(Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here [2010-2020]

[Wanderer]

I suppose it depends on what type of labialisation you talk about. If labialisation just refers to rounding your lips while saying the consonant, I doubt you can hear the difference, because it wouldn't be there. However, oftentimes labialisation is actually labiovelarization. In that case, there is indeed a difference between [ɥ] and [jʷ].

Since [ʷ] is mostly used for any type of labialization, it is slightly ambiguous, I think. Wikipedia lists at least 7 types of labialization, not including labiovelarization (it says labialized consonants often also have simultaneous velarization though).

[Nortaneous]

I guess you could also say that there's a slight difference in how far back they are. Since [y] is generally not as fronted as , maybe [ɥ] wouldn't be as fronted as [j]. But it could go either way; IPA isn't specific enough for any conclusions to be drawn here.

[Avjunza]

Would it make sense if, in an Ergative language, the reflexive is marked by simply putting the subject in the Ergative case and not having an object?

E.g:
"3s.ERG kill.PAST" for "He killed himself."
"1s.ERG wash.HABI" for "I wash myself (habitual)"


Also, does anyone have some links to a good site on polysynthetic natlangs?

[Przemysław]

Would it make sense if, in an Ergative language, the reflexive is marked by simply putting the subject in the Ergative case and not having an object?

It's an invented language, so everything might make sense, but for me your examples, at first glance, would mean ‛He killed it’ and ‛I wash it usually’, respectively.

A few of possible solutions (I'm omitting TAM and any argument marking on verbs):

1) Absolutive + intransitive:

John.ERG Mary.ABS kill.TR ‛John Killed Mary’
but
John.ABS kill.INTR ‛John killed himself’

2) Reflexive verbal affix:

John.ABS kill.REFL

3) (Transitive with) both arguments explicit:
a) with a personal pronoun:

he.ERG John.ABS kill(.TR)
or
John.ERG he.ABS kill(.TR)

b) with a reflexive pronoun or a noun which functions as such:

John.ERG self(.ABS) kill

[Micamo]

How can I romanize /ɥ/ if my conlang also has /j w i y/?

[MrKrov]

How're you romanizing /j w i y/?

[Thakowsaizmu]

How can I romanize /ɥ/ if my conlang also has /j w i y/?

ï, ÿ, ü, ŷ, ŵ, û, ui, wy, iu, yw

[Micamo]

How can I romanize /ɥ/ if my conlang also has /j w i y/?

ï, ÿ, ü, ŷ, ŵ, û, ui, wy, iu, yw

I'm going with <ui>, thanks!

[Nortaneous]

Aww. I've always liked <ẅ>.

[Micamo]

It's not on my keyboard: I prefer to use polygraphs wherever possible so I don't have to mess around with switching keyboard layouts when I wanna type my conlang.

[jseamus]

What are all possible characters to transcribe /ʔ/ (the glottal stop)?

I am leaning toward using <Ɂ ɂ>, but <ɂ> messes with formatting, particularly tabs. Is there any other capital/lowercase pair that i can use to represent it?

[Micamo]

What are all possible characters to transcribe /ʔ/ (the glottal stop)?

I am leaning toward using <Ɂ ɂ>, but <ɂ> messes with formatting, particularly tabs. Is there any other capital/lowercase pair that i can use to represent it?

Other than what you describe I don't think there is anything you can use if you absolutely must have capital/lowercase versions. However if you don't mind unicode or it looking nothing like the IPA character itself you can always use one of the spare letters from Cryllic or something.

[Nortaneous]

What are all possible characters to transcribe /ʔ/ (the glottal stop)?

I am leaning toward using <Ɂ ɂ>, but <ɂ> messes with formatting, particularly tabs. Is there any other capital/lowercase pair that i can use to represent it?

Maltese uses <Q q>. Piraha uses <X x>. You could probably get away with using <C c>. I think someone used <Ḥ ḥ> in a conlang once, but I've always thought it looked ugly; if you want to use some form of <h>, I'd say you should use <Ḩ ḩ>, <Ħ ħ>, or <Ⱨ ⱨ>.

[jseamus]

Maltese uses <Q q>. Piraha uses <X x>. You could probably get away with using <C c>. I think someone used <Ḥ ḥ> in a conlang once, but I've always thought it looked ugly; if you want to use some form of <h>, I'd say you should use <Ḩ ḩ>, <Ħ ħ>, or <Ⱨ ⱨ>.

Thanks for the input. I was hoping to avoid using a letter that already had a well established (different) usage. What do y'all think about using <ʔ ˀ> as a cap/small pair?

I might just end up resigning myself to <'>.

[Bristel]

Maltese uses <Q q>. Piraha uses <X x>. You could probably get away with using <C c>. I think someone used <Ḥ ḥ> in a conlang once, but I've always thought it looked ugly; if you want to use some form of <h>, I'd say you should use <Ḩ ḩ>, <Ħ ħ>, or <Ⱨ ⱨ>.

Thanks for the input. I was hoping to avoid using a letter that already had a well established (different) usage. What do y'all think about using <ʔ ˀ> as a cap/small pair?

I might just end up resigning myself to <'>.

I like <ʔ ˀ> even though it looks similar to <?>.

[MrKrov]

In a four phoneme vowel system of /i e o a/, in which direction is it more likely for these diphthongs/vowel clusters to monophthongize into long vowels: the first vowel to the second or vice-versa? I suppose it's relevant to specify a CV-exclusive syllable structure.

io > ?, ia > ?, ea > ?, oi > ?, oe > ?

Also some mildly unconventional things that /j/ can become?

[Micamo]

In a four phoneme vowel system of /i e o a/, in which direction is it more likely for these diphthongs/vowel clusters to monophthongize into long vowels: the first vowel to the second or vice-versa? I suppose it's relevant to specify a CV-exclusive syllable structure.

io > ?, ia > ?, ea > ?, oi > ?, oe > ?

Also some mildly unconventional things that /j/ can become?

I'd say first to the second, just feels more natural.

I don't know the rest of your phonology or diachronic plans, but how about /ʝ/ before front vowels and /ħ/ before back ones?

[Sankon]

Also some mildly unconventional things that /j/ can become?

j -> ʝ -> ɣ -> g
j -> dʒ -> ɟ

[roninbodhisattva]

Also some mildly unconventional things that /j/ can become?

j -> ʝ -> ɣ -> g
j -> dʒ -> ɟ

Alternatively!

j > lʲ > ðʲ (where ð is some kind of dental non-lateral approximant) > ð (where ð is a real fricative)

[MrKrov]

I think roninbodhisattva’s alternative of ð will work best since it kinda parallells what I’m doing with /w/. 'k, thanks.