Re: A Conlang by de group: genders
|From:||Pablo Flores <fflores@...>|
|Date:||Saturday, October 10, 1998, 18:19|
Carlos Thompson wrote:
>Rethinking the gender evidence/gender merge and the subgenders, I will try
>phisical evidence: you have seen, touch, percive with your senses the act
>deduced evidence: you have seen, touch, percive, listen to effects of the
>act and can recreate de fact.
>refered evidence: you have been told of the act itself.
>concrete things: things you can see, listen, percive with your senses.
>mental things: things you can deduce based on your knoledge or perceptions
>but are no phisical (abstract things)
>speech things: things involving language, very suitable for us conlangers.
>This level of evidence and gender are compulsory: al nouns have to mark this
>distinction as well as any acompaning modifiers.
>Subevidence & subgenders
>- ? / person and any speech capable creature/organization
>- ? / animated or live things
>- ? / inanimated things
>- deduced by own thoughts / ideas
>- deduced after phisical evidence / perception
>- remembering / knowledge
>- ? / action
>- trusted source / speech creations (languages, works, etc.)
>- transcription of given source / gramatical terms
>- gossip / ?
>Those subevideces/subgenders are not compulsory. If agreement is needed
>words must agree in first level gender and must not disagree in second level
>If deduced/mental is given by ending in -o, ideas would end in -ido (this
>way ending in -o).
We're going back into detailed classification. The problem with
these is that, tho not compulsory, it'd be nice to use them, and
they'll be difficult to remember.
I would divide concrete things in: person, animate, and inanimate. The
other evidence/genders should be left undivided. Thus having:
Gender - Evidence
person - actually perceived/done (actual)
animate - idem
thing - idem
concept - perceived thru results (conceived)
speech - heard or guessed (heard)
The "actual" evidence should agree with the gender of the agent or patient,
e.g. if "the dog bit me", the predicate "bite" should be marked
"animate" (for emphasis on the dog) or "person" (for emphasis on me).
Do you agree?