Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: preliminary conjugation in ju:dajca

From:Christophe Grandsire <christophe.grandsire@...>
Date:Wednesday, January 12, 2000, 9:59
At 14:29 11/01/00 -0500, you wrote:
> >AMÂL (to love) [a'mAl] < amâre > >(active) > >amô ['amow] < ámô >amâ ['amA] < ámâs >ama ['ama] < ámat >amâmus [a'mAmuS] < amâmus >amâti [a'mAsi] < amâtis >aman ['aman] < ámant > >(passive) > >amo ['amo] < ámor >amâri [a'mAri] < amâris >amâtu [a'mAsu] < amâtur >amâmul [a'mAmul] < amâmur >amâmîn [amA'mijn] < amâmínî >amant [a'mant(@)] < amántur >
Pretty neat conjugation :) .
>Does anyone see any problems with this? I was thinking of maybe dropping >the -S and -R (>L) in the 4th person, leaving the "we" active and passive >forms identical, although i'm not sure how that would be disambiguated.
I don't think those forms could really produce confusions. Their contexts would certainly be very different (like the absence of object for the passive form).
>Also, the only difference between active and passive 1st person is the >existence or lack of the offglide [w] - maybe keeping the -R (>L) ? >
The problem is that if you eliminate the L for amâmul, you shouldn't have it for amo. Also, even if you keep the L, final L easily becomes an offglide [w], which would then make both forms identical :) . And anyway, it would make a nice parallel with the fourth person if the first was identical in passive and active too :) .
>amô | amo / amol ? >amâmus / amâmu | amâmul / amâmu ? > >
I'd vote for amô / amo and amâmu /amâmu (do you have û? you could maybe have amâmû / amâmu by analogy with the first person? - I may be wrong, I don't remember the pronunciations -).
>-Stephen (Steg) > "Eze-guvdhab wa'hrikh-a tze, / "zhoutzii wa'esh," i eze-mwe." > >
Christophe Grandsire |Sela Jemufan Atlinan C.G. "Reality is just another point of view." homepage : http://rainbow.conlang.org