Duh! Whatever was I thinking????
Charlie
--- In conlang@yahoogroups.com, "Mark J. Reed" <markjreed@...> wrote:
>
> Tas -> sat does not form a palindrome anywhere. That's just
reversal.
> Tas -> tassat forms a palindrome. Duplication is just the
mechanism
> ised to get a palindrome result. Other mechanisms are possible but
> less general.
>
>
>
> On 7/28/08, caeruleancentaur <caeruleancentaur@...> wrote:
> >> Jim Henry <jimhenry1973@> wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 10:44 PM, Vincent Pistelli <pva003@
> >> > wrote:
> >> > I just came up with an idea for a language I have been working
on
> >> > that I thought everyone would like. The idea is that if the
nouns
> >> > in your language are single syllables you can just turn the
word
> >> > into a palindrme to make it plural.
> >>
> >> I don't see why it wouldn't work with words longer than one
> >> syllable; though the longer the root words are, the longer the
> >> pluralized forms will be, assuming I am reading you correctly (do
> >> an inverse reduplication of all or part of the root to
pluralize).
> >>
> >> E.g., with monosyllables you might do,
> >>
> >> tas > tasat / tassat
> >> kin > kinik / kinnik
> >
> > I understoodd the original idea not to include reduplication,
simply
> > palindrome. Thus:
> >
> > tas > sat
> > kin > nik
> >
> > I guess it would work as long as there was no homophone sat > tas.
> > But then there's always context.
> >
> > Charlie
> >
>
> --
> Sent from Gmail for mobile | mobile.google.com
>
> Mark J. Reed <markjreed@...>
>