Re: Separate verb conjugation paradigms in conlangs
|From:||Benct Philip Jonsson <bpj@...>|
|Date:||Friday, August 13, 2004, 18:10|
John Leland wrote:
> In a message dated 8/8/04 12:02:59 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
> scotto@ACCESIDEAL.COM writes:
> << I honestly don't know why this is
> but I'm sure I'm not the only one with a 'favourite' part of speech. >>
> My favorite part of speech is definitely nouns, and I am sure a count of my
> vocabulary words would confirm this. I often genereate batches of, say, 20
> nouns, but much less often verbs, postpositions, adjectives, adverbs (the last
> being the most neglected in Rihana-ye).
> John Leland
I'm definitely biassed towards deriving the whole vocabulary from verb
roots, but then I hàve studied IE philology and Sanskrit, so this bias
may be acquired habit. OTOH it seems to be true of most languages have
more deverbal nouns than denominal verbs, and also in that non-IE
language I know best, viz. Tibetan, it seems to make sense to regard
verbal morphology and verbal roots as primary even tho there are root
In conlanging practice, however, it is difficult to derive the whole
vocabulary from verbal roots... Very strange. Maybe it is due to a
lack of semantic ingenuity on my part?
B.Philip Jonsson -- melroch at melroch dot se
Solitudinem faciunt pacem appellant!