En réponse à Steg Belsky <draqonfayir@...>:
>
> Prônôminnôrû: eg / tû / hac hâjic / nôs / jôs / hîdê hajdê
> (pronouns: i / you(sg) / he she / we / you(pl) / they(m) they(f)
>
Where do hac and hâjic come from?
>
> Prayyentâ (present):
> actîvâ:
> -ô
> -â
> -
> -Âmû
> -Âtî
> -An
>
> passîvâ:
> -Ôs
> -Ârê
> -Âtû
> -âmÛyû
> -âmÎn
> -Enet
>
Synthetic passive forms, I love them! Kept them in Reman, am gonna do the same
with Arabo-Romance... :)
>
> passîvâ:
> -âtÛs
> -âtûyÊ
> -âtûyÊs
> -âtîyÛm
> -âtîjÊs
> -âtîyÛn
>
What a nice one! And as I just checked it, it has the same origin as the Reman
form of the same voice and tense :) .
> Puttûrâ (future/conditional?):
> actîvâ:
> -âljÔ
> -âlÎ
> -âlÎt
> -âlÎmû
> -âlÎtî
> -âljÛn
>
Same origin as in other Romance langs (infinitive + habere)?
> passîvâ:
> -Âbô
> -âbEres
> -âbÎtû
> -âbÎmû
> -âbimmÎn
> -âbÔnet
>
If the future passive comes directly from the Latin form, why didn't you do the
same with the active form? Or would they have been to similar? Unless it's by
analogy with other verb conjugations where the future is more similar to other
tenses?
> Impêrâtîvâ (command):
> actîvâ:
> -
> -Ât
>
> passîvâ:
> -Âr
> -Âmen
>
One thing I'm wondering is whether any Romance lang kept a trace of the Latin
future imperative... Maybe I should keep it for my Arabo-Romance lang...
>
> As usual, the circumflexes should be macrons, and various consonants are
> missing their cedillas.
> Do the conjugations look like the words they'd make would be impossibly
> long?
>
Not at all! These endings don't look longer than what you have, say, in Italian
or Romanian (for what I can remember). Just one question: do you have a
subjunctive mood, or did Jûdajcâ lose it?
I long to see what has become of the other conjugations.
Christophe.
http://rainbow.conlang.free.fr