Re: Going NOMAIL: Honeymoon (was Re: Word classification (was Re: The philosophical language fallacy (was Re: Evanescence of information (was Re: Going NOMAIL: Honeymoon))))
| From: | John Vertical <johnvertical@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Thursday, July 10, 2008, 7:30 |
|---|
On Tue, 8 Jul 2008 22:08:44 -0700, David J. Peterson wrote:
(...)
>semantic categorization can be a *lot* of fun for artlangs--
>especially when it comes to noun classes. If a language has
>noun classes, then every noun has to fit into one of the
>classes, and that in itself proves interesting even when you
>only have two (e.g., masculine and feminine).
Yep, forcing non-living things into such a system can even be fun in all its
ludicrousness. I've been similarly toying in one project with a noun class
system of "black/red/white".
There's also that one where I'm trying to work in about six distinct but not
entirely orthogonal noun class systems, each on a different grammatical level
(a purely semantic animate / inanimate distinction, purely morphophonemic
declension classes, purely syntactic pseudo-definitness, and then the hairy
ones in-between...) ;)
John Vertical