PTW, with great interest.
I've just read the entire thread, and am surprised that nobody has mentioned a simple workaround for all questions of pronouns, verb suffixes, and the like: what if dwarf society, and therefore linguistic structure, were built around the passive voice?
After all, there are a few constants to dwarf lifestyles:
i) All dwarves (the cursed being a notable exception) are described as 'Slaves to Armok.' What slave does anyone know of who was a master of hir own destiny?;
ii) The scientific method is based on the passive voice, drawing attention to the verb and its object, rather than to the subject. Why should the !!SCIENCEY!! method be any different?;
iii) Lives are cheap, and given names are commonly shared. This seems to point to a lack of concern over specific actors in dwarven society. It's not important that Urist built the dam; what matters is that the dam was built - this also meshes well with how (correct me if I'm wrong) most players approach DF;
iv) Last, and perhaps most important: Dorfs be different from Humes.
Examples:
Human English: 'Urist was in the kitchen, cooking a plump helmet roast.'
Dorf: Plump helmet roast cooked in kitchen; was there: Urist.'
H.E.: 'Somebody had better link up that blasted lever.'
D: 'Lever get linked; anydorf?'
H.E.: 'I'm too sober for work.'
D: 'Work undone; sober me.'
--------
Just thought I'd throw that idea to the crowd, here. It somehow seems more... dwarfy to me, to try to model Armokian to the way DF plays, rather than trying to model it after our own common usage of language.
OR
Idea was thrown to crowd. Seems (seen to be) dwarf. Is made model of game; is not made of us. By humans heard weird(ly); sense to dwarf.
The second way of putting forth the concept sounds, to me, more likely to come from a bearded, drunken, quarry-bush stinking, dwarven mouth.
Anyways, gonna follow this thread keenly.