Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Wordless language (WAS: NonVerbal Conlang?)

From:John Quijada <jq_ithkuil@...>
Date:Friday, June 30, 2006, 15:05
Sally Caves wrote:
It might be worth asking John Q. if he considers
>his Ithkuil to have words in the traditional sense. >=========================================================================
Interesting thread. As for Ithkuil, it is true that "word" is definitely a secondary consideration and that the morpheme is king. However, I would say Ithkuil retains some concept of "words" in that word boundaries are important in Ithkuil for parsing purposes so that a speaker/listener can correctly interpret homophonous morphemes, e.g., a word-final vocalic suffix -/a/ has an entirely different meaning than a word-initial prefix /a/-. The only way to know which you're hearing is via stress/tone patterns which indicate word boundaries. So in that sense, I would say Ithkuil definitely retains "words". --John Quijada