Re: Personal Conjugation based on Closeness
|From:||Arthaey Angosii <arthaey@...>|
|Date:||Friday, March 28, 2003, 21:19|
Emaelivpeith HS Teoh:
>Wow. This begins to sound like the approximately 150 different terms
>Chinese has for various relatives, which is the source of 50% of the
>conversations/arguments at family reunions... *shudder*.
Ooo, do tell me more. :)
>Muahahaha, the Ebisedi know where you live! :-P
And will come get me through your fountain-things (which I can't for the
life of me remember the names of, and yes, searching the archives is just
far too hard -- open a browse? pah! <grin> )? Yeah, well, you come invade
us, we'll sic our flying noodles on you. ;)
>It's just convention that you use them in the order ki-, cu-, and ro-.
Ahh, I remember you talking about those prefixes before.
>Note, though, that they have come to acquire specialized meanings:
> ki- "the former"
> cu- "the current (or the latter)"
> ro- "the other"
Good way to translate them. I hadn't thought of that.
>people won't anticipate which nouns need tagging!), but you use the
>former/latter/other meaning and put the tag on the first pronoun that
>refers back to that noun.
In which case, it's more like Asha'ille than I first thought. :)
>The tags are optional. Of course, you'll have to make good use of them if
>you want people to understand what you're talking about! :-)
Unless you're practicing your bureaurocrat-speak, that is. <grin>
>OK, Ebisedian doesn't distinguish between direct and indirect discourse,
The difference between the two is stuff like
"He said, 'Blah blah.' " versus
"He said blah blah."
Right? Asha'ille uses the equivalent of saying "quote unquote" to distinguish.
>so I can get away on a technicality. That's my excuse and I'm sticking to
Speaking of getting away on technicalities, I had to add a new stress rule
to make up for the fact that my oft-used |emaelivpeith| (and the former
|emaelivpar|) should have had an accent on the <ae>. So now syllables with
<ae> are stressed as a rule, and no accent mark is needed. :)
>second-class people, so that *could* mean you're already regarded as an
>uncivilised outcast without needing to make any gender-related mistakes.
This comparison of our languages is fun! Well, perhaps not for the rest of
the list, but... :)