David J. Peterson wrote:
> Benct wrote:
>
> <<
> Thanks for noticing! It was due to an empty cell too much.
>
> So what do you think about the language? :)
> >>
>
> Yeah, really. I felt bad about that, but I noticed it, and I didn't
> have time to write anything else.
'Tis OK. I'm afraid the page *is* pretty chaotic...
> I don't know much about Swedish, and no even less about
> Old Swedish. Nevertheless, a few questions:
No problem. Mærik is not *really* similar to Old Swedish,
except in phonology and superficially in orthography.
E.g. in O.Sw. *when* there is a markered difference between
nominative and accusative of nouns it is the nominative which
carries the marker. Not so in Mærik where the accusative is
markered. Moreover Mærik lacks a distinctive adjective inflection
among other things found in O.Sw. OTOH Mærik has more cases.
> -You explain in a footnote the presence of "w" in the vowel
> list, but why "v"? Are these orthographic vowels or IPA?
They are orthographic. In the medieval style v/u are positional
variants of one grapheme which can stand for both a consonant and
a vowel. Medial [v] is spelled _ffu_!
> -I like the way you do negation! I never seem to do negation
> in any special way, but it tends to be special in most languages.
> I like it!
Sorry, but I nicked it outright from Finnish (and Dravidian).
There are many languages that have a verb meaning "not be".
>
> -Not knowing Swedish, it's kind of hard to see which word
> matches up with which in your examples, since there are no
> glosses.
The words are utterly unlike Swedish. Will fix glosses (or
interlinears).
>
> Anyway, looks pretty neat. I like the look and sound of the
> words (if I'm pronouncing them right), as well as the first
> person verb suffix. I'd definitely like to see more.
What is cool about the first person verb suffix? That there
is an inclusive/exclusive distinction? There is one in pronouns
too.
> -David
>
>
--
/BP 8^)>
--
Benct Philip Jonsson -- melroch at melroch dot se
Solitudinem faciunt pacem appellant!
(Tacitus)