Print

Print


On Tue, 3 Mar 1998 19:36:30 GMT, James Chandler
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
 
>Marcos skripted: (es kelki punktues kel me non respondad; pardona!)
 
:-? Joking?
 
>
>> >I couldn't have WIL because W is a rare letter,=3D20
>>
>> Why not rendering it into "unrare letter"? I don't find it difficult
>> to pronounce, and it's widely known by means of English.
>
>[w] may be known from E, but I don't want to postulate a knowledge of
>E as a prerequisite for learning my IL.
 
Well, aren't you doing that when taking vud, -(e)d, etc?
 
>> Well, you can get the answer to that question yourself. Just think of
>> a Novial which used "es going (tu)" (or something similar) for every
>> future tense.
>
>I'm not sure this works. =20
 
Yes, it does. The use of near future in Spanish is similar to English.
 
=46or me, if I take J's example: The Earth will
>cool down in three million years, and change it to: The Earth is going
>to cool down in three million years, I don't really find any appreciable
>difference in correctness.
>Would you be able to tell me the maximum length of time into the future
>something has to take place for it to be wrong to use "ir" in Sp.?
 
It's more a matter of relative time than absolute time. 3 years can be
a lot of time or just a bit of time. It depends on for what.
 
>> I know many natlangs work without accusative ending. But they usually
>> have another ways to express accusativity. I don't think an accusative
>> marker for cases of inversion bothers anyone. It just simply permits
>> to change word order if one feels the neccesity of it. I like that
>> flexibility, tho the standard order will go on being SVO.
>
>Any accusative marker will be cumbersome and unnatural for most people.
 
Then don't they use it. But let the rest of us have the opportunity of
playing with word order if we feel the necesity.
 
>But actually, the order is not SVO in Novial, it is SV.
 
Well, I suppose Object has to go somewhere...
 
 
 
Saludos,
Marcos