Speedlang IX (Jan 17-19)

A forum for all topics related to constructed languages
User avatar
VaptuantaDoi
roman
roman
Posts: 1070
Joined: 18 Nov 2019 07:35

Re: Speedlang IX (Jan 17-19)

Post by VaptuantaDoi »

Sfeðraaʔn

I spent about three hours on Sfeðraaʔn in two sessions. It’s more developed than 90% of my conlangs which is great. I got most of my inspiration from that Skou language with no plosives, early IE languages with fossilised reduplicated forms in some aspects and the Simple English Wikipedia article on bricks. I even managed to translate a fifty-word text. It looks like a wierd combo of Mayan, Ancient Greek and a PNG language.

Complying with the constraints
Spoiler:
1. No /i o u/, also /ə ɔ ʊ/ [tick]
2a. No plosives other than /ʔ/, no velars, no front high vowel [tick]
2b. Contains /ð̞/ [tick]
3. [tick]
4. Ablaut [tick]
5. VOS [tick]
6. Mostly non-concatenative or isolating. But verbs are sort of agglutinative in the way they use ablaut and reduplication... sort of [tick]?
7. Two genders [tick]
8. Sure does [tick]
9. Only aspect distinction (which is a bit of a cheat but oh well) [tick]
10. Fossilised reduplication for aspect marking... I can claim it’s not productive because it only applies to the closed class of verbs. And in the pronouns a similar thing. [tick]
Phonology

Phonemic inventory
Plosives: /ʔ/
Fricatives: /ɸ s h/
Nasals: /m n/
Approximants: /ð̞ r/

Vowels: /ʊ e ə ɔ a/
(/ɸ ð̞ ʊ ɔ/ are written f ð u o)

Syllable structure
CCVʔR
Spoiler:
  • Onset may be any single consonant other than /ʔ/
  • Onset cluster may be 2 of /ɸ s h/, 2 of /m n/, any consonant other than /ʔ/ followed by /r/ or /nh/
  • Coda may be one of /n ð̞ r ʔ s/ or /ʔn ʔð̞ ʔr/
  • Verbs roots are always monosyllabic, nouns have two- to four-syllable roots
  • V may be a single or doubled vowel
Allophony
Spoiler:
  • /ʔ/ does not occur word-initially
  • Sequences of /nr nh/ become [nt ŋk]
  • /ʔɸ ʔr ʔh/ are [ʔp ʔt ʔk] or [p’ t’ k’]
  • /ʔn ʔð̞/ are [ʔn ʔd] or [n̰ ɗ]
  • Any sequence of /əC/ may be realised as a syllabic consonant
Ablaut
All verbal roots (verbs are a closed class) are monosyllables with the vowel /ə/. This can become any other vowel in subsequent mutations.

Verbs
Verbs form a relatively small closed class. There are only about 200 possible monosyllables, and of these about 150 are verbal roots. In the citation form (third person), the vowel is always /ə/ (this might be like the PIE Ø-form, where it's underlyingly zero). The conjugation modifies the verbs in two ways - through fossilised reduplication for aspect and ablaut for person, number and gender mutation.

Person/number/gender ablaut
The zero- / schwa- form is used for the third person singular and plural in the first gender, which are not distinguished.

sfəʔn “he/she/it/they move(s)”
əʔr “he/she/it/they fish(es)”

The first person singular uses -u-:

sfuʔn “I move”
uʔr “I fish”

The second person singular is -a-, first person plural is -o- and second person plural is -e-.

sfaʔn, sfoʔn, sfeʔn “you move, we move, y’all move”
aʔr, oʔr, eʔr “you fish, we fish, y’all fish”

In the second gender, the vowel is lengthened/doubled.

sfəəʔn, sfuuʔn, sfaaʔn, sfooʔn, sfeeʔn “he/she/it/they move(s), I move, you move, we move, y’all move”
əəʔr, uuʔr, aaʔr, ooʔr, eeʔr “he/she/it/they fish(es), I fish, you fish, we fish, y’all fish”

Aspectual reduplication
The two marked aspects (continuous and habitual) are formed by fossilised reduplication. The forms are usually predictable, but are not reduplicative. To form the reduplicated form, the onset of the verb root is doubled with /ə/ added between. The first consonant of the root then modifies, with /Ø ɸ s h m n ð̞ r/ alternating with /ʔ m ð̞ r h h h r/. With clusters, the first element is ignored in the reduplicated form in the root (e.g. sfuʔn → sfəmuʔn). Several irregular forms exist which I don’t have time to come up with. Other than this the ablaut stays the same (not modifying the /ə/ in the reduplicated form).
Spoiler:
ooʔr “we fish” → əʔooʔr
sfuʔn “I move” → sfəmuʔn
seʔð “y’all hover” → səðeʔð
has “you see” → həras
mee “y’all sit down” → məhee
nəʔ “catches lobsters” → nəhəʔ
ðuu “I speak” → həðuu
rəs “boils something” → rərəs
The habitual is doubly reduplicated with the same rules, except that the ablaut applies to the first syllable as well.
Spoiler:
ooʔr “we fish” → oʔəʔooʔr
sfuʔn “I move” → sfuʔəmuʔn
seʔð “y’all hover” → sesəðeʔð
has “you see” → hahəras
etc.
Nouns
Nouns have two genders in a semantic~formal thing. These can be determined 100% of the time from the noun root; if it has a short vowel in the final syllable, it’s gender one and if it has a long vowel it’s gender two. These are most of the time based on size, deriving from an earlier big (long vowel) vs. small (short vowel) gender category. Except for people, it’s generally reversed; tall people are in gender one and short people are in gender two, unless they aren’t. This most likely derives from ironic nicknaming... (nickgendering?) where people jokingly referred to short people as if they were tall and vice versa. This is also seen in some English nicknames. Not all nouns are semantically in the right gender, but the final vowel is always correct. Nouns can be put in both genders; e.g. moðuʔn “pebble,” moðuuʔn “boulder.” This isn’t very prevalent, as the two forms can (very) easily be confused. People’s names always fit their gender, although the gender can change; this is a matter of other people calling them say ðermii instead of ðermi until it catches on. The first person pronoun matches the speaker’s name.
Nouns don’t do much apart from combining with prepositions, which I’ll hopefully get to when I do syntax. In glossing, gender one is “ɢɪ” and gender two is “ɢɪɪ.” Adjectives also show gender with vowel length of final syllable.

Pronouns
Sfeðraaʔn distinguishes gender in all the pronouns as well. There is no number distinction in the third person because I didn’t make enough vowels for the verb ablaut. ɢɪ and ɢɪɪ forms are unrelated but still have short/long distinction. The singular forms are one syllable and the plurals are two syllables which are reduplications of no-longer-existing unreduplicated forms (*suʔ, *hfeem, *reʔð, *hooʔ) , suggesting that some pronouns were changed quite a lot.
Spoiler:
1sg.ɢɪ. fho
1sg.ɢɪɪ. nhəəʔ
2sg.ɢɪ. nmuð
2sg.ɢɪɪ. sree
3.ɢɪ. ə
3.ɢɪɪ. uu
1pl.ɢɪ. səruʔ
1pl.ɢɪɪ. hfəmeem
2pl.ɢɪ. rəreʔð
2pl.ɢɪɪ. hərooʔ
They have two possessive forms which are historically derived through reduplication. The inalienable possessive was formed similarly to the verbal reduplication but with the first vowel retained in the ɢɪ forms; the resulting forms are not all regular due to me changing them so reduplication isn’t productive.
Spoiler:
1sg.ɢɪ. fhorə
1sg.ɢɪɪ. nhərooʔ
2sg.ɢɪ. nmuhəð
2sg.ɢɪɪ. srəree
3.ɢɪ. əʔə
3.ɢɪɪ. əʔuu
1pl.ɢɪ. surərəʔ
1pl.ɢɪɪ. hfənmeem
2pl.ɢɪ. sreʔð
2pl.ɢɪɪ. hrooʔ
The alienable possessive forms are the same as the possessive but with the first syllable onset removed.
Spoiler:
1sg.ɢɪ. orə
1sg.ɢɪɪ. ərooʔ
2sg.ɢɪ. uhəð
2sg.ɢɪɪ. əree
3.ɢɪ. əʔə
3.ɢɪɪ. əʔuu
1pl.ɢɪ. urərəʔ
1pl.ɢɪɪ. ənmeem
2pl.ɢɪ. eʔð
2pl.ɢɪɪ. ooʔ
Syntax
This is the tricky part. I usually don’t get this far in conlangs because I concentrate too much on phonology.

Possession in nouns
Nouns also have an alienable / inalienable distinction. These are marked with two postpositions, alienable se and inalienable roð. These also distinguish the gender of the possessor (i.e. se vs. see, roð vs. rooð. The possessee comes first, followed by the possessor and finally the postposition.

moðuuʔn mnemuʔ see
boulder.ɢɪɪ sand.ɢɪɪ poss.alien.ɢɪɪ
“The sand attached to the boulder.”

moðuʔn mnemuuʔ roð
pebble.ɢɪ sand.ɢɪɪ poss.inalien.ɢɪ
“The sand owned by the pebble.”

In addition, alienable possession can be shown with a simple compound of possessor + possessed.

ðror moðuuʔn
small.dog.ɢɪ boulder.ɢɪɪ
“The small dog’s boulder.”

Other postpositions all distinguish gender with vowel length. All of them apart from the possessives are two syllables.

Noun phrase
Noun phrases are generally head followed by modifier.

moðuuʔn unmnooð
boulder.ɢɪɪ grey.ɢɪɪ
“Grey boulder”

Sentences
The default word order is VOS, with indirect objects being unmarked in initial position.

hus moðuʔn fho
/hʊs mɔð̞ʊʔn ɸhɔ/
see.1sg.ɢɪ pebble.ɢɪ 1sg.ɢɪ
“I see a pebble”

sree sfəʔəməʔn moðuʔn Ðermi
/sree sɸəʔəməʔn mɔð̞ʊʔn ð̞ermi/
2sg.ɢɪɪ HAB-move.3.ɢɪ pebble.ɢɪ З
“Ðermi usually gives the pebbles to you.”

Dependent clauses are formed identically

hsərað: sree sfəʔn moðuʔn Ðermi
/hsərað̞ || sree sɸəʔn mɔð̞ʊʔn ð̞ermi/
cont.-be.good.2sg.ɢɪ: 2sg.ɢɪɪ move.3.ɢɪ pebble.ɢɪ З
“(If) you are being well-behaved, Ðermi will give the pebbles to you.”

Relative clauses use the pronoun faʔ or faaʔ as well as some other ones.

sree sfəəʔn moðuʔn: hsərərəəð: ðroor
you.ɢɪɪ move.3.ɢɪɪ pebble.ɢɪ || hab-be.good.3sg.ɢɪɪ || big.dog.ɢɪɪ
“The big dog which is always good will give the pebbles to you.”

Short sample text
I’ve decided to attempt to translate a short, very simple text into Sfeðraaʔn. I’ll be making stuff up as I go along, hopefully something comes out.

Original text: “A brick is a man-made building material used to make walls and make places to walk. It is a single unit of a kneaded clay-bearing soil, sand and lime, or concrete material, fire-hardened or air-dried, used in masonry construction. Bricks are made mostly of clay. They are put into molds or cut with wires, and then baked in an oven. The color of a brick depends on the clay from which it was made.”

Gloss:
cont-be.man.made.3.ɢɪ brick.ɢɪ. || 3.ɢɪ with.ɢɪ hab-build-3ɢɪ wall.ɢɪɪ ground.ɢɪɪ and.ɢɪɪ person.ɢɪ || be.a.lump.of.3.ɢɪ dirt.ɢɪɪ clayey.ɢɪɪ 3.ɢɪ | rub.3.ɢɪɪ | sand.ɢɪɪ limestone.ɢɪɪ and concrete.ɢɪɪ or.ɢɪɪ || hab.-cook.3.ɢɪɪ hab.-cause.to.become.3.ɢɪɪ or.ɢɪɪ 3.ɢɪ. || 3.ɢɪ with.ɢɪ hab-build-3ɢɪɪ brick.ɢɪ || hab.-have.3.ɢɪ clay.ɢɪɪ big.ɢɪɪ brick.ɢɪ || box.ɢɪɪ in.ɢɪɪ string.ɢɪ with.ɢɪ | hab.-break.3.ɢɪɪ 3.ɢɪ. || future.ɢɪɪ in.ɢɪɪ oven.ɢɪ in.ɢɪ | hab.-cook.3.ɢɪɪ 3.ɢɪ || from.ɢɪɪ build-3.ɢɪ | hab.-move.3ɢɪɪ colour.ɢɪɪ 3.ɢɪɪ.inalien.poss clay.ɢɪɪ || end ||

Nrərən hsufəfhoʔ. Ə renroʔð frərərə ðasheen mreshaʔaan usoor hunheð. Mən ðromənhəə hromfusaar ə: rəər: mnemuuʔ remsruun usoor honhreʔuu mefaa. Hərərəəʔ məhəhəəʔ mefaa ə. Ə renroʔð frərərəə hsufəfhoʔ. Hərərəð hromfuus funðuuʔ hsufəfhoʔ. Eðnruuʔð əməəʔ ronðaðeʔ renroʔð: frərərəəs ə. Fruðəʔaa əməəʔ uʔenðus əməʔ: hərərəəʔ ə. Neʔaas frə: sfəʔəməəʔn aranfee əʔuu hromfuus. Məheʔ.

Semi-literal translation:
Spoiler:
Brick is man-made. With him, people build walls and paths. He is a conglomeration of clayey soil: which is rubbed: and sand and lime or concrete. People cook him or dry him. With him, people build bricks. Bricks have much clay. Into box, with string, they divide him. In the afterwards in an oven they cook him. From which he was made: clay moves the colour of him. The end.
What a wonderful piece of prose.
Spoiler:
Something cool I discovered - for a sort of reflexive / null-subject construction, you can just make the subject the opposite gender to the object, then drop the subject. Then the speaker knows that the object can’t be the subject because it doesn’t agree in gender with the verb. For example, frərərəəs ə above has to mean “he is broken,” while frərərəəs əə would mean “he breaks” and frərərəs ə ə woulxd mean “he breaks him.” So that’s how reflexives are handled. (Probably ANADEW but I like it)
User avatar
spanick
roman
roman
Posts: 1336
Joined: 11 May 2017 01:47
Location: California

Re: Speedlang IX (Jan 17-19)

Post by spanick »

I'm really impressed with the speedlangs so far! I'm gonna hold off on commenting until tomorrow in case others add their speedlangs.

Yaðak

This is pretty short and sketchy, but I’m pretty happy and surprised by the results. It’s so sketchy because I only started today and have probably worked for a maximum of 2-3 hours on it total. I haven’t bothered with a romanization, so everything is given in IPA.

Phonology

/p t d k g/
/f θ ð x/
/m n/
/r/
/ʋ j/

/i y e o a/

Phonotactics
The maximum syllable structure is CRV(C/N). All words must be closed.

Syntax
Yaðak is a mostly isolating, rigidly VSO language.

Nouns
Nouns are either animate or inanimate. Animate nouns include all humans, vertebrate animals except fish, body parts, and supernatural beings. Inanimates include everything else. There is no special marking to distinguish the genders.

Nouns are marked for plurality by a system of final consonant mutation:
p > f
t > θ
d > ð
k > x
g > j
f > ʋ
θ > ð
ð > j
x > j
m > ʋ

Final /n r ʋ j/ do not themselves undergo mutation and thus these words remain in marked.

There is also a closed class of words which have their plural marked by reduplication of the onset, the former dual marker.

Ex:
hok ‘eye’ > hojok ‘eyes’

There are also a small, closed class of nouns which were formed by reduplication.

Ex:
fak ‘knife’ > faʋak ‘scissors’
but fag ‘knives’

Possession
Possession can be alienable or inalienable. Only animate nouns have inalienable possession and they can only inalienably possess other animate nouns. This is indicated by simple juxtaposition with the possessum preceding the possessor.

Ex:
xojok gʋað
eye.PL man
‘the man’s eyes’

However, alienable possession is indicated by marking the possessum in the construct state -ak

Ex:
fagak gʋað
knife-CON man

This pattern is also followed when both the possessor and possessum are inanimate

Ex:
braθag ðjot
leaf-CON.PL tree
‘the tree’s leaves’

(Note that the plural consonant mutation affects the final consonant of the affix. This is a remnant from when the language was more heavily agglutinative and the plural marker came after case marking.)

Pronouns
Pronouns are he only group still marked for case as well as number. This is op

Singular/Dual/Plural - Subject
1 jek/jejek/jeg
2 ðox/ðojox/ðoj
3 ʋit/—/ʋiθ

Singular/Plural - Oblique
1 jegem/jegeʋ
2 ðojem/ðojeʋ
3 ʋiθem/ʋiθeʋ

Singilar/Plural -Possessive
1 jegað/jegaj
2 ðojað/ðojej
3 ʋiθað/ʋiθaj

Possessive pronouns may only be used by animate referents and only for inalienable possession.

Ex:
xojok ʋiθað
eye.PL 3P-POS.PL
‘his eyes’

Verbs

Verbs are not marked to agree with their subjects nor for tense or aspect. In simple constructions, tense is inferred from context or adverbials. When tense is made explicit, it is done through periphrastic constructions

Finite verbs are always marked with -on.

Ex:
hygon gʋað ðjot
see-FIN man tree
the man sees the tree

There is a small class of auxiliary verbs used in the production of periphrastic tenses and aspect:
jax ‘go’ - future
kvak ‘make, do’ - past

These periphrastic constructions are made by marking the auxiliary with the finite marker -on. The lexical verb is then moved to the object position and is treated as a noun. If the verb is transitive, the original object is preceded by ka ‘at.’

Ex:
jajon gʋað hyk ka ðjot
go-FIN man see at tree
‘The man will see the tree.’

Passives
Passives are formed similarly to the above periphrastic tenses except that the auxiliary verb used is copula byj; the object is promoted to the subject position; and the agent is preceded by the preposition my ‘of, from.’

Ex:
byjon ðjot hyk my gʋað
COP-FIN tree see of man
‘The tree is seen by the man.’

Adjectives

Attributive adjectives precede their head nouns and are marked with -an.This is he old stative verb marker (therefore related to -on) but has since been generalized to all adjectives. They do not agree in number to their head nouns.

Ex.
fjeran ðjot
green-ADJ tree
‘green tree’

Predicative adjectives remain unmarked.

Ex:
byjon ðjot grem
COO-FIN tree green
‘The tree is green.’
User avatar
VaptuantaDoi
roman
roman
Posts: 1070
Joined: 18 Nov 2019 07:35

Re: Speedlang IX (Jan 17-19)

Post by VaptuantaDoi »

spanick wrote: 20 Jan 2020 05:11 Nouns
Nouns are either animate or inanimate. Animate nouns include all humans, vertebrate animals except fish, body parts, and supernatural beings. Inanimates include everything else. There is no special marking to distinguish the genders.
I like your language (which has some surprising similarities to my own), but I have one minor nitpick with the gender system. If they're not distinguished on nouns, and pronouns don't seem to have gender, where are they marked?
User avatar
spanick
roman
roman
Posts: 1336
Joined: 11 May 2017 01:47
Location: California

Re: Speedlang IX (Jan 17-19)

Post by spanick »

VaptuantaDoi wrote: 20 Jan 2020 05:46
spanick wrote: 20 Jan 2020 05:11 Nouns
Nouns are either animate or inanimate. Animate nouns include all humans, vertebrate animals except fish, body parts, and supernatural beings. Inanimates include everything else. There is no special marking to distinguish the genders.
I like your language (which has some surprising similarities to my own), but I have one minor nitpick with the gender system. If they're not distinguished on nouns, and pronouns don't seem to have gender, where are they marked?
Thanks. I’ve noticed that several ideas I had were also done by others. Some of the restraints quite specific and seem to have guided most of us in a similar direction.

As for nouns, they’re gendered because they behave differently with regards to possession. Animate nouns can have inalienable possession and use possessive pronouns, while inanimate nouns don’t have inalienable possession and can’t use possessive pronouns.
User avatar
VaptuantaDoi
roman
roman
Posts: 1070
Joined: 18 Nov 2019 07:35

Re: Speedlang IX (Jan 17-19)

Post by VaptuantaDoi »

spanick wrote: 20 Jan 2020 06:36
VaptuantaDoi wrote: 20 Jan 2020 05:46
spanick wrote: 20 Jan 2020 05:11 Nouns
Nouns are either animate or inanimate. Animate nouns include all humans, vertebrate animals except fish, body parts, and supernatural beings. Inanimates include everything else. There is no special marking to distinguish the genders.
I like your language (which has some surprising similarities to my own), but I have one minor nitpick with the gender system. If they're not distinguished on nouns, and pronouns don't seem to have gender, where are they marked?
Thanks. I’ve noticed that several ideas I had were also done by others. Some of the restraints quite specific and seem to have guided most of us in a similar direction.

As for nouns, they’re gendered because they behave differently with regards to possession. Animate nouns can have inalienable possession and use possessive pronouns, while inanimate nouns don’t have inalienable possession and can’t use possessive pronouns.
Ah ok. I misread that section, although it does seem a very marginal gender distinction. I'm not sure about the technical definition, but according to ALC, gender is "defined by agreement with other items," which wikipedia seems to use too. Assuming this is correct, then distinguishing them only in terms of possession sounds more like a "semantic gender" than a "grammatical gender." It depends on whether a native speaker would think that using the wrong possessive form was incorrect (i.e. it's wrong because it doesn't apply to the rules of grammar) or just nonsensical (it's wrong because it doesn't apply to the rules of pragmatics/semantics) . It's a very interesting way of including gender anyway.
User avatar
Dormouse559
moderator
moderator
Posts: 2945
Joined: 10 Nov 2012 20:52
Location: California

Re: Speedlang IX (Jan 17-19)

Post by Dormouse559 »

Lësha Bek

Welcome to Lësha Bek, otherwise known as All the bits and pieces that have been floating around in my head lately [:P] It's split-ergative. It has height-based vowel harmony. Verbs change their harmonic group as a form of gender agreement. Fossilized instrumentals are treated as adverbs. It's new. It's now.

I was going to add a sample text, but I was so tired that I accidentally deleted half my translation. It'll have to wait until sometime tomorrow. I look forward to seeing what everyone else has come up with, too … once I've gotten some sleep. [>_<]

EDIT: I just finished the translation. You can check it out at the end of the post.

Restraints
Spoiler:
Phonological Restraints (see "Phonology" for details)

1. Your language must not use the five vowel system of /i e a o u/. (NB: It may use any of those vowels, just not only those five)
The language has seven monophthongs: /i e a ɨ ə u o/.

2a. Your language's phonological inventory must include a gap.
There is a voicing contrast in plosives and nasals, but it lacks /g/ and /ŋ̊/.

2b. Your language's phonological inventory must include a typologically rare phoneme.
The language has voiceless nasals. PHOIBLE lists just 46 entries with phonemic /m̥/ and /n̥/.

3. Your phonotactics must allow for consonant clusters and closed syllables.
The syllable structure is (C)V(C), and any string of two consonants is permitted word-medially.

4. Phonological changes (i.e. ablaut, consonant mutation, etc.) must be included and be grammatical.
Vowel harmony indicates gender agreement. (see "Verbs")

Morpho-Syntax Restraints

5. Your language should avoid SVO and SOV word orders.
The default word order is VOS. (see "Syntax")

6. Your language should not be agglutinative.
Lësha Bek displays mainly fusional and isolating tendencies in its grammar.

7. Your language must incorporate some form of grammatical gender.
Animate and inanimate genders are distinguished. They are marked on verbs, pronouns and adjectives. (see respective sections)

8. Your language must distinguish between alienable and inalienable possession.
The language distinguishes between inalienable, permanant alienable and temporary alienable possession. (see "Possession")

9. Lexical verbs may not be directly marked for grammatical tense.
Tense is marked with a stand-alone particle. (see "Verbs" -> "Marking Tense")

10. Reduplication should be an evident historical, but no longer productive, system.
There's a closed set of adverbs formed through reduplication. They appear to be the remnants of an instrumental/locative construction. (see "Adverbs")

Phonology

Phoneme Inventory and Romanization:

/m̥ m n̥ n ŋ/ <mh m nh n g>
/p b t d k/ <p b t d k>
/f v s z ʃ ʒ/ <f v s z sh zh>
/l/ <l>
/j w/ <y w>

/i ɨ u/ <i ï u>
/e ə o/ <e ë o>
/a/ <a>

/eː oː/ <ee oo>
/aː/ <aa>

/i̯iː i̯uː/ <ii iuu>
/i̯a(ː) u̯a(ː)/ <ia(a) ua(a)>

/i̯iː/ surfaces as [iː].


Syllable Structure and Prosody:

(C)V(C)

Where V is any of the vowel segments listed above.

A string of two consonants is permitted word-medially, with the first consonant assimilating to the voicing of the second one. A consonant cluster is always preceded by a long vowel. Voiced plosives and fricatives devoice word-finally. Voiceless nasals voice word-finally.

/ɨ ə/ are the only vowels that can precede a voiceless nasal. /e o/ never appear in the first syllable of a word that is not a noun or verb (/eː oː/ can, though).

Stress is weight-based and non-phonemic. It falls on the first heavy syllable in a word or, if there are no heavy syllables, the final syllable. When a word with final stress precedes a single-syllable word, the monosyllable loses stress.


Vowel Harmony:

Lësha Bek has a system of height-based vowel harmony. A word can only contain vowels from the high group /i ɨ u/ or the mid group /e ə o/. /a/ can appear with vowels of either group, but when it is the first vowel in a word it triggers mid harmony. Most vowels and diphthongs form alternating pairs that are relevant to the grammar. When citing a form where the alternation is relevant (usually a verb or a suffix), I refer to the pairs with capital letters: I = i/e, Ï = ɨ/ə, U = u/o, IA = i̯a/a, II = i̯iː/eː, IUU = i̯uː/oː.

For example, the vowels in verbs are underspecified for height, so I cite the verb meaning "fall" as bÏnhUk. It can surface as bïnhuk /bɨ.n̥uk/ or bënhok /bə.n̥ok/.


Syntax

The basic word order is VOS. Adverbs and predicative adjectives go before the verb or adjective they modify. Attributive adjectives and relative clauses follow the noun. Tense particles go after the subject of a transitive clause, or the agent of an intrasitive clause. The language uses prepositions, and prepositional phrases by default go after the core arguments.


Nouns

Nouns are largely invariable. They have two genders: animate and inanimate. While gender assignment correlates strongly with the meaning of a noun, the noun's form is the most consistent gender indicator. Animate nouns have high harmonic vowels (e.g. miuula /muː.la/ "woman", sidi /si.di/ "cow"), while inanimate nouns have mid harmonic vowels (e.g. lësha /lə.ʃa/ "language", bot /bot/ "mouth").

Definiteness is not marked, but the direct object can be moved after the subject to indicate it is new to the discourse, which often corresponds to indefinite.


Verbs

Verbs display ergative-absolutive alignment; they agree in gender with the object of a transitive clause or the agent of an intransitive clause. They do this by matching the harmonic group of the object/agent. I respresent this change in glosses with a backslash followed by H for high harmony and M for mid harmony.

Many verbs, as in these examples, are understood to be past tense, in the absence of explicit tense marking.

Examples:

bÏnhUk "to fall"

1a)
Bïnhuk shiap.
/bɨ.n̥uk ʃi̯ap/
bÏnhUk\H shiap
fall\AN man
The man fell.

1b)
Bënhok tooza.
/bə.n̥ok toː.za/
bÏnhUk\M tooza
fall\INAN book
The book fell.

In 1a, shiap "man" is an animate noun with high harmony. Since it is the agent of the clause, the verb bÏnhUk agrees by also taking high harmony. In 1b, the verb takes mid harmony because tooza "book" is an inanimate noun with mid harmony.


kIUUdmI "to see"

2a)
Kiuudmi shiap miuula.
/ki̯uːd.mi ʃi̯ap mi̯uː.la/
kIUUdmI\H shiap miuula
see\AN man woman
The woman saw the man.

2b)
Koodme tooza miuula.
/koːd.me toː.za mi̯uː.la/
kIUUdmI\M tooza miuula
see\INAN book woman
The woman saw the book.

Here, the sentences are transitive, so the verb kIUUdmI agrees with the object. In 2a, that's animate/high shiap "man", and in 2b it's inanimate/mid tooza "book".


Marking Tense:

Dynamic verbs, as well as verbs of perception, are usually understood to be past tense, unless explicitly indicated otherwise. Lësha Bek uses a particle after the subject/agent to specify tense. The most common is sa, which is non-past.

3)
Bïnhuk shiap sa.
/bɨ.n̥uk ʃi̯ap sa/
bÏnhUk\H shiap sa
fall\AN man NPST

Sentence 3 is a slightly modified version of 1a. It can be translated in multiple ways, including "The man falls", "The man is falling" and "The man will fall".

Stative verbs are understood to be non-past without the particle. The most common is sIAf, which means "stand" and is also used as a locative copula.

4)
Siaf shiap la zëvot.
/si̯af ʃi̯ap la zə.vot/
sIAf\H shiap la zëvot
be\AN man LOC house
The man is at the house.


Voice Marking and Valency:

Lësha Bek has a few strategies for changing a verb's valency. There are some etymological pairs, like kUdIm "see (intransitive)" and KIUUdmI "see (transitive)". The most systematic method is through the antipassive voice, which is represented with the particle mhee. Voice particles directly follow any tense particle. The former object is either deleted or demoted to a prepositional phrase headed by the instrumental preposition maakshe. The subject becomes absolutive if it was formerly ergative; no change if it was nominative. The verb now agrees with the subject.

The antipassive is most used for de-emphasizing the object of a verb, especially if its identity isn't known or it's considered unimportant. It doesn't have much use in relativization, since the constraints on this are nominative-accusative. It also isn't particularly used for coordinating clauses; it's typically just quicker to restate shared arguments.

Compare the following active and antipassive sentences:

5a)
Shebok tooza miuula.
/ʃe.bok toː.za mi̯uː.la/
shIbUk\M tooza miuula
read\INAN book woman
The woman read the book.

5b)
Shibuk miuula mhee (maakshe tooza).
/ʃi.buk mi̯uː.la m̥eː (maːk.ʃe toː.za)/
shIbUk\H miuula mhee (maakshe tooza)
read\AN woman ANTIP (INS book)
The woman read (the book).

This also works in an analogous nominative-accusative sentence:

5c)
Shebok tooza oot.
/ʃe.bok toː.za oːt/
shIbUk\M tooza oot
read\INAN book 1S.NOM
I read the book.

5d)
Shibuk oot mhee (maakshe tooza).
/ʃi.buk oːt m̥eː (maːk.ʃe toː.za)/
shIbUk\H oot mhee (maakshe tooza)
read\AN 1S.NOM ANTIP (INS book)
I read (the book).


There is also the passive voice, which is mainly of use for relativizing the object of a clause (see "Adjectives and Relative Clauses" for details on relativization). It is represented by the particle sha. The old subject is deleted or demoted to a maakshe phrase. The object becomes nominative if it was formerly accusative; no change if it was absolutive. The verb agreement doesn't change.

6a)
Shebok tooza oot.
/ʃe.bok toː.za oːt/
shIbUk\M book oot
read\INAN book 1S.NOM
I read the book.

6b)
tooza shebok sha (maakshe ka)
/toː.za ʃe.bok ʃa (maːk.ʃe ka)/
tooza shIbUk\M sha (maakshe ka)
book read\INAN PAS (INS 1S.OBL)
the book that was read (by me) (or: the book that I read)


Pronouns

Pronouns display ergative-absolutive alignment, except when one of the core arguments is a speech participant, when they switch to nominative-accusative. There are dedicated nominative and accusative pronouns; and the ergative is indicated with multipurpose "oblique" pronouns. The absolutive has no corresponding pronouns because their function is performed by verbal agreement. As such, Lësha Bek could be called non-pro-drop, because it doesn't omit any pronouns it does have.

Nominative:
1S - oot
2S - meet
3S.AN - eet
3S.INAN - aat

Accusative:
1S - ik
2S - im
3S.AN - fuya
3S.INAN - foya

The third-person singular accusatives are often dropped.

Oblique/Ergative
1S - ka
2S - mee
3S.AN - is
3S.INAN - as

As stated above, oblique pronouns replace ergative arguments. They also are used after prepositions.

Examples:

Compare the following sentence to 1a:

7)
Bïnhuk.
/bɨ.n̥uk/
bÏnhUk\H
fall\AN
He [the man] fell.

Shiap "man" is an absolutive argument in 1a, so to replace it, all one needs to do is drop the noun.


Consider these variations on 2a:

8a)
Kiuudmi miuula.
/ki̯uːd.mi mi̯uː.la/
kIUUdmI\H miuula
see\AN woman
The woman saw him [the man].

8b)
Kiuudmi shiap is.
/ki̯uːd.mi ʃi̯ap is/
kIUUdmI\H shiap is
see\AN man 3S.AN.ERG
She [the woman] saw the man.

8c)
Kiuudmi is.
/ki̯uːd.mi is/
kIUUdmI\H is
see\AN 3S.AN.ERG
She saw him.

In 8a, one knows that there is an implied pronominal object because kIUUdmI "see" is obligatorily transitive and Lësha Bek is not pro-drop. So the pronominal interpretation is the only grammatical choice. 6b sees miuula "woman" replaced by the ergative pronoun is. Finally, 6c combines both changes.


Finally, here are examples of the nominative-accusative alignment triggered when at least one core argument is a speech participant:

9a)
Kiuudmi ik miuula.
/ki̯uːd.mi ik mi̯uː.la/
kIUUdmI\H ik miuula
see\AN 1S.ACC woman
The woman saw me.

9b)
Kiuudmi ik eet.
/ki̯uːd.mi ik eːt/
kIUUdmI\H ik eet
see\AN 1S.ACC 3S.AN.NOM
She saw me.

9c)
Kiuudmi miuula oot.
/ki̯uːd.mi muː.la oːt/
kIUUdmI\H miuula oot
see\AN woman 1S.NOM
I saw the woman.

9d)
Kiuudmi (fuya) oot
/ki̯uːd.mi (fu.ja) oːt/
kIUUdmI\H (fuya) oot
see\AN (3S.AN.ACC) 1S.NOM
I saw her.


Combining Nominatives With Sa:

The nominative pronouns combine with sa, when it follows them in the same clause:

oot + sa = oozva
meet + sa = meezva
eet + sa = eezva
aat + sa = aazva

For example:

10)
Kiuudmi ik eezva.
/ki̯uːd.mi ik eːz.va/
kIUUdmI\H ik eet-sa
see\AN 1S.ACC 3S.AN.NOM-PRS
She sees me.


Adjectives and Relative Clauses

Adjectives:

Adjectival meanings are typically expressed with verb phrases. There is a small set of true adjectives describing qualities like size, age and goodness. When attributive, true adjectives go directly after the noun and don't agree with it in gender. When predicative, they are put into a construction with the copula shUn and agree in gender by adding suffixes.

Examples:

pan "big"
AN: pana, INAN: pëto

11a)
tooza pan
/toː.za pan/
tooza pan
book big
big book

11b)
sidi pan
/si.di pan/
sidi pan
cow big
big cow

11c)
Pëto shon tooza.
/pə.to ʃon toː.za/
pan-tU shUn\M tooza
big-INAN be\INAN book
The book is big.

11d)
Pana shun sidi.
/pa.na ʃun si.di/
pan-a shUn\H tooza
big-AN be\AN cow
The cow is big.


Relative Clauses:

Only the subject/agent of a clause can be relativized. A relative clause is marked syntactically by placing the clause after its antecedent, following any true adjectives. The clause looks like a normal independent clause, except for the lack of the relativized subject.

12a)
tooza pan [bënhok]
/toː.za pan bə.n̥ok/
tooza pan [bÏnhUk\M]
book big [fall\INAN]
the big book [that fell]

12b)
Koodme tooza [bënhok] miuula.
/koːd.me toː.za bə.n̥ok mi̯uː.la/
kIUUdmI\M tooza [bÏnhUk\M] woman
see\INAN book fall\INAN woman
The woman saw the book [that fell].

If an object is modified by a long or complex relative clause, it tends to be moved after the subject, giving VSO word order.

12b)
Koodme miuula tooza [bënhok la zëvot pan].
/koːd.me mi̯uː.la toː.za bə.n̥ok la zə.vot pan/
kIUUdmI\M woman tooza [bÏnhUk\M la zëvot pan]
see\INAN woman book [fall\INAN in house big]
The woman saw the book that fell in the big house.

The working title of the language, Lësha Bek is an example of using relative clauses to express adjectival meanings:

13)
lësha bek
/lə.ʃa bek/
lësha bIk\M
language be_fast\INAN
fast language (i.e. speedlang)


Adverbs and Subordination

True adverbs are a closed class. Many of them are relatively transparent reduplicated forms of nouns, though sound changes and semantic shift have made them somewhat harder to predict (e.g. bot "mouth" vs. bëbot "with the mouth; forward; in front"). These reduplicated adverbs appear to be what's left of an old instrumental/locative construction. They serve a derivational purpose and are sometimes used to differentiate verbs made ambiguous by sound changes (mÏtUk "eat" or "throw" -> bëbot mÏtUk "eat [with the mouth]" and dënhëme mÏtUk "throw [with the hand]").

14a)
Bëbot mëtok nheda oot.
/bə.bot mə.tok n̥e.da oːt/
bëbot mÏtUk\M nheda oot
mouth eat\INAN food 1S.NOM
I ate the food.

14b)
Dënhëme mëtok nheda oot.
/də.n̥ə.me mə.tok n̥e.da oːt/
dënhëme mÏtUk\M nheda oot
hand throw\INAN food 1S.NOM
I threw the food.

Other adverbial functions are performed by prepositional phrases, or by putting a verb phrase followed by the subordinating particle maa at the beginning of the clause, before true adverbs. The verbs in this case often agree with the subject of the main clause.

14c)
Bik maa bëbot mëtok nheda oot.
/bik maː bə.bot mə.tok n̥e.da oːt/
bIk\H maa bëbot mÏtUk\M nheda oot
be_fast\AN ADVZ mouth eat\INAN food 1S.NOM
I ate the food quickly. / I ate the food while I was being quick.


Possession

Possession is expressed using a few of the reduplicated adverbs in an abbreviation of a locative phrase. Lësha Bek distinguishes inalienable possession from two types of alienable possession: permanent (current possession not inherent to the possessor but which they expect to have for a long time) and temporary (current possession which the possessor won't have for long, or a past possession).

Temporary alienable possession is particularly used for things associated with a particular person. If you're painting Tom Sawyer's aunt's fence with your friends, and Tom hands out paintbrushes, you could talk about "your" paintbrush with the temporary alienable. It is associated with you, but once the task at hand is done, you will give it back to Tom.

The same category is also used for past possessions. For example, your dwelling place normally gets the permanent alienable, but once you move out, it gets referred to with temporary alienable.

Predicative Possession:

One of the adverbs këkop "inalienable", sësako "permanent alienable" or dënhëme "temporary alienable" is used to introduce the clause. Next comes the possessum, which is treated as the absolutive agent of an intransitive verb; because possessives are abbreviated, this isn't obvious on the surface level. The possessor comes last in its oblique form.

15a)
Dënhëme tooza ka.
/də.n̥ə.me toː.za ka/
dënhëme tooza ka
ALIEN.TEMP book 1S.ERG
The book is mine (for the moment).

15b)
Sësako tooza ka.
/sə.sa.ko toː.za ka/
sësako tooza ka
ALIEN.PERM book 1S.ERG
The book is mine.

15c)
This one sounds weird, but for the sake of completeness:
Këkop bot ka.
/kə.kop bot ka/
këkop bot ka
INAL mouth 1S.ERG
The mouth is mine.


Attributive Possession:

Attributive possession is formed by simply relativizing the predicative clause. Compare the following phrases to sentences 15a-c above.

16a)
tooza dënhëme ka
/toː.za də.n̥ə.me ka/
tooza dënhëme ka
book ALIEN.TEMP 1S.ERG
my book (temporarily)

16b)
tooza sësako ka
/toː.za sə.sa.ko ka/
tooza sësako ka
book ALIEN.PERM 1S.ERG
my book

16c)
bot këkop ka.
/bot kə.kop ka/
bot këkop ka
mouth INAL 1S.ERG
my mouth



EDIT: Sample Text

Here's a translation of The Cat and the Fish.

Miuu lua Zidi

Siaf miuu lo. Gitia shun da bidim. Bëmhan vuk maa dënhëme koo lan is! Zup kaavme is nheda maa bëmhan shisaf. Kaavme is uga dolo da koodme is bëlot. Ash bëbot shi mëtok bëlot miuu sa! Kaavme nheda is taam fede da kiuudmi is bishukiis. Ash bëbot shi mïtuk bishukiis miuu sa! Kaavme nheda is la zëvot da koodme is maam lan zhoosko da saf la paga. Shon zidi! Da bëbot mïtuk zidi maa iavam! Zup gus bo paga da zhil zidi is. Aa! Zhil zidi is maa kiuudmi zïvut. Gus miuu git la nedëko da bëmhan shïmuk is koodla. Iavam maa bëbot mïtuk zidi is. Ash voo dënhëme son is.


Spoiler:
Miuu lua Zidi
/mi̯uː lu̯a zi.di/
miuu lua zidi
cat and fish
The Cat and the Fish

Siaf miuu lo.
/si̯af mi̯uː lo/
sIAf\H miuu lo
be\AN cat PST
There was a cat.

Gitia shun da bidim.
/ŋi.ti̯a ʃun da bi.dim/
git-a shUn\H da bIdIm\H
small-AN be\AN and be_white\AN
She was small and white.

Bëmhan vuk maa dënhëme koo lan is!
/bə.m̥an vuk maː də.n̥ə.me koː lan is/
bëmhan vUk\H maa dënhëme koo lan is
DYN be_awake\AN SBRD ALIEN.TEMP hunger a_lot 3S.AN.OBL
When she woke up she was very hungry!

Zup kaavme is nheda maa bëmhan shisaf.
/zup kaːv.me is n̥e.da maː bə.m̥an ʃi.saf/
zup kIAAvmI\M is nheda maa bëmhan shIsaf\H
so look_for\INAN 3S.AN.ERG food SBRD DYN be_gone\AN
So she went looking for some food.

Kaavme is uga dolo da koodme is bëlot.
/kaːv.me is u.ŋa do.lo da koːd.me bə.lot is/
kIAAvmI\M is uga dolo da kIUUdmI\M bëlot is
look_for\INAN 3S.AN.ERG behind tree and find\INAN 3S.AN.ERG acorn
She looked behind the tree and found an acorn.

Ash bëbot shi mëtok bëlot miuu sa!
/aʃ bə.bot ʃi mə.tok bə.lot mi̯uː sa/
ash bëbot shi mÏtUk\M bëlot miuu sa
but with_mouth NEG eat\INAN acorn cat NPST
But cats don't eat acorns!

Kaavme nheda is taam fede da kiuudmi is bishukiis.
/kaːv.me n̥e.da is taːm fe.de da ki̯uːd.mi is bi.ʃu.kiːs/
kIAAvmI\M nheda is taam fede da kIUUdmI\H is bishukiis
look_for\INAN food 3S.AN.ERG under rock
She looked under the rock and found a bug.

Ash bëbot shi mïtuk bishukiis miuu sa!
/aʃ bə.bot ʃi mɨ.tuk bi.ʃu.kiːs mi̯uː sa/
ash bëbot shi mÏtUk\H bishukiis miuu sa
but with_mouth eat\AN bug cat NPST
But cats don't eat bugs!

Kaavme nheda is la zëvot da koodme is maam lan zhoosko da saf la paga.
/kaːv.me n̥e.da is la zə.vot da koːd.me is maːm lan ʒoːs.ko da saf la pa.ŋa/
kIAAvmI\M nheda is la zëvot da kIUUdmI\M is maam lan zhIUUskU\M da sIAf\M la paga
look_for\INAN food 3S.AN.ERG LOC house and see\INAN 3S.AN.ERG thing very be_interesting\INAN and be\INAN LOC table
She looked in the house and saw something very interesting on the table.

Shon zidi! Da bëbot mïtuk zidi maa iavam!
/ʃon zi.di | da bə.bot mɨ.tuk zi.di maː i̯a.vam/
shUn\M zidi | da bëbot mÏtUk\H zidi maa IAvam\H
be\INAN fish | and with_mouth eat\AN fish SBRD love\AN
It was a fish! And she loved to eat fish!

Zup gus bo paga da zhil zidi is.
/zup ŋus bo pa.ŋa da ʒil zi.di is/
zup gUs\H bo paga da zhIl\H zidi is
therefore jump\AN at table and grab\AN 3S.AN.ERG
So she jumped on to the table and grabbed the fish.

Aa! Zhil zidi is maa kiuudmi zïvut.
/aː | ʒil zi.di is maː ki̯uːd.mi zɨ.vut/
aa | zhIl\H zidi is maa kIUUdmI\H zïvut
uh_oh | grab\AN fish 3S.AN.ERG SBRD see\AN person
Uh oh! A person saw her take the fish.

Gus miuu git la nedëko da bëmhan shïmuk is koodla.
/ŋus mi̯uː ŋit la ne.də.ko da bə.m̥an ʃɨ.muk is koːd.la/
gUs\H miuu git la nedëko da bëmhan shÏmUk\H is koodla
jump\AN cat little LOC window and REFL hide\AN 3S.AN.ERG field
The little cat jumped out the window and hid in the field.

Iavam maa bëbot mïtuk zidi is.
/i̯a.vam maː bə.bot mɨ.tuk zi.di is/
IAvam\H maa bëbot mÏtUk\H zidi is
be_happy\AN SBRD with_mouth eat\AN fish 3S.AN.ERG
She happily ate the fish.

Ash voo dënhëme son is.
/aʃ voː də.n̥ə.me son is/
ash voo dënhëme son is
but now ALIEN.TEMP sleepiness 3S.AN.ERG
But now she was very sleepy.
brblues
sinic
sinic
Posts: 248
Joined: 03 Aug 2018 15:34

Re: Speedlang IX (Jan 17-19)

Post by brblues »

Should I also still post how I complied with the restraints?
User avatar
gestaltist
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1617
Joined: 11 Feb 2015 11:23

Re: Speedlang IX (Jan 17-19)

Post by gestaltist »

brblues wrote: 20 Jan 2020 15:19 Should I also still post how I complied with the restraints?
Yes. If you don't, you'll be banned from the CBB forever. ;)

And in all seriousness, I didn't, and I don't think it matters as much as the actual language.
User avatar
spanick
roman
roman
Posts: 1336
Joined: 11 May 2017 01:47
Location: California

Re: Speedlang IX (Jan 17-19)

Post by spanick »

gestaltist wrote: 20 Jan 2020 15:49
brblues wrote: 20 Jan 2020 15:19 Should I also still post how I complied with the restraints?
Yes. If you don't, you'll be banned from the CBB forever. ;)

And in all seriousness, I didn't, and I don't think it matters as much as the actual language.
Agreed. It's cool that some have posted a separate section on how they met the restraints, but it's not a requirement or whatever. It's a game after all!
User avatar
spanick
roman
roman
Posts: 1336
Joined: 11 May 2017 01:47
Location: California

Re: Speedlang IX (Jan 17-19)

Post by spanick »

VaptuantaDoi wrote: 20 Jan 2020 06:56 Ah ok. I misread that section, although it does seem a very marginal gender distinction. I'm not sure about the technical definition, but according to ALC, gender is "defined by agreement with other items," which wikipedia seems to use too. Assuming this is correct, then distinguishing them only in terms of possession sounds more like a "semantic gender" than a "grammatical gender." It depends on whether a native speaker would think that using the wrong possessive form was incorrect (i.e. it's wrong because it doesn't apply to the rules of grammar) or just nonsensical (it's wrong because it doesn't apply to the rules of pragmatics/semantics) . It's a very interesting way of including gender anyway.
I admit that I may have pushed the idea to the brink, but I've had an idea of this kind of minimal distinction for a while, so I just ran with it. That being said, I probably should have at the very least included a set of inanimate, third-person pronouns. I also probably should have marked attributive adjectives differently between the two genders.
User avatar
Omzinesý
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4082
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 08:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: Speedlang IX (Jan 17-19)

Post by Omzinesý »

I don't know where I should publish this because the lang doesn't quite fit the idea of speedlanging. I was however inspired by the constraints. I think this time they were good ones.
First most of the ideas are uhralt ideas of mine.
Second many of the constraints are broken or I never achieved the state of the lang where they could appear.
Spoiler:
Phonological Restraints
Spoiler:
1. Your language must not use the five vowel system of /i e a o u/. (NB: It may use any of those vowels, just not only those five)
Depends on analyses. I analysed the lang so that it has two low vowels. [tick]
2a. Your language's phonological inventory must include a gap. [cross] Nope
2b. Your language's phonological inventory must include a typologically rare phoneme. [cross] Nope
3. Your phonotactics must allow for consonant clusters and closed syllables. [tick]
4. Phonological changes (i.e. ablaut, consonant mutation, etc.) must be included and be grammatical. [tick] This was the tricky one, but I did it. There is coda-alternation.
Morpho-Syntax Restraints
Spoiler:
5. Your language should avoid SVO and SOV word orders. [tick] / [cross] I thin the lang would be VOS. I never got that far. I should also find out how VOS-langs work.
6. Your language should not be agglutinative. [tick] More or less OK
7. Your language must incorporate some form of grammatical gender. [tick]
8. Your language must distinguish between alienable and inalienable possession. [tick] / [cross] Never got that far
9. Lexical verbs may not be directly marked for grammatical tense. [tick] This is a nice one.
10. Reduplication should be an evident historical, but no longer productive, system. [tick] / [cross] Haven't even thought that far.
Third I'm late.

Phonology
The inventory of vowel phonemes is the one below:
i u
e o
æ ɑ

The inventory of consonant phonemes is the one below:
p t t͡s k <p t c k>
(b d g) <b d g>
m n ŋ <m n nġ>
s x <s x>
z ɣ <z ġ>
l r <l r>
j w <j w>
(The phonemic status of voiced stops is questionable, because they only appear in the coda alternation.)

There is a harmony that affects both consonants and vowels. It is a word-lever phenomenon. All words are either “light” or “dark”. Sounds in light words are back, velarized, pharyngealized or +ATR. I’m not well aware of the phonetic details.
i, u, e, o, and æ can appear in “light words”, while e, o, and ɑ can appear in “dark words”. e and o don’t have, at least remarkable, allophony between them. All consonants except /t͡s/ appear in both “dark” and “light” words. They though have “back” allophenes. /t͡s/ only appears in “light words”, which is explained historically by sound change t => t͡s / _i, and /i/ appears in “light words” only. I see “darkness” as a suprasegmental feature, so “dark consonants” don’t appear in the table above.

Phonotactics
Onset
The onset can be no consonant, one consonant, or an obstruent plus a glide.
Nucleus
The nucleus consists of any vowel.
Coda
The coda can only be one vowel word-finally and a resonant plus an obstruent word-internally.

Morpho-phonological process: coda alternation
Aspect is for example formed by this process. Words are nearly always of the form (C)(C)VCCV. The process applies to the second C. In the formula below, long coda is derived from the short one.
If the coda is a fricative or a plosive, it is voiced. Voicing is complemented by lengthening.
s => z:
x => ɣ:
p => b:
t => d:
k => g:
If the coda is a nasal of a liquid, it just lengthens. As short codas, nasals also assimilate in POA with the following consonant. That does not happen as long codas.
n [N] => n:
m [N] => m:
ŋ [N] => ŋ:
l => l:
r => r:
Lengthening can be replaced by a short schwa between the two consonants, especially if they are of different POAs.

If the coda is a semi-vowel (j or w), a schwa is always added.
i => jə
u => wə

Nouns
There are two noun classes. Words are very randomly allocated to them. There are some derivational processes that also apply a particular class, but the gender of roots is fully random. There is no semantic core of a class. The classes are called T-class and p-class after they markers. Plural is marked by /k/ and can be seen third class.

Class markers appear before the last vowel of the noun.
kasta ‘house’
kas<t>a

kaska ‘houses’

The root /kasa/ can appear in compounds.


[There may be a case system based on coda alternation.]

kaito ‘person’
kajto [kɑjetɤo] ’person ACC ?’


Verbs
Verbs have two aspect: Habitual(-Iterative) and Nonhabitual(-Iterative). Habitual expresses gnomic or repeated events, while Nonhabitual expresses all single events, or events seen single, regardless if they are telic or atelic. Habitual Aspect is coded by long coda and Nonhabitual Aspect is coded by short coda.

tramka [træməkæ] ‘They usually swim’
tranka [træŋkæ] ‘They are swimming. They swam [to a place]’


Verbs also agree their subject.
My meta-thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5760
User avatar
VaptuantaDoi
roman
roman
Posts: 1070
Joined: 18 Nov 2019 07:35

Re: Speedlang IX (Jan 17-19)

Post by VaptuantaDoi »

spanick wrote: 20 Jan 2020 16:18
gestaltist wrote: 20 Jan 2020 15:49
brblues wrote: 20 Jan 2020 15:19 Should I also still post how I complied with the restraints?
Yes. If you don't, you'll be banned from the CBB forever. ;)

And in all seriousness, I didn't, and I don't think it matters as much as the actual language.
Agreed. It's cool that some have posted a separate section on how they met the restraints, but it's not a requirement or whatever. It's a game after all!
I only did it to keep track of what I needed to do still, then I just left it in.
User avatar
Dormouse559
moderator
moderator
Posts: 2945
Joined: 10 Nov 2012 20:52
Location: California

Re: Speedlang IX (Jan 17-19)

Post by Dormouse559 »

I finished rebuilding my sample text for Lësha Bek, so you can find that added at the end of my previous post. [:)]



VaptuantaDoi wrote: 20 Jan 2020 21:19
spanick wrote: 20 Jan 2020 16:18
gestaltist wrote: 20 Jan 2020 15:49
brblues wrote: 20 Jan 2020 15:19 Should I also still post how I complied with the restraints?
Yes. If you don't, you'll be banned from the CBB forever. ;)

And in all seriousness, I didn't, and I don't think it matters as much as the actual language.
Agreed. It's cool that some have posted a separate section on how they met the restraints, but it's not a requirement or whatever. It's a game after all!
I only did it to keep track of what I needed to do still, then I just left it in.
Similar for me. Plus, I just wanted to give people a highlights reel/table of contents.

spanick wrote: 20 Jan 2020 16:44
VaptuantaDoi wrote: 20 Jan 2020 06:56 Ah ok. I misread that section, although it does seem a very marginal gender distinction. I'm not sure about the technical definition, but according to ALC, gender is "defined by agreement with other items," which wikipedia seems to use too. Assuming this is correct, then distinguishing them only in terms of possession sounds more like a "semantic gender" than a "grammatical gender." It depends on whether a native speaker would think that using the wrong possessive form was incorrect (i.e. it's wrong because it doesn't apply to the rules of grammar) or just nonsensical (it's wrong because it doesn't apply to the rules of pragmatics/semantics) . It's a very interesting way of including gender anyway.
I admit that I may have pushed the idea to the brink, but I've had an idea of this kind of minimal distinction for a while, so I just ran with it. That being said, I probably should have at the very least included a set of inanimate, third-person pronouns. I also probably should have marked attributive adjectives differently between the two genders.
Gosh, I can't remember where ("Gender" by Greville Corbett? Conlangery?), but I feel like I've heard of the Navajo animacy hierarchy being called a gender system. In Navajo, the order of arguments is decided by their animacy; the more animate one comes first.

gestaltist wrote: 19 Jan 2020 18:04Hsaa Mote is an isolating language with minimal morphology, spoken as a trade language on a tropical archipelago.
It's great that you found the time to do a bit of conculturing. Creating a language in a vacuum can have challenges. Plus, you had a reason to get into more specialized vocabulary, like sailing.

brblues wrote: 19 Jan 2020 19:512PL /ʙɑʙɑpʰe/ “worms” insulting or – if the verb is in irrealis – very harsh imperative
The Disney villain's chosen form of address [}:D]



I'm fascinated that so many of us picked VOS word order. I count three or four out of the six sketches posted so far. Does it have some special attraction, at least in the absence of SVO and SOV? Personally, I picked VOS because I imagine Lësha Bek was originally SVO, with some auxiliary constructions that occasionally switched it to VOS, and those constructions eventually became the default form.
User avatar
spanick
roman
roman
Posts: 1336
Joined: 11 May 2017 01:47
Location: California

Re: Speedlang IX (Jan 17-19)

Post by spanick »

Dormouse559 wrote: 21 Jan 2020 03:53 I finished rebuilding my sample text for Lësha Bek, so you can find that added at the end of my previous post. [:)]

Awesome! I'll check it out. I'm planning on commenting on everyone's languages, but I just haven't had the time to do them all justice.
Gosh, I can't remember where ("Gender" by Greville Corbett? Conlangery?), but I feel like I've heard of the Navajo animacy hierarchy being called a gender system. In Navajo, the order of arguments is decided by their animacy; the more animate one comes first.
I think I got the idea after reading Exploring Language Structure by Thomas Payne.
I'm fascinated that so many of us picked VOS word order. I count three or four out of the six sketches posted so far. Does it have some special attraction, at least in the absence of SVO and SOV? Personally, I picked VOS because I imagine Lësha Bek was originally SVO, with some auxiliary constructions that occasionally switched it to VOS, and those constructions eventually became the default form.
I noticed this as well. I'm kind of surprised, actually. VSO is the next most common word order and the only remaining word order that puts the subject before the object. I played it safe with VSO and gestaltist went big with OVS haha
User avatar
VaptuantaDoi
roman
roman
Posts: 1070
Joined: 18 Nov 2019 07:35

Re: Speedlang IX (Jan 17-19)

Post by VaptuantaDoi »

Dormouse559 wrote: 21 Jan 2020 03:53 I'm fascinated that so many of us picked VOS word order. I count three or four out of the six sketches posted so far. Does it have some special attraction, at least in the absence of SVO and SOV? Personally, I picked VOS because I imagine Lësha Bek was originally SVO, with some auxiliary constructions that occasionally switched it to VOS, and those constructions eventually became the default form.
I picked VOS because I've used VSO too much, and object-initial languages are too wierd.
User avatar
Omzinesý
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4082
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 08:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: Speedlang IX (Jan 17-19)

Post by Omzinesý »

Dormouse559 wrote: 21 Jan 2020 03:53

I'm fascinated that so many of us picked VOS word order. I count three or four out of the six sketches posted so far. Does it have some special attraction, at least in the absence of SVO and SOV? Personally, I picked VOS because I imagine Lësha Bek was originally SVO, with some auxiliary constructions that occasionally switched it to VOS, and those constructions eventually became the default form.
S[VO], S[OV], [OV]S, [VO]S make it possible to have a well-known topic-comment or subject NP - predicate VP syntax.
I still don't know how other word orders work. There is even some name for them.
My meta-thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5760
User avatar
gestaltist
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1617
Joined: 11 Feb 2015 11:23

Re: Speedlang IX (Jan 17-19)

Post by gestaltist »

Dormouse559 wrote: 21 Jan 2020 03:53
gestaltist wrote: 19 Jan 2020 18:04Hsaa Mote is an isolating language with minimal morphology, spoken as a trade language on a tropical archipelago.
It's great that you found the time to do a bit of conculturing. Creating a language in a vacuum can have challenges. Plus, you had a reason to get into more specialized vocabulary, like sailing.
Yeah, I immediately placed these guys in my main conworld after I realized I liked the sketch.
I'm fascinated that so many of us picked VOS word order. I count three or four out of the six sketches posted so far. Does it have some special attraction, at least in the absence of SVO and SOV? Personally, I picked VOS because I imagine Lësha Bek was originally SVO, with some auxiliary constructions that occasionally switched it to VOS, and those constructions eventually became the default form.
Well, the constraints didn't leave that many options to us. I purposefully thought: "this looks like it's forcing us to do verb-initial so I'm going to be contrary and not do that." Which was for the best because the OVS word order pushed me towards ergative alignment (because it could've evolved from an earlier nominative-accusative SVO or SOV language) and gave me the idea for verb serialization.

Seems I'm the only stubborn contrarian in the group, though.

---

And to add some comments about other's conlangs:

brblues - your phonology is a bit of an acquired taste. :) Your "intense" pronouns caught my attention. They feel East Asian with a twist. I might steal that idea in the future. I also noticed the construct state which you weren't alone in picking. I wonder what in the constraints made people think in that direction.

VaptuantaDoi - I like the name of the language and the phonology is definitely interesting. I loved your aspectual reduplication. You picked a very euphonic pattern. My head canon is that /ʔɸ ʔr ʔh/ are just slightly preglottalized [p t k] to make things more naturalistic. I also think preglottalized nasals could have the allophones [ b d g].

spanick - I love the simple but still non-standard phonemic inventory! I also loved the fossilized historical dual. I'm a sucker for these kinds of details. One thing to note about your "rigidly VSO" comment. I've read that all VSO languages have elements of fronting things before the verb, i.e., no language is fully verb initial. Not sure how reliable this information is, though.

Dormouse - "otherwise known as All the bits and pieces that have been floating around in my head lately" - that seems to be what happens with every conlang I make. As to your language, I like the vowel harmony, and especially the idea to use it to indicate agreement. I also found your syntax section to be elegant. I liked closed class adjectives and adverbs and that you spent time working out clause subordination. Oh, and the distinction between temporary and permanent possession is very cool! I've been thinking for years about introducing fine distinctions in possessive constructions but you beat me to actually implementing it.

Omzinesy - some cool ideas but not enough "meat" for me to be able to comment more.
brblues
sinic
sinic
Posts: 248
Joined: 03 Aug 2018 15:34

Re: Speedlang IX (Jan 17-19)

Post by brblues »

I chose VOS because I wanted to mark noun classes on verbs, and was drawn to marking for the class of the subject; I pre-supposed VSO order in a previous language stage, and the suffixation of the noun class coming about due to the verb "swallowing" the classifier of the subject. For that, I'd made some other assumptions on the fly; namely that the classifier, which also acts as definite article, must have been overused to the point of it being there almost all the time so that it could grammaticalise, as well as that the word order then shifted to VOS, possibly because the subject (pro)noun was dropped so often in discourse when clear from context that this could somehow be parsed as the default order by the speakers.

I've discovered a problem with this, which may be related to the reason why all the crazy marking-verb-for-shape-of-an-argument-etc stuff going on in e.g. Navajo seems to be more popular for direct objects than subjects - the distinctions in the noun classes I made are mostly for inanimate nouns, and those tend to show up much more often as objects than subjects in natural discourse, so that I even found it hard to come up with many examples for my suffixed noun classes.
gestaltist wrote: brblues - your phonology is a bit of an acquired taste. :) Your "intense" pronouns caught my attention. They feel East Asian with a twist. I might steal that idea in the future. I also noticed the construct state which you weren't alone in picking. I wonder what in the constraints made people think in that direction.
I have to say I did see the constraint requiring inclusion of a rare phoneme as encouraging me to make a very quirky phonology - after I'd included /B/, which would already satisfy the constraint of having a rare phoneme, I thought I could also still do /c/, given that I have been trying to produce that recently due to an interest in Hungarian, and also wanted to make the gaps in the system more unorthodox by not just leaving out stops from a series, but by having the "internal" phonology of the speakers regard fricatives with the same PoA as parts of the stop series (as reflected in the romanisation). I wanted to err on the side of caution though and also had gaps by not including an aspirated stop where it would be expected.

I like the "intense pronouns" myself, and was of course inspired by the East Asian open-class pronouns, but tried to make it bit different by still having mandatory conjugation for the relevant person (which also actually allows using the same pronoun in both 1SG and 2SG, for example).

I haven't had time myself to look much at all your works but will soon!
User avatar
VaptuantaDoi
roman
roman
Posts: 1070
Joined: 18 Nov 2019 07:35

Re: Speedlang IX (Jan 17-19)

Post by VaptuantaDoi »

gestaltist wrote: 21 Jan 2020 15:39 VaptuantaDoi - I like the name of the language and the phonology is definitely interesting. I loved your aspectual reduplication. You picked a very euphonic pattern. My head canon is that /ʔɸ ʔr ʔh/ are just slightly preglottalized [p t k] to make things more naturalistic. I also think preglottalized nasals could have the allophones [ b d g].
Thanks! The reduplication was definitely the part I was most pleased with (although I wouldn't consider forms like frərərə euphonic). The allophony with the plosives is basically completely taken from a Skou language (I wish I could remember the name). My excuse for not making [ˀp ˀt ˀk] phonemes was that they only occurred intervocalically, and all ʔC sequences other than /ʔɸ ʔr ʔh/ occurred between vowels. The vague historic plan was:
p t k → b d g /V_V
p t k → ɸ s,r h
b d g → m ð̞ r
(e.g. Sfeðraaʔn < */spedraaʔn/)
Which is why I should have made /ʔm/ → [ʔb ~ ɓ ~ b] but forgot. The coronal was /ʔð̞/ → [ʔd ~ ɗ ~ d] which I did remember.
Edit: Turns out it wasn't a Skou language. It's Ontena Gadsup, which has /ʔ ɸ β s x m n r j/.
User avatar
Dormouse559
moderator
moderator
Posts: 2945
Joined: 10 Nov 2012 20:52
Location: California

Re: Speedlang IX (Jan 17-19)

Post by Dormouse559 »

gestaltist wrote: 21 Jan 2020 15:39 Yeah, I immediately placed these guys in my main conworld after I realized I liked the sketch.
So cool! [:D] A speedlang taking on a life of its own.

I'm glad you liked so many parts of my lang. [:)]
gestaltist wrote:Dormouse - "otherwise known as All the bits and pieces that have been floating around in my head lately" - that seems to be what happens with every conlang I make. As to your language, I like the vowel harmony, and especially the idea to use it to indicate agreement.
This is something I've been trying to devise for a while. The only examples of vowel harmony I'm familiar with have roots that are largely stable. For Lësha Bek, I got something I kind of like, thanks to a vowel system, sound changes and historical morphology that just happen to allow verbs to change all their vowels and never become ambiguous.

I also found your syntax section to be elegant.
What struck you about it? I actually wasn't satisfied with how I wrote it since there were a few syntax features, related to shifting the object after the subject, that I put elsewhere.

I liked closed class adjectives and adverbs and that you spent time working out clause subordination.
The closed classes did let me reuse verbs to fill in grammatical functions without having to worry about whole new parts of speech. Need an adjective? Verb it! Need a possessive? Verb it! [>:)]

Oh, and the distinction between temporary and permanent possession is very cool! I've been thinking for years about introducing fine distinctions in possessive constructions but you beat me to actually implementing it.
That's one of the things that hadn't been floating around in my head, and the prompt caused me to come up with it. I'd like to see what possession distinctions you go with, if/when you implement them.
Post Reply