First off, this is very thorough. Great job – you’ve got everything here a language needs to be not only functional, but allow for nuance, tone, even connotation.
I do have some concerns, though.
The first is there seem to be some important words missing. Example: There’s an entire entertainment industry built off of enjoying other people’s misfortune and humiliation, yet there’s no word for it. Hans, in the language he wrote, came up with “Schadenfreude.” Yes, I know the words and spelling in Hans’ language are kind of over the top and occasionally hilarious, but he has words for everything.
Second, is that your language seems a little scattershot with the rules. To be honest, most of them. It seems like there are very few rules without exceptions. Example: this “i before e” thing. “I before e” – clear enough; “except after c” – why? Is there some purpose? So, fine you learn that – but then there are fourteen exceptions to this already unnecessarily complex rule? Don’t just make things complicated to make it seem more sophisticated. It’s just confusing
Then there’s things like “affect” and “effect”. I can’t see a point to having two different words here. Maybe you can explain the need?
Similarly, there’s food. You raise a cow, a pig, a chicken. But when you eat them, you eat beef, pork, and poultry. Why would you not just “eat cow” for dinner?
Which brings me directly to another point. And I want to be clear: I’m not accusing you of anything.
Beef, pork, and poultry are pretty clearly taken from Pierre’s project language, where the animals are “boeuf,” “porque,” and “poulet,” respectively. And this isn’t isolated. To be honest, much of what you’ve done here seems like you just took a bunch of elements of other students’ work and mashed it together. Greek. French. Latin. Norse.
Now, I’m not accusing you of plagiarism, per se. It just seems like you could have spent a little more time constructing clear, consistent rules and a little less time picking this and that from the others.
Also – and your punctuation is fine, I guess – but how come Miguel is the only one who thought putting exclamation and question marks at the start of the sentence as well as at the end?
Anyway, an impressive effort, but needlessly confusing, and riddled with inconsistencies. Perhaps a revision?
C / C-