Re: draqa syntax - help please?

On Sat, Sep 30, 2000 at 08:45:17AM -0700, Autumn Yasmin Ajinqwai wrote:
[snip]
>  Your
> conveyant to 'ei-' (toward) or 'ieh-' (successfully
> to).
Surely you mean the receptive not the conveyant? The conveyant is the
moving object; the receptive is the destination/goal.

[snip fascinating list of correspondences]
> Well, it seems that the main difference (superficially
> of course) between our systems is that since draqa has
> no Nouns/Verbs, sometimes the central Event in my lang
> corresponds to the Conveyor or Originator in your
> lang, where a Verb would be the Event.  Cool.
Very interesting! I'd love to know more about draqa syntax :-)

[snip]
> Well, it would be nice to find a current theory that
> such systems would fit into.  The description I posted
> before, however, is definitely much more "natively"
> intuitable, and would probably representative of the
> draqa's theory of their own language.
Same here. Although there might be some contorted way to represent our
langs in current linguistic theory, I think a more "intuitive" description
of the systems (such as we're posting here) is much more useful.

[snip]
> draqa is definitely meant for humans - for example...
> me! :)
:-)


T