This is only a test.
The topic-comment stative is something I made to function as the Umu copula. When both are unmarked, the meaning is “is comment, topic” or using English word order “topic is comment”.
hopa köva
hopa.kvá
fat dog
The dog is fat.
Topics can possess comments. This incorporates the comment into the topic, creating a new topic.
Before, I’d always marked the shift on the topic. Like this:
hopa köve
hopá.kve
fat GEN\dog
The fat dog…
But with my chosen word order—and because the same shift must also mark possessives—this didn’t really work. It didn’t make much sense orthographically either because the shift also changed the stress of the former comment, leaving the reader one step behind.
This time I’ll try marking the comment instead of the topic. The site of the vowel shift and and stress shift is now the same place and meets the readers eye first.
hupe köva
húpe.kva
GEN\fat dog
The fat dog…
It’s also less ambiguous when the new comment comes into play.
köpö hupe köva
kőp húpe.kva
black GEN\fat dog
The fat dog is black.
It seems to work even with multiple comments.
köpö hupe köva
kɓő.hupe.kva
GEN\black GEN\fat dog
The black fat dog…
zö’ö köpö hupe köva
ző kɓő.hupe.kva
pretty GEN\black.GEN\fat.dog
The black fat dog is pretty.
It also seems to work as both the possessor and possessee.
zö’ö ‘ötu köpö hupe köve
zö.wtú kɓő.hupe.kva
pretty.hair GEN\black.GEN\fat.GEN\dog
The black fat dog’s hair is pretty.
köpö hupe köva ‘öme
kőp húpe.kva.wme
black GEN\fat dog GEN\1
My fat dog is black.
köpö hopa köva ‘öme
kőp hópa kvá.wme
black fat dog GEN\1
My dog is black and fat.
This is as far as I’ve gotten. I’m not sure what happens with more complex noun phrases yet or whether it’s actually viable. But it’s a good start.
And just noticing this now. It looks like shift in this manifestation make verbs adjectives and puts nouns in the genitive. I hadn’t looked at it that way.
What do you think of this new system? Is it solvent?
Oh forgot about compounds. Now that the modifier is marked and not the head, the issue of which part of the compound gets marked our both or “look how long that crazy marked compound is” goes away. They’ll just s it there in this original for.
zimu köva
zímu.kva
forest dog
wolf
hopa köpö zimu köva ‘öti
hópa kɓő.zimu.kva.wti
fat GEN\black forest wolf GEN\2
Your black wolf is fat.
It may start getting hairy when the compound is in the genitive or when there’s multiple genitives. This may or may not work here.
hopa kari köpö zimo köve ‘öti
hopa.karí kɓő.zimo.kve.wti
fat baby GEN\black GEN\forest GEN\wolf GEN\2
Your black wolf’s baby cub is fat.
But who knows? Maybe it does work.
Pseudoglyphs 
Looks great! It reminds me of the Semitic construct state? Is that a valid comparison?
Oooooh tell me more! I’m both inspired and intimidated by Semitic morphology. I’ll read up on it. Could be helpful.
Thanks Robert! This is why I love comments.
Yeah there’s definitely something very similar happening. Except it looks like I’m not marking the head at all and I’m not using it with noun+noun compounds (because I’m afraid of falling back into the whole phrase being genitive) unless the compound is the possessor. I update this post to play with a compound example. I’m not sure how that will play out. Seems like I’m using it to incorporate the verb/adjective into the noun to create a new noun.
Your glyphs are simply amazing. I like your lang to a point, but I think the phonology is not my taste.
Kudos. Keep up the great work!
I can’t produce audio samples right now. They’d might make you like it more — or less. Thanks C.