THEORY: Non-Content/Auxiliary verbs (was: Re: THEORY: Temporal Auxiliaries ...)

I hope I'm not too late and you already answered this question
elsewhere ...

From: "Jeffrey Jones" <jsjonesmiami@...>
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 9:05 PM
Subject: Re: THEORY: Temporal Auxiliaries, Aspectual
Auxiliaries, Modal Auxiliaries

 > In a couple of my conlang projects, I have a marker that
 > makes any content verb into an auxiliary (if it makes
 > sense). I don't know if I'll have any non-content
 > auxiliaries. This mechanism handles tense and mood
 > auxiliaries, evidentials and attitudinals, and some other
 > stuff, but not aspectual auxiliaries, which are handled
 > using the compounding mechanism.

Could you please elaborate on that? It's because I'm
currently thinking about whether to start

  a) a completely new conlang project from scratch
     -> Grammatical features not sure yet, I'd like to
        try on an ergative/split-whatever and isolating
        language, though.

or

  b) try to tweak Ayeri to make it look like e.g. Sanskrit,
     or more like Indonesian, i.e. starting to derive
     daughter languges
     -> Active language? Inflecting!
     -> Ayeri is already Austronesian inspried, but its
        sound went into a direction I did not want it to go
        actually. So back to the roots!

or

  c) invent a good many strange sound changes to
     "reconstruct" Proto-South-West-Kataytanian in order to
     make a different language that is related to Ayeri
     like e.g. Russian (or even better, Farsi) is to
     English in order to try out some of Tom Chappell's
     nice thoughts about languages that have e.g. the
     indirect object marked for Ergative (Erg. indirect?)

or whether to stick to Ayeri and stop producing any grammar
for the near future.

You see, that's why I'm collecting information about anything
that seems interesting at the moment.

Carsten

--
Edatamanon le matahanarà ea Bahis Venena, 5 Iran B18 ea
15:06:10:1B ena Curan Tertanyan Cuperin.