Re: A New Conlang For Your Consideration

John Quijada wrote:
---------------
but had not deeply considered
subdividing the Experiencer role.  I can only say two things, one
subjective, the other practical:  1) perhaps overt sub-delineations of the
Experiencer role aren't necessary if the would-be sub-delineations
themselves are mutually exclusive.  So if the "obey" schema takes only one
kind of experiencer, and the "listen" schema takes a different kind, but
together they both qualify as Experiencers in general (i.e., party
undergoing an unwilled affective experience whether self-induced, self-
enabled, etc.) then can't the overt case-marking simply point to the higher-
level delineation and not the sub-delineations?
-----------------
Definitely. R. Morneau did the same with mutually exclusive natures of his
"focus" case.
But then why have n different "genitive" cases? ;-)

µ.

Reply