[YG Conlang Archives] > [ceqli group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
on 3/4/02 6:18 PM, Rob Speer at rob@hidden.email wrote: > On Mon, Mar 04, 2002 at 07:58:58AM -0700, Rex May - Baloo wrote: >> If I know what you mean here, this is where disambiguating particles can >> show up. >> >> Xipe hamer kan. Woman hammers dog. >> >> We can make it clearer thus. >> >> Xipe da hamer te kan. > > I would hope so. This usage worries me quite a bit, because it would > basically be ambiguous every time. What does it mean when you use a noun > without a t-clause? Is it definite, indefinite, or simply vague? Should > this really be standard usage (as opposed to only being used where > brevity is key)? > > I can see XIPE HAMER KAN as the headline of a Ceqli newspaper, but I > find it rather unappealing for ordinary usage. The way I see it, in common usage, the use of simple 'Xipe hamer kan' would depend on context. That is, if you said it in answer to, maybe 'What's that noise?, (Cusa xum bi kwa?) the answer 'xipe hamer kan' would presume that there is a woman and dog known to the questioner, I think. This is all very Mandarinish. But, what I'm trying for here is a language that can be a brief as Mandarin when it's okay, and as precise as Loglan when necessary. Te means nothing except that what follows is a noun phrase. -- >PLEASE NOTE MY NEW E-MAIL ADDRESS: rmay@hidden.email > Rex F. May (Baloo) > Daily cartoon at: http://www.cnsnews.com/cartoon/baloo.asp > Buy my book at: http://www.kiva.net/~jonabook/gdummy.htm > Language site at: http://www.geocities.com/ceqli/Uploadexp.htm >Discuss my auxiliary language at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/txeqli/