peto - a new minimalistic language which is a reform of puna

[arpee]

18 words + 3 special markers (21)
6 consonants + 2 of the marker (8)
3 vowels: a (a~schwa), e (e~i), o (o~u)
k - k~g
m - m
n - n
p - p~b
r - l~r
t - t~d

different, other, change, edit, alternative, alter: ta
do (cause), act, active (powered on), create, construct, news, happen: ke
at, for, to, toward, on, in, inside, (inside) place, inner, interior, internal: ne
no, not, opposite, negative, question marker (when placed at end of sentence): no
sense (feel, taste, see, hear, know), understand, knowledge, touch, recognize: ka
good, heal, improve, help (to assist), support, benefit, advantage, positive, easy, simple, OK, correct, yes: pe
light, color, day-time, heat, hot, fire, cook: ro
new, young, fresh, source, seed, egg, original, initial, child, start: ko
sound, say, speak, noise, ring, play (instrument): to
move, go, travel, journey, path, way, road: mo
energy, power, fuel, meal (food), charge (with energy), inspire, encourage, sure (confident), strong: pa
want, desire, need, lust, pray: ma
liquid, water, wash, wet, clean: na
rule, control, law, stir, to lead: re
can, able, possible, maybe, allow, enable: po
live, life, experience, living thing (creature/animal/human), health: me
attract, bring, carry, pull, keep (hold), contain, maintain: ra
time, moment: te
topic marker - wa
verb marker - yo
end of sentence marker - ya

Example sentences:

me wa pe ya - life is good
me yo wa pe ya - living is good
me wa pe no ya - is life good?
me yo wa pe ya - is living good?
pa wa ma ya - energy is needed.
me wa ma ya - life is needed.
me wa ma yo ya - life is needing (something)
me wa ma yo wa... ya - (what) life is needing is....
no ka ya - no sense, no intellect
no ka yo ya - not understanding
ka yo no ya - (are you) understanding?
no ka yo no ya - (are you) not understanding?
rakane (get+knowledge+inside place) ya - (it is/ there is/ that is a) school, learning place
name (sea+creature) - fish, sea creature
name wa mo ya - the fish is moved
name wa mo yo ya - the fish moves
ro ya - (it is) hot.
ro yo ya - (it is) heating (something).

[Micamo]

How are your interrogative constructions formed?

How do you make distinctions of TAM, generally? "I walked" vs. "I was walking." "I walked today" vs. "I will walk today."

[Thakowsaizmu]

Wow, another minimalist language...

[MrKrov]

Dude: What compels you to ignore previous criticism as if your latest will be any different?

[Thakowsaizmu]

I am assuming insanity...

[Micamo]

So what? He obviously likes minimalism. What's wrong with that?

[Thakowsaizmu]

So what? He obviously likes minimalism. What's wrong with that?

It's not the minimalism, it's that he has ignored every criticism over the past... it's been years.

[arpee]

How are your interrogative constructions formed?

How do you make distinctions of TAM, generally? "I walked" vs. "I was walking." "I walked today" vs. "I will walk today."

there is no "did", "will", "was". Time tenses are not in this language. Nor are there pronouns but names can be used.

[Micamo]

So such distinctions simply can't be made? What's the semantic replacement?

[Thakowsaizmu]

So such distinctions simply can't be made? What's the semantic replacement?

You should know, it is like talking to a wall...

[Micamo]

I doubt he'd be so irresponsible as to remove time from the language without replacing time's semantic function.

[arpee]

So such distinctions simply can't be made? What's the semantic replacement?

I guess the best ideas would be:

ne ko te - at a new time (for future)

and

ne no ko te- at a non-new time (for past)


nekote wa me wa ta ya.
At a new time, life, different.
In the future, life will-be different. * The "will be" is implied because of "in the future"

nekote wa me wa po ta ya.
At a new time, life, can change (end of sentence).
In the future, life could change.

nekote wa po wa mo yo ya.
At new time, maybe, going.
In the future, I'll probably go.

This is the best I could think of for now.

(Also, spaces are optional, you can bunch it all together or leave spaces)

[Micamo]

How about more specific times like "tomorrow" or "three days ago" or "January 7th 1942"?

[arpee]

How about more specific times like "tomorrow" or "three days ago" or "January 7th 1942"?

Not possible at all. The language is very general. It's only 18 words (excluding the markers).

[Thakowsaizmu]

How about more specific times like "tomorrow" or "three days ago" or "January 7th 1942"?

Not possible at all. The language is very general. It's only 18 words (excluding the markers).

And therefore impractical.

[Micamo]

Okay then, what do the speakers of your lang do instead?

[arpee]

Okay then, what do the speakers of your lang do instead?

I guess you can just speak generally.

tomorrow = new day

January 7th 1942 = a non-new day
three days ago = a non-new day

Probably if I added some words for numbers and links sets of times to words like

moon = month
sun = day
circle = cycle/orbit/year

but I did without those words because this language is based on an older language that I made with only 18. It's amazing how much more you can say in Peto compared to Pulu, just because I added markers into the language.

[MrKrov]

(Not really.)

Futile question #1: That the "non-new day" isn't going to cut it doesn't immediately beat you in the face as a bad idea ... why?
Futile question #2: You form comparisons how?

[arpee]

(Not really.)

Futile question #1: That the "non-new day" isn't going to cut it doesn't immediately beat you in the face as a bad idea ... why?
Futile question #2: You form comparisons how?

Pulu didn't have markers so it was much more ambiguous and difficult to read.

[Micamo]

We aren't talking about Pulu. We're talking about Peto, and how you expect users to have even a basic conversation in the language.