--- In conlang@yahoogroups.com, Remi Villatel <maxilys@T...> wrote:
> Henrik Theiling wrote:
>
> >>Nice. Marking the "determiner" (or "article") -- a newish idea,
to
> >>me -- rather than either the verb or the noun (strategies I
mentioned
> >>in that post you referred to.)
>
> > Oh, you don't need to go far: German and (Spoken) French do this.
But, French and German do /not/ mark the "COLLECTIVE"
and "DISTRIBUTIVE" attributes on the determiners. If these languages
mark these attributes at all, they mark them on the nouns or on the
verbs. Unless I'm wrong?
At any rate, Henrik's examples below are not examples of COLL and
DSTR marked on the determiner.
> > French:
> > Je vois l'homme.
> > [Z vwa lOm]
> >
> > Je vois les hommes.
> > [Z vwa lez Om]
> >
> > -s on the noun is not pronounced (here), so the article is the
> > only place to infer the number.
Number, yes; COLL vs DSTR, no.
> Shhhh! Don't you see you're destroying my conlang when you mention
that
> I subconsciously reproduced the system of determiners from my
natlang?
>
> ;-)
I wouldn't be too shocked if it's ANADEW, but I do not think it comes
from your native natlang; I don't think it's Standard Average
European, either.
>
> Maybe I should think about spliting all this in two one way or
another?
>
> Ho, wait... I already did! The inalienable possession can't be
expressed
> through a determiner when it's the possession of a rational entity
> (person and assimilated). You have to say:
>
> **the mine friends
>
> ...instead of the too "europaish":
>
> my friends
>
> Now, I have to think hard what other aspect I can "expell" from the
> quantifiers and express through a qualificative in order not to
look so
> French.
>
> --
> ==================
> Remi Villatel
> maxilys_@_tele2.fr
> ==================
Keep writing.
Thanks.
Tom H.C. in MI