Print

Print


I may as well get in on this one, if only to test drive an in-development Bengali-Romance inspired mix-up. It's my first proper attempt at an irregular spelling system which I haven't stolen from a natural language.

"Tsi teu legatarias ascrobla tean caffari tenne teu ballants magnanna fulle li an tutti"

if 2ndSingNom [to be set upon]Cond [to beat up] 2ndSingGen masterAcc Conj [Aux verb]Subj [to drown] full 3rdSingMascAcc and all

So (using "source" words):

"If tha's set on scrobbling tha gaffer, tha's best to full drown him and all"

There's a perfectly good concultural reason for this wording, it's just I haven't quite thought of it yet. I'm sure it involves John Masefield's "Box of Delights" and Trade Unionism :D

On 16 Jul 2011, at 17:09, Charlie wrote:

> --- In [log in to unmask], Wm Annis <wm.annis@...> wrote:
>> 
>> I ran across this line in reference to British politicians turning
>> on Murdoch due to recent revelations: "if you strike at the king
>> you must kill him."
> 
> In Senjecas:
> 
> If a direct statemnt to someone:
> da tus medzasúrum do páálgo, toaari tus num órgu kélo:
> 
> da = if
> tus = you NOM.sg.
> medz-asúrum = great prince ACC.sg.
> do = to, towards, at
> páálg-o = strike, beat, etc., SUBJ
> toaari = then
> tus = you NOM.sg.
> n-um = 3rd person ACC.sg.
> órg-u = kill, SUPINE
> kél-o = must, have to, etc., SUBJ.
> 
> If a general principle, one, someone:
> Substitute
> for tus, semus = someone, one
> for num, olnum = 4th person, sing.
> 
> Charlie