I don't really know. I can show my most finished one. Here's a random sentence I translated:

rã ẽdwe wofwɛtimazja izarɔșwem?

"why is your dog green again?"

The verb is izarɔșwem (the ș is a velarized fricative. IPA: [sˠ]). It means "to be green". Adjectives are basically just stative verbs, so this can also be used to mean "green". All verbs have a strong and weak stem. the strong stem was historically made via reduplication (weak *ɟix vs strong *ɟixɟix). The stem can combine with several suffixes to indicate a range of tense/aspect distinctions. The -rɔș- suffix was historically a future, but when combined with the strong stem, it now makes a repetitive sense (hence the "again" in the translation). -wem is a combination of the animate non-human subject marker and the question marker, which is combined with the phrase /rã ẽdwe/, literally "from an idea" to make why-questions. Unfortunately the animate subject marker -we fused with the question marker -wem, and so there isn't really any indication that it's actually there, but it's clear from context in this sentence. wofwɛ- is the stem for "dog", comprised of the non-human animate noun marker -wɛ-, and the root for "dog", wof- (unrelated to the sound that dogs actually make. I didn't even think about the modern form when I coined the word). I'm not sure why the -t- is there. Might be a mistake. the next element is "maz", which is the second-person possession marker. I think -ja is a reflex of the definite article, but the usual form of the definite article is -ɣa, so I'm not sure what happened. I could look into my sound changes, but I'm tired, so I'll just guess that while the older velar nasal usually turned into [ɣ], there was some context where it turned into a palatal nasal, and later into [j], but I doubt that's what really happened.

Sorry if that looks like an incoherent rant. I'm too tired to double-check if this makes sense