Vreleksį Forum Index Vreleksį
The Alurhsa Word for Constructed: Creativity in both scripts and languages
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Aalmoken
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Vreleksį Forum Index -> Conlangs
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
eldin raigmore
Admin


Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 1621
Location: SouthEast Michigan

PostPosted: Sat Dec 03, 2011 10:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kiri wrote:
Quote:
I'm more a senior student than I am a teacher, professor, or doctor. And, really, I'm only senior compared to some, not to others.
If you feel more comfortably with "先輩", I will use that from now on Wink That is, if this forceful and unnatural japanisation doesn't bother you.

Since I don't know Japanese, none of it bothers me. Wink
_________________
"We're the healthiest horse in the glue factory" - Erskine Bowles, Co-Chairman of the deficit reduction commission
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
LingoDingo
Admin


Joined: 25 Oct 2011
Posts: 100
Location: Eastern US

PostPosted: Sun Dec 04, 2011 2:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've made some changes and additions to the original post that include some more prepositions and conjunctions, and a minor change to the numbering system and imperative forms.
_________________
Fluent or nearly fluent in: English, German, Japanese
Mildly capable in: Spanish, Russian, French, Chinese

Constructed Languages: Aalsen, Aalmok Repurpose, Samamisu

.aď sodai peťās sokās na asnā;šustās buntai mokā aaťal. - One never truly knows a culture until they learn its language.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
eldin raigmore
Admin


Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 1621
Location: SouthEast Michigan

PostPosted: Mon Dec 05, 2011 10:21 pm    Post subject: Re: Aalmoken Reply with quote

LingoDingo wrote:
The basic Aalmoken sentence is SVO in a normal sentence or exclamation and OVS in a question.

Subject-verb inversion is common in some families and sprachbunds. Complete inversion is very atypical in most families and sprachbunds.
In other words SVO statements and VSO questions are more common than SVO statments and OVS questions.


LingoDingo wrote:
There are six grammatical cases in Aalmoken:

Could you give a couple of examples of each?
And examples of their uses, and morphemic glosses of those examples?

Also:
Could you show which prepositions can take which cases as objects?
And what the difference in meaning is between that and no preposition or between that and some other preposition?
And if a preposition can be used with more than one casse, what the difference in meaning is between using the preposition with one case and using it with another case?

LingoDingo wrote:
zān niiksnākal - genitive case (used exclusively for nouns/pronouns who are in possession of the preceding noun)

The genitive case is unique in that it can exist “within” the other cases. This case essentially takes the place of adjectives. Each case has its own declension of the nouns therein and a genitive case noun has its own, similar declensions as adjectives do in, say, German or Russian (more like in Russian though). This system, hopefully, would both lead to a more capable sentence formatting structure and a more poetic result.

So what are the rules for case-stacking?
Obviously one rule is that all but one of the stacked cases must be "genitive". Or is that a rule? Maybe the rule is "if two cases are stacked then at least one of each two consecutive stacked case-endings must be genitive".
How many "genitive" endings in a row can you have?
How many case-endings in a row can you have?
"My boss's wife's kid's dog's tail"?


LingoDingo wrote:
Here is an example of a noun and an “adjective” going through the cases:

fum (air) - fumal (atmospheric)
fume - fumek
fumde - fumez
fumžei - fumeic
fumšau - fumauc

Which case goes with which row?

Can you show us what it looks like when you take a: masculine or feminine or neuter, singular or plural, noun, and stack genitive with each other case-ending on it?
what's
air-GEN-NOM
air-GEN-ACC
air-GEN-DAT
air-GEN-LOC (might "locative" or "adessive" be better than "positional"?)
air-GEN-LAT (might "orientative" or "lative" be better than "directional"? Maybe not.)
air-GEN-GEN

See perhaps some of:
http://aclweb.org/anthology/C/C86/C86-1082.pdf
http://www.mv.helsinki.fi/home/jylikosk/origins_of_dir_cxs.pdf
http://linguistlist.org/pubs/diss/browse-diss-action.cfm?DissID=3099
http://web.mit.edu/omerp/www/files/Coon-and-Preminger-%282008%29---Positional-Roots-and-Case-Absorption.pdf

LingoDingo wrote:
Aalmoken verbs are conjugated into five tenses: the distant past, near past, present, near future and distant future. They also conjugate to reflect their antecedent. For the reason asserted in the previous sentence these antecedents are often unused if their identity is obvious.

Here is a verb conjugated through the tenses and antecedents:

An "antecedent" is usually something a pronoun has. It's usually the noun which first referred to something subsequently referred to by the pronoun.

I'm not familiar with verbs having "antecedents".

It looks like what's actually happening is that your verbs inflect to agree in person and number with their Subject, or with their Absolutive, or with their Agent. (Pick one. It's probably the same choice for all verbs in your language.)

What's the cutoff between "near past" and "distant past"?
What's the cutoff between "near future" and "distant future"?
Examples of each?


LingoDingo wrote:
There also exists a command form for 1st and 2nd persons, plural and singular:

Exclamation Surprised Shocked I'd think a 3rd-person imperative would come in handier than a 1st-person-singular imperative! Confused
Example of the 1st-person-singular imperative actually used in an out-loud utterance?


LingoDingo wrote:
Finally, there exists an ending for a root that turns it into an adverb: _ās

So does momās mean "verbally" or "out loud" or "in so many words" or "explicitly"?
Does fumās mean "airily" or "gassily" or "by air" or "aerially" or what?


-----------------------------
Looking forward to more!
_________________
"We're the healthiest horse in the glue factory" - Erskine Bowles, Co-Chairman of the deficit reduction commission
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
LingoDingo
Admin


Joined: 25 Oct 2011
Posts: 100
Location: Eastern US

PostPosted: Wed Dec 07, 2011 5:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

eldin raigmore wrote:
Subject-verb inversion is common in some families and sprachbunds. Complete inversion is very atypical in most families and sprachbunds.
In other words SVO statements and VSO questions are more common than SVO statments and OVS questions.


I know. I have it this way for two reasons: 1. (better illustrated in German) when using the question word, "what" (was) the order of questions becomes OVS, for example: this simple question, "What are you doing?" (Was machst du?). Since this also applies in Aalmoken, I decided to standardize it across all questions. However, 2. As I stated just after the SVO/OVS comment I mentioned that this is not a very stringent rule and the interwoven phrases allow for fairly loose word order.

eldin raigmore wrote:
LingoDingo wrote:
There are six grammatical cases in Aalmoken:


Could you give a couple of examples of each?
And examples of their uses, and morphemic glosses of those examples?


Alright. Starting with the Nominative Case (zān deenien*al), which is used for free-standing nouns or nouns which are not having an action expressed upon them:

tiik - time(the fourth dimension)
.tiik aanai heřimal. Time is unending. .time to-be(3p/Sn/Pr) end(not-having suffix).
.la aancoi tiik. It was time. .it to-be(3p/Sn/Np) time.

The Accusative Case(zān deenuanal) is used for direct interaction with something:

.niiksno e joolmokene. I have a conlang. .to-have(1p/Sn/Pr) a(Sn/Ac) conlang(Sn/Ac).

The Dative Case(zān šāďeenienal) is used for indirect interaction with something, with or without a direct object:

.buuiycu ge ša gwe. I brought it for you. .to-bring(1p/Sn/Np) it(Sn/Ac) for you(Sn/Dt).
.šitno ni avnā nāyeepāg. I run with other people. .to-run(1p/Sn/Pr) with person(Pl/Dt) another-one(Gn/Dt/Pl).

The Positional Case(zān deicātal) is used to mark the position of something.

.ta siinīť kuunai ku kuuīdīť. The bed is in the house. .the bed to-be(3p/Sn/Pr) in house(Sn/Ps).

The Directional Case(zān taucātal) is used to describe the direction something is traveling in.

.tālsidwa jo fsadšau. I will swim across the river. .to-swim(3p/Sn/Nf) across river(Sn/Dr).

The Genitive Case(zān niiksienal) is used to show somethings possession of other items.

.wovnim<joonal>kiinai giival. John's sister is happy. .sister John(Sn/Gn) to-feel(3p/Sn/Pr) happiness(Sn/Gn).

eldin raigmore wrote:
Also:
Could you show which prepositions can take which cases as objects?
And what the difference in meaning is between that and no preposition or between that and some other preposition?
And if a preposition can be used with more than one casse, what the difference in meaning is between using the preposition with one case and using it with another case?


Well, that's a bit complex. I'll have to devote another post to it.

eldin raigmore wrote:
So what are the rules for case-stacking?
Obviously one rule is that all but one of the stacked cases must be "genitive". Or is that a rule? Maybe the rule is "if two cases are stacked then at least one of each two consecutive stacked case-endings must be genitive".
How many "genitive" endings in a row can you have?
How many case-endings in a row can you have?
"My boss's wife's kid's dog's tail"?


Well, for the moment, the rule is simple: Only the Genitive Case can exist within another case and it can do so as many times as is necessary;as such, though I don't have the vocabulary for it, the final sentence could be constructed and then interpreted something like so, "Tail of the dog of the kid of the wife of the boss of I." It's within the grammatical rules to have an infinite sequence of genitive-within-genitive words or phrases.

eldin raigmore wrote:
LingoDingo wrote:
Here is an example of a noun and an “adjective” going through the cases:

fum (air) - fumal (atmospheric)
fume - fumek
fumde - fumez
fumžei - fumeic
fumšau - fumauc


Which case goes with which row?


Top to bottom: Nominative, Accusative, Dative, Locative, Directional.

eldin raigmore wrote:

Can you show us what it looks like when you take a: masculine or feminine or neuter, singular or plural, noun, and stack genitive with each other case-ending on it?
what's
air-GEN-NOM
air-GEN-ACC
air-GEN-DAT
air-GEN-LOC (might "locative" or "adessive" be better than "positional"?)
air-GEN-LAT (might "orientative" or "lative" be better than "directional"? Maybe not.)
air-GEN-GEN


I'll do it without the Genitive as well.

I like Locative, but the two choices you gave for Directional didn't define as what the case in Aalmoken represents.

GEN-GEN doesn't happen in Aalmoken.

I'll use wov(sibling) to more sensibly represent the different genders and numbers in the cases.

MAS-NOM - wovbun; MAS-ACC - wovgu; MAS-DAT - wovdzai; MAS-LOC - wovži; MAS-DIR - wovše
FEM-NOM - wovnim; FEM-ACC - wovki; FEM-DAT - wovdzā; FEM-LOC - wovža; FEM-DIR - wovšo
PL-NOM - wovāň; PL-ACC - wovnā; PL-DAT - wovdeb; PL-LOC - wovžeiv; PL-DIR - wovšauf

The GEN forms are the same across the genders and numbers with the only difference being that which precedes _al: MAS-GEN-NOM - wovbunal, FEM-GEN-NOM - wovnimal, PL-GEN-NOM - wovāňal.

eldin raimore wrote:
An "antecedent" is usually something a pronoun has. It's usually the noun which first referred to something subsequently referred to by the pronoun.

I'm not familiar with verbs having "antecedents".

It looks like what's actually happening is that your verbs inflect to agree in person and number with their Subject, or with their Absolutive, or with their Agent. (Pick one. It's probably the same choice for all verbs in your language.)


They don't. I just couldn't think of the right way to say it at the time.

eldin raigmore wrote:

What's the cutoff between "near past" and "distant past"?
What's the cutoff between "near future" and "distant future"?
Examples of each?


I'd say this was a touchy subject, but that wouldn't really be true.

It's very much a matter of relativity. For instance, "Christmas will be here in three months," for, say, someone who doesn't celebrate it, could feel like not a long time; however, for a little kid anticipating his presents, it could feel like forever.

In essence, there is no cutoff point. The dinosaurs died 65 million years ago is a very long time in respect to the average human life span, but not in respect to the age of the Earth.

I hope that makes sense.

eldin raigmore wrote:
LingoDingo wrote:
There also exists a command form for 1st and 2nd persons, plural and singular:


Exclamation Surprised Shocked I'd think a 3rd-person imperative would come in handier than a 1st-person-singular imperative! Confused
Example of the 1st-person-singular imperative actually used in an out-loud utterance?


This is how it is for two reasons: 1. it's formed by just removing the plural ending from the "we" command and 2. the regularity of Aalmoken gives the "definition" to the imperative as a direct command, and I don't think I could directly command someone I'm not talking directly about or to to do something. I find it a lot easier to command myself to do something.

e.g. ”deenuwi ge! Do it!(say some mental block is keeping from doing your homework and you want to try to motivate yourself)

eldin raigmore wrote:
LingoDingo wrote:
Finally, there exists an ending for a root that turns it into an adverb: _ās


So does momās mean "verbally" or "out loud" or "in so many words" or "explicitly"?
Does fumās mean "airily" or "gassily" or "by air" or "aerially" or what?


To find the meaning of the adverbial form of a word, one must first think of the descriptor form.

i.e. since fumal = "atmospheric", fumās = "atmospherically" or "by air".

momal = of speech, verbal, out loud(adj.); momās = verbally, out loud(adv.), by speech.

*a new gerund ending. part of a set of suffixes I'd be willing to show.

(this took a long time)

I'll have that preposition explanation asap.

Also, it might be a good idea to check the original comment for changes sometimes, as I will alter it to fit any modifications I make to the language over time.

Lastly, I've been thinking of adding a distinction between inclusive and exclusive wes. What do you think?
_________________
Fluent or nearly fluent in: English, German, Japanese
Mildly capable in: Spanish, Russian, French, Chinese

Constructed Languages: Aalsen, Aalmok Repurpose, Samamisu

.aď sodai peťās sokās na asnā;šustās buntai mokā aaťal. - One never truly knows a culture until they learn its language.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
eldin raigmore
Admin


Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 1621
Location: SouthEast Michigan

PostPosted: Wed Dec 07, 2011 7:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

LingoDingo wrote:
eldin raigmore wrote:
Complete inversion is very atypical in most families and sprachbunds.
I know. I have it this way for two reasons:

That's fine, as long as you're doing it on purpose and say so.

LingoDingo wrote:
eldin raigmore wrote:
LingoDingo wrote:
There are six grammatical cases in Aalmoken:
Could you give a couple of examples of each? And examples of their uses, and morphemic glosses of those examples?
Alright.

Thanks.

LingoDingo wrote:
eldin raigmore wrote:
Could you show which prepositions can take which cases as objects? And what the difference in meaning is between that and no preposition or between that and some other preposition? And if a preposition can be used with more than one casse, what the difference in meaning is between using the preposition with one case and using it with another case?
Well, that's a bit complex. I'll have to devote another post to it.

OK, I look forward to it.

LingoDingo wrote:
eldin raigmore wrote:
So what are the rules for case-stacking? How many "genitive" endings in a row can you have? How many case-endings in a row can you have?
Well, for the moment, the rule is simple: Only the Genitive Case can exist within another case and it can do so as many times as is necessary;as such, though I don't have the vocabulary for it, the final sentence could be constructed and then interpreted something like so, "Tail of the dog of the kid of the wife of the boss of I." It's within the grammatical rules to have an infinite sequence of genitive-within-genitive words or phrases.

OK, thanks.

LingoDingo wrote:
eldin raigmore wrote:
Can you show us what it looks like when you take a: masculine or feminine or neuter, singular or plural, noun, and stack genitive with each other case-ending on it? What's
air-GEN-NOM
air-GEN-ACC
air-GEN-DAT
air-GEN-LOC (might "locative" or "adessive" be better than "positional"?)
air-GEN-LAT (might "orientative" or "lative" be better than "directional"? Maybe not.)
air-GEN-GEN

I'll do it without the Genitive as well.
I like Locative, but the two choices you gave for Directional didn't define as what the case in Aalmoken represents.

That's fine.

LingoDingo wrote:
GEN-GEN doesn't happen in Aalmoken.

Surprised Shocked Confused Exclamation Question
Then how do you say "my boss's wife's kid's dog's tail's tip"?

LingoDingo wrote:
I'll use wov(sibling) to more sensibly represent the different genders and numbers in the cases.

MAS-NOM - wovbun; MAS-ACC - wovgu; MAS-DAT - wovdzai; MAS-LOC - wovži; MAS-DIR - wovše
FEM-NOM - wovnim; FEM-ACC - wovki; FEM-DAT - wovdzā; FEM-LOC - wovža; FEM-DIR - wovšo
PL-NOM - wovāň; PL-ACC - wovnā; PL-DAT - wovdeb; PL-LOC - wovžeiv; PL-DIR - wovšauf

The GEN forms are the same across the genders and numbers with the only difference being that which precedes _al: MAS-GEN-NOM - wovbunal, FEM-GEN-NOM - wovnimal, PL-GEN-NOM - wovāňal.

Wait.
It looks like wovbunal is wov-MAS-NOM-GEN instead of wov-MAS-GEN-NOM.
It looks like wovnimal is wov-FEM-NOM-GEN instead of wov-FEM-GEN-NOM.
It looks like wovāňal is wov-PLU-NOM-GEN instead of wov-PLU-GEN-NOM.

Would wov-MAS-GEN-ACC be wovalgu?
Would wov-FEM-GEN-DAT be wovalzā?
Would wov-PLU-GEN-LOC be wovalžeiv?

LingoDingo wrote:
eldin raimore wrote:
I'm not familiar with verbs having "antecedents".
They don't. I just couldn't think of the right way to say it at the time.

OK.

LingoDingo wrote:
eldin raigmore wrote:
What's the cutoff between "near past" and "distant past"? What's the cutoff between "near future" and "distant future"?
It's very much a matter of relativity.
....
I hope that makes sense.

So, it's a matter of discourse deixis; the exact meanings of "near" and "far" depend on what/when you're talking about at the time.

LingoDingo wrote:
eldin raigmore wrote:
I'd think a 3rd-person imperative would come in handier than a 1st-person-singular imperative!
This is how it is for two reasons: 1. it's formed by just removing the plural ending from the "we" command and 2. the regularity of Aalmoken gives the "definition" to the imperative as a direct command, and I don't think I could directly command someone I'm not talking directly about or to to do something. I find it a lot easier to command myself to do something.
e.g. ”deenuwi ge! Do it!(say some mental block is keeping from doing your homework and you want to try to motivate yourself)

Hmmm. I'm still not sure .... but it's your conlang, and you do have a reason, whether or not I find it convincing, so you should go with that.

LingoDingo wrote:
To find the meaning of the adverbial form of a word, one must first think of the descriptor form.
i.e. since fumal = "atmospheric", fumās = "atmospherically" or "by air".
momal = of speech, verbal, out loud(adj.); momās = verbally, out loud(adv.), by speech.

OK, good. Thanks.

LingoDingo wrote:
*a new gerund ending. part of a set of suffixes I'd be willing to show.

The sooner the better IMO!

LingoDingo wrote:
I've been thinking of adding a distinction between inclusive and exclusive "we"s. What do you think?
IMO clusivity distinctions are as necessary as obviatives. So I, for one, approve.

---------
Thanks!
_________________
"We're the healthiest horse in the glue factory" - Erskine Bowles, Co-Chairman of the deficit reduction commission
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
LingoDingo
Admin


Joined: 25 Oct 2011
Posts: 100
Location: Eastern US

PostPosted: Thu Dec 08, 2011 4:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

eldin raigmore wrote:
Then how do you say "my boss's wife's kid's dog's tail's tip"?


lepan joľal wūfal lakal seifnimal tseekāval toˀal

The GEN-GEN idea doesn't really help in of itself with multiple levels of descriptors. It only removes the ambiguity from the first level; however, this has me thinking, I think I know a way to deal with all the possible levels with a varying GEN-GEN form depending on which level the descriptor is in.
It would go a bit like this (I'm not goin' fancy, so it'll just be one word over and over):

giiv - happiness

giiv giival giivalu giivalo giivala giivale giivali giivalu giivalo etc.

the u, o, a, e, or i would serve as a sort of GEN-#GEN (# - level)

This would make the original phrase: lepan joľal wūfalu lakalo seifnimala tseekāvale toˀali

What do you think?

eldin raigmore wrote:
Wait.
It looks like wovbunal is wov-MAS-NOM-GEN instead of wov-MAS-GEN-NOM.
It looks like wovnimal is wov-FEM-NOM-GEN instead of wov-FEM-GEN-NOM.
It looks like wovāňal is wov-PLU-NOM-GEN instead of wov-PLU-GEN-NOM.


I would say no. The Genitive ending first attaches to whatever ending may or may not be on the word and is the declined to the proper case thereafter. Thus, wov-MAS-NOM-GEN would be incorrect as it would imply that the Genitive ending is after the Masculine ending has been declined, which is not the case.

eldin raigmore wrote:

Would wov-MAS-GEN-ACC be wovalgu?
Would wov-FEM-GEN-DAT be wovalzā?
Would wov-PLU-GEN-LOC be wovalžeiv?


wov-MAS-GEN-ACC would be wovbunek
wov-FEM-GEN-DAT would be wovnimez
wov-PLU-GEN-LOC would be wovāňeic

Though, to be perfectly honest, that's actually missing something. It should be more like, "wov-MAS-GEN-NEUT-ACC".

(glossing looks like it could be a pretty big pain in the butt for Genitive stuff)

I'll have the explanation for the prepositions up by the late evening.
I can tell you right now, though, that the prepositions work something like this: They have a sort of underlying basic meaning that can't really be defined, and that basic meaning is then focused into something more easily understood once one adds a certain case marking to the prepositional phrase. e.g. "ci" (probably the most complicated of the prepositions) means, "by (as in, "the project was written by Bob")" when used with the Accusative case, but means, "at" with the Locative and, "near/around" with the Directional.
_________________
Fluent or nearly fluent in: English, German, Japanese
Mildly capable in: Spanish, Russian, French, Chinese

Constructed Languages: Aalsen, Aalmok Repurpose, Samamisu

.aď sodai peťās sokās na asnā;šustās buntai mokā aaťal. - One never truly knows a culture until they learn its language.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
eldin raigmore
Admin


Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 1621
Location: SouthEast Michigan

PostPosted: Fri Dec 09, 2011 12:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

LingoDingo wrote:
The GEN-GEN idea doesn't really help in of itself with multiple levels of descriptors. It only removes the ambiguity from the first level; however, this has me thinking, I think I know a way to deal with all the possible levels with a varying GEN-GEN form depending on which level the descriptor is in.
It would go a bit like this (I'm not goin' fancy, so it'll just be one word over and over):
giiv - happiness
giiv giival giivalu giivalo giivala giivale giivali giivalu giivalo etc.
the u, o, a, e, or i would serve as a sort of GEN-#GEN (# - level)
This would make the original phrase: lepan joľal wūfalu lakalo seifnimala tseekāvale toˀali
What do you think?

(See
http://www.amazon.com/Double-Case-Suffixaufnahme-Frans-Plank/dp/0195087755
and
http://img2.tapuz.co.il/forums/1_141488251.doc
among others.)


I think it's a good idea.

A language that allows präfixaufnahme (prefix-uptake) or suffixaufnahme (suffix-uptake), whether for purposes of case-stacking (1, 2, 3, 4, 5) or any other purpose where a dependent word inherits a feature of its head word, have to impose some arbitrary limit, or else the language won't be "linear"*.

*
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mildly_context-sensitive_language#Definition wrote:
4. all the languages have constant growth; this means that the distribution of string lengths should be linear rather than supralinear. This is often guaranteed by proving a pumping lemma for some class of mildly context-sensitive languages.


For example, if -GEN- could be stacked without limit, the number of morphemes in a long possessive-within-...-possessive-...-within-possessive phrase would grow quadratically instead of linearly.
tip . . . 1 morpheme
tail-GEN tip . . . 3 morphemes
dog-GEN-GEN tail-GEN tip . . . 6 morphemes
kid-GEN-GEN-GEN dog-GEN-GEN tail-GEN tip . . . 10 morphemes
wife-GEN-GEN-GEN-GEN kid-GEN-GEN-GEN dog-GEN-GEN tail-GEN tip . . . 15 morphemes
boss-GEN-GEN-GEN-GEN-GEN wife-GEN-GEN-GEN-GEN kid-GEN-GEN-GEN dog-GEN-GEN tail-GEN tip . . . 21 morphemes
1st.SG-GEN-GEN-GEN-GEN-GEN-GEN boss-GEN-GEN-GEN-GEN-GEN wife-GEN-GEN-GEN-GEN kid-GEN-GEN-GEN dog-GEN-GEN tail-GEN tip
. . . 28 morphemes (assuming 1st.SG is just one morpheme)

Case-stacking languages usually limit how many case-endings can be stacked, which cases can be inside which, which cases can be outside which, how many times in a row each case can occur in a stack, how many times total each case can occur in a stack, etc. Rather typical might be: At most four case-endings in a stack; no case-ending can happen more than three times in a single stack; and no case-ending can happen more than twice in a row in a single stack.

That way we'd just have
1st.SG-GEN-GEN boss-GEN-GEN wife-GEN-GEN kid-GEN-GEN dog-GEN-GEN tail-GEN tip . . . 18 morphemes (assuming 1st.SG is just one morpheme)
Whenever the addressee hears "-GEN-GEN" she/he/they(/it?) know it signals "a stack of at least two possessions, possibly more than two-deep".

I like your idea better, though.


LingoDingo wrote:
I would say no. The Genitive ending first attaches to whatever ending may or may not be on the word and is the declined to the proper case thereafter. Thus, wov-MAS-NOM-GEN would be incorrect as it would imply that the Genitive ending is after the Masculine ending has been declined, which is not the case.
....
wov-MAS-GEN-ACC would be wovbunek
wov-FEM-GEN-DAT would be wovnimez
wov-PLU-GEN-LOC would be wovāňeic

Though, to be perfectly honest, that's actually missing something. It should be more like, "wov-MAS-GEN-NEUT-ACC".

(glossing looks like it could be a pretty big pain in the butt for Genitive stuff)

To me it still looks like you're having the genitive ending outside of, or after, the other ending, rather than inside, or before, it.
I guess I'm confused. I hope I'll understand eventually.


LingoDingo wrote:
I'll have the explanation for the prepositions up by the late evening.

I'm looking forward to it! Cool Smile


LingoDingo wrote:
I can tell you right now, though, that the prepositions work something like this: They have a sort of underlying basic meaning that can't really be defined, and that basic meaning is then focused into something more easily understood once (could you mean "until"?) one adds a certain case marking to the prepositional phrase. e.g. "ci" (probably the most complicated of the prepositions) means, "by (as in, "the project was written by Bob")" when used with the Accusative case, but means, "at" with the Locative and, "near/around" with the Directional.

Sort of what I expected.

Classical Greek had only 12 prepositions and only 4 cases. But many prepositions could be used with at least three of the cases, and (nearly?) all could be used with at least two. So they could express around two-and-a-half dozen meanings.

IIRC there are some natlangs having both prepositions and postpositions in which a given preposition+postposition pair has a meaning not necessarily transparently obvious given how each adposition operates without the other. You could do that and also add the cases. With 5 prepositions and 5 postpositions and 6 cases you could express 216 = (5+1)*6*(5+1) meanings.
_________________
"We're the healthiest horse in the glue factory" - Erskine Bowles, Co-Chairman of the deficit reduction commission
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
LingoDingo
Admin


Joined: 25 Oct 2011
Posts: 100
Location: Eastern US

PostPosted: Fri Dec 09, 2011 5:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

So, this is how I'm gonna do this: I'll start by giving a list of the prepositions atm, then for each case I'll go through the meaning each preposition holds when used with it.

Current list (subject to updates):

ša, byu, ku, kyo, ma, wi, yu, fa, go, ni, nimo, tuu, gaa, ci, we, yo, du, lu, ľe, na, li, šu, la, kwi, mi, kosi, kozu, kowe, koyo, kwa, yau, jo, gľoi, kreu, di, lila, lišu, nala, našu, pu, kukwi, kudi

Nominative:

Currently none (may change)

Accusative:

wi - of a higher order than, greater than
yu - of a lesser order than, less than
fa - in front of, leading, giving leadership to
go - behind, in support| of, supporting
ni - of the same mind as
nimo - of a different mind than
tuu - near to, close to
gaa - distant from, far from
ci - by, by the hands of
du - between (e.g. "just between you and me")
kwi - about, on the subject of
mi - just ... as, as ... as
kwa - separate from
yau - at ...'s side, by ...'s side
jo - different from, apart from
gľoi - ruling, in control of
kreu - enslaved by, at the bottom of
di - alongside, following but with equal importance as
pu - for each, from each, per

Dative:

ša - for, with the intent to give to, with ... in mind
byu - from, with ...'s intent to give
ni - with, in concourse with, plus, added to, using
nimo - without, minus, removed from, without using
ci - specifically in reference to, about
mi - similar|ly to, like
kwa - tangent of
jo - on the contrary| to

Locative:

ku - in, inside| of, on the inside| of, within
kyo - on, attached to, attached to the outer side of
ma - out| of, outside| of, on the outside| of
wi - above, in the space above| of
yu - beneath, below, in the space underneath| of
fa - in front of, before, on this side| of
go - behind, on the far side| of
tuu - near| to, close| to, nearby, close by, in the vicinity| of
gaa - far| from, far away, nowhere near
ci - at, by, in close proximity| to, at the position of
we - left| of, on the left| of, on the left side| of
yo - right| of, on the right| of, on the right side| of
du - in between, in the space between, between
lu - during, within the time of, while ... is or was or will be occurring
ľe - at, at about, at around, around, about (time expressions)
na - near| to, close| to, almost (time expressions)
li - far| from, far away| from (time expressions)
šu - before, preceding (time expressions)
la - after, afterwards
kwi - around, surrounding, all around, in every direction
kosi - north| of, to the north| of
kozu - south| of, to the south| of
kowe - west| of, to the west| of
koyo - east| of, to the east| of
kwa - apart, separate
yau - to or on the side| of, beside, next to
jo - across from, on the other side| of
gľoi - on| top of
kreu - on the underside| of, underneath
di - along the side| of, alongside, stretched across the edge| of
lila - long after
lišu - long before
nala - soon or just after
našu - soon or just before
kukwi - throughout, around within, all throughout

Directional:

ša - to, towards, in the direction| of
byu - away from, in the direction opposite| of
ku - into, form the outside to the inside of, from the outside inwards
kyo - onto, from away from to a position attached to
ma - out of, from the inside to the outside of, from the inside outwards
wi - up, upwards, from above upwards
yu - down, downwards, from beneath downwards
fa - to the front| of, to the front side| of, from elsewhere to the front| of
go - behind, to the far side| of, from elsewhere to the far side| of
tuu - nearby
gaa - far away| from
ci - in the same direction and position as
we - to the left side| of, from elsewhere to the left side| of
yo- to the right side| of, from elsewhere to the right side| of
du - through, from one side through to the other side| of
lu - during for a time or while
ľe - until (time expressions)
kwi - around, in every direction| outwards
kosi - northwards
kozu - southwards
kowe - westwards
koyo - eastwards
kwa - in opposite directions from
yau - to the side of, from elsewhere to the side| of
jo - across, from one side to the other| of
gľoi - over, from one side above to the other side| of
kreu - below, from one side underneath to the other side| of
di - along, alongside, along the side| of
kukwi - throughout, all around the inside| of
kudi - along(through)/down(a road/path)/across(a bridge)

Genitive:

Currently none (and will probably remain as such)

Adding ni to certain prepositions and using them with the Directional case like "niwe (meaning "in the same direction while on the left side| of")" gives the meaning of going in the same direction while in the Locative cases position in relation to something.

Once again, this list is subject to changes and additions.

Also, this will now be the true list and definitions of the prepositions. If there is any discontinuity between the original post list and this one, then this one will hold precedence. Thus, the meanings in this list are the presiding definitions, and should be believed instead of the original post's.
_________________
Fluent or nearly fluent in: English, German, Japanese
Mildly capable in: Spanish, Russian, French, Chinese

Constructed Languages: Aalsen, Aalmok Repurpose, Samamisu

.aď sodai peťās sokās na asnā;šustās buntai mokā aaťal. - One never truly knows a culture until they learn its language.


Last edited by LingoDingo on Thu Jan 26, 2012 4:57 am; edited 5 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
LingoDingo
Admin


Joined: 25 Oct 2011
Posts: 100
Location: Eastern US

PostPosted: Fri Dec 09, 2011 6:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

eldin raigmore wrote:
For example, if -GEN- could be stacked without limit, the number of morphemes in a long possessive-within-...-possessive-...-within-possessive phrase would grow quadratically instead of linearly.

...

I like your idea better, though.


I was thinking of a simpler notation since I personally feel only one morpheme is being added to the initial Genitive no matter which level.

Something like this:

tip tail-GEN dog-GEN-1GEN child-GEN-2GEN wife-GEN-3GEN boss-GEN-4GEN 1SG-GEN-5GEN

The number denoting which level the morpheme represents.

eldin raigmore wrote:
LingoDingo wrote:
*a new gerund ending. part of a set of suffixes I'd be willing to show.


The sooner the better IMO!


Gerund
_is
Recieved gerund
_us
Completed action
_edal
Thing that does
_īk
Thing that recieves the doing
_uek
Person that does
_ād
Person that recieves the doing
_auw
Place suffix
_īť
ability suffix
_ob
wanting suffix
_eňgal
having suffix
_iksal
not having suffix
_ogzal
study-of suffix
_ibet
borne-of suffix
_eiy
Thing that is
_īn
Person that is
_an
causing suffix
_acal
This that is used for
_ekš
Person that is used for
_aks
_________________
Fluent or nearly fluent in: English, German, Japanese
Mildly capable in: Spanish, Russian, French, Chinese

Constructed Languages: Aalsen, Aalmok Repurpose, Samamisu

.aď sodai peťās sokās na asnā;šustās buntai mokā aaťal. - One never truly knows a culture until they learn its language.


Last edited by LingoDingo on Wed Feb 01, 2012 12:02 am; edited 8 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
eldin raigmore
Admin


Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 1621
Location: SouthEast Michigan

PostPosted: Fri Dec 09, 2011 7:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Both of your last two posts are:
Really Cool! Cool

More comments later, after more thought.
_________________
"We're the healthiest horse in the glue factory" - Erskine Bowles, Co-Chairman of the deficit reduction commission
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
LingoDingo
Admin


Joined: 25 Oct 2011
Posts: 100
Location: Eastern US

PostPosted: Mon Dec 12, 2011 1:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

While I wait, here's a set of unique descriptors:

a - a(n)
ta - the
teta - every/each/all
nata - any/some/a few or couple/several
gopa - few
kepa - much/many
sota - no
iiťa - this/these(near me)
aaťa - that/those(near you)
uuťa - that/those(near neither)
eipa - (an)other/some more/a few or couple more
fara - whole
mima - same
kwoda - most
mepa - last
nāfa - only

These are important because they go in front of what they are referencing and they do not possess the final consonant of normal descriptors. As such, I like to call them prepositioned descriptors.


Except for ten and it's multiples, "e.g. nebal" ordinal numbers are formed my adding, "-nal" to the cardinal
_________________
Fluent or nearly fluent in: English, German, Japanese
Mildly capable in: Spanish, Russian, French, Chinese

Constructed Languages: Aalsen, Aalmok Repurpose, Samamisu

.aď sodai peťās sokās na asnā;šustās buntai mokā aaťal. - One never truly knows a culture until they learn its language.


Last edited by LingoDingo on Fri Feb 03, 2012 10:37 pm; edited 4 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
LingoDingo
Admin


Joined: 25 Oct 2011
Posts: 100
Location: Eastern US

PostPosted: Mon Dec 12, 2011 5:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Also, this is rather random but, I was just looking at a conlang's numbering system and the creator brought up a subject which reminded me of a system in Aalmoken that I had been very proud of ever since I devised it.
Let me begin by restating the numbers:

1-10:

nā - one
dwe - two
za - three
koi - four
po - five
vi - six
sei - seven
hau - eight
mu - nine
neb - ten

Zero is denoted by the word for no with a short vowel instead of long, "mo"

After ten, with numbers 11-19, the vowel of each number is added to neb to get each teen's number:

nebā - eleven
nebwe - twelve
neba - thirteen
neboi - fourteen
nebo - fifteen
nebi - sixteen
nebei - seventeen
nebau - eighteen
nebu - nineteen

To get the multiples of ten, one simply attaches the 1-9 words with the primary vowel extended to neb which is then modified to nāb:

dweenāb - twenty
zaanāb - thirty
kooināb - fourty
poonāb - fifty
viināb - sixty
seeināb - seventy
haaunāb - eighty
muunāb - ninety

Twenty one and so on are maid by doing with each multiple of ten what was done to get the teen numbers, e.g. dweenābā - twenty one.

Now comes the interesting part, each power of ten is created by attaching the number of the power (numbers with diphthongs have the second vowel removed, dwe has the w removed and neb has the b removed) to "mo". so:

demo - hundred
zamo - thousand
komo - ten thousand
pomo - hundred thousand
vimo - million
semo - ten million
hamo - hundred million
mumo - billion
nemo - ten billion
nenāmo - hundred billion
nedemo - trillion

and so on. The impressive thing about this setup is that one can make obscenely large numbers with out using very many syllables, and no stacking occurs until Google.

e.g. zaanāhamo - 10^38 or one with 38 zeros

These numbers can be prefixed on to words to form concepts like the kilogram (zamogram[number prefixes' stress is pronounced separately from the stem's stress])

This would likely make the SI's congregations to divine new measurement prefixes unnecessary should Aalmoken come in to common use as I could easily say a value of 10^70 grams as seeinemogram.

Also the decimal numbers (half, tenth, hundredth) are made by flipping the last primary vowel across the a vowel as per my rule of vowel order(u,o,a,e,i) and deepening a by one level(a-o and ā-ū):

dwo - half
zo - third
kei - fourth
nob - tenth
dweenūb - twentieth
deme - hundredth

As such, 10^-40 grams could be represented as kooinemegram.

By the way, I can give a list of the measurement words I have right now but you'll find them to be rather familiar.

(Once again, I'm very proud of my numbers)

Here's 123456789 written out in Aalmoken for reference:

hamo-dweesemo-zaavimo-kooipomo-pookomo-viizamo-seeidemo-haaunābu
_________________
Fluent or nearly fluent in: English, German, Japanese
Mildly capable in: Spanish, Russian, French, Chinese

Constructed Languages: Aalsen, Aalmok Repurpose, Samamisu

.aď sodai peťās sokās na asnā;šustās buntai mokā aaťal. - One never truly knows a culture until they learn its language.


Last edited by LingoDingo on Thu Jan 19, 2012 4:30 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
LingoDingo
Admin


Joined: 25 Oct 2011
Posts: 100
Location: Eastern US

PostPosted: Mon Dec 12, 2011 11:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've just made a change to my inflection table that's pretty significant. I changed the plural ending from _āň to _eš and reworked almost all of the noun inflections as well as a couple of descriptor inflections, in order to suit the new plural. Here's a table:

Code:
Noun
Gend.          Nom.          Acc.          Dat.          Loc.          Dir.          Gen.
Masc.          _un           _(u)gu        _(i)da        _(o)ji        _(u)cī        _unal
Fem.           _im           _(i)ki        _(ā)de        _(ū)ja        _(ī)co        _imal
Neut.          _             _a            _(e)ze        _(e)ci        _(a)cu        _al
Pl.            _īš           _(e)na        _(e)sa        _(e)šis       _(a)žuz       _īšal

Descriptors
Gend.          Nom.          Acc.          Dat.          Loc.          Dir.          Gen.
Masc.          _ul           _ug           _aid          _īj           _īc           _ulu
Fem.           _il           _ik           _ed           _aj           _ac           _ilu
Neut.          _al           _ak           _ez           _eic          _auc          _alu
Pl.            _el           _as           _ad           _eiď          _auť          _elu


While this is up, I'll also mention the comparative and superlatives, which work the same way as in most IE languages. In the case of Aalmoken, one adds an infix between the stem and the Genitive ending, this infix will remain the same no matter what inflection the Genitive ending has. The connotations are for comparatives: better than but perhaps not the best; and superlatives: the best with no equal. To say something is equal to something else one simply uses the "mi" preposition. Note "better/greater than" and "less(er) than" can also be said using "wi" and "yu" with the Accusative case.

Comparatives add -ub- for masculine, -ib- for feminine, -ab- for neuter, and -eb- for plural

Superlatives add -wuť- for masculine, -wiť- for feminine, -wať- for neuter, and -weť- for plural.

Also, since the code box doesn't seem to want to show the symbols: Nouns-Pl.-Nom. is _īš; Nouns-Pl.-Loc. is _(e)šis; Nouns-Pl.-Dir. is _(a)žuz; and Nouns-Pl.-Gen. is _īšal.

Finally, as part of what has become a major renovation of the inflections and conjugations, I suggest a review of the original post, as I've added an inclusive we with conjugations for it and changed all the verb endings as well as the infinitive ending. This renovation is due to the fact that inflections beginning with consonants could cause problems should the final consonant of the root be too similar to the initial consonant of the ending; as such, all endings, except for the ones with optional initial vowels listed in the tables above, now begin with a vowel.

(btw, am I using inflection right or should I be saying declension, or are they the same.)
_________________
Fluent or nearly fluent in: English, German, Japanese
Mildly capable in: Spanish, Russian, French, Chinese

Constructed Languages: Aalsen, Aalmok Repurpose, Samamisu

.aď sodai peťās sokās na asnā;šustās buntai mokā aaťal. - One never truly knows a culture until they learn its language.


Last edited by LingoDingo on Wed Feb 01, 2012 12:13 am; edited 7 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
eldin raigmore
Admin


Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 1621
Location: SouthEast Michigan

PostPosted: Tue Dec 13, 2011 8:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

"Declension" is a kind of "inflection".
"Conjugation" is another kind; and there are more kinds, but without names as far as I know.

When you inflect a word through all of its possible forms, that's called a "paradigm".
You could have said "paradigm" instead of "inflection table", though IMO what you did say is perfectly fine.

A paradigm for a noun is called a "declension".
Your table seems to be a declension for nouns and a declension for "descriptors" (adjectives?).
Adjectives may agree with the nouns they modify; so they may decline as well.

Adjectives and adverbs also have paradigms.
They inflect through degrees-of-comparison; in natlangs there are maximally four of those TTBOMK, namely {positive, equative, comparative, superlative}.
You have discussed in your post but after your table, the degrees-of-comparison for your language.

A paradigm for a verb is called a "conjugation".

"Inflection" and "derivation" are two kinds of morphological process that can happen to words.

"Inflection" processes are
* usually productive (apply to nearly every word of that part-of-speech, including newly coined or newly borrowed words),
* usually semantically consistent (make the same changes in meaning no matter which word they're applied to),
* usually semantically "transparent" (if a speaker has never heard that particular word inflected that particular way before, s/he nevertheless has a good idea of its meaning; for instance, if you knew what a "wug" is you'd know what "wugs" are);
* and usually don't change the part-of-speech.

"Derivation" processes are
* frequently not fully productive (don't apply to a big subset of that part-of-speech, in particular not to most newly coined or newly borrowed words),
* are frequently semantically idiosyncratic (don't make the same changes in meaning no matter which word they're applied to),
* and are frequently semantically "opaque" (if a speaker has never heard that particular word inflected that particular way before, s/he may not have a good idea of its meaning);
* and often change the part-of-speech.

The way English forms gerunds and participles from verbs, probably should count as inflection instead of derivation, because it changes part-of-speech (verb to noun, or verb to adjective), but it's productive, consistent, and transparent.

However not everybody always agrees with that for every purpose.
_________________
"We're the healthiest horse in the glue factory" - Erskine Bowles, Co-Chairman of the deficit reduction commission
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
LingoDingo
Admin


Joined: 25 Oct 2011
Posts: 100
Location: Eastern US

PostPosted: Tue Dec 13, 2011 9:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks very much.

I call the Genitive forms descriptors because I don't really see them as being the same as adjectives, though the serve essentially the same purpose.

Perhaps I could revert to adjective if you feel that concepts like, "John's" and "of beauty" are adjectives.
_________________
Fluent or nearly fluent in: English, German, Japanese
Mildly capable in: Spanish, Russian, French, Chinese

Constructed Languages: Aalsen, Aalmok Repurpose, Samamisu

.aď sodai peťās sokās na asnā;šustās buntai mokā aaťal. - One never truly knows a culture until they learn its language.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
eldin raigmore
Admin


Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 1621
Location: SouthEast Michigan

PostPosted: Fri Dec 16, 2011 12:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well:

According to Barry J. Blake's "Case":

Cases are either syntactical/grammatical or are semantic.
Examples;
Nominative, Absolutive, Accusative, Ergative, Dative, Dechticaetiative, Pegative, and Genitive are grammatical. They show which syntactic or grammatical role their thus-cased nouns play in the clause or in a noun-phrase.
Comitative, Instrumental, Locative, Allative, Ablative, and Vialis are semantic. They show what semantic role their thus-cased nouns play in the clause or in a noun-phrase.


Also, cases are either ad-nominal or ad-verbal.
Ad-verbal cases show the relationship of the thus-cased noun to the verb or to the clause as a whole;
ad-nominal cases show the relationship of the thus-cased noun to some noun.
Examples:
Nominative, Absolutive, Accusative, Ergative, Dative, Dechticaetiative, Pegative, Comitative, Instrumental, Locative, Allative, Ablative, and Vialis are ad-verbal.
Possessive, Genitive, and Partitive are ad-nominal.

A noun in the Genitive tells "what kind" the head-noun modified by the Genitive phrase is.
In "wooden ships" or "ships of wood", "wooden" and "of wood" are genitive; in "golden rings" or "rings of gold", "golden" and "of gold" are genitive;
they tell what kind of ship or what kind of ring (that is, what it's made of).

A noun in the Possessive tells who has or owns (or whatever) the head-noun modified by the Possessive phrase is. "Friend of mine" or "my friend", for instance.

A noun in the Partitive tells what the head-noun modified by the Partitive phrase is part of. "Piece of cake" or "slice of pie" or "cup of coffee", for instance.

Clearly, in English at least, Genitive and Possessive and Partitive seem to be homophonous; or it might be simpler to say they're all the same case, since one hallmark of cases is that they do more than one job. In fact some grammarians refuse to call a system a "case" system unless at least one case is both grammatical and semantic, like English's "Dative"="Allative" case ("to someplace" or "to someone"). (Though for English, except for the "Saxon genitive" <s> and, for pronouns, the "objective" (incorporating the "accusative"), "cases" are generally indicated by prepositions rather than by morphology on the noun.)

In languages with many cases, most cases are ad-verbal and most cases are semantic. Indeed, if it has enough cases, probably most cases are locational or directional somehow.

Adjective phrases, Genitive phrases, and Relative clauses, all do the same things; they either further describe the referent(s) of some noun, or they restrict and circumscribe the referents of some noun.

You might think of the Genitive (and other ad-nominal cases, if there are any) as "turning a noun (or pronoun) into an adjective"; you might think of relativization as "turning a clause into an adjective".

Anyway, in typology, they are usually all treated at the same time and compared to each other. The degree to which they differ in a given language is considered typologically significant.

Does any of that help?

Your "descriptors" might be better left as you've named them; or, they might be better named something your readers are more familiar with. You'd either have to explain what "descriptor" meant, or you'd have to explain how they were different from most other languages' adjectives.
Use your own judgment, and make sure your grammar's readers know what you're doing. That'll be not only great; it'll be superior to some professional texts I've read.
_________________
"We're the healthiest horse in the glue factory" - Erskine Bowles, Co-Chairman of the deficit reduction commission
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
LingoDingo
Admin


Joined: 25 Oct 2011
Posts: 100
Location: Eastern US

PostPosted: Fri Dec 16, 2011 4:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's certainly very enlightening.

It actually leads me to wonder if these words(as well as their english adjectival counterparts) could be thought of as, "adjectives in function but descriptors in purpose."

I may just be making a loopy thought pile here that is totally bogus, but it popped into my mind and I feel like questioning so.

This is somewhat based on the derivation of the word for adjective, which I saw you mention elsewhere, as a "noun that is thrown at another(or something along those lines)". It might suggest that the term, "adjective," represents more a function in a sentence as a freestanding but dependent morpheme as opposed to the purpose of describing a substantive noun.

Also, based on what you said, It's legitimate to have what I call the Genitive Case occupy the meanings implied for the Possessive Case?

On another note(a rather tangent one), seeing as how I have a fair interest in becoming a teacher of language, and under the hopeful presumption that my language at least mildly hits it off, does it seem reasonable that this language would spend about one year focused on grammar concepts and then the later years focused on the vocabulary for the college/university level? My high school Russian learning spent about two years on grammar before moving on to more vocabulary late my last school year, and I feel that learning Aalmoken grammar should be significantly quicker than that, but maybe slightly longer than German. Granted I've been learning German since I was in 1st grade so I don't really remember how much time was spent thereon.

Lastly, if you guys were to decide that you wanted to see the current Aalmoken lexicon, would it be better to post it in this topic or make another devoted to the words and their meanings?
_________________
Fluent or nearly fluent in: English, German, Japanese
Mildly capable in: Spanish, Russian, French, Chinese

Constructed Languages: Aalsen, Aalmok Repurpose, Samamisu

.aď sodai peťās sokās na asnā;šustās buntai mokā aaťal. - One never truly knows a culture until they learn its language.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
LingoDingo
Admin


Joined: 25 Oct 2011
Posts: 100
Location: Eastern US

PostPosted: Fri Dec 16, 2011 4:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's certainly very enlightening.

It actually leads me to wonder if these words(as well as their english adjectival counterparts) could be thought of as, "adjectives in function but descriptors in purpose."

I may just be making a loopy thought pile here that is totally bogus, but it popped into my mind and I feel like questioning so.

This is somewhat based on the derivation of the word for adjective, which I saw you mention elsewhere, as a "noun that is thrown at another(or something along those lines)". It might suggest that the term, "adjective," represents more a function in a sentence as a freestanding but dependent morpheme as opposed to the purpose of describing a substantive noun.

Also, based on what you said, It's legitimate to have what I call the Genitive Case occupy the meanings implied for the Possessive Case?

On another note(a rather tangent one), seeing as how I have a fair interest in becoming a teacher of language, and under the hopeful presumption that my language at least mildly hits it off, does it seem reasonable that this language would spend about one year focused on grammar concepts and then the later years focused on the vocabulary for the college/university level? My high school Russian learning spent about two years on grammar before moving on to more vocabulary late my last school year, and I feel that learning Aalmoken grammar should be significantly quicker than that, but maybe slightly longer than German. Granted I've been learning German since I was in 1st grade so I don't really remember how much time was spent thereon.

Lastly, if you guys were to decide that you wanted to see the current Aalmoken lexicon, would it be better to post it in this topic or make another devoted to the words and their meanings?
_________________
Fluent or nearly fluent in: English, German, Japanese
Mildly capable in: Spanish, Russian, French, Chinese

Constructed Languages: Aalsen, Aalmok Repurpose, Samamisu

.aď sodai peťās sokās na asnā;šustās buntai mokā aaťal. - One never truly knows a culture until they learn its language.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Kiri



Joined: 13 Jun 2009
Posts: 471
Location: Latvia/Italy

PostPosted: Fri Dec 16, 2011 6:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

LingoDingo wrote:

Lastly, if you guys were to decide that you wanted to see the current Aalmoken lexicon, would it be better to post it in this topic or make another devoted to the words and their meanings?


I see no problem with posting it here Smile

Sorry for not participating in the conversation Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
eldin raigmore
Admin


Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 1621
Location: SouthEast Michigan

PostPosted: Fri Dec 16, 2011 8:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

LingoDingo wrote:
It's certainly very enlightening.
It actually leads me to wonder if these words(as well as their english adjectival counterparts) could be thought of as, "adjectives in function but descriptors in purpose."
I may just be making a loopy thought pile here that is totally bogus, but it popped into my mind and I feel like questioning so.
This is somewhat based on the derivation of the word for adjective, which I saw you mention elsewhere, as a "noun that is thrown at another(or something along those lines)". It might suggest that the term, "adjective," represents more a function in a sentence as a freestanding but dependent morpheme as opposed to the purpose of describing a substantive noun.

That sounds about right.
"Nomina substantiva" are basically "independent names";
"Nomina adiectiva" are basically "dependent names".


LingoDingo wrote:
Also, based on what you said, It's legitimate to have what I call the Genitive Case occupy the meanings implied for the Possessive Case?

Oh heck yes!
I hoped I'd made that clear.
In most languages with case, at least one case has more than one function.
And in many languages you might be familiar with, "genitive" and "possessive" are the same, and/or "genitive" and "partitive" are the same.


LingoDingo wrote:
On another note(a rather tangent one), seeing as how I have a fair interest in becoming a teacher of language, and under the hopeful presumption that my language at least mildly hits it off, does it seem reasonable that this language would spend about one year focused on grammar concepts and then the later years focused on the vocabulary for the college/university level?

I don't see why not. I'm not the expert, though, so, really, I don't know.


LingoDingo wrote:
Lastly, if you guys were to decide that you wanted to see the current Aalmoken lexicon, would it be better to post it in this topic or make another devoted to the words and their meanings?

Here would be fine IMO.
_________________
"We're the healthiest horse in the glue factory" - Erskine Bowles, Co-Chairman of the deficit reduction commission
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Vreleksį Forum Index -> Conlangs
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 2 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Theme ACID © 2003 par HEDONISM Web Hosting Directory


Start Your Own Video Sharing Site

Free Web Hosting | Free Forum Hosting | FlashWebHost.com | Image Hosting | Photo Gallery | FreeMarriage.com

Powered by PhpBBweb.com, setup your forum now!
For Support, visit Forums.BizHat.com