> [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.