To Pirka: I didn't say he couldn't. I just said it's really freaking weird because it's really freaking atypical. That kinda seemed like an elicitation for such an explanation. Guy²'s example wasn't such an explanation.
Preemptive edit: Damn my slow typing.
Inote
Re: Inote
Pardon? Who is that?MrKrov wrote:Guy2's example...
Contraiwise, I didn't say that you said it's wrong; however, you implied it.
Wait, why the heck are we talking about this? Sorry for latching onto your words, MrKrov... Let's let Sectori do his thing. And @Sectori, if you have an explanation of your decision for this atypicality, could you share it with us?
Re: Inote
The explanation is that that is how it is done in Inote. That is how it has always been done since I moved from prefixing to suffixing.
inida elish, er·jīse pan.
sheb olnezī, on zūl kaid
nyer maudem? māzeye gejegura,
ib·zhiyorī aur mādaresh; kep panī weram.
e pel zherokareshī, onyek ne rād:
izholen tekab. yerogim nyer.
(semar pel, i.1-6)
sheb olnezī, on zūl kaid
nyer maudem? māzeye gejegura,
ib·zhiyorī aur mādaresh; kep panī weram.
e pel zherokareshī, onyek ne rād:
izholen tekab. yerogim nyer.
(semar pel, i.1-6)
Re: Inote
I don't see the point in criticising Inote because it differs from the trend of natlangs. One of the purposes of conlanging is to be creative, which is something Sectori will have to be in order to create a useful vocabulary with such a limiting phonology and phonological constraints - that's the point I'd be debating, rather than whether the case suffix should come before or after the number suffix.