Tim_Tex wrote:
kevinjh wrote:
I like VSO. It just, "fits," perfectly with both my brain and computer. Maybe someday, my computer can acquire some rudimentary level of sentience, sapience, self-awareness, consciousness, and verbal capabilities.
What's VSO?
Verb-Subject-Object. English is (outside of poetry) SVO, or Subject-Verb-Object. Most languages (by a small margin) are SOV, or Subject-Object-Verb.
This will help with the differences (with Adjective-Noun, not Noun-Adjective):
SVO: I ate the meatball.
VSO: Ate I the meatball.
SOV: I the meatball ate.
Of course, the languages generally have a case system, so there's less confusion about which noun is the subject and object. Let's say that the tag, "izet," represents the accusative, or object (assuming a nominative-accusative language), and the word I is, "ego," which becomes, "egoizet," in the accusative case.
Ate ego meatballizet. (I ate (the) meatball)
This is very distinct from the reverse, assuming that word order doesn't matter in the language.
Ate egoizet meatball. ((The) meatball ate me.)
I think I'm already monologuing, but some languages are ergative-absolutive. It would probably be too complicated for a single forum post, but the absolutive is the normal case, much like, "I," is to, "me," and, "thou," is to, "thee." Transitive verbs are verbs with objects, like, "eat." Let's assume again that, "ego," is, "I," and, "izet," represents the ergative case.
Ego ate.
Egoizet ate meatball.
Note how both the subject of an intransitive verb and the object of a transitive verb are in the absolutive. It gets more complicated, with concepts such as valency, but that's the general idea. In VSO, the sentences would look like this:
Ate ego.
Ate egoizet meatball.
Again, it gets complicated with the various modifiers and particles, but that's the basic idea.