Print

Print


On 20 March 2012 21:59, Logan Kearsley <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Indeed, I am no longer confused as to the distinction between
> surdeclinaison and suffixaufnahme!
>
>
Great! Although those two features look superficially similar, they are
actually quite different in use.


> > And also as usual, comments are more than welcome. In this case, I'm
> mostly
> > interested in knowing whether anyone has ever tried their hands at
> > including surd├ęclinaison in a conlang of theirs, and how it works in that
> > conlang. Also, I'd like to know whether the explanations on my post are
> > understandable.
>
> I thought so. In particular, I think you found a rather elegant
> solution to the problem of disambiguating adjectival and adverbial
> prepositional phrases / oblique noun phrases.
>
>
Well, all the honour goes to Basque for inspiring me :) .


> On 20 March 2012 06:49, A. da Mek <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> [...]
> > (in my conlangs), there is not so great distinction between  inflexion
> and
> > derivation. Inflected forms are considered as compounds with grammatical
> > roots. Cases are considered as adverbs derived from substantives and
> > participles as adverbs derived from verbs.
>
> That reflects my juvenile understanding of cases rather well; I had to
> go learn Russian before I really 'got' why case inflection was not
> just a fancy name for adverb derivation. Having discovered what cases
> are actually for, I sometimes ponder creating a language that actually
> does work that way on purpose.
>
>
I'm not sure it's so "juvenile" after all :) . If you look for instance at
some of the Latin adverbs, there are definitely indications that those used
to be declined noun phrases. So case inflection can definitely result in
adverb derivation, definitely diachronically, but also synchronically as
well. And it's not as if the difference between inflection and derivation
is so clear-cut.
-- 
Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets.

http://christophoronomicon.blogspot.com/
http://www.christophoronomicon.nl/