Accusative, Dative ?
|From:||From Http://Members.Aol.Com/Lassailly/Tunuframe.Html <lassailly@...>|
|Date:||Friday, May 28, 1999, 20:58|
Dans un courrier dat=E9 du 28/05/99 13:10:17 , Josh a =E9crit :
> Well, Aroven certainly isn't perfect at the moment, in fact it's in a=20state=20
> chaos due to this -- seemingly endless -- revision. Every time I think I='m
> just about done (I don't mean entirely done with the language, which I=20never
> intend to be, I just mean finally bringing the major phonological upheava=ls
> to a rest) I find something new that just *has* to be done. For instance=20
> these last two months I've been working at eliminating end vowel clusters=;
> roots still may be CCVVCC or even CCVVCCC but I've been working to engine=er
> the disappearance of naked roots in the language -- a word with an end=20vowel
> cluster (except at the end of a word) is either mutated or capped off wit=h
> one -VC suffix or another. One and a half years this revision has been
> rolling along and I've finally stopped trying to predict where the langua=ge
> is going to end up, or when it's going to get there!
This is why i find it interesting to visit your site - and each conlanger's =
from time to time.
> Exactly right! That's why I usually refer to my objects by the generic
> 1st, 2nd and 3rd rather than accusative, dative, "jurative" (the advantag=e
> of these being that the names are more memorable -- good for teaching the
> language, as opposed to theorizing about it); they don't have universal
> meanings, but depend on the definition of the particular word, or in most
> cases that of its class.
The class system seems to be very handy. Charles (who popped up again on thi=
list today (Hi Charles ! :-) told me a bit about that months ago but i think=20
i did not understand quite well how to use it with roles.
> I admit Aroven's object system is one of the more artificial-tasting=20
> of the language.
i don't think it sounds more artificial than the ones of other con- or=20
natlangs, but you definitely planned it with a lot of precision.
But I consider it a necessary evil -- it allows the
> unambiguity which the logical demands of the language require, and after=20all
> it works well enough even for humdrum speech :-)
IMHO this is something auxlangers may benefit from : planning roles into=20
standard maps as you do is necessary up to 2 or 3 roles. This implies that=20
the mapping of transitive and ditransitive voices are more precisely=20
designed. Even a very simple language like Indonesian makes a difference=20
between final transitive (me-) processive transitive (me-kan), ditransitive=20
transformative (memper-kan) or address (mem-i) because "to do something" or=20
"to have somebody do something" are not the same map as "to make something=20
into something else" or "to apply something on something else". It's very=20
stupid to have different prepositions for the core roles. Some are universal=
some others are not. It would be better to have one preposition specific to=20
2nd object for transformative, one for address, etc. Japanese "ni" and=20
Indonesian "pada" are good for that.
> I love dark cellars (and tunnels, and especially caves; perhaps I should=20
> been born a Dwarf :) 'long as I don't have to worry about knocking=20someone's
> wine bottles all over the ground or anything
I love climbing rocks and trees :-)