No, you haven't been listening/reading. We are trying to explain to you that writing is completely different than language, yet you aren't listening. Writing can be easily separated from language. You haven't even looked at the title of the page. It says "Writing"Sew'Kyetuh wrote:Clearly I listen because I have interacted discussions with some of the members with whom I not only agree with, but get excited when proposals are made that do fit and make sense. I consider ignorance (refusal of information) a sin. But since I'm interested in the truth here, I'm doing my best to sort through the information given to me and see if it applies to the conlang in question. I'm not gullible and I have to verify that the information you give me is correct.qwed117 wrote: The only vibe I get from you is "I'm still not listening". This is really irritating. Really irritating. It seems like your only purpose is to go on and input a "thought-provoking idea" that's just awfully wrong.
Second of all, (based on your reference to AUI) I think your language has morphemes that are a single phoneme long, and they combine to form larger words. Unfortunately I can't confirm this because of your increasing obtusity.
If it is not correct, I have to do my best to explain why it doesn't work that way. If my explanations don't make sense, or they mean something other than what I'm trying to communicate, then it might appear that I'm not listening, but not listening and not understanding are 2 different things.
Let's translate some more. It seems like translating individual words would work better than translating phrases.
How would you translate
"fish" "whale" "leviathan"
"blue" "cerulean" "aqua"
"danced" "dance" "will dance" "cannot dance" and "couldn't dance" (If you have trouble with the last two, don't worry, do the first three though)