(Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

A forum for all topics related to constructed languages
User avatar
Dormouse559
moderator
moderator
Posts: 2699
Joined: 10 Nov 2012 20:52
Location: California

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by Dormouse559 »

aliensdrinktea wrote: 14 Oct 2020 03:14Is this naturalistic?
Certainly. There are plenty of examples of this sort of thing, but the one that I think of first is Latin clitics, such as -que "and". Take populus /‍ˈpopulus/. It has initial stress, but when -que is added (as in Senātus Populusque Rōmānus) it becomes populusque /popuˈluskʷe/, with stress moving two syllables over. Like with your conlang, that's a regular consequence of stress assignment.
Salmoneus
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2067
Joined: 19 Sep 2011 19:37

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by Salmoneus »

aliensdrinktea wrote: 14 Oct 2020 03:14 I don't mean to interrupt, but I just realized the definite affix in Yuraalian is a heavy syllable, and because it affixes onto nouns, it affects stress placement in certain words (and vowel quality in turn). For example:

jalun [ˈʑɒln̩] '(a) road'
ol-jalun [ˈolʑəˌlun] 'the road'

Is this naturalistic? Or should I fix it somehow?
It's completely naturalistic. Dormouse points out a straightforward example with Latin, where it's just a stress shift; at the other end of the continuum, into the realms of nightmare, there's Old Irish, in which negating a verb effectively requires a completely different verb root, thanks to the massive loss of unstressed vowels and all that that results in (including vowel changes and palatalisation)

Wikipedia gives examples like:
do⋅berat (they bring), vs ní-taibret (they don't bring)
as⋅bó (he may refuse), vs ní⋅op (he may not refuse)
imm⋅soí (he turns around), vs ní-impaí (he doesn't turn around)
do⋅róscai (he surpasses), vs ní-derscaigi (he doesn't surpass)


In between these extremes, there's a big, fun area with noticeable but understandable ablaut effects.



However, I would say that extreme systems like Old Irish's probably aren't very sustainable: speakers will get confused, new speakers will struggle to learn the language, and over time one form or the other is likely to be chosen. The more extreme the variation, the more likely it is to collapse. More moderate forms, however, can last a very long time, particularly if they're very systematic, or if they become limited to only a subset of more common words - look at English 'irregular' verbs! [which ultimately (probably) result from this sort of stress shift, only caused by a suffix rather than a prefix - which in turn triggered vowel changes]
User avatar
aliensdrinktea
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 10
Joined: 11 Oct 2020 17:28
Location: Spain

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by aliensdrinktea »

Thanks guys [:D]
Salmoneus wrote: 14 Oct 2020 13:12 into the realms of nightmare, there's Old Irish, in which negating a verb effectively requires a completely different verb root, thanks to the massive loss of unstressed vowels and all that that results in (including vowel changes and palatalisation)
Fascinating, and nightmarish indeed! Thank you for sharing! [:)]
Post Reply