Re: My Grammatical Sketch (again!)

Christophe skrev:

> Well, I'm not sure about an interrogative mood, but what I can say is
> that the Romance grammatical tradition considers infinitives and
> participles to be impersonal moods, whereas indicative, subjunctive =
and
> imperative are personal moods (and if you have an imperative mood, why
> not an interrogative one?). =20
Yes. That is most likely the most important question in conlanging:
'Why not?' I like moods, the more the merrier I think.

And now: AFMCL:

Myself, I'm thinking about making Rinya both head and
dependent marking (and head initial). Something like:

Reigar           rewecyn      iyn       =20
Vegetable:PL-ABS green:PL-ABS the:PL-ABS=20

cwet-a-ri-sh             dich-en    in-en
buy-PRES-3sg:SUB-3sg:OBJ father-ERG the-ERG

'The father buys the green vegetables.'

(Some Rinya words will probably change in the future, not that
anyone cares... ;).

That is, I mark the arguments both on the verb (with an accusative =
system)
and on the NPs themselves (with an ergative/'active' system). Somewhat
unusual I guess, but why not? I like it. Redundancy rules!
What do you think?
And just to make it clear. I'm not criticizing Austin in any way.=20
I was just curious about some moods I hadn't heard of before.

----------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Andreasson | daniel@conlang.nu | http://conlang.nu
"Mmm... free goo..." - Homer Simpson
----------------------------------------------------------