Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Kamakawi Comments

From:jesse stephen bangs <jaspax@...>
Date:Friday, March 15, 2002, 22:52
David Peterson sikayal:

> some regular, some irregular results. I also kind of sit down and decide > which words I want to be derived, which I don't, and what that does. And, of > course, just because you have one word that means x, doesn't mean you can't > have two or three. ;)
:-) Synonyms are something I used to avoid, for some reason. Now I love them.
> I'll answer the last part of this first. After having this pointed out > to me, I thought about it, and decided to adopt the idea that all words that > begin with a vowel in Kamakawi must begin with a glottal stop. Now, for the > first point. Let's take the word "aeiu" (to go into). Looks pretty hairy. > However, if you think of it as a combination of "ae" (to be inside) and "iu" > (to go through), I think it's not that bad. I also don't have trouble > pronouncing it without glottal stops or breathiness, and that pretty much > goes for all the words I've drafted up.
Yeah, I guess it's possible, though it strains my vocal cords. Oh, well.
> <<Speaking of h, I dislike your orthographic decision for indicating it.>> > > :(... Now you've hurt poor "h"'s feelings! She's run off to her room > and has shut the door and is crying. I hope you realize this is *your* mess, > and I'm not cleaning it up.
Hmph. If she's going to be so sensitive, then I don't see why *I* have to make her happy. After all, all of the other letters seem to pull their fair share of the weight.
> <<It works for the learner's grammar, I suppose, but in general I think that > conlang orthographies should strive to be phonemic except where > historically justified.>> > > This isn't an orthography; this is a romanization system (hence the use > of the Roman alphabet).
Aaaaahhhh. That makes a big difference, of course.
> it. :) Also, doesn't Japanese have different characters for allophones? I > know Hindi does.
So does Polish, and (embarrassed) so does Yivríndil--but I'm following the native script, so there :-P. Anyway, this wasn't an absolute principle, just a sort of wish-list.
> Well, only "e" and "u" are articles. They share forms with "e" and "u", > which are subject markers, but there are also a ton of others, including "a", > "au", "ka", "ae", "kau", etc.
Ah. So there *are* articles, and they just happen to be homophonous with the discourse markers. Neato. Can they co-occur, then: E tikili e mokomoko. "The starfish, the same was as was the subject in the last sentence, is orange." It's redundant, of course, but is it allowed?
> new and the same--aka, it came from somewhere else in the sentence). Now, > what I'm debating is being able to drop the pronoun, in cases like this where > it's completely understood (if you were to say "I hugged a fish in a house", > then it wouldn't be--it could be the fish or the house--, but in this case it > is). I still haven't decided.
That seems most logical. Pro-dropping is fun.
> <<The whining verbs are fabulous. A bitch to learn, I'm sure, but a great, > creative, natural feature. You're a tad unclear though--are the > accompanying adverbs absolutely necessary or simply preferred by speakers? > You say "Using these adverbs isn't absolutely necessary, as far as meaning > goes," but aside from this the adverbs look pretty mandatory.>> > > When I say "not absolutely necessary", I'm thinking about how tense isn't > absolutely necessary in English to get meaning across: "I go to the store > yesterday". You understand what's meant, but it's clearly ungrammatical.
OK. I have to say that I really like this. It's like nothing I've seen before, but it just makes so much sense. Very cool.
> <<Kinship terms. Ugh. I had to learn these bastards for Thai, and I didn't > like it any better then, either. Plenty naturalistic, so I can't really > complain there, but it's not to my taste.>> > > HA, HA, HA, HA!!! Yeah... I know someone who speaks Thai. I should ask > him what the system's like. That is, unless you'd like to outline it for me. > ;) You could think of it like a quiz! ~:D
Oh, I wouldn't do that. Here's what I can remember (leaving off tone)-- phAA - father mEE - mother phii chai - older brother phii sau - older sister nong chai - younger brother nong sau - younger sister puu - father's father yaa - father's mother taa - mother's father yai - mother's mother paa - older sister of either parent sung - older brother of either parent aa - younger sibling (either gender) of father naa - younger sibling (either gender) of mother And there's more, like husband/wife, cousins of various sides and genders, grandchildren, etc. I don't know them all. Jesse S. Bangs "If you look at a thing nine hundred and ninety-nine times, you are perfectly safe; if you look at it the thousandth time, you are in frightful danger of seeing it for the first time." --G.K. Chesterton


Jesse Raccio <jraja0722@...>Adjectives vs. stative verbs, plus general info
Aidan Grey <grey@...>Adjectives vs. stative verbs, plus general info