday, October 27, 1999, 22:10|
> Another thing you can do is: make ae ligature a-umlaut, and make your
> a-umlaut an e-umlaut, since it's the traditional shva. That would be more
> 'regular' -- but it's up to you, just making a suggestion...Actually the umlaut means reduced to shva. Any vowel can be umlauted, a is
the most common, hence why I put it on the chart. Otherwise I would take
your suggestion, because at one time my ae ligature was a-umlaut.
> The _-ek_ suffix for plurals, that's from Hungarian right? (It's also _-ak_
> according to vowel harmony rules.)You have the right plural for Hungarian, but that's not the right borrowing.
-ek derives from rek, the Skerre word for many. I would like to have some
consonantal alteration due to the r, but I'm not sure how it would work.
(The r is a flap/tap). The plural morpheme is one that I've struggled and
struggled with to get a unique, yet acceptable sound.
>>other relations are marked with prepositions whose actual difference from
>>the particles is non-existent.
> Hmm, explain...Well, the locative, temporal, benefactive, and instrumental cases are all
shown through prepositions. However, the difference between the case
particles and the prepositions is artificial, since they both are in the
same position (in front of the noun without an article, since there aren't
any articles) and most are single syllables. There are some 'compound'
prepositions, but they are really just two 'simple' prepositional phrases in
> French influence perhaps?The obligatory usage is French, Russian, and Polynesian influence. The
inanimate/animate distinction mostly from Klingon and Polynesian. And the
obviation is borrowed from the Algonquin family, but since Skerre lacked
gender, I thought it might be useful (especially since when I wrote
conversations in English, I wished it was a feature of English).