Print

Print


Kristian Jensen  wrote:

> >>At first, I thought my conlang was an active language -- and indeed, it
> >>does resemble an active language in marking noun cases semantically.
> >
> >No, definitely not an active language.
>
>Perhaps an active-portmanteaus lang? What I mean is, an
>active lang with much more than expected.

The only thing about it that resembles an active lang is the fact that case
is semantically determined.  (And I don't believe that's completely true of
active langs anyways -- but that's a side issue.)  The particulars of the
system don't resemble activity at all.  It could conceivably be analyzed as
an accusative lang based on the four or five sentence I looked at before
writing this -- but that would require a lot work redefining the actual
meanings of some of the verbs and cases.  For example, the word _fww't3_
'see' would have to be redefined as 'be seen by'.  You could then allow
some verbs to give "quirky case" to their subjects and objects, as many
natlangs do.  (That's Icelandic's claim to theoretical fame).

I don't think that would be useful though.  The system works as it is
AFAIK, so worrying about how it matches natlangs is not necessarily
productive, unless being "natural" is a goal of the project.


===============================
Marcus Smith
AIM:  Anaakoot
"When you lose a language, it's like
dropping a bomb on a museum."
   -- Kenneth Hale
===============================