* Eldin Raigmore said on 2006-08-16 02:05:29 +0200
> How about your conlangs? Would you say they are:
> 4. Would you say they are neither very Tense-Prominent nor very Aspect-
> Prominent?
> 4a. Nevertheless, rather more Tense-Prominent than Aspect-Prominent?
Taruven is probably 4a. right now. Neither tense nor aspect is
obligatory but since I'm used to tense-marking from my L1 I guess I mark
tense more often by accident :)
> Does your conlang require that any speaker mention how he/she knows what
> he/she is saying happened, but hardly ever require at that they mention
> when it happened (or how often it happened, or how long it took to happen,
> or whatever)?
Taruven generally only require cases on nouns, the verb-machinery is
mostly pick and choose. There are both mood-markers and evidential-
markers and they can be mixed and matched.
> Whatever your answers to the above questions, can you also answer this one?
> Where did you get that idea to put it in your conlang?
I knew of mood and evidentials through general reading of (descriptive)
linguistic works, but didn't find a space for it until I read Describing
Morphosyntax by Payne.
> Is your conlang a lot like any natlang or any group of natlangs in that
> way?
I don't know. I haven't consciously modelled the verb-machinery on any
one system, I've just been trying to avoid certain uses of adverbs,
coverbs etc.
t.