Objectlessnessish

An astute linguist by the handle of Taipo comments on my post Hiding Nouns in Verbs, that merely switching from encoding pronouns (e.g. you, me, them) to encoding deictics (e.g. this, that, those) isn't really doing away with nouns.  He says a better concept is "vectors", as if the verb is an arrow on map, and you turn it to point to and from whatever you want.  He comments about doing that is his conlang, t.a.f.k.a. Tepa.
I agree with him that a lot of what I'm doing is just hiding the nouns grammatically.  However, I want to do more, to model a way of thinking.  What is noun-less-ness?  Look at an English dictionary.  It's all nouns.  Even verbs are turned into nouns.  e.g. 'run' becomes 'to run' and is defined as 'the act of propelling one's legs quickly'.  Further proof of English's noun-centric-ness can be seen in that all our adjectives are nouns and immediately recognizable as substantive nouns when alone.  e.g. 'the good, the bad and the ugly' immediately becomes three men, not three actions.
Korean has prepared my brain to think slightly differently.  There are stative verbs in Korean.  "To be pretty" is not the copula and 'pretty-the-adjective'.  It is all one verb: 예쁘다.  If you want to say 'the pretty person' you use the verb: 예쁜 사람 - the-being-pretty person.  Korean is a verb-centric language.
When English-speakers try to conceptualize the world, we see it as solid, unchanging things that are annoyingly interrupted by action.  We ask stupid questions like, "What is the essence of running" and expect a noun in reply.  Perelandrans wouldn't be like that.  They live on the ocean all their lives and everything the use is organic.  Their own bodies would be the only thing not constantly in flux.  There is no sun in the sky or moon at night, only fuzzy, continual cloud cover.  The essence of things isn't an idea or a state, it's a process.  Hence my goal is not to eliminate nouns per se, but "solid, unchanging objects" and replace everything with processes.

In a lot of sentences, nouns outnumber verbs.  "I hit the ball" and "Suzy ate cake" each have a 2:1 ratio.  More complex sentences only get worse: "Aunt Sally's ball was given to Uncle Bill by Steve the butcher on a Wednesday night to ease his frustration over Cardinal's baseball." 13:2.  Korean and Japanese often do better by drop the subject as a matter of course.  But I really want to keep the attention on processes.  If there are multiple actors and patients in a sentence, then there must be role marking (typically case or word order) and the language emphasizes nouns, whether present or absent from any given sentence.  The solution -- as I see it -- to limit each phrase to one noun or none.

The key topic becomes voice or valency.  Because of the birthday, the mother made the child use her breath to blow out the candle.  Each of these five nouns could have it's own sentence:

1. Birthdays causes blowing
2. The mother made there be blowing
3. The child was made to blow
4. The breath blew
5. The candle was blown out.

These five "voices" of the verb "to blow/to blow out" with their five nouns would have to be five phrases in Perelandran.  Each "noun" would have to be a process.  Notice that this means "nouns" would change their "name" if they did something different.  In a conversation "the speaking one" becomes "the hearing one".  If you are getting wet, you are not the same process as when you are drying off and when you leave you become another process.  Perelandran would clue the listener in that the "vector orientation" had or hadn't changed with a switch-reference marker.

For my own reference, the "voice roles" called and numbered as follows:

• 5) The Reason, Stimulus, or Etiology ("because of x, verb....")
• 4) Agent, Cause, Force.  ("x made someone make there be verbing")
• 3) Actor, Enable ("x makes there be verbing")
• 2) Means, Instrument ("x actually does the verbing")
• 1) Patient, Direct Object, Experiencer, Recipient ("x is verbed")
• 0) Dummy subjects in English "It is raining" is there same as "There is raining" ("There is verbing")
• -1) Result, Teleology, Effect ("Verbing caused x")

Additionally, processes can have the topical marker.  So, put it all together, if the above situation were being described to a Perelandran, you would have to say

Earth-TOPIC Birthday-Blow5 Parent-Blow4 Child-Blow3 Mouth-Blow2 Candle-Blow1 SWITCH Happy-Blow-1.

"On Earth, because of 'birthdays', parents make kids use their mouths to blow out candles, and then we are happy."