> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of steve rice

> > If they are "optional", but still copy English
> > then you'll have an
> > interesting situation where some use them and some
> > don't.  I'd
> > prefer to just do away with them, and have some type of
> > adverb or
> > other isolating marker. 
> You largely can. The plural ending would be -s, I think, but 
> English generally allows analytical tense marking anyway, so 
> I could have something like
> past: ha (or perhaps don or was)
> present: bi
> future: gona
> irrealis: wud?
> general verb: -in (lukin, takin [talk], teikin, etc.)
> passive verb: -ed (luked, taked, teiked,...)
> (Note that these "verb" endings could be considered 
> adjectival or participial instead.)

Of course you could go with a system of "auxiliary verbs" or adverbs
to mark these things which is how I think Ingli is going to do it,
though I don't expect to have any plural suffix but most likely a
numeral like "several".  I'm still contemplating whether I want to
have a verbal marker, but it will be "-in" if I choose to have one.
"bi" is more of a candidate to be the passive.

> The optionality feature would work much as in English-based 
> creoles. If an actual user base arose, I think you'd find 
> that those more comfortable with English would use the 
> plurals and such more often. I still like the idea of marking 
> non-pronominal NPs with an "article."
> ... 
> > The more I think about it, the more I sometimes wish I had
> > gone with
> > an a priori system because I'd probably have a working
> > language by
> > now.  As it stands, I again have a lot of overhauling to
> > do, and I'm
> > now more likely than ever to start creating a system of
> > sound
> > symbolism rather than attach labels from natural languages.
> The reason I suspended work on my a priori system was that I 
> decided I didn't know enough about constructing a proper 
> lexicon. I think I could almost do it now if I had the time. 
> But I do like the possibilities of a priori systems; the 
> problem is that the field has dominated by taxonomic systems 
> like Ro. An ordering method is necessary, but there are 
> alternatives such as sound symbolism.

I tend to take lists of primes that others have developed and alter
them to suit my needs.  Generally I start with Lojban's gismu or the
ULD depending on the type of language.  I never cared much for Ro
though I am starting to like the oligosynthethic approach more and
more, just not taken to the ridiculous extreme that most have done
as with AUI.  I'm working on a system of sound symbolism for my
loglang, but I'm still not sure just how valuable the idea is.  I
know natural languages have such systems, but there seem to be only
a few "universals" that are known which are really only tendencies
rather than absolutes.  What little time I spend on conlanging
lately is usually on this project.  Just another one of those
tangents I ran with one day.