On 12/19/05, Gary Shannon <fiziwig@...> wrote:
> --- Jim Henry <jimhenry1973@...> wrote:
> > If compounds of two or more words are allowed,
> > and your derivational patterns include both prefixes
> > and suffixes, it seems that a word of seven
> > syllables
> > might be ambiguous, e.g.:
> >
> > (prefix + word1) + word2
> > or
> > (word1 + suffix) + word2
> > or
> > word1 + (prefix + word2)
> > or
> > word1 + (word2 + suffix)
> >
> > This might also be an ambiguity re:
> > the word boundary in a two-word phrase.
>
> Maybe I could use dipthongs in prefixes and suffixes,
> but nowhere else. Thus kianalija could only be
> kia+nalija and kulajipenalijua can only be
> kulaji+penali+jua.
This would work if certain diphthongs are used
only in prefixes and other sonly in suffixes. If
any diphthongs maybe used in either kind of affix,
then something like
penalijuakulaji
could be parsed as
(penali + (jua + kulaji))
or
((penali + jua )+ kulaji)
But perhaps the set of affixes is small and manageable
enough you don't have to restrict them that way
-- once you've been studying the language for a little
while, you would know all the affixes and would know
at a glance that jua- is a prefix rather than a suffix.
> > Also, unless you want phonemic gemination, you need
> > to exclude /n/ from the set of consonants that
> > can form roots -- else the /n/ in a root
> > and the /n/ in a derivational vowel pattern
> > could end up adjacent.
> Good point. The other alternative would be to have an
> alternative, like substituting 'L' for 'N' if two
> consecutive Ns would result. Thus:
You would need to select your vowel patterns
so these would not be ambiguous:
> nalija -> analinja
NLJ + a-a-in-a
or
NLN + a-a-i-na
> patina -> apatilna
PTN + a-a-in-a
or
PTL + a-a-i-na
--
Jim Henry
http://www.pobox.com/~jimhenry/gzb/gzb.htm