Re: GROUPLANG: optional features and case

Mathias M. Lassailly wrote:
>
>I know. But I did not intend to stop conlanging process. I've always thought
>we should go ahead with
>subclauses, pronouns, aspects, vocab, etc. WHILE discussing cases : because they are
>implied in almost
>all other topics anyway like pospositions, verbal affixes, word-deriving, etc. so addressing these
>issues will fix case choice.
See my other post about the mixed case system (or STM).
I'd be OK with those for now. I fully agree with you that
we should go ahead.

Now, I know this will sound mean, but... I think we should
decide on a core system for cases -- to which more cases could
be added later if useful. This decision should be made over
the possible systems presented so far -- not over new ones.
I have a lot of ideas and I'm sure you all do too, but the
brainstorming has to end somewhere!

I like the mixed system (plus a copulative case, unless
Mathias can explain how to replace it :) What do you say?


>
> As I posted earlier I'd rather tag on the predicate whether it's verb or noun-rooted, then
>cases would be understood from context.
>
I didn't get that before! But it's a good idea to avoid confusion.



--Pablo Flores