On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 18:20:38 -0500, Eldin Raigmore 
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>---In [log in to unmask], Jeffrey Jones <jsjonesmiami@...> wrote:
>>The phonology and orthography page for MNCL5 is up and ready for
>>comments. It's at:
>< http://qiihoskeh.googlepages.com/M5Orthog.htm >
>
>I like it.

Thanks.

>>A preliminary morphology page is also up.
>
>At
>< http://qiihoskeh.googlepages.com/M5Morpho.htm >
>?
>
>Although an "initial" is mandatory, it could be "zero", right? That is, an initial
>block is (C)- ; and an initial morpheme is an initial block followed by zero or
>more medial blocks; and a word has to have an initial morpheme and a final
>morpheme; but it's possible the only one of these that has any pronounceable
>parts is the final morpheme, which consists of a final block, which may be -V
>or -VV or -VC.
>
>So some words may consist of a single vowel, only; this is thought of as
>having a zero intial morpheme and a -V final morpheme, right?

Right, as in |o handa| "someone's hand" or |E katan.| "Cats exist."

>The "aspect" tags might be usable on nouns to indicate whether it's a
>mass-or-measure noun or a count-noun.

Hmmm. I'm not sure this fits in MNCL5, but could you elaborate?

>The voice applies only to non-verbs? But it can vary in meaning depending on
>whether or not the non-verb in question is a subject or an object?  To me
>that will be confusing; what tells me which is subject and which is object?  A
>mark on the verb? Or on the noun?

This comment is very helpful, since it tells me that I need to rewrite that 
section completely. Only, I don't know how to go about it, especially without 
referring to syntax. "Subject" and "object" are intended to refer to the 
arguments of the non-verb form itself, not the verb of the clause, but are 
probably the wrong terms.

>In general I really like everything about the morphology section you have put
>in so far on that page.  I worry only about the question I asked above and
>about how confusing the zero-morphemes (the ones filled in by "-") will be.
>
>< http://qiihoskeh.googlepages.com/M5Medial.htm >
>looks very interesting, but I haven't had time to fully digest and analyze it
>yet, so I don't have any other remarks (kudos nor criticism) to make about it
>yet.
>
>However:  Thanks!  This was fun to read.
>
>>I'm still working on numbers, compounds, syntax, etc.
>>Jeff
>
>I look forward to it; I'll bet we all do.

Well, one other person has expressed interest. Thanks for the sentiment.