Re: Has anyone made a real conlang?

Roger Mills palsalge:
>Dan Jones wrote:
>Consider: nuper autogyro Aquas Sulis volavi[1] "recently I flew
>> by helicopter to Bath". The Romans obviously didn't have helicopters, so
>the
>> language must have changed in some way during the intervening centuries
so
>> that we can discuss helicopters now.
>
>Right.  Not only a new word (apparently a neuter), but unless I'm
mistaken,
>a syntactic change as well-- volare  used transitively (though it grates a
>little, IMO, personally I'd have used a Spanish type paraphrase ...hice
>volar....-- not sure whether Sp. volar can be used transitively, maybe it
>can?......so, feci ut autogyro volaret (is that the correct subjunctive?)
Why is "autogyro" neuter? Might not it be masculine ablative? That would
make the verb intransitive again (and it's happy-land), and it would also
make the translation more exact. Though I thought ablative would be used
for "by" as in "near" rather than "using, by means of".

ObStupidAmericanComment: where is Bath? Is it about an hour south of
Rochester, New York? Or is it on the Mediterranean Sea, or in England?

~Wright

Replies