[YG Conlang Archives] > [ceqli group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
Rob Speer wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 03, 2002 at 02:40:10PM -0700, Rex May - Baloo wrote: > > That's sort of true, which is why I've made the 'the' words all in the form > > tV(V), as an assistance. > > But there's other grammatical words like 'be' and 'sa'. > > > 'pe xi, ' BTW, would be a strange combination. Normally, as Mike would > > point out, it would be 'xi pe,' or 'xisa pe.' So why does this not > > invalidate 'pexi,' etc. > > Oh. I got the impression that 'pe xi' and 'pexi' would be different ways > to spell the same thing. Otherwise, how would you tell the difference > when spoken? 'sa' should be necessary to prevent the morphemes from > forming a compound. > > I suppose there would be no problem with stress if you're not allowed to > write 'blu faul' in the first place; you'd have to write either 'blusa > faul' or 'blufaul'. [...] Can we tack "sa" onto an adjective "xxx" to mean "a/some xxx one/ones"? For example, "blusa" to mean "a blue one/some blue ones" or "zosa" to mean "a male/some males". I'm thinking of something like: Go ten tri kan, han byelsa kai du kalasa. -- Mike Wright http://www.CoastalFog.net _______________________________________________________ "When they wired us humans up, they really should have labeled the wires--don't you think?" -- Ed