[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
The following facts are incompatible:
{lo blanu} means "da poi is-a-countable-blue-thing".
{ti blanu} means "this is blue", not "this is-a-countable-blue-thing".
Here are some ways to resolve the contradiction:
1. To say "this is blue", say {ti du pisu'oloi blanu}.
2. Scrap the {lo broda} = {da poi broda} rule.
3. Go for a more drastic overhaul. Since countability is encoded by
outer PA and/or inner ro, and uncountability is encoded by
outer piPA and/or inner tu'o, the lV/lVi distinction is redundant
as an encoder of +/-countable. This frees up lVi for use as pure
collectives, with {loi} as a nonspecific counterpart of {lei} --
i.e. {loi} denotes a group of broda, not the group of all broda
(or perhaps {loi ro} is the group of all, and {loi su'o} is a
group of some).
Kind: lo broda le broda la broda
Kinds of: PA lo broda PA le broda PA la broda
% of Kinds of: piPA lo broda piPA le broda piPA la broda
Bits of: piPA (loi) (tu'o) broda piPA lei (tu'o) broda piPA lai broda
le piPA broda
Countable: PA (loi) (ro) broda PA lei (ro) broda PA la broda
% of countbls: piPA loi ro broda piPA lei ro broda
Collective: loi (ro) broda lei (ro) broda lai broda
{piPA le (tu'o) broda} would mean "some of a certain broda", while
{le piPA broda} would mean "a certain bit of broda".
"% of countables" = proportions of a population of countables -- e.g.
{piso'e loi ro prenu} = "most people"; {piso'e lo (ro) nanmu} =
"most kinds of men".
{loi re prenu} = "a pair of people".
{lei re prenu} = "a certain pair of people".
{loi piso'e (loi ro) prenu} = {piso'e loi ro prenu} = "a majority of people"
{lei piso'e (loi ro) prenu} = "a certain majority of people"
{da poi broda} = {da broda} neutralizes the distinction between
{da (poi) du pa broda} and {da (poi) du pisu'o broda} (and
possibly {da (poi) du pa lo broda}.
--And.