Christophe Grandsire wrote:
> OK, Let's do it for Maggel. Although not complete, there should be enough
> to be able to reply to those questions meaningfully (and will raise my
> quota of on-topic posts :))) ).
Any post about Maggel is a good one! (The other-persons-conlang I like
the most :) )
> b. Maggel uses a construct state structure, where it's the completed noun
> which is modified rather than the completing one.
I'm not sure what you mean by these construction state things. What are
they?
>> 10. case type
>> a. nominative/accusative
>> b. ergative/absolutive
>> c. split ergative
>> d. other
>
>
> So far as I can tell it is a.
Now that's a real cop-out answer :)
>
> The conjugation system in Maggel is quite messed up actually :)) . Tense,
> aspect and realis/irrealis are mixed into a witch's soup :)) . It also
> has
> a productive distinction between performative and unperformative verbs,
> probably three moods (indicative, subjunctive and optative/desiderative)
> and a bunch of voices (reflexive, reciprocal, middle, causative, various
> applicatives, but no passive).
Sounds vaguely like Pidse (crap I give myself too much work...). Maybe
horrible orthographies are related to horrible tense systems?
>
> Like someone forgot that spelling *should* be related to pronunciation
> ;))))) .
How does that one work, then? I don't see any relationship between
spelling and pronunciation :)
--
Tristan <kesuari@...>