On Sat, 10 Jul 1999, Carlos Thompson wrote:

> Boudewijn Rempt escribi=F3:
> PhT++++ only one vowel, few consonants an a lot of tones
> PhT+++  several tones
> PhT++   few tones but phonemic
> PhT     tones are important but no phonemic
> PhT-    a correct speach has some tone patterns but using some others
> doesn't matter
> PhT---- completely unimportant, a self segregating language where it has =
> prosodic marks.

> what does that A mean?

A is a leftover of the first draft :-), where it stood for atonal. I'd like
to keep the indication of type of tones in it, thought.

> I think the C and V marks can be  droped, also add () for inventory of
> sounds with main alophonies included:
> Example: Bogot=E1 Spanish:
> PhT-;18(23);5 (including the voiced occlusive/fricative series and the
> semivowels)

No problem as far as I'm concerned.

> > Mph=3DMorphology
> Let's use M alone.


> >   a=3Dagglutinative
> >   i=3Disolating
> >   f=3Dinflecting (or a combination for a transitory language)
> Add some degrees:
> i- isolating with few inflexions


> >   C+, C- =3D compounding
> C++++ oligosyntetic(what's the term?) like Nowa
> C+++  long compound's like German or Swedish
> C     some technical vocabulary and VO->N series (noun-verb-er)
> C--   no compound ever


> >   T=3DF;Ph=3DT-,C40,V15,S=3Dc(g)vc;Mph=3Da,C+,t7,asp5,c26;Syn=3Dsvo,TC+=
> Probably droping the equal signs to make it look more like the other part=
> of the conlang code.  With your example:
> Denden: TF PhT-;40;15 Sc(g)vc Ma C+ t7 asp5 c26 Sysvo TC+ L1374

Thanks! Well, I hope that when I return we'll have a fully fleshed
out grammatical notation using nothing but letters!

Boudewijn Rempt  |