Folksprak-Wiki

This page is read only. You can view the source, but not change it. Ask your administrator if you think this is wrong.
<markdown>
# Correlatives

## Proposal 1

Naturalistic, with each word being taken from the corresponding word in the source languages.


### Advantages

- Easier to guess the meaning of a word


### Disadvantages

- Harder to learn, as there are more words to be memorised


## Proposal 2

Schematic, with each correlative being predictable from its meaning by a combination of two words, along the lines of Esperanto's system. For example, all of the interrogatives would start with the word __vilk__, and all correlatives about location end with __sted__, so _where_ would be __vilk sted__ or literally _which place_.


### Advantages

- Perhaps easier to learn, as there are fewer words to be memorised


### Disadvantages

- Somewhat unintuitive as this is less naturalistic and less reflective of what the reference langs do


## Proposal 3

Schematic, with all of the correlatives predicable from their function, but more reflective of the reference langs. This is possible due to some schematic-ness already existing for historical reasons. For example, in English, most interrogatives start _wh-_ and most definites start with _th-_. Some locatives end in -ere, and some correlatives about things end in _-at_. This accurately predicts _"what"_, _"that"_, _"where"_, and _"there"_ (at least orthographically). A similar pattern exists in other Germanic languages.


### Advantages

- Perhaps the best of both worlds - easier to learn and easier to recognise


### Disadvantages

- The system is not perfectly followed in the reference languages (_"here"_ and _"this"_ cannot be predicted, for example), so there would still need to be some degree of irregularity and/or change from the reference languages.

</markdown>
Folksprak-Wiki

User Tools

Site Tools

Page Tools
