Re: Active Romance, Was: Active
|From:||Vasiliy Chernov <bc_@...>|
|Date:||Monday, January 24, 2000, 18:18|
On Mon, 24 Jan 2000 18:17:19 +0100, Christophe Grandsire
>><...> "Est-ce que je n'y ai pensé pas?" [esk ZjEpANsEpA] (is
>>this example correct? ;) ).
> Nearly. The correct is "Est-ce que je n'y ai pas pensé ?" /Esk@
>ZniEpapa~'se/ or /Esk@ ZjEpapa~'se/, more informal (the 'ne' disappears).
Oops... Accordingly, "Est ecce_hoc quid ego non habeo passum pensatum" ;)
> Maybe. Maybe shorter words should be considered, _figura_ may seem a
>little long, except if it was already shortened by sound changes before it
>became widely used.
Oh, I think all phonetic issues should be coped with last in this case.
I see no problems with _figura_: it's so easy to contract a word having
initial /f/ ( > /h/ > zero), medial voiced velar ( > zero, immediately),
and final /r/ (same comment)... I wonder if I'll leave anything besides
some consonant mutation of it by 10th century ;)
>>Illud pro puerum in visu positum est 'The boy can see it'.
>>(or 'in visu pueri' ;) ?)
> Hey, interesting thing to replace the perception verbs by formsusing the
>copula! I want to do something like that in Itakian for the verbs of
>motion. In fact, in Itakian there are no verbs of motion, but only
>prepositions that can be used in nominal sentences (the copula doesn't
>exist in Itakian). So the equivalent of 'I go to France' is: 'I (am) to
>France', with a 'to' of motion.
Oh yes, such deep restructuring of verbal paradigms makes it tempting
to try everything... I'm already thinking of dialects... ;)