Print

Print


On Sat, 9 Dec 2006 00:27:40 -0500, Andrew Nowicki <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>Rex May wrote:
>
>>One thing Ive considered is allowing a single phoneme to be
>>used only in grammaticals and always in them.  My first thought
>>is L.  Depending on the word-shape rules, this could produce
>>sufficient grammaticals, I think.  If you used Ceqli phonology,
>>prohibiting L in lexicals, and requiring that L be now regarded
>>as a consonant, you could have nCnV for lexicals and
>>LnV for grammaticals.  Thus, a plenitude of grammaticals
>>would be available.  La, lunu, liqwanoru, etc.  And if these
>>grammaticals were to operate as suffixes, theyd always be
>>pronouncable.
>
>Andrew Nowicki wrote:
>
>>I doubt anyone understands what you mean.
>>If you have a good idea, explain it in
>>simple terms that a five year old child
>>can understand.
>
>Rex May wrote:
>
>>Maybe it's the notation that's the problem:
>>
>>nCnV means one or more consonants followed by one
>>or more vowels.
>>
>>"L"nV means the letter "L" followed by one or more
>>vowels.
>>
>>Does that clear it up?
>
>It helps, but it is not clear if you define
>grammaticals as prepositions and pronouns.

Pronouns, probably.  Prepositions, mostly not.
>
>Here is an example of the morphemes you are proposing:
>gkdtaeaoae.

No, that would be prohibited by lack of pronounceability.

Just check Ceqli out and you'll see what I'm referring to.