Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

R: Re: Ke'kh

From:Mangiat <mangiat@...>
Date:Thursday, September 21, 2000, 13:37
Dirk wrote:

> The categorization of 'incidental', 'deliberative', and > 'consequential' reminds me of the Salish feature of 'control', which > encodes precisely the same kind of information. I've usually seen it > as a basic two-way distinction, but there are reports of more finely > articulated "control-space". Very nice! I also am a big fan of non- > concatenative morphology a la Arabic/Hebrew, etc.
What's a non-concatenative grammar? One which does not rely exclusively on pre/suffixes but changes the root itself (or, à la Sémitique, the vowels in the root)?
> A question about the transliteration. Do you also have voiced stops? > If not, perhaps the transcription system could use those symbols for > the plain voiceless stops; that way you could use the voiceless stop > symbols for aspirates. Thus the Incidental Progressive <k3Ki'kh> > becomes <g3ki'kh>. Or not. I've always felt it to be somehow inelegant > to have to rely on capitalization for phonetic quality distinctions, > but that's my personal preference.
And I agree with you. Capitalized letters remind me of one of the ugliest Conlangs I've ever seen, Klingon. Luca