2012/12/16 Herman Miller <[log in to unmask]>:
> On 12/16/2012 1:16 PM, Leonardo Castro wrote:
>> I  prize clarity and brevity, but also avoidance of loss of
>> information. I have even considered allowing both vowel and consonant
>> gemination in order to avoid loss of information. For instance, one
>> could write (and say) "lietoo" to avoid confusion with "liete", but I
>> fear it is inelegant. BTW, does any natlang have some kind of
>> "gemination for emphasis"?
> If anything, I'd think -o would be confused more likely with -u than with
> -e, with the backness and the visual cue of lip rounding. But if you can't
> decide, how about using both? Languages often have more than one way of
> doing the same thing. Perhaps with some semantic difference:
> lieta = to teach
> lieto = to be taught (by), to study under
> lieta-kau = to be taught, to learn

It might be a good idea!

I'm trying to create a language with no prepositions by using more
verbs instead. The event "teacher teaches lesson to student" is
decomposed in "teacher (tutor) teaches pupil" and "teacher teaches
lesson". Besides, there is the verb "to study" and so I have different
ways of saying "teacher", "lesson" and "student".

So far, I'm dealing with this kind of triple relations by having three
differente roots, but your suggestion makes me wonder if I'd better
have more derivation rules...

My current words for the vertices of the teacher-lessons-student triangle are

lieti = teacher, tutor
lietu = student, pupil

liesi = teacher [of a subject], author [of lesson]
liesu = lesson, studied subject

lieni = student [of a subject]
lienu = lesson, object of study

As you can see, there are different words for the same things, but
they evoke different relations:

lieta = to teach someone -> teacher-student relation
liesa = to teach something -> teacher-matter relation
liena = to study something -> student-matter relation

I had already decided to set my verb endings as -e (active*) and -o
(passive*) and reserve -a for make compound words (such as
"liena-kinti"), but now I'm thinking that it could be simpler using
i-a-u for subject-verb-object:

kuomi = eater; being capable of eating (animal?)
kuoma = to eat
kuomu = food

* - they the verbs not always really "active" and "passive"; sometimes
they are just direction-1 and direction-2 verbs.


2012/12/16 Ph. D. <[log in to unmask]>:
> Leonardo:
> Just a friendly note:
> the past tense and past participle of "teach" is "taught" (the "gh" is
> silent).

Thank you!