Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: GROUPLANG: Pronouns

From:Nik Taylor <fortytwo@...>
Date:Friday, October 16, 1998, 8:01
Pablo Flores wrote:
> But the > no-natlang-has-that is no excuse! We're creating something here! :-)
Okay, I'll accept that. It's just that I prefer naturalistic, but, whatever the group prefers.
> (Assuming "gender" includes "sex") I'd rather not, tho it wouldn't > hurt me to use it.
I just thought it might be interesting. I-mascline saw you-masculine, for instance. If you prefer, we could have an epicene form, with the gendered forms as alternates, perhaps used in intimate settings?
> Such as?
How about an instrumental in the third person. Dative would be useful as well.
> I agree with polite/informal for all persons, tho I don't quite get > what it would mean in 1st person (respect for myself?) -- maybe it'd > mean you consider yourself a great respectable person. :-)
We could have like in Japanese, a "plain" 1st person pronouns, and various levels of humbleness.
> Shouldn't we mark politeness on verbs, too (at least in very formal > or pompous speech)?
Good idea!
> Well, we seem to have set on > > agent > patient > undergoer > absolutive > causative > modifier > determinant > predicate
These are the cases? I don't really like them that much. Very odd. I must've missed that discussion, but what's the difference between "undergoer" and "patient"? And what's absolutive if you already have patient? Subject of an intransitive verb? -- "It's bad manners to talk about ropes in the house of a man whose father was hanged." - Irish proverb ICQ: 18656696 AOL: NikTailor