Re: polysynthetic languages

On Sun, Sep 21, 2003 at 09:45:00AM -0500, Eddy Ohlms wrote:
> > Sure, but it's been in embryonic stasis for ages up until a few weeks
> > ago. Unfortunately, I haven't yet decided on the grammatical morphemes,
> > so the best I can do is show the verb structure:
> >
> > verb_root-(deriv)-(TAM)-subject+marker-(object+marker)-funct-enclitic(s)
> >
> > deriv = derivation (causative, "fail to ~", etc.)
> > TAM = tense, aspect, mood (inchoactive, graduative, etc.)
> > funct = the VP's function (used to nominalize or adverbalize the
> > whole VP; takes case markers, including zero affix)
> > enclitics = discourse clitics (evidentiality, emphasis)
>
> Similar to my conlangs's verbs' morphology, but it's more suffixing.
Ah yes, my conlang is exclusively suffixing.

>
> > As you can see, noun incorporation is the default. I'm not even sure if
> > roots with a nominal function can stand alone, other than in responses.
>
> In my conlang , nouns can be unicorporated.
Incorporated into the verb stem thus making a noun-verb verbal compound
or incorporated into the verb structure, or both?

I guess mine can do both, although I haven't yet felt any difference
between the two, semantics-wise.


>
> >
> > --
> > vaksje.
--
vaksje.

Reply