What are some of the issues you would like to see fixed from older analyses?

and to me the addition of -a/-ø is the last step in any agglutination process.
anhe'enge'ym = I don't speak
xe nhe'enge'yma = My lack of speech
xe nhe'enge'ym = I lack speech

Anything with the -a suffix to me is a noun, which means it can be juxtaposed with anything else to illustrate equality

I guess to answer your question then, I would argue the opposite of him at this point in time. My current understanding of tupi has me believe that almost everything is or can be agglutinated into a stative verb.
anhe'eng = I speak
xe nhe'enga = my speech
xe nhe'eng = I have speech

not so much that "ixé" is a copular subject, but the nature of the structure of two nouns next to each other in tupi is inherently an equivalence statement. The sentence functions as well if we say "aoba ixé". once we say "xe aob" it becomes a stative verb meaning to have clothes.

We opt to use "p/mor-, people" as a generic object prefix. "moraûsuba - love to people" but I can describe the subject as well using a "possessive" prefix/pronoun "xeporaûsuba, my love for people". This can also be used as a subordinate clause "ereîpotar xeporaûsuba" - you want (my love/me to love)

I am not 100% sure what he means by that bc I didn't finish it but to me a predicate can take arguments. In Tupi Antigo, nominalized transitive verbs necessarily require some sort of argument, even if it's a placeholder. If I say "aûsuba" means love in tupi that's wrong because it's missing the obj.

Coming back to this, I was just reading Arte by Anchieta and here in the second page you have Ereiûripè which would be Ereîurype in Navarro's orthography :)

That's exactly the kind of thing we talk about haha. I've read most of it, still haven't taken the time to finish it because I too focus in primary sources but not only historic, also various distinct revival projects around Brazil all based in Navarro's description of the language.

due to misinterpretation. It's a great place to get peer review. About revitalization, it necessarily relies in justification from historic sources. By aiding in this endeavor, we end up becoming intimately familiar with historic sources. We cannot have revitalization without a firm grasp of the old

Just to reiterate, the group is for people who have some interest in Tupi, it isn't a revival project. Most have an academic interest, some use the language. If we have people writing and studying about Tupi publicly, it's better to not do it in a vacuum because it can lead to misinformation +

I think personally if I tried to write about Tupi without trying to internalize the language at least a little bit and have an ability to understand and create basic sentences, I would be much further behind than I am today when understanding Anchieta and other historic sources.

It sure did. Someone in my group shared your posts and we were surprised to see someone else who seems as studious as us in Tupi. We spend the days talking about tupi, sharing sources and discussing translations and such, not everyone in the group is trying to speak Tupi. If you want to join you may

Both forms are used and seen as synonyms, mostly because learning a language is hard for anyone, imagine trying to make a whole community follow the letters of the book. The important thing is to be understood in modern speech. But if you just want to read tupi and not write then no issues there.

Our opinions in modern revival don't really matter as linguists. Our job is to describe the language as it happens. It's important to accept change when taking about modern revival projects. I now know the you don't have any interest in studying contemporary indigenous language, just historic.

I wrote in my first message "welcome! Can you speak in tupi? I'm in a group of tupi speakers. Do you want to join? I always want more people speaking Tupi. Até" and this message was in a modern tupi (potiguara) which is based on the potiguara letters and tupi antigo. Almost the same language.

Beware of calling indigenous revival projects "conlangers". I understand what you're saying, I'm not sure if you understood my messages properly. Aside from perhaps some typos or imperfect application of the grammar, everything I wrote to you is based in attestation.

I katueté xe rapixat gûé! Aîpó nhe'enga "Ereîúrype" oúr amõ nhe'engûatiara "tupi potiguara kuapa" seryba'e suí. Onhe'eng ybyá tupi potiguara rupi Paraípe. Emonãnamo, tupi tuîba'e, tupi pysasu nhe'enga abé e'ikatu nhomongetakatûabo. Torogûenoĩpe ûīme?

Ereîurype xe irũ gûé? Erekatupe enhe'enga tupi nhe'enga rupi? Aîkó tupi rupindûara onhe'engyba'e irũndýpe. Ereîupotarype? Ko'arapukî Ixé abá-bé tupi rupi onhe'engyba'e potari! Ne'ĩ ne'ĩ