[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
xorxes:
> la xod cusku di'e
>
> > This is the rebirth of a discussion that raged here months ago, and now
> > all the principals (Nick, Jorge, And Rosta) are mysteriously silent. For
> > background, I suggest you take a look at the past 200 archived messages.
>
> I don't object to your suggestion. In the case of {lo'e} it would suit
> my usage very well, because it would officialize {lo'e} for unique, and
> the other allowed meanings are never used anyway, so they wouldn't
> really interfere. In the case of {loi} I'm not so sure. I have not felt
> much need for a substance gadri, but I see it could have some uses.
The need for a substance gadri partly depends on whether sumti places
really are neutral wrt countability, as they are sometimes alleged to be.
On the official story, they are neutral wrt countability, so the
(non)countability must be indicated by means of a gadri.
However, a whole raft of problems would disappear if countability was
made an intrinsic part of the meaning of the brivla, and then there
wouldn't be a need for a substance gadri.
--And.