Linguistic Notes

How many P.I.E. clones do you see with an experimental grammar? That precisely what happened with Lamian; a language whose subjects are verbs based on the nature of the actually object that the word describes. This reveals the way of thinking and the mindset of the language's original speakers, and is enough to base a philosophy on.

To illustrate, the verb "galas", to emit or nourish, is also the noun meaning "star". Of course, this synchronicity is only present in the nominative case: the case in which the object described actually does something. There's no reason for there to be a noun-verb correspondence if the noun is being acted upon, and thus not acting itself. Therefore, other than in the nominative case, the verb and noun forms are totally different for their respective declensions, albeit still the same word.

It should be noted that the words in Lamian can be traced back to a) Indo-European roots, that show an early break from the main tongue such as other proto-languages and b) an unknown language which is similar but not analogous with P.I.E. The grammar can best be described as a mix of P.I.E. grammar and Japanese grammar.

This noun-verb synchronicity feature also cuts down on redundancy. For example, if the noun was distinct from the verb, in order to say "the star shines", you could have to say "galas galin", both using the same root to support the same idea with only the difference in noun and verb separating them. It is similar to saying in English, "The gift gives". It's redundant. Therefore, in Lamian, we can express this idea with a simple, "galin", which automatically implies, without the presence of any other words, that it is a star that is shining. It is a statement of the word in it's basic nature without any interference (that is, without accompanying words). This is only a brief example behind it's expressive grammar.