Re: (tangent thoughts arising from) Active-Ergative langs (discussion)

> Cool!! I'm still working on an aspect of my conlang called the referential
> relatives, which function like your "ok" and "oc" there. I'll keep your
> example handy when I work out the details of my system :-)
>
Hey, thanks!

> [snip]
> > Completely off-topic, but I hope people don't mind me making selfish
> > observations about Gevey in this manner. While I would like to take
> > part in many of the debates going on in the mailing list, I feel that
> > I have not studied linguistic theory, practice, (jargon, even) in
> > sufficient depth.
> [snip]
>
> Heh. I've next to no linguistics background at all. I mostly go by "gut
> feeling", guesswork, etc.. And my jargon is probably worse than yours, so
> we're about in the same boat. :-) That's one thing I like about this list
> and conlanging in general -- you get to learn so much about linguistics
> from each other and by doing it, not just studying a textbook.
>
Seems to me like you have very intuitive guts. I agree with the
learning part too - I've learned more about English (my native
language) through trying to develop Gevey and having to consult
references and dictionaries and now (thankyou, gods!) the internet,
than they ever bothered to teach me at school - perhaps a sad
commentary on teaching English as a language in the UK state school
system...

Keep parsin'

Rik

--
http://homepages.enterprise.net/rikroots/gevey/index.html
The Gevey Language Resource.