Re: MNCL5 Phonology and Orthography
|From:||Eldin Raigmore <eldin_raigmore@...>|
|Date:||Tuesday, November 13, 2007, 23:20|
---In firstname.lastname@example.org, Jeffrey Jones <jsjonesmiami@...> wrote:
>The phonology and orthography page for MNCL5 is up and ready for
>comments. It's at:< http://qiihoskeh.googlepages.com/M5Orthog.htm >
I like it.
>A preliminary morphology page is also up.
< http://qiihoskeh.googlepages.com/M5Morpho.htm >
Although an "initial" is mandatory, it could be "zero", right? That is, an initial
block is (C)- ; and an initial morpheme is an initial block followed by zero or
more medial blocks; and a word has to have an initial morpheme and a final
morpheme; but it's possible the only one of these that has any pronounceable
parts is the final morpheme, which consists of a final block, which may be -V
or -VV or -VC.
So some words may consist of a single vowel, only; this is thought of as
having a zero intial morpheme and a -V final morpheme, right?
The "aspect" tags might be usable on nouns to indicate whether it's a mass-or-
measure noun or a count-noun.
The voice applies only to non-verbs? But it can vary in meaning depending on
whether or not the non-verb in question is a subject or an object? To me that
will be confusing; what tells me which is subject and which is object? A mark
on the verb? Or on the noun?
In general I really like everything about the morphology section you have put
in so far on that page. I worry only about the question I asked above and
about how confusing the zero-morphemes (the ones filled in by "-") will be.
< http://qiihoskeh.googlepages.com/M5Medial.htm >
looks very interesting, but I haven't had time to fully digest and analyze it yet,
so I don't have any other remarks (kudos nor criticism) to make about it yet.
However: Thanks! This was fun to read.
>I'm still working on numbers, compounds, syntax, etc.
I look forward to it; I'll bet we all do.