Re: A noun class system

Staving David Peterson:
><snip Pete's description>
>
>Wow, cool!  Here's a question I'll put to you that I've struggled with:
>In having a very similar noun class system with Zhyler (not similar
>classes, but similar in that they're suffixes), I've noticed that it's near
>impossible to make short words, i.e., monosyllabic words.  I don't
>think there are any monosyllabic nouns in Zhyler (well, maybe one
>or two), whereas in a language like English, most "basic" words are
>monosyllabic.  Is that a problem, or is that just something one has
>to deal with?  What do you think?  Have you noticed something
>similar with Kangathyagon?  [Sorry; can't do thorn.]
>
The noun class system doesn't belong to Khangaþyagon, but to a descendent.
Khangaþyagon can have short noun roots, but it can also have long chains of
suffixes for various grammatical functions (eg. relg, house relgbanipamar
"into those houses", which has a total of four suffixes).

The descendent language will have a tendency towards longer roots, so I'm
making it fusional to shorten the endings a bit. Also, some derivational
suffixes can be replaced with the noun class system, so that for example
yagon (language, which is the present participle of speak in Khangaþyagon,
can become yagnis speak.ABS in the descendent). zerrish, "bird" has been
reanalysed as ze+rris in the descendent. And longer roots can be reduced.

That being said, shortness isn't always part of my aesthetic for a language!

Pete