On Mon, 13 Nov 2000 15:59:35 +0100, Christophe Grandsire
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>The verbal system of "Roumant" is not original in itself, the categories
>existing are quite the same as other Western Romance languages. Yet it has
>originalities. The first thing is that verbs are classified into 5 groups
>conjugations (not three like in other Romance languages)

I don't know particularly well how French is formally taught (though I've
had 5 years of formal teaching), but I've always considered there to be 4
conjugations: -er (from L -are), -oir (from L -re), -re (from L -ere),
and -ir (from L -ire and seemingly also -re). Ok, those are just my
observations/conclusions - I've usually been too put off by French (that's
what happens when you learn the langs at school!) to bother studying its
history well.

>- the auxiliaries stre /stEr/: to be and avre /a'vor/: to have,
>- the verbs in -re (like pre /por/: to be able to), descendant of CL esse? Oh yes, that's true; French tre is a
descendant of CL stare as well, with stare and esse suppleting each other
criss-cross in the conjugation. Correct? And BTW, why spelled with  and
not, say, ai? Would seem more etymological to me. But then, false etymology
is also quite realistic, hehe ;)

>- the verbs whose infinitive is marked by doubling the last consonnant of
>radical + e (like volle /vOl/: to want),

You're kidding!? Isn't that way arcane? I mean, wasn't that 'volre' back
in VL? Does 'esse' exist at all in Roumant?

>- 1st group verbs: -e, -as, -at, -ams, -s, -am
>- 2nd group verbs: -e, -es, -et, -ems, -s, -em
>- 3rd group verbs: -ie, -ies, -iet, -issims, -isss, -issim

Shudder. That orthography continues to give me the creeps! ;)

>The indicative imperfect:
>It's also formed from the radical to which special endings are added:
>- 1st group: -v, -vs, -vt, -vams, -vs, -vam
>- 2nd group: -v, -vs, -vt, -vams, -vs, -vam
>- 3rd group: -issv, -issvs, -issvt, -issvams, -issvs, issvam

What's with the circonflexes anyway? In French they serve a dubious
etymological role (with plenty of false appearances), but that doesn't seem
to apply here...I think it's just me not remembering your pronunciation
guide well enough. So I guess  actually has a different quality to .

>This formation is common to most Western Romance langs. Note that the
verbs like
>volle drop their -e and add an -r before the endings, so that the future
>is for volle: vollr-. This tense is the most regular of all.

That seems weird to me. Why no -t-, i.e. 'voltr-'? Hasn't separating
liquids by stops always been a hallmark of Romance langs? I'm surprised by
the regularity of Roumant conditional. Are there no, for example,
weakenings of stem vowels by the final stress (as per French 'faire'
> 'ferais')?

>The subjunctive future:
>It is formed from the same base as the indicative future, to which are
added the
>endings of the verb avre in subjunctive present (in fact the same endings
>the 1st and 2nd groups).

Applause applause :) I forgot to mention above: the form 'avre' strikes
me. Did the  develop from Latin  as in French  > ei > oi > wa (and then
wa > o)? Or  > ei > oi > o? In short, what's with the !?

>The conditional present:
>It is formed from the same base as the indicative future, to which are
added the
>endings of the verb avre in the indicative imperfect:
>- -v, -vs, -vt, -vams, -vs, -vam

Oh joy, conjugations with ` ^  interchanging :) What's the Roumant
keyboard like? You're sincerely evil Cristophe, no need to deny it :)

>The past participle:
>It's formed from the radical to which is added:
>- 1st group: -t
>- 2nd group: -t
>- 3rd group: -t
>It also can be used as an adjective, and also agrees in gender and number
>the noun it completes.

Was there no lenition process in Roumant? Actually, I'm quite interested by
now in establishing some equations between VL and Roumant. Perhaps you'll
inform me.

>It is also possible to form an infinitive perfect (avre + past
participle), a
>perfect participle (eiyent + past participle) and a perfect gerund
(eiyemmente +
>past participle), but those forms are hardly ever used.

The use of y for /j/ in Romance langs has always annoyed me. Especially in
French. Not that I'm criticizing its use in Roumant; I choose to see
Roumant orthography as a satire of the modern French one, an excellent joke
really :)

>the verbs not featuring the augment -i(ss) (for lack of a better name), the

Is the same feature in French basically just an "augment"? Funny how a
language like French could delete sounds and syllables to the point of
having to reinforce them all back. Like the phrase 'qu'est que c'est?" so
well illustrates.

>Right now I'm waiting for your comments on this part. If you want, I will
>more verbal paradigms, or I will go to other parts, like the prepositions,
>negation (a very interesting feature in "Roumant") and the numerals. Or I
can do

Negation sounds interesting to me. You could tell me BTW, about why 'non'
doesn't feature as a negating adverb in French, but only 'ne', the archaic
Indo-European word.