Re: Ephphatha

J Y S Czhang wrote:

>    BTW has anyone done a loglang based on non-linear dynamic logic,
process logic theory or similar?  *
>    OR, like, say, a language not based solely on static "being" - using
>words similar to the forms of "be" [is, are, am, etc.] but also based on
dynamic
>"becoming" - perhaps _rogo_ from PIE _*reg-_ and Latin _rogus_ "extension,
>direction" ; the root form of _ergo_, "therefore"... Does this make any
sense -
>what I am attempting, fumblingly, to say?
>
>* I am already somewhat familiar with General Semantics and E-Prime
______________________

Consistent with General Semantics/E-Prime, Ithkuil has no real equivalent
to "being" or "be"-type constructions as explained in Sec. 10.7.1 of the
Ithkuil grammar, although it does have inchoative aspect (i.e., becoming).

As for my own introduction to language, my parents' native language was
Spanish (although they didn't teach us kids), and at the age of ten, I
decided to study it.  I checked out the Berlitz Spanish Self-Teacher book
from the library, and in so doing, discovered the language section of
books.  From that point on, there was no turning back.  I began checking
out every book my local library had on language and languages, thus getting
exposed to Romance and Germanic languages, as well as Arabic, Amharic,
Hebrew, Esperanto, Japanese, Welsh, Irish and Vietnamese.  However, it was
reading Tolkien at age 14 that got me started on conlanging.  I ended up
studying linguistics in college, although unlike many others, my classical
language exposure was not Latin (which I've only casually studied on my
own) but rather Sanskrit.

--John Quijada