Re: First Conlang...? (Was Re: some insane West Greenlandic sentences)
| From: | Muke Tever <hotblack@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Thursday, January 8, 2004, 5:16 |
|---|
E fésto Andreas Johansson <andjo@...>:
> Is there a term for languages where you have essentially one-to-one
> correspondence between morphemes and grammatical categories, but forgoes
> agglutinating accretion of suffixes in favour of mutations and infixes?
I think that'd just be a fusional polysynthetic language.
Doesnt the idea of mutations undermine the idea of one-to-one mapping? If
something has mutated, then it expresses both its original meaning and and
the mutation's meaning, doesnt it?
*Muke!
--
http://frath.net/ E jer savne zarjé mas ne
http://kohath.livejournal.com/ Se imné koone'f metha
http://kohath.deviantart.com/ Brissve mé kolé adâ.
Replies