Re: draqa syntax - help please?

On Tue, Sep 26, 2000 at 10:16:11AM -0700, Marcus Smith wrote:
[snip]
> system don't resemble activity at all.  It could conceivably be analyzed as
> an accusative lang based on the four or five sentence I looked at before
> writing this -- but that would require a lot work redefining the actual
> meanings of some of the verbs and cases.  For example, the word _fww't3_
> 'see' would have to be redefined as 'be seen by'.  You could then allow
> some verbs to give "quirky case" to their subjects and objects, as many
> natlangs do.  (That's Icelandic's claim to theoretical fame).
Well, it's certainly possible to redefined "fww't3" as "be seen by", but
what about "lyy's", where the "subject" is in the conveyant case? Sure,
let's redefine that one too. But when 80% (i.e., 4/5) of the language's
verbs give "quirky case" to their subjects and objects, then something
isn't right with the theory! :-P

>
> I don't think that would be useful though.  The system works as it is
> AFAIK, so worrying about how it matches natlangs is not necessarily
> productive, unless being "natural" is a goal of the project.
[snip]

Well, I *did* set out to make my conlang unique, though I'm a bit
disappointed that I can't really draw that much from current linguistic
theory when developing it, since it defies categorization. I *am*
surprised that there is no natlang precedent... this system isn't exactly
"weird" or anything; I'd have expected some culture, somewhere, to have
adopted a similar system.

As to whether I want it to be "natural", the conlang *is* intended for
human or at least human-like beings. I also made it a point that whenever
I add something to the lang, I have to be able to assimilate it myself --
it cannot be so strange or different that even I can't grasp it. If indeed
Chomsky is right, then my conlang must be "possible" under the universal
grammar (since I myself can assimilate it), so it *should* be analysable
by linguistic theory.

But anyway... I'm not too worried about that at the moment. I've got to
iron out a few more issues such as direct/indirect discourse, pronouns,
and larger structures like the flow of a passage, etc.. That's more than
enough to worry about at the moment :-)


T