Abibin + Welcome! + performartive verbs

Theodore Kloba <ted.kloba@...> wrote:

> Due, in part, to the interest expressed here, I've gotten off my behind
> and started developing and refining Abibin for the first time in months.
See the effect? It happened the same for me! These folks make
you think, "Hey, what am I doing? I should be researching word
order or something!". ;-)

>=20
> I'm still going to keep the large number of possible verbal
> substantives, since I like them, and they can replace enough other word=
s
> to justify lots of syllables.  There will still be a word for
> "that-which-we-have-been-burning," but don't ask me what it is just yet.
Oooh I like that!. And it certainly saves words.

> I'll be posting my updates to the webpage as soon as I think it over a
> bit.
I've been reading it, and I think I like Abibin. I've particularly
fond of simple phonologies lately, and I really like OVS order (my
Drasel=E9q is slowly going back from VSO to OVS at the time). I have
only two critiques to make:

First, and most important: isn't there too small a diference between
[m@], [n@] and [N@], esp. since they occupy the same slot in a phrase?

Second, and just hair-splitting: :) when you describe the vowels, wouldn'=
t
it be better to say you have /i a u/, with /a/ having allophones [a] and
[@]? You say /a/ is [@] only when unstressed, so that's predictable,
isn't it?

Well, and finally, since I didn't do it before, welcome!

[Aside, to those discussing performative verbs: just noticed 'to welcome'
is another performative with unmarked 1st person, and in fact, also with
unmarked 2nd person object...]


--Pablo Flores
  http://draseleq.conlang.org/pablo-david/