Hallo!

On Mon, 5 Nov 2007 18:47:52 -0500, Roger Mills wrote:

> It's time to let y'all know what's going on....
> 
> The sound system is: p b t d k g m n N r l s z y h; vowels i e a u o -- but 
> these are only the "underlying" phonemes. A lot happens on the way to the 
> surface.
> 
> Underlying forms of lexemes can be V(C), CV(C), CVV(C)-- these are rare; 
> most are (C)VCV and (C)VCVC. A handful of loans and frozen compounds have CC 
> clusters in initial and/or medial position-- _prevli_ itself is one such 
> /peda/ 'tongue' + /bili/ 'speak'). Underlying stress in on the penult.

Let me guess: *pedabili > *perevili > prevli ?
 
> CVCV nouns and verbs keep that form, though the final V can be dropped. 
> CVCVC forms > surface C1VC2VC3 (with some mutations) or undergo final-VC 
> metathesis > C1VC2C3V (also with mutations depending on the resulting 
> cluster)-- this last is the common form for nouns and realis 
> verbs/adjectives. I haven't quite decided what will be the function of the 
> unmetathesized forms, though for verbs I think it's a gerund/infinitive...

This looks very interesting - a whiff of triconsonantalrootism,
but not quite that.
  
> Final C mutation: in absolute final position (CVCVC) /ptk/ voice > bdg; both 
> final and medial /bdg/ lenit > BrG; others are unaffected. BTW, all C except 
> /y h/ can occur in final pos.

Nice!

> Vowel harmony: in CVCVC and CVCCV, the unstressed final /i a u/ change as 
> follows:  i--u > i--ü, e--u > e--ö, i/e--a > i/e--& (written ä a-uml); u--i 
>  > u--ü, o--i > o--ö, u/o--a > u/o--O (written å a-ring); a--i > a--e, a--u 
>  >
> a--o. (/e o/ do not occur in final unstr. syllables).  There are slightly  
> different rules for /i a u/ in CVCV and CVV(C) forms :-) Some exs:  /sapit/ 
>  > saped, sapte, /subat/ > suvOd, suftO. /sagud/ > saGor, saGro etc.

This looks interesting and makes perfect sense.

> The irrealis form of the verb has initial CV metathesis and final stress/no 
> V-harm., with more phonetic changes to the resulting clusters); exs. /sapit/ 
>  > aSpít (vl.stops don't mutate); /sagud/ > aZGúr (vd.stops do, at least so 
> far...). A CVCV form /koba/ kovo 'to go' > okfá

An interesting morphology, I must say.

> Realis passive infixes /-i-/ /s-i-apit/ siapte > S&pte, again, more changes 
> to the palatalized initial C; irrealis passive prefixes it: /i-aspit/ > 
> y&Spit; etc.  All this is set forth in extensive tables in the current draft 
> of the grammar....

This looks nice, too.

> Then there are several verbal aspects (right term?): inchoative 
> (becoming...), causative, desiderative (want to...), obligative (have to..., 
> must...), debitive (ought to, should...), prospective (about to...), 
> intentive (going to...), potential (can, able to...) and progressive 
> (be...ing); these are mutually exclusive, that is, if /ziza/ 'eat' > caus. 
> /ap-ziza/ abzize 'feed s.o.', you can't have a combined form meaning "I must 
> feed him"-- in that case, the modal "must" has to be in its independent form 
> (with pronoun suffix) followed by the caus. form. + I-him pronoun form.

More precisely, these are _aktionsarten_ (singular _aktionsart_),
but they are indeed often referred to as aspects, so your usage is
OK, I'd say.

> All these aspectual forms can be realis, irrealis, active/passive and even 
> imperative, semantics permitting. Oh-- and tenses-- present (unmarked), past 
> /-d/, future /-l/, and irrealis-conditional /-s/. I think I shall indicate 
> the perfects with a particle.
> 
> Enough for now. It's lotsa fun. :-)))))

It is.  This looks like a very interesting language, and I definitely
enjoyed reading your post.  Keep it up!

... brought to you by the Weeping Elf