Micamo wrote:Languages actually differ on this point: Some languages handle "evidential of inner experience" with a visual evidential, others with a nonvisual evidential, and some languages have a special "1st-person" evidential for this purpose.
Interesting. I'm thinking of tweaking this a bit.
Micamo wrote:Degree, sure. But this collection feels... a little kitchen-sinky to me. The aspects especially; Is it really necessary to distinguish "habitual" and "customary" aspects? Or circuitive and perambulative? Or durative and persistive?
I borrowed heavily from Koyukon motion verbs and activity verbs here. I did neglect to mention these only apply to verbs of motion and action. But even so I'm throwing out the Customary one actually (which is a soft habitual anyway). I sometimes make inflectional morphology where derivational would do. This is probably the case. That being said, I'm in love with the notion of a Perambulative aspect being at my disposal. I want to be able to succinctly say "Xing/ed all over the place". But I appreciate the candor. I'll get rid of persistive too, though something in me wants desperately to keep it.
Circuitive I find to be pretty cool though...
...but... yeah, I'll cut it. I'm only able to think of a handful of examples where it's actually useful. Shit.
Micamo wrote:If you're asking "Is it possible to have highly complex verb morphology without personal affixes?" The answer is yes. Haida and Piraha are good examples.
Excellent. I want to have a fairly compact verb structure. But I'll do some trimming.
Thus far I'm thinking:
Polarity: Obviously having a positive and negative form.
Evidentials are maintained but are now constitute a word class so no affixing. This will also allow me to do syntactic tricks to mess about a bit.
Perhaps the Desiderative and Trepidative are less and less common in everyday speech?
That's some decent house cleaning.