[YG Conlang Archives] > [romanceconlang group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
romanceconlang@yahoogroups.com writes: >That's really a matter of taste, I think. Personally, I am not a fan of >apostrophes in the text, so the second possitility seems least attractive >to me >(unless it was meant to represent e-acutus, which I still wouldn't like >too >much anyway). >I would probably prefer "emi": It's simple, clear, and modifies the >article >somewhat, which makes it already more attractive. I agree mostly :). Montreiano in writing would write de emi as "d'emi", and it does this with simple nouns: d'aguila. Same with la - l'aguila. > >eu mi > emi >la mi > lami >lo mi > lomi (?) >How do you handle the plural? > Hum. Hadn't really considered that yet (silly silly), but i think logically it would be: Lomis, lotus, losus, lamis, latus, lasus. I think. Any better ideas? __________________________ No the moth dont care when he sees the flame The moth dont care if the flame is real Cause flame and moth got a sweetheart deal And nothing fuels a good flirtation Like need, and anger, and desperation