[YG Conlang Archives] > [ceqli group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
Rex May - Baloo wrote: > > Slowly updating correlatives. > http://www.geocities.com/ceqli/Ceqcorrel.html > When I'm done, I'll delete the Esperanto stuff. When you get to the section on <bekau> (<bekaw>?), could you post something on the logic behind it? Is a dog a <diq> or a <pe>? Or can we create compounds on the fly, like <kwakan>, <kwafaul>, <kwadir>, <kwadaryasol>, <kwadom>, <kwaduvilvi>, etc.? My feeling is that there is no logical need for special compounds with <diq> and <pe>, since these, like all nouns, can be preceded by the <X-sa> forms. It seems like an unnecessary complication. Why would we prefer <kwadiq> to <kwasa diq>, or <sope> to <sosa pe>? Is there some subtle difference in meaning between the elements of these pairs? Even when we can translate <kulpe> as "everyone" and <kulsa pe> as "every person", is there actually any difference in meaning between the two? (I'm against trying to match every nuance of English.) Or, perhaps there is no need for the <X-sa> forms, and <kwa>, <ci>, <kul>, and so on, should be able to compound with any noun? I just don't see the advantage of having both forms. -- Mike Wright http://www.CoastalFog.net _____________________________________________________ "China is a big country, inhabited by many Chinese." -- Charles de Gaulle