Re: 'per': was: Artyom Kouzminykh: Answers & proposal

>bsarempt@rempt.xs4all.nl writes:
>>That's actually a very well-known phenomenon: most pidgins will have
>>one preposition that indicates all sorts of relations.
>
>I've done something similar in both of my conlangs. In my current one, the
>locative prepositions are:
>
>    Yai - to, in, into, on, at, inside, to, between, among, with, through
>    Rai - out of, out from , from, away
>    Lai - above, up, over,
>    Hai - under, down, beneath, behind
>    Sai - around, along, against, about
>    Jai - in front of, before
>
>It's not like a pidgin, but i am partial to prepositions that can cover
>relationships that in English use many different ones.
>
Interesting.  Get the total number of prepositions down to a reasonable
number, attach them to the noun, and maybe its adjectives too, and you'll
have one of those case systems that simplicity-obsessed auxlangers love to
deride.  It makes me wonder: do we really need all the prepositions we have
in langs like English? Were these additional preps created because we really
needed them--because the 8 cases of PIE really weren't enough--or are our
many preps sort of like all those gradually developed verb tenses that
conlangers love to tell us we really don't need?  Has anyone experimented
with a severely pruned collection of prepositions, or with a limited  case
system with no preps?  Is this really workable?  ~alypius