Re: Grammar idea

I think that an RPNish format would work better, but this is quite
logical/simple.

On 10/4/05, Yann Kiraly <yann_kiraly@...> wrote:
> Hi! Based on a grammar I used for the schedule - less relay, I have created a new language with a
> veeery simple grammar. I would just like to know what you think about it and if you
> think it would
> work as a spoken or written language.
> There is only one syntax rule in this (unnamed) language:
> X Arguments.X na/.
> That is supposed to mean:
> Every word X is followed by its arguments. The end of the list of these arguments
> is marked either
> by na or by a full stop. This is easier to understand when you imagine the
> grammar rule like this:
> X (Arguments.X)
> The opening parantheses doesn't occur in speaking or writing. The closing parantheses is
> indicated by na, which closes one open parantheses, or a full stop, which closes all open
> parantheses. That's the whole syntax.
> Here's an example:
> Pakja luru panja gama na na nau kwa.
> Here's an interlinear with added parantheses (the na's are replaced by closing parantheses in the
> interlinear):
> Strong (appeal (grin (fruit)) to (I)).
> A smooth translation would be:
> Grinning fruit appeals strongly to me.
> or:
> I like jack-o-lanterns very much ;-)
> So, please comment on this little language.
> Thanks in advance,
> Yann Kiraly
>