Crona VERBS!
Crona VERBS!
You all, already, know what THIS is about. And I will leave my opinions to myself. :)
/m n p t k f s h ɾ (w j)*/ <m n p/b t/d c/g f/v s/z h r/l>
/i u e o a/ <i u e o a>
Allophony:
1. [p t k f s] become voiced intervocally and after nasals.
2. [ɾ] = [l] at the end of syllables.
Conscript:
m <ɔ> n <c>
p <ɒ> t <ɑ> k <o>
f <ɜ> s <ɛ> h <ɵ>
ɾ <ı>
i <v> u <ʌ>
e <w> o <ʍ>
a <x>
eu <n> oi <u>
au <m> ai <ɯ>
geminate <:> (BEFORE consonant)
Onset clusters:
/sm sp st sk/
/pɾ tɾ kɾ fɾ/
Intervocal clusters:
/mb nd ŋg ɱv nz/
/nsp nst nsk/
/mbɾ ndɾ ŋgɾ/
/lm lp lt lk lf ls/
/lsp lst lsk/
/sm sp st sk/
/spɾ stɾ skɾ/
/pn tm km kn fn/
/p: t: k: f: s: l:/
/pɾ tɾ kɾ fɾ/
One-syllable word coda:
/-m -n -p -t -k -f -s -x -l/
/-mp -nt -ŋk -ns -lp -lt -lk -ls -sp -st -sk/
Two-syllable word coda:
/-n -p -t -k -s -l/
/-nt -ns -lt -ls -st/
Three-syllable word coda:
/-n -t -s -l/
Diphthongs and Triphthongs:
/ai au oi eu/
<ai au oi eu>
*/ja jo ju wa we wi/
<ya yo yu wa we wi>
<ia io iu ua ue ui>
/jau wai/
<yau wai>
<iau uai>
/m n p t k f s h ɾ (w j)*/ <m n p/b t/d c/g f/v s/z h r/l>
/i u e o a/ <i u e o a>
Allophony:
1. [p t k f s] become voiced intervocally and after nasals.
2. [ɾ] = [l] at the end of syllables.
Conscript:
m <ɔ> n <c>
p <ɒ> t <ɑ> k <o>
f <ɜ> s <ɛ> h <ɵ>
ɾ <ı>
i <v> u <ʌ>
e <w> o <ʍ>
a <x>
eu <n> oi <u>
au <m> ai <ɯ>
geminate <:> (BEFORE consonant)
Onset clusters:
/sm sp st sk/
/pɾ tɾ kɾ fɾ/
Intervocal clusters:
/mb nd ŋg ɱv nz/
/nsp nst nsk/
/mbɾ ndɾ ŋgɾ/
/lm lp lt lk lf ls/
/lsp lst lsk/
/sm sp st sk/
/spɾ stɾ skɾ/
/pn tm km kn fn/
/p: t: k: f: s: l:/
/pɾ tɾ kɾ fɾ/
One-syllable word coda:
/-m -n -p -t -k -f -s -x -l/
/-mp -nt -ŋk -ns -lp -lt -lk -ls -sp -st -sk/
Two-syllable word coda:
/-n -p -t -k -s -l/
/-nt -ns -lt -ls -st/
Three-syllable word coda:
/-n -t -s -l/
Diphthongs and Triphthongs:
/ai au oi eu/
<ai au oi eu>
*/ja jo ju wa we wi/
<ya yo yu wa we wi>
<ia io iu ua ue ui>
/jau wai/
<yau wai>
<iau uai>
Last edited by DV82LECM on 30 Mar 2021 03:24, edited 17 times in total.
𖥑𖧨𖣫𖦺𖣦𖢋𖤼𖥃𖣔𖣋𖢅𖡹𖡨𖡶𖡦𖡧𖡚𖠨
Re: Crona (redux)
+1 like to the onset clusters, word coda, diphthongs and triphthongs.
Most of these are also used in my conlang
Most of these are also used in my conlang
Re: Crona (redux)
Thank you. I must admit that this is becoming more complex than I first worked it. I wanted more diversity in my endings, but I might have gone too big. But, after WHAT you wrote, I have to use them! I'm just finding it tricky. I'm not a fan of all of the coda clusters, but I am. Make sense? I think a basic rule WILL BE that no one cluster can show up twice in a root or word, as well as CVC arrangements can't have the same consonant. No "pep" or "stast." Maybe you can help me, Reyzadren.
𖥑𖧨𖣫𖦺𖣦𖢋𖤼𖥃𖣔𖣋𖢅𖡹𖡨𖡶𖡦𖡧𖡚𖠨
Re: Crona (redux)
Not sure what I could help you with tbh. My conlang has almost the same number/type of front and back clusters as yours, but it is not complex, linguistically. In fact, the clusters and diphthongs actually make the language easier for me. The guideline that I use is basically just "Can I pronounce it?"
Re: Crona (redux)
Touché. I just have something vaguely German that I want to make seem vaguely Spanish. My dilemma is cognates. DOES "rupt" and "rupta" mean close to the SAME thing? If NOT, why? Get what I mean?Reyzadren wrote: ↑19 Mar 2019 23:28 Not sure what I could help you with tbh. My conlang has almost the same number/type of front and back clusters as yours, but it is not complex, linguistically. In fact, the clusters and diphthongs actually make the language easier for me. The guideline that I use is basically just "Can I pronounce it?"
𖥑𖧨𖣫𖦺𖣦𖢋𖤼𖥃𖣔𖣋𖢅𖡹𖡨𖡶𖡦𖡧𖡚𖠨
Re: Crona (redux)
Hmm, I don't really do much on cognates/etymology for my conlang. The situation above does seem more about morphology to me though. If that is what you are asking, my conlang will always have such words to be related via affixations. Hence, in general, they are related: /'serp/ "killings", /'serpa/ "kill". The only exceptions that I can think of are embedded cores that very rarely occur.
Last edited by Reyzadren on 15 Aug 2020 10:32, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Crona (redux)
One possible method would be to not allow them in roots, which doesn't seem too unlikely (given the size of your inventory and the clusters that are permitted, you're looking at, what, 8602 possible monosyllabic and 7457934 possible bisyllabic words right there, so not having all of those possible combinations being represented in roots makes perfect sense. This could be handwaved as some change that happened at some point in the language's history, or you could try to come up with sets of rules that prevent them from occurring (something like Grassman's Law, for example, could have /pep/ shift to /fep/ or /pef/, and dissimilation rules like nVn > nVr could help).DV82LECM wrote: ↑19 Mar 2019 15:29Thank you. I must admit that this is becoming more complex than I first worked it. I wanted more diversity in my endings, but I might have gone too big. But, after WHAT you wrote, I have to use them! I'm just finding it tricky. I'm not a fan of all of the coda clusters, but I am. Make sense? I think a basic rule WILL BE that no one cluster can show up twice in a root or word, as well as CVC arrangements can't have the same consonant. No "pep" or "stast." Maybe you can help me, Reyzadren.
As for preventing repeated clusters in general, well some of those could be handled by the above dissimilation rules, or even by haplology. So, for example, if you have /stas-/ which then takes a suffix like /-tar/, the resulting /stastar/ could end up being /star/.
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.
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.
Re: Crona (redux)
Whoa. Thanks SO MUCH for the LOGISTICS. That helps, a lot. I might wanna start thinking like a linguist on this project.sangi39 wrote: ↑21 Mar 2019 00:16One possible method would be to not allow them in roots, which doesn't seem too unlikely (given the size of your inventory and the clusters that are permitted, you're looking at, what, 8602 possible monosyllabic and 7457934 possible bisyllabic words right there, so not having all of those possible combinations being represented in roots makes perfect sense. This could be handwaved as some change that happened at some point in the language's history, or you could try to come up with sets of rules that prevent them from occurring (something like Grassman's Law, for example, could have /pep/ shift to /fep/ or /pef/, and dissimilation rules like nVn > nVr could help).DV82LECM wrote: ↑19 Mar 2019 15:29Thank you. I must admit that this is becoming more complex than I first worked it. I wanted more diversity in my endings, but I might have gone too big. But, after WHAT you wrote, I have to use them! I'm just finding it tricky. I'm not a fan of all of the coda clusters, but I am. Make sense? I think a basic rule WILL BE that no one cluster can show up twice in a root or word, as well as CVC arrangements can't have the same consonant. No "pep" or "stast." Maybe you can help me, Reyzadren.
As for preventing repeated clusters in general, well some of those could be handled by the above dissimilation rules, or even by haplology. So, for example, if you have /stas-/ which then takes a suffix like /-tar/, the resulting /stastar/ could end up being /star/.
𖥑𖧨𖣫𖦺𖣦𖢋𖤼𖥃𖣔𖣋𖢅𖡹𖡨𖡶𖡦𖡧𖡚𖠨
Re: Crona (redux)
Little update.
I decided to give my four Diphthongs their own symbol. This is the full list:
m <ɔ> n <c> p <ɒ> t <ɑ> k <o> f <ɜ> s <ɛ> h <ɵ> ɾ <ı>
i <v> u <ʌ> e <w> o <ʍ> a <x>
eu <n> oi <u> au <m> ai <ɯ>
geminate <:> (BEFORE consonant)
If you study my symbols, you'll see that symmetry means a LOT to me. And...if anyone wants to be extra cool, look at my vowels and discern the pattern for WHY I chose those new shapes.
I decided to give my four Diphthongs their own symbol. This is the full list:
m <ɔ> n <c> p <ɒ> t <ɑ> k <o> f <ɜ> s <ɛ> h <ɵ> ɾ <ı>
i <v> u <ʌ> e <w> o <ʍ> a <x>
eu <n> oi <u> au <m> ai <ɯ>
geminate <:> (BEFORE consonant)
If you study my symbols, you'll see that symmetry means a LOT to me. And...if anyone wants to be extra cool, look at my vowels and discern the pattern for WHY I chose those new shapes.
𖥑𖧨𖣫𖦺𖣦𖢋𖤼𖥃𖣔𖣋𖢅𖡹𖡨𖡶𖡦𖡧𖡚𖠨
Re: Crona (redux)
I do want to post something new about this language: words for body parts. I've been considering something interesting: inalienable plurality. The root for the part of a body with symmetry will be, inherently, pluralized. As much, the genitive is unnecessary.
<euzi> "feet"
<yos euzi> "one feet (foot)"
Whatchall think? (STILL a work in progress.)
<euzi> "feet"
<yos euzi> "one feet (foot)"
Whatchall think? (STILL a work in progress.)
𖥑𖧨𖣫𖦺𖣦𖢋𖤼𖥃𖣔𖣋𖢅𖡹𖡨𖡶𖡦𖡧𖡚𖠨
Re: Crona (redux)
Plurality:
One-syllable words end in /m n p t k f s x l/. Each get /-t/.
/-m/ = /-mt/ = /-mp/, those ending in /-t/ get/-in/.
Two-syllable words end in /n p t k s l/;
rule for /-t/ applies.
Three-syllable words end in /n t s l/;
rule for /-t/ applies.
ALL phonemic clusters get /-it/;
rule for /-t/ applies.
One-syllable words end in /m n p t k f s x l/. Each get /-t/.
/-m/ = /-mt/ = /-mp/, those ending in /-t/ get/-in/.
Two-syllable words end in /n p t k s l/;
rule for /-t/ applies.
Three-syllable words end in /n t s l/;
rule for /-t/ applies.
ALL phonemic clusters get /-it/;
rule for /-t/ applies.
𖥑𖧨𖣫𖦺𖣦𖢋𖤼𖥃𖣔𖣋𖢅𖡹𖡨𖡶𖡦𖡧𖡚𖠨
Re: Crona (redux)
New phonology:
/m/ <ɔ> /n/ <ი> /-ŋ/ <c>*
/p/ <ɒ> /t/ <o, ɪ> /k/ <ɑ>
/h/ <ɜ> /ɬ/ <ɵ> /s/ <ɛ>**
/w/ <r> /l/ <ı> /j/ <ɹ>
/i/ <ʌ> /u/ <v>
/e/ <ʍ> /o/ <w>
/a/ <x>
/eu/ <n> /oi/ <u>
/au/ <m> /ai/ <ɯ>
*exists, initially, in older dialect, but still used in a few clusters.
**<ɪ> is a later development, only exists at word coda position.
/m/ <ɔ> /n/ <ი> /-ŋ/ <c>*
/p/ <ɒ> /t/ <o, ɪ> /k/ <ɑ>
/h/ <ɜ> /ɬ/ <ɵ> /s/ <ɛ>**
/w/ <r> /l/ <ı> /j/ <ɹ>
/i/ <ʌ> /u/ <v>
/e/ <ʍ> /o/ <w>
/a/ <x>
/eu/ <n> /oi/ <u>
/au/ <m> /ai/ <ɯ>
*exists, initially, in older dialect, but still used in a few clusters.
**<ɪ> is a later development, only exists at word coda position.
Last edited by DV82LECM on 09 Mar 2021 01:02, edited 30 times in total.
𖥑𖧨𖣫𖦺𖣦𖢋𖤼𖥃𖣔𖣋𖢅𖡹𖡨𖡶𖡦𖡧𖡚𖠨
- WeepingElf
- greek
- Posts: 531
- Joined: 23 Feb 2016 18:42
- Location: Braunschweig, Germany
- Contact:
Re: Crona (redux)
I like the way you constructed a featural alphabet out of existing letters.
... brought to you by the Weeping Elf
My conlang pages
My conlang pages
Re: Crona (redux)
It was, but not much so, now. I would have to derive some wicked sound changes to make it work.WeepingElf wrote: ↑13 Aug 2020 10:47 I like the way you constructed a featural alphabet out of existing letters.
I'm also flattered that you could recognize it is featural. Is it that obvious? Truth be told, it is (intended to be) a conceptual mirror to Korean, even down to the symmetry in the vowels.
𖥑𖧨𖣫𖦺𖣦𖢋𖤼𖥃𖣔𖣋𖢅𖡹𖡨𖡶𖡦𖡧𖡚𖠨
Re: Crona (redux)
Intervocalic clusters:
/mn mb mp~ɱf/
<mn mp nh>
/nd~nd͡ʒ nt~nθ nl~nð/
<nt nl nr>
/ŋm ŋn ŋg ŋk~nt͡ʃ/
<nm nn nc ns>
/pn ps~pʃ pt~pθ pl~bð/
<pn pt pl pr>
/km kn kp ks~kʃ kt~kθ kl~gð/
<cm cn cp ct cl cr>
/fn ft~ft͡ʃ fk>
<hn ht hc>
/sm sn sp sk/
<tm tn tp tc>
/xm~ʃm xn~ʃn xp~ʃp xt(ʃ)~ʃt(ʃ)/
<sm sn sp st>
/lm ln lp lk lh~lf ls~lʃ/
<lm ln lp lc lh ls>
/ɾm ɾn ɾp ɾk ɾh~ɾf ɾs~ɾʃ/
<rm rn rp rc rh rs>
Diphthongs:
/ai au oi eu/
/ʲa ʲo ʲu ʷa ʷe ʷi/
<ia io iu ua ue ui>
Word coda:
/n t s l ɾ~ɹ/
/mn mb mp~ɱf/
<mn mp nh>
/nd~nd͡ʒ nt~nθ nl~nð/
<nt nl nr>
/ŋm ŋn ŋg ŋk~nt͡ʃ/
<nm nn nc ns>
/pn ps~pʃ pt~pθ pl~bð/
<pn pt pl pr>
/km kn kp ks~kʃ kt~kθ kl~gð/
<cm cn cp ct cl cr>
/fn ft~ft͡ʃ fk>
<hn ht hc>
/sm sn sp sk/
<tm tn tp tc>
/xm~ʃm xn~ʃn xp~ʃp xt(ʃ)~ʃt(ʃ)/
<sm sn sp st>
/lm ln lp lk lh~lf ls~lʃ/
<lm ln lp lc lh ls>
/ɾm ɾn ɾp ɾk ɾh~ɾf ɾs~ɾʃ/
<rm rn rp rc rh rs>
Diphthongs:
/ai au oi eu/
/ʲa ʲo ʲu ʷa ʷe ʷi/
<ia io iu ua ue ui>
Word coda:
/n t s l ɾ~ɹ/
Last edited by DV82LECM on 09 Mar 2021 00:56, edited 98 times in total.
𖥑𖧨𖣫𖦺𖣦𖢋𖤼𖥃𖣔𖣋𖢅𖡹𖡨𖡶𖡦𖡧𖡚𖠨
Re: Crona (redux)
Allophony:
/t/ > [tʃ], before /i e/.
/ɬ/ > [θ], before /i e/.
/l/ > [ð], before /i e/.
/s/ > [ʃ], before /i e/.
/j/ > [ʒ], before /i e/.
/h/ > [f], before /u o/.
/w/ > [v], before /u o/.
/ɬ/ > [l], at syllable coda.
/l/ > [ɾ], at syllable coda.
/h ɬ s/ > [p t k], after nasals.
/p t k/ > voiced, after nasals.
Phonetic rules:
similar onset and coda is forbidden, except involving morphemes.
/m n ŋ l ɾ/ only preceded by /e o a/ at coda.
/ai oi au eu/ only in open syllables.
/au eu iu/ do not precede /m p h w j/.
/ai oi ui/ do not precede /k s w j/.
words end with anything but /i, u, iu, ui/.
/t/ > [tʃ], before /i e/.
/ɬ/ > [θ], before /i e/.
/l/ > [ð], before /i e/.
/s/ > [ʃ], before /i e/.
/j/ > [ʒ], before /i e/.
/h/ > [f], before /u o/.
/w/ > [v], before /u o/.
/ɬ/ > [l], at syllable coda.
/l/ > [ɾ], at syllable coda.
/h ɬ s/ > [p t k], after nasals.
/p t k/ > voiced, after nasals.
Phonetic rules:
similar onset and coda is forbidden, except involving morphemes.
/m n ŋ l ɾ/ only preceded by /e o a/ at coda.
/ai oi au eu/ only in open syllables.
/au eu iu/ do not precede /m p h w j/.
/ai oi ui/ do not precede /k s w j/.
words end with anything but /i, u, iu, ui/.
Last edited by DV82LECM on 09 Mar 2021 00:58, edited 31 times in total.
𖥑𖧨𖣫𖦺𖣦𖢋𖤼𖥃𖣔𖣋𖢅𖡹𖡨𖡶𖡦𖡧𖡚𖠨
Re: Crona (redux)
FYI, what you call "inalienable plurality" is usually called plurale tantum. Obviously, you can use every description that you likeDV82LECM wrote: ↑01 Apr 2019 01:20 I do want to post something new about this language: words for body parts. I've been considering something interesting: inalienable plurality. The root for the part of a body with symmetry will be, inherently, pluralized. As much, the genitive is unnecessary.
<euzi> "feet"
<yos euzi> "one feet (foot)"
Whatchall think? (STILL a work in progress.)
What would be the difference to a noun that doesn't have inalienable plurality? Is there a plural marker featured in euzi? In your last post, you featured some plural markers but none of them was -i or -zi.
Wipe the glass. This is the usual way to start, even in the days, day and night, only a happy one.
Re: Crona (redux)
Although it's not entirely clear, I think DV8 may be referring to the opposite of a plurale tantum.
A plurale tantum is morphologically plural (has plural marking) but semantically singular.
But there can also be nouns that are morphologically singular (has no plural marking) but semantically plural: if it occurs without number marking, it is assumed to refer to more than one object. To refer to the singular, you need a numeral ("one"), a counter ("a head of") or a morphological "singulative" on the noun.
English doesn't really have any clearcut examples of this. But one possible example is the word "veg" - "pass the veg" looks like a singular, but refers to multiple vegetables, and you need to say "a piece of veg" or the like to indicate the singular (or sometimes "one veg", meaning "one portion of veg"?).
I don't know what these nouns are called, but some languages do have them. In English, anything that might be this sort of noun is generally lumped in with either mass nouns or collectives. But they're not collectives, because they refer to the items directly, not to the group; and they're not mass nouns because they don't refer to uncountable masses. [semantically, for example, five different vegetables on the plate can be 'the veg', despite quite clearly being almost a paradigm example of countable objects].
They're generally found with nouns that either form mass-like collectives (herds, forests, etc) or that form proper groups, so feet would be a very plausible example for some language.
[Especially because the dual gives an obvious place of origin: if a language has a morphological dual only for proper pairs - twins, feet, eyes, etc - and that dual is eroded, you'd end up with the default form looking like a singular yet by default referring to the pair]
A plurale tantum is morphologically plural (has plural marking) but semantically singular.
But there can also be nouns that are morphologically singular (has no plural marking) but semantically plural: if it occurs without number marking, it is assumed to refer to more than one object. To refer to the singular, you need a numeral ("one"), a counter ("a head of") or a morphological "singulative" on the noun.
English doesn't really have any clearcut examples of this. But one possible example is the word "veg" - "pass the veg" looks like a singular, but refers to multiple vegetables, and you need to say "a piece of veg" or the like to indicate the singular (or sometimes "one veg", meaning "one portion of veg"?).
I don't know what these nouns are called, but some languages do have them. In English, anything that might be this sort of noun is generally lumped in with either mass nouns or collectives. But they're not collectives, because they refer to the items directly, not to the group; and they're not mass nouns because they don't refer to uncountable masses. [semantically, for example, five different vegetables on the plate can be 'the veg', despite quite clearly being almost a paradigm example of countable objects].
They're generally found with nouns that either form mass-like collectives (herds, forests, etc) or that form proper groups, so feet would be a very plausible example for some language.
[Especially because the dual gives an obvious place of origin: if a language has a morphological dual only for proper pairs - twins, feet, eyes, etc - and that dual is eroded, you'd end up with the default form looking like a singular yet by default referring to the pair]
Re: Crona (redux)
I'm STILL figuring stuff out. I get so stuck on phonetics with each of my projects. Eventually, I forget to MAKE proper grammars. However, to your question, <euse> (changed to match current phonetics) means "(all) feet." Any lowest part of an outer extremity. It is a collective noun.Iyionaku wrote: ↑20 Aug 2020 15:50FYI, what you call "inalienable plurality" is usually called plurale tantum. Obviously, you can use every description that you likeDV82LECM wrote: ↑01 Apr 2019 01:20 I do want to post something new about this language: words for body parts. I've been considering something interesting: inalienable plurality. The root for the part of a body with symmetry will be, inherently, pluralized. As much, the genitive is unnecessary.
<euzi> "feet"
<yos euzi> "one feet (foot)"
Whatchall think? (STILL a work in progress.)
What would be the difference to a noun that doesn't have inalienable plurality? Is there a plural marker featured in euzi? In your last post, you featured some plural markers but none of them was -i or -zi.
Last edited by DV82LECM on 20 Aug 2020 22:01, edited 1 time in total.
𖥑𖧨𖣫𖦺𖣦𖢋𖤼𖥃𖣔𖣋𖢅𖡹𖡨𖡶𖡦𖡧𖡚𖠨
- Creyeditor
- MVP
- Posts: 5091
- Joined: 14 Aug 2012 19:32
Re: Crona (redux)
I think singulative number might be the term you are looking for. The Wikipedia article is decent.Salmoneus wrote: ↑20 Aug 2020 16:55 Although it's not entirely clear, I think DV8 may be referring to the opposite of a plurale tantum.
A plurale tantum is morphologically plural (has plural marking) but semantically singular.
But there can also be nouns that are morphologically singular (has no plural marking) but semantically plural: if it occurs without number marking, it is assumed to refer to more than one object. To refer to the singular, you need a numeral ("one"), a counter ("a head of") or a morphological "singulative" on the noun.
English doesn't really have any clearcut examples of this. But one possible example is the word "veg" - "pass the veg" looks like a singular, but refers to multiple vegetables, and you need to say "a piece of veg" or the like to indicate the singular (or sometimes "one veg", meaning "one portion of veg"?).
I don't know what these nouns are called, but some languages do have them. In English, anything that might be this sort of noun is generally lumped in with either mass nouns or collectives. But they're not collectives, because they refer to the items directly, not to the group; and they're not mass nouns because they don't refer to uncountable masses. [semantically, for example, five different vegetables on the plate can be 'the veg', despite quite clearly being almost a paradigm example of countable objects].
They're generally found with nouns that either form mass-like collectives (herds, forests, etc) or that form proper groups, so feet would be a very plausible example for some language.
[Especially because the dual gives an obvious place of origin: if a language has a morphological dual only for proper pairs - twins, feet, eyes, etc - and that dual is eroded, you'd end up with the default form looking like a singular yet by default referring to the pair]
Creyeditor
"Thoughts are free."
Produce, Analyze, Manipulate
1 2 3 4 4
Ook & Omlűt & Nautli languages & Sperenjas
Papuan languages, Morphophonology, Lexical Semantics
"Thoughts are free."
Produce, Analyze, Manipulate
1 2 3 4 4
Ook & Omlűt & Nautli languages & Sperenjas
Papuan languages, Morphophonology, Lexical Semantics