Quick Diachronics Challenge

A forum for all topics related to constructed languages
shimobaatar
korean
korean
Posts: 7792
Joined: 12 Jul 2013 23:09
Location: PA

Re: Quick Diachronics Challenge

Post by shimobaatar »

In response to Ratsawn's third attempt:
Spoiler:
Ratsawn wrote: 09 Nov 2020 00:28 AB: [ˈɣoðiɲ] - [əɳɖaˈðiməspo] - [twaˈkaɳɖəɻ] - [mekˈkuðit͡ɕaɣu] - [iˈðekəm]
Word 1 - The initial consonant is off. Please see below for more details.
Word 2 - Please see my response below.
Word 3 - Please see my response below.
Word 4 - [-kk-] is partially correct, and [-ɣ-] is off. Please see below for more details. 
Word 5 - Please see my response below. 
Ratsawn wrote: 09 Nov 2020 00:28 I’m fairly confident on the initial correspondence of word 1 now.
Your original guess, [gw-] was half correct.
Ratsawn wrote: 09 Nov 2020 00:28 Word 2 has the first consonant very tricky, and I briefly considered ɖɳ, though that wouldn’t explain the compensatory lengthening in A. My solution to that seems to explain all the features, but I still feel unsure.
[ɖɳ] would have been closer in that it's a [Cɳ] cluster. Regarding the compensatory lengthening, I'd recommend making comparisons with Word 3. 
Ratsawn wrote: 09 Nov 2020 00:28 The k͡x : ɣ correspondence would best be explained (regarding your comments) by the voicing of B and the MOA of A, yielding gɣ, but in your comments to another player you stated that the consonant in word 5 was in fact a k, so I’m a little confused.
[g͡ɣ] is indeed what I had in mind. 

Could you please direct me to where I said that? I'm having a hard time finding it. In any case, that's almost certainly a typo. 

I put all of my responses under spoilers and in separate posts in hopes of discouraging participants from reading the comments I've left for other players, but there's nothing I can actually do to prevent this, I don't think there's an actual rule against it, and it's really not a big deal. In this case, hopefully it can help me catch and correct a mistake in one of my responses. 

Ratsawn wrote: 09 Nov 2020 00:28 CDː [ˈħøːm] - [rɨnˈd͡zimpʰo] - [toħˈɫand͡ʒɨ] - [ʔemˈp’yːt͡so] - [ʔiˈd͡ʒelmɨ]
Word 1 - Spot-on!
Word 2 - Spot-on!
Word 3 - Spot-on!
Word 4 - The final vowel is off. Please see below for more details.
Word 5 - Spot-on!
Ratsawn wrote: 09 Nov 2020 00:28 
I can’t think of a better reflex for the final vowel in word 4 other than the two reflexes because they are basically the same vowel.
Your previous guess, [ɔ], was correct in terms of quality. 

Ratsawn wrote: 09 Nov 2020 00:28 EFː [ˈʔoːn] - [əraˈd͡ziːfsə] - [tuˈlaːdə] - [ʔepˈkuːt͡sa] - [ʔəˈd͡zelə]
Word 1 - Spot-on!
Word 2 - Spot-on!
Word 3 - Spot-on!
Word 4 - Spot-on!
Word 5 - Spot-on!
Ratsawn wrote: 09 Nov 2020 00:28 I hope I’ve interpreted the incorrect segments correctly.
You have! Well done!

Ratsawn wrote: 09 Nov 2020 00:28 ABCDEFː [ˈχøːm] - [ranˈd͡zimpəso] - [tuħˈlandɻə] - [ʔempˈkyːt͡sau] - [iˈd͡ʒelmə]
Word 1 - For the initial consonant, [χ-] and [ħ-] have both been close. They're correct in voicing and MOA. The vowel in your previous guess, [oː], was partially correct. The issue with [-m] is a matter of secondary articulation. 
Word 2 - All of the segments are correct, but [ə] is in the wrong place. I'd recommend comparing AB and EF.
Word 3 - Please see my response below.
Word 4 - [ʔempˈk-t͡saʊ̯] is correct. The stressed vowel in your previous guess, [uː], was partially correct in the same way as [oː] in Word 1. It may be helpful to think about the nucleus of the final syllable of this word, which you've now reconstructed correctly. 
Word 5 - Please see my response below. 
Ratsawn wrote: 09 Nov 2020 00:28 
I hope here I’ve interpreted the “structural inaccuracy” of the final syllable in words 3 and 5.
First of all, [tuħˈland-] and [iˈd͡ʒel-] are correct, and for Word 5, [m] is partially correct.

At this point, I'm going to tell you that Words 3 and 5 end in syllabic consonants. So, Word 5 is [iˈd͡ʒelm̩]. However, [ɻ] is not the correct rhotic.  


Ratsawn wrote: 09 Nov 2020 00:28 GHː [ˈhoːm] - [rədˈd͡zissə] - [səxˈxaːrn] - [jəkˈkuːta] - [jəˈgeːlmə]
Word 1 - Spot-on!
Word 2 - Spot-on!
Word 3 - Spot-on!
Word 4 - Spot-on!
Word 5 - Two segments do not need to be there. I'd recommend comparing the pretonic syllables of Words 4 and 5 and the stressed syllables of Words 3 and 5.

Ratsawn wrote: 09 Nov 2020 00:28 IJː [ˈsomi] - [ˈrɛnd͡ʒĩːso] - [ˈt͡sollarən] - [ˈwiŋkeːtaː] - [ˈhigelam]
Word 1 - Spot-on!
Word 2 - Spot-on!
Word 3 - Very close! The third vowel is off in quality.
Word 4 - There is a [w], but it's in the wrong place. The first vowel is off, but all the other segments are correct. 
Word 5 - Spot-on!
Ratsawn wrote: 09 Nov 2020 00:28 In word 1, I propose a final vowel that could produce the diphthong seen in J. Whether that is i or another vowel, I don’t know.
You're correct!
Ratsawn wrote: 09 Nov 2020 00:28 For word 3, I’ve chosen to interpret the missing intervocallic consonant as an r because of many of these words’ reflexes, but I could also see it as another approximate. It seems plausible then to postulate a chain shift in J where t > d and d > Ø.
[r] is correct! 

I don't believe there's a [-d-] in any of these words in IJ, but yes, something like [t d] > [d ð~Ø] intervocalically is accurate for J. 

Ratsawn wrote: 09 Nov 2020 00:28 KL: [ˈsoːme] - [ranˈnind͡zo] - [tuʃˈʃæːrin] - [d͡ʒeŋˈgyːtoː] - [ħɪˈxeɪ̯lin]
Word 1 - Spot-on!
Word 2 - Spot-on!
Word 3 - Spot-on!
Word 4 - Spot-on!
Word 5 - Please see my comments below.
Ratsawn wrote: 09 Nov 2020 00:28 The pretonic vowel in word 2 seems to be an a or a schwa, but I’m not sure which.
[a] is correct!
Ratsawn wrote: 09 Nov 2020 00:28 For word 5, I have no idea how a consonant can be unvoiced and a fricative, yet be off in some way other than POA. I’m assuming that that was supposed to say MOA. If it was not a typo, please enlighten me.
As far as I can tell, there aren't any typos in the relevant portion of my previous response, but it could have been worded far, far more clearly. I'll do my best to correct that here.

For the initial consonant of Word 5, I'd be willing to accept any of [x~χ~ħ~h], really, although in my notes I have either [x] or [h]. This is partially what I meant by "it's not POA that's the problem" in my response to your previous reconstruction, [ˈχeɪ̯lin]. The problem, instead, was that the structure of the word is [xiˈCeɪ̯lin], not [ˈCeɪ̯lin], as I tried to clarify in the following paragraph of my last response. 

Hopefully this clears things up.

Ratsawn wrote: 09 Nov 2020 00:28 GHIJKLː [ˈsome] - [ranˈdinso] - [tuɬˈɬarin] - [jeŋˈkyːtaː] - [hiˈgelim]
Word 1 - [ˈsom-] is correct, and [-e] is very close. Please see below for more details.
Word 2 - Spot-on!
Word 3 - The third vowel is off in terms of quality. Please see below for more details.
Word 4 - [jeŋˈk-t-] is correct. [-aː] is partially correct. Your previous guess for the stressed vowel, [-uː-], was partially correct in more or less the same way. 
Word 5 - The third vowel is off in terms of quality. Please see below for more details.
Ratsawn wrote: 09 Nov 2020 00:28 In word 1, I assume it ends with some front vowel, but which one, I don’t know.
"some front vowel" is correct. [-e] isn't what I have, but I may end up treating it as essentially correct. 
Ratsawn wrote: 09 Nov 2020 00:28 The vowels in word 3 and 5 are complex. I’m assuming they lowered in IJ and became schwa in GH.
You're generally correct about vowel reduction in GH, I'd say, but there's a reason some vowels became [ə] while others were completely lost. There was lowering in Word 3 in IJ, but it wasn't unconditioned. 


Ratsawn wrote: 09 Nov 2020 00:28 MNː [ˈzwaʒu] - [ɳɛːˈnaɪ̯zo] - [tyːˈnɛːɻu] - [ʒiːˈguʒʒaʊ̯] - [jiɣˈɣeɪ̯mu]
Word 1 - [ˈz-ʒu] is correct. Please see below for more details.
Word 2 - Spot-on!
Word 3 - [t-ˈ-ɛːɻu] is correct. There is a nasal in the onset of the stressed syllable, but neither M nor N preserves its POA. Please see below for more details.
Word 4 - [ʒ-ˈguʒʒaʊ̯] is correct. [iː] is partially correct. Please see below for more details.
Word 5 - Please see my response below. 
Ratsawn wrote: 09 Nov 2020 00:28 I don’t even have a clue for the stressed vowel in word 1. It seems like a French change, like a rising diphthong became a falling one in MN, and then monophthongized in N.
You're looking for falling diphthongs [VV̯] in the stressed syllable of Word 1 and the pretonic syllables of Words 3 and 4.  
Ratsawn wrote: 09 Nov 2020 00:28 I’m still unsure about the identity of the geminate in word 5.
The geminate in your previous guess, [-ww-], was correct in terms of MOA. I'd recommend keeping in mind that it becomes [-ʒʒ-] in N. 

Ratsawn wrote: 09 Nov 2020 00:28 OPː [ˈzʌːʒə] - [jʌːˈlɯːzo] - [tuwˈwʌːje] - [ʒʌːˈgudd͡ʒaf] - [ˈjeumə]
Word 1 - Spot-on! 
Word 2 - Spot-on!
Word 3 - Spot-on!
Word 4 - Spot-on!
Word 5 - Spot-on!

Ratsawn wrote: 09 Nov 2020 00:28 QRː [ˈzɔɪ̯ʒ] - [ʁɔˈjeɪ̯zə] - [təɣˈɣɔɪ̯ʁ] - [ʒɛˈgudda] - [ɣəˈɣeɣm]
Word 1 - Spot-on!
Word 2 - Spot-on!
Word 3 - Spot-on!
Word 4 - Spot-on!
Word 5 - Spot-on!

Well done!

Ratsawn wrote: 09 Nov 2020 00:28 MNOPQRː [ˈzõːʒə] - [rõːˈdĩːzo] - [tuˈɫãːrə] - [ʒẽːˈgudt͡sav] - [giˈɣemə]
Word 1 - Spot-on!
Word 2 - [r-ˈ-ĩːzo] is correct. The quality of the pretonic vowel and the MOA of the second consonant are off.
Word 3 - All of the segments you've reconstructed are correct, but there's a consonant missing. 
Word 4 - [ʒẽːˈgu-av] is correct. Please see below for more details. 
Word 5 - [-iˈɣe-mə] is correct. Please see below for more details. 
Ratsawn wrote: 09 Nov 2020 00:28 I’m very unsure about the cluster in word 4. It appears that it should be d plus some palatal value. Ts here is mostly a filler.
The cluster is [-Cd-], so you're partially correct. The other consonant isn't palatal in the way that, for example, [c ç j] are, but it's definitely one of the more "palatal" coronals, I guess I'd say. 
Ratsawn wrote: 09 Nov 2020 00:28 The first syllable in word 5 is incomprehensible to me. Any help would be appreciated.
You're very close! [Ci-] is correct, but the initial consonant is off in the same way that [-d-] is off in Word 2 (MOA). There's another consonant missing from a different syllable, however. 


Ratsawn wrote: 09 Nov 2020 00:28 A-Rː [ˈsømʒə] - [ranˈdimso] - [tuhˈlantɻə] - [jemˈkydt͡sav] - [hiˈgelmə]
Word 1 - Two correct segments
Word 2 - Eight correct segments
Word 3 - Six correct segments
Word 4 - Five correct segments
Word 5 - Five correct segments
Ratsawn wrote: 09 Nov 2020 00:28 Word 1 is a structural nightmare. I’m thinking either sV[+round][+mid]mʒV or sV[+round][+mid]ʒmV, but neither of them really “feel right”.
Something about the structure of Word 1 in A-R is "unstable", I guess I'd say, and each of the three descendants resolve this in a different way. 

[ˈsV[+round,mid]m-] is correct. 
Ratsawn wrote: 09 Nov 2020 00:28 In word 2, I’m thinking that the mk cluster in 4 has an analogy ms, which led to the same sorts of reflexes in AF and GL.
Good thinking! [ranˈdimso] is exactly right! 
Ratsawn wrote: 09 Nov 2020 00:28 For the others, I hope I’m at least a little closer.
For Word 3, two of the correct segments are in the incorrect order.

For Word 4, you changed one of the five correct segments you had last time, but also made the correct change to one of your previously incorrect segments. 

For Word 5, I'm torn on whether to count a sixth segment as correct or not. The issue is related to the "structural" problems in A-F.
Ratsawn
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 19
Joined: 31 Aug 2020 23:17

Re: Quick Diachronics Challenge

Post by Ratsawn »

Before I start again, after a quick glance at your comments, I have one question. Did I get the proto-form for word 2 right, or am I missing segments? You said 8 correct segments (there are only 8) but didn't say it was correct explicitly.
Ratsawn
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 19
Joined: 31 Aug 2020 23:17

Re: Quick Diachronics Challenge

Post by Ratsawn »

Also I'd like to apologize for reading others' comments. I was not aware of that rule, and I will not do that for the remainder of this challenge, or any future one. Whoops.
shimobaatar
korean
korean
Posts: 7792
Joined: 12 Jul 2013 23:09
Location: PA

Re: Quick Diachronics Challenge

Post by shimobaatar »

Ratsawn wrote: 09 Nov 2020 04:33 Before I start again, after a quick glance at your comments, I have one question. Did I get the proto-form for word 2 right, or am I missing segments? You said 8 correct segments (there are only 8) but didn't say it was correct explicitly.
I believe I did:
Spoiler:
shimobaatar wrote: 09 Nov 2020 03:42
Ratsawn wrote: 09 Nov 2020 00:28 A-Rː [ˈsømʒə] - [ranˈdimso] - [tuhˈlantɻə] - [jemˈkydt͡sav] - [hiˈgelmə]
Word 1 - Two correct segments
Word 2 - Eight correct segments
Word 3 - Six correct segments
Word 4 - Five correct segments
Word 5 - Five correct segments

[…]
Ratsawn wrote: 09 Nov 2020 00:28 In word 2, I’m thinking that the mk cluster in 4 has an analogy ms, which led to the same sorts of reflexes in AF and GL.
Good thinking! [ranˈdimso] is exactly right! 
Ratsawn wrote: 09 Nov 2020 04:39 Also I'd like to apologize for reading others' comments. I was not aware of that rule, and I will not do that for the remainder of this challenge, or any future one. Whoops.
No worries. As I said, I don't think there's a formal rule about it. I know how I do things, but I don't know how anyone else feels about reading the comments that have been left for others. [:)]
Last edited by shimobaatar on 09 Nov 2020 04:42, edited 1 time in total.
Ratsawn
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 19
Joined: 31 Aug 2020 23:17

Re: Quick Diachronics Challenge

Post by Ratsawn »

Just wanted to make sure. Thanks!
Ratsawn
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 19
Joined: 31 Aug 2020 23:17

Re: Quick Diachronics Challenge

Post by Ratsawn »

Alright, here's my fourth response (followed the rules this time):
Spoiler:
A: [ˈgoðɛ̃ː] - [əːɖɔ̃ːˈðĩə̯̃spo] - [tʼaˈk͡xɔ̃ːɖəː] - [bɛ̃ˈkʼuðiθagu] - [iˈðek͡xə̃ː]
B: [ˈvoziɲ] - [ɳɳaˈziməff] - [paˈɣaɳɳəɻ] - [mexˈxuzit͡ɕav] - [ˈzeɣəm]
AB: [ˈwoðiɲ] - [ərɳaˈðiməspo] - [twaˈg͡ɣaɳɖəɻ] - [meˈkuðit͡ɕawu] - [iˈðeg͡ɣəm]

As for where you said k was correct in word 5, I think I may have misread and gotten a bit of karma for breaking the rules.

In word 2, I have used cognates to postulate an rɳ cluster, which would yield sound changes in A: Cɳ > Cɖ > ːɖ and in B: Cɳ > ɳɳ. The fortification of ɳ to ɖ makes me a bit lost, but we already know ɖ isn’t part of the cluster, so this is the best we can do.

Is there supposed to be a coda consonant in the first syllable of word 4?

C: [ˈħem] - [rɨnˈd͡zimpʰo] - [toħˈland͡ʒɨ] - [jemˈpʼiːt͡sɔ] - [ˈd͡ʒlemɨ]
D: [ˈħyə̯m] - [ɹn̩ˈd͡zɪɱfa] - [taħˈɫand͡z] - [ʔɛmˈpəʏ̯so] - [ʔɪˈzɛɫm]
CDː [ˈħøːm] - [rɨnˈd͡zimpʰo] - [toħˈɫand͡ʒɨ] - [ʔemˈp’yːt͡sɔː] - [ʔiˈd͡ʒelmɨ]

E: [ˈʔun] - [ɹaˈzaɪ̯fs] - [tʊˈɫað] - [ʔɛfˈkaʊ̯sa] - [ˈzɛɫ]
F: [ˈwoŋ] - [jerˈd͡ziffe] - [tuˈloːde] - [jeˈk͡puːt͡sa] - [jeˈd͡zeːle]
EFː [ˈʔoːn] - [əraˈd͡ziːfsə] - [tuˈlaːdə] - [ʔepˈkuːt͡sa] - [ʔəˈd͡zelə]

AB: [ˈwoðiɲ] - [ərɳaˈðiməspo] - [twaˈg͡ɣaɳɖəɻ] - [meˈkuðit͡ɕawu] - [iˈðeg͡ɣəm]
CDː [ˈħøːm] - [rɨnˈd͡zimpʰo] - [toħˈɫand͡ʒɨ] - [ʔemˈp’yːt͡sɔː] - [ʔiˈd͡ʒelmɨ]
EFː [ˈʔoːn] - [əraˈd͡ziːfsə] - [tuˈlaːdə] - [ʔepˈkuːt͡sa] - [ʔəˈd͡zelə]
ABCDEFː [ˈhoimʲ] - [ranˈd͡ziəmpso] - [tuħˈlandr̩] - [ʔempˈkuit͡sau] - [iˈd͡ʒelm̩]

My vowel in word 1 seems tricky, but I can see an epenthetic consonant breaking the diphthong in AB and two different types of monophthongization in CD and EF. This also holds in word 4, so I’m feeling more confident.

The schwa in word 2 can’t be between the mp or ps clusters, so I’m thinking it must be part of a falling diphthong. I assume if this is correct, the lengthening in EF is a result of that as well as the deleted nasal. Knowing the proto-form, this means that the diphthong is a new development in ABCDEF.

G: [ˈhuːŋ] - [retˈt͡sisse] - [sexˈxɔːreŋ] - [jekˈkyːtɔ] - [jeˈgiːleŋ]
H: [ˈhom] - [r̩ˈd͡zɪs] - [ˈsxarn] - [ɪˈcuːðɐ] - [ˈʝeʊ̯m]
GHː [ˈhoːm] - [rədˈd͡zissə] - [səxˈxaːrn] - [jəkˈkuːta] - [əˈgeːlm]

I hope I’ve interpreted the “extra segments” correctly.

I: [ˈsum] - [ˈrɛnʒes] - [ˈsoʎən] - [ˈwɪŋketæ] - [ˈsiʎəm]
J: [ˈsõɪ̯̃] - [ˈrjɛ̃dĩzo] - [ˈtolɔ̃ɐ̯̃] - [ˈŋõʊ̯̃pæda] - [ˈŋiə̯ɮã]
IJː [ˈsomi] - [ˈrɛnd͡ʒĩːso] - [ˈt͡sollaran] - [ˈewŋkeːtaː] - [ˈhigelam]

The final vowel in word 3 seems to match the final vowel in 5, with a > schwa in I and a nasalization in J. I assume the intervening r affected the quality in 3.

The first syllable in 4 eludes me.

K: [ˈsũvɛ] - [rɐ̃ˈnĩdɐ] - [tʊˈʃẽɪ̯̃] - [dɛ̃ˈŋœʏ̯dɐ] - [ħɪˈʕĩː]
L: [ˈsoʊ̯n] - [r̩ˈɲinz] - [ˈt͡ʃæːrin] - [ʒeŋˈgiːto] - [ˈkʰeɪ̯lin]
KL: [ˈsoːme] - [ranˈnind͡zo] - [tuʃˈʃæːrin] - [d͡ʒeŋˈgyːtoː] - [xiˈkeɪ̯lin]

In word 5, your comments were greatly appreciated. For the second consonant, it seems a velar would be appropriate based on cognates.

GHː [ˈhoːm] - [rədˈd͡zissə] - [səxˈxaːrn] - [jəkˈkuːta] - [əˈgeːlm]
IJː [ˈsomi] - [ˈrɛnd͡ʒĩːso] - [ˈt͡sollaran] - [ˈewŋkeːtaː] - [ˈhigelam]
KL: [ˈsoːme] - [ranˈnind͡zo] - [tuʃˈʃæːrin] - [d͡ʒeŋˈgyːtoː] - [xiˈkeɪ̯lin]
GHIJKLː [ˈsomi] - [ranˈdinso] - [tuɬˈɬaren] - [jeŋˈkuitau] - [hiˈgelem]

In word 4, I’ve chosen to take the cognate route for those vowels and interpret them as diphthongs.

M: [ˈzwaʒu] - [ɳɛˈnaɪ̯ʒo] - [twiˈɲɛɻu] - [ʒjaˈguʃaʊ̯] - [jiˈwemʲu]
N: [ˈzuːʒo] - [ˈnaːneːzo] - [ˈtyːnaːʒo] - [ˈʒiːguʒʒoː] - [ˈjeʒʒeːmo]
MNː [ˈzauʒu] - [ɳɛːˈnaɪ̯zo] - [tuiˈɳɛːɻu] - [ʒaiˈguʒʒaʊ̯] - [jijˈjeɪ̯mu]

I hope these vowels are correct in words 1, 3, and 4.

In word 5, you said it is an approximate, and I should keep in mind its reflex in N. I’m analyzing it as a j, but its rounded equivalent also seems likely.

O: [ˈzʌːʒe] - [ˈd͡ʒʌːlɯːzo] - [ˈtubbʌːje] - [ˈʒʌːgudd͡ʒaf] - [ˈd͡ʒoːme]
P: [ˈzaʒa] - [jɛˈlɯzo] - [tuˈwɔje] - [ʒaˈgut͡ʃa] - [ˈjeːma]
OPː [ˈzʌːʒə] - [jʌːˈlɯːzo] - [tuwˈwʌːje] - [ʒʌːˈgudd͡ʒaf] - [ˈjeumə]

Q: [ˈrɔɪ̯z] - [ɦɔˈjeɪ̯ra] - [taxˈxɔɐ̯] - [zɛˈgʏtta] - [gaˈɣeɐ̯m]
R: [ˈzwɛʃ] - [ɣəjˈjez] - [ˈtxwɛx] - [ʒəˈguddə] - [ˈɣɣem̥x]
QRː [ˈzɔɪ̯ʒ] - [ʁɔˈjeɪ̯zə] - [təɣˈɣɔɪ̯ʁ] - [ʒɛˈgudda] - [ɣəˈɣeɣm]

MNː [ˈzauʒu] - [ɳɛːˈnaɪ̯zo] - [tuiˈɳɛːɻu] - [ʒaiˈguʒʒaʊ̯] - [jijˈjeɪ̯mu]
OPː [ˈzʌːʒə] - [jʌːˈlɯːzo] - [tuwˈwʌːje] - [ʒʌːˈgudd͡ʒaf] - [ˈjeumə]
QRː [ˈzɔɪ̯ʒ] - [ʁɔˈjeɪ̯zə] - [təɣˈɣɔɪ̯ʁ] - [ʒɛˈgudda] - [ɣəˈɣeɣm]
MNOPQRː [ˈzõːʒə] - [rãːˈnĩːzo] - [tuɣˈɫãːrə] - [ʒẽːˈguʒdav] - [ɣiˈɣeɣmə]

ABCDEFː [ˈhoimʲ] - [ranˈd͡ziəmpso] - [tuħˈlandr̩] - [ʔempˈkuit͡sau] - [iˈd͡ʒelm̩]
GHIJKLː [ˈsomi] - [ranˈdinso] - [tuɬˈɬaren] - [jeŋˈkuitau] - [hiˈgelem]
MNOPQRː [ˈzõːʒə] - [rãːˈnĩːzo] - [tuɣˈɫãːrə] - [ʒẽːˈguʒdav] - [ɣiˈɣeɣmə]
A-Rː [ˈsomj] - [ranˈdimso] - [tuhˈlantr̩] - [jemˈkuitav] - [hiˈgelm̩]

My reconstruction for word 1 seems pretty unstable, but maybe that’s just me. It does seem like a j or i in word 4 caused similar results, so I’m thinking the ʒ in word 1 and 4 in MR is a result of fortification of that j or i.

Word three could use some extra advice, I feel like the final VC I had before should be a syllabic consonant, but that doesn’t really address your concerns, so I dunno.
User avatar
sangi39
moderator
moderator
Posts: 2727
Joined: 12 Aug 2010 01:53
Location: North Yorkshire, UK

Re: Quick Diachronics Challenge

Post by sangi39 »

Yeah, I don't think we've ever said reading other people's guesses and feedback is against the rules. It's a pretty free-range game as to whether you build on other people's work or whether you go at it alone (much like in real-world reconstructions, I suppose). Different people play the game in different ways for different reasons, as long as everyone's having fun doing it, that's all that really counts [:)]

(I think spoilers started being used so that if someone does choose to work alone, they don't accidentally read through other guesses while scrolling)
You can tell the same lie a thousand times,
But it never gets any more true,
So close your eyes once more and once more believe
That they all still believe in you.
Just one time.
shimobaatar
korean
korean
Posts: 7792
Joined: 12 Jul 2013 23:09
Location: PA

Re: Quick Diachronics Challenge

Post by shimobaatar »

sangi39 wrote: 10 Nov 2020 22:07 Yeah, I don't think we've ever said reading other people's guesses and feedback is against the rules. It's a pretty free-range game as to whether you build on other people's work or whether you go at it alone (much like in real-world reconstructions, I suppose). Different people play the game in different ways for different reasons, as long as everyone's having fun doing it, that's all that really counts [:)]

(I think spoilers started being used so that if someone does choose to work alone, they don't accidentally read through other guesses while scrolling)
[+1] I'm glad to have confirmation on this from someone who's been playing the game longer than I have. [:)]

I prepared my response to Ratsawn's latest attempt the day after it was posted, almost two weeks ago. Would anyone like to have another shot at this?
ɶʙ ɞʛ
sinic
sinic
Posts: 301
Joined: 02 Aug 2019 18:47

Re: Quick Diachronics Challenge

Post by ɶʙ ɞʛ »

For me, probably not.
Post Reply