On 1 September 2017 at 06:12, C. Brickner <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> How strict are you in maintaining the word order you have given to your conlangs? What are the reasons that you deviate from this word order? I'm especially interested in SVO.
> Charlie

Celimine is pretty strictly SOVA ("A" for "Adjunct"- all arguments
besides the subject and direct object). It does not deviate at all,
that I know of so far, requiring explicit voice-alteration
constructions if you want to move things around. The reason for that
is that the nominative and accusative cases are indistinguishable, so
you have to rely on rigid word order instead.

Valakwluuxa looks strongly verb-initial, but it's really SVO for
pronominal subjects, and otherwise VS or VO. (Objects are prohibited
in main clauses with non-pronominal subjects, and subjects are
prohibited in relative clauses.) I suppose the VS order would count as
a deviation from SVO, but the circumstances in which each structure is
used are still extremely strict. The only other possible source of
deviation is that it might be developing an invariant copula... but if
so, the verb/copula would still come in the middle anyway.

WSL doesn't fit the usual word order typology, but it tends to put
specifiers (the "hubs" in the semantic graph of a clause) first, which
I suppose could be reasonably analogized to V-initial word order.
Different orders can be forced by quantifier scoping, though; unlike
English, quantifier scope is completely unambiguous in WSL, so a
sentence like "Everybody loves somebody." can translate up to 6
different ways, with the component phrases in different orders,
depending on how much love there is going around, and whether it's one
person being loved or many. When quantifier scope doesn't matter,
things can be fronted for pragmatic emphasis.