[YG Conlang Archives] > [ceqli group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >


[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: [ceqli] Re: Xyen



On 5/28/05, Rex May - Baloo <rmay@hidden.email> wrote:
> on 5/27/05 10:19 AM, Jim Henry at jimhenry1973@hidden.email wrote:

> > Having both "byen" and "bien" ocur would probably be a bad idea;
> > they don't contrast strongly enough.  Having "ie" in some
> > words and "ye" in others might be similarly confusing.
> > Maybe you should forbid any sequence of two vowels that could
> > be easily confused with a permitted diphthong.
> > So since you allow "wa" there could be no words with "ua",
> > etc.
> 
> Yes, except for the stress rules again.   bwa is pronounced BWA, and bua
> pronounce BU-a.

But what if you had a final or medial consonant?
buan / bwan
tuali / twali
etc.


> >> One more consideration.   Ceqli makes many opposites by reversal, which
> >> consists of keeping the cwaba initial group, and then reversing the order of
> >> the following faloba:

> > It's similar to the way Solresol formed its opposites,
> > but here you don't have the Solresol problem of changing
> > the classifier morpheme.  You might have potential problems
> > of collision between words, however, unless you're very careful
> > and/or forbid users of the language to form their own ad-hoc
> > opposites in this way - which implies there should be another
> > (probably less terse) way to form opposite terms ad-hoc.
> >
> I see no reason not to allow adhocs, in that good ones will survive and
> awkward ones won't.   And the non-terse way is with the prefix po - pobon =
> bad.

OK, but in that case you need to make sure that no two words
in the base lexicon could be changed into each other by this
faloba-reversal antonymy -- even in cases where you don't think
antonymy would make sense.

-- 
Jim Henry
http://www.pobox.com/~jimhenry/review/log.htm