--- Taka Tunu <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Let's say you make a language with
> Indonesian "nya" used as a
> genitive tag stuck btw the possessing and the
> possessed items in that order: how
> "a posteriori" is this tag given that "-nya" in
> Indonesian is a possessive
> suffix stuck to the possessed item that comes after
> the possessing one? 

I made a mistake about the derivation of that word.
It's really based on Tetum (the Malay-Portuguese
creole spoken in East Timor), and there they do
apparently use it after the possessor. 

I do agree with you that in many cases, there isn't
much to be gained from a posteriori vocabulary.
Actually, there are times where it may be detrimental.
A good example is, when I started studying Bislama,
there's the massive use of the term "long" to mean
"belong to" or "at" or "for". So it seemed natural to
me when they say "XXX long me," but when I read the
sentence "my child is sick long hospital", it was hard
for me to imagine that it wasn't possessive. Maybe it
would be just as good in that case to have an a priori

But in any case, it's a decision that I've made so I'm
going to try to continue to use "natural" words. I'm
sure other people will add new words if they think
it's necessary. 

-Jens Wilkinson

Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around