Christophe Grandsire wrote: > En réponse à Andreas Johansson : > > >> Your adpositions should be impositions (ie, go in the middle of the >> word). >> Plural should be indicated by reduplication of the preceding word, >> and verbs >> should be discontinuous (ie, consist of 2+ separate bits that go in >> different >> places in the sentence). > > > Well, German and Dutch already have that, and Maggel is planned to > have that too, so I'm not sure it's such a wacky feature (Maggel is a > bit wackier than Dutch and German as it separately conjugates both > bits of the verb :)) ). > Well, if they're seperately conjugated, it qualifies as wacky. But I protest the idea that any feature that is found in a European language is unwacky. >> Evidentiality should be indicated by suppletion of >> the verb stem, while imperative mood by reversing the tonal contour >> of the >> verb, except on the third syllable from the right, if present. > > > LOL. The verbs should also conjugate for future and non-future, and > make no distinction between past and present :))) . The language > should be written in a reverse abjad, i.e. with mandatory vowels as > full letters and consonants not written at all or only optionally, but > should have only 4 vowels and 50 consonants, and make most of its > grammatical marks through vowel changes :))) . > I think that verbs should conjugate for non-future and non-past. Lets have no definite tenses at all. Incidentally, I recently constructed a vowel-abugida, for a language with a number of consonants near to what you suggest. Of course, it only has ten consonant signs, and a strict CVCV(C) word structure.