Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

A Conlang by the group: parts of speech

From:Carlos Thompson <cthompso@...>
Date:Saturday, October 10, 1998, 16:42
De: Pablo Flores <fflores@...>
Fecha: S=E1bado 10 de Octubre de 1998 10:29
Asunto: Re: A Conlang, created by the group?

>>>and some small particles (prepositions?) to extend some meanings. >>Pre- or post-? I think they should be in the opposite end of the noun >>with respect to case markers (i. e. cases postfixed > prepositions, >>cases prefixed > postpositions). > >I agree to this case system. I'm still a bit reluctant to kill the >verb-noun distinction, but it's certainly a good thing, because it >makes it possible to create an inflection which will be useful for >any part of speech. So I agree in principle. I guess practice will show >us if the system is comfortable. > >The "modifier" case is sort of a catch-all case. I think we should call >"modifier" what is called "classifier" above, and drop "classifier". Als=
>let's have "predicate" alone as a case, and add other inflections to >distinguish between static and dynamic. Carlos? That way we would have: > >agent >patient >undergoer >theme >predicate >modifier >determinant > >Let's be aware that in this way we could NOT make case agreement unless >we agglutinate the inflections. "The stopped car is blocking the highway=
>would have "The stopped" as a determinant, "car" as an agent. "The stopp=
>wouldn't be considered part of "the stopped car" as the agent.
>If the proposal of no verb/noun disctintion is accepted, gender (if any) >would be applied to a verb... of course, if we have not yet decide which >genders we will use, we could no be sure what they would mean.
>>cases/modes: absolutive, accusative, conditional, copulative, ergative, >>imperative, indicative, subjunctive, unergative. > >I don't agree. This is why I'd like to preserve some form of distinction >between nouns and verbs. Some roots should be inherently verbal and some >inherently nominal.
Well, we could have original nominal roots, and original verbal roots, bu= t they could take any part of speech when needed (as Esperanto). [...]
>>>* Adjectives: the only proposal so far is to have them behave like ver=
>>>which also gets rid of copulative "to be" and allows many derivations. >>>I agree on the proposal. >> >>Of course, if verbs and nouns are the same, only recognized by the
>>tag, such disctintions would be irrelevant. > >Granted. Given the system we have, there would be a root generally meani=
>"red" that could be inflected to mean "to be red", "(which is) red"
>"red" [modifier], etc.
or "red color" [theme, patient or agent] Alternative: No case agreement and semifixed order (never take the modifier or determinant too far from the modified word). Gender agreement of modifiers. Predicades and predicate modifiers agree with theme. [...]
>--Pablo Flores >