Re: A Language built around a novel grammar

Hi!

Harold Ensle writes:
>...
> I understand why you do not distinguish them, but I think that as such
> that a verb includes the operator, it can be morphosyntactically
> differenciated.
>...
Ah!  Yes, I see what you are doing.  So are your operators an open
word class?  Because when I match your statement with Qþyn|gài
grammar, your operators are essentially the cases, which are a closed
category in Q..

Then in my unfinished S11, I wanted to get rid of the closed category
of cases and have an open one instead, because it felt a bit arbitrary
what to express in cases and what not.  So I started with two open
categories, that could be labelled verb (the equivalent to cases) and
nouns.

After a while of constructing, I *still* arrived at the point where I
joined the two open word classes.  Again, I found no way to
distinguish them in a good way.  The result is that any lexicon entry
may function as either nullary (a 'noun') or unary (equivalent of
intransitive verb or case or adposition).  Binary (equiv. of
transitive verb) n-ary relations in general are expressed by serial
verb construction of 'verbal'-'nomimal' compounds.

**Henrik