Zompist Bboard Again

Shed: the place where two sets of warp threads are held away from each other so that the weft can be passed between them in weaving. Fell: Where the completed cloth turns into warp threads--not the same as the shed, because the fell always exists but the shed doesn't have to. Are those complex or j...

What is a complex concept though?
What makes a concept complex (or simple)?

It literally means "for the thing born" and is used to describe medication that is taken as and when required, apparently using 'born' to describe something new.
Are there any other phrases in any other language that you know of that use this metaphor/logic?

Like "da" used to vocalise rhythms in English? Shave and a haircut goes: "DA da da DA da, da da". Yep, that's right except in (my) English you have to put "like this" plus a pause in front. I must have been inspired by that without knowing it (or with?), a bit like cry...

The Kwehnu, who return as zombies, count their lifespans as being from birth to complete decay--and as their lifespans as zombies are exactly equal to their lifespans as humans, this led to some of them reaching the ripe old age of 160 local years before the introduction of modern medicine (which p...

Just "no mobile phobia" or "no cell phobia" without bothering to borrow a Greek root is not too long, I think.

For example, "The password is to knock once-once, once-once". That would describe a particular way of knocking 4 times.

For example: (Walking in woods or something) A: ~"What did these feathers come from do you think?" B: ~"Bird" ("I dunno") A: ~"Yes" ("I don't know either") This sounds awkward in English but in a conlang it obviously can sound however the creator wan...

I like Chuma's idea

Am I missing something, or are you just reinventing active-stative languages ? So it is essentially "fluid-s" with overt marking on all argument values? I suppose so but the new part is how the 'cases' are formed. Also, since any noun can be used in that way, such roles can be invented on...

Salmoneus wrote: ↑Mon Feb 18, 2019 8:44 am This isn't "replacing case morphology", it's just "making the nominative case homophonous with the word 'agent'".

That's just another way of phrasing or looking at the same thing.

akam chinjir wrote: ↑Mon Feb 18, 2019 4:56 amLISP?

No, I don't think so.

So if I understand correctly, this idea would be something like “Franklin the agent kissed Thomas the patient.” Assuming your language has tidy terms for “agent” and “patient,” you’re just describing their grammatical role like stage directions. If these are indeed acting as ersatz noun cases, then...

Natural languages tend to minimise the amount of phonologically overt material they use for this sort of thing, so I wouldn't want to use this idea in a realistic conlang (of course, non-realistic conlangs are fine too). Even you got rid of the "numbering", which is redundant if you mark ...

Both nouns would be inflected with the same numbered apposition inflection, which can be expressed in the gloss as "APP<n>". For example, Apposition of any noun and the word for 'agent/doer' replaces the ergative case and it might be expressed in the gloss as "<noun>-APP1 one.who.does...

It doesn't mean them in some strict sense of 'meaning', but it can map to them:
A pheremone that increases attraction can map to "I love you", "I like you" or some varietion thereof.
Some pheremone that happens in response to injury can map to "Ow!".
Et cerera.

So how can you eliminate the difference between voluntary (conscious) and involuntary (unconscious) behaviour, if both are necessary? I was talking about eliminating the difference in expression . So, instead of evolving a different lexicon for conscious signalling versus certain kinds of unconscio...

but there is no "lexicon" of the subconscious it isn't true language, and it is impossible for there to be one because language is based on the way a conscious mind thinks. The way a conscious mind thinks evolved in the real world from the way the subconscious thinks. According to the cur...

If it's too difficult to evolve in a particular way, then a species will make do. If my understanding of evolution is correct, it seeks the local maxima not the global (It was ages ago that I watched this video but I'm fairly sure it will explain what I mean.)

I'm not sure how this differs from the real world? Most humans, for instance, are in very little doubt about what a dog seems to be saying at any given moment... We still in the real world have a difference between pheromone communication and verbal communication. Yes, some animals have some senses...