Yay or Nay?

A forum for all topics related to constructed languages
User avatar
Man in Space
roman
roman
Posts: 1304
Joined: 03 Aug 2012 08:07
Location: Ohio

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Man in Space »

Creyeditor wrote: 19 Oct 2021 19:54 Should I reverse the order of restrictive and non-restrictive adjectives in Kobardon? Right now non-restrictive (topicalized) adjectives precede their head noun and restrictive (focused) adjectives follow their head noun.
Nay.
Twin Aster megathread

AVDIO · VIDEO · DISCO

CC = Common Caber
CK = Classical Khaya
CT = Classical Ĝare n Tim Ar
Kg = Kgáweq'
PB = Proto-Beheic
PO = Proto-O
PTa = Proto-Taltic
STK = Sisỏk Tlar Kyanà
Tm = Təmattwəspwaypksma
User avatar
Omzinesý
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4080
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 08:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Omzinesý »

Creyeditor wrote: 19 Oct 2021 19:54 Should I reverse the order of restrictive and non-restrictive adjectives in Kobardon? Right now non-restrictive (topicalized) adjectives precede their head noun and restrictive (focused) adjectives follow their head noun.
Yay, I find the new way more natural. I think Romance languages use the older version.
My meta-thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5760
User avatar
Creyeditor
MVP
MVP
Posts: 5091
Joined: 14 Aug 2012 19:32

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Creyeditor »

Thank you for your answers. My plan is to post something on Kobardon as soon as I have a first version of a grammar pdf.
Omzinesý wrote: 20 Oct 2021 15:12
Creyeditor wrote: 19 Oct 2021 19:54 Should I reverse the order of restrictive and non-restrictive adjectives in Kobardon? Right now non-restrictive (topicalized) adjectives precede their head noun and restrictive (focused) adjectives follow their head noun.
Yay, I find the new way more natural. I think Romance languages use the older version.
Great [:)] Can you poimt me to some examples maybe?
Creyeditor
"Thoughts are free."
Produce, Analyze, Manipulate
1 :deu: 2 :eng: 3 :idn: 4 :fra: 4 :esp:
:con: Ook & Omlűt & Nautli languages & Sperenjas
[<3] Papuan languages, Morphophonology, Lexical Semantics [<3]
User avatar
Omzinesý
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4080
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 08:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Omzinesý »

Creyeditor wrote: 20 Oct 2021 18:28 Thank you for your answers. My plan is to post something on Kobardon as soon as I have a first version of a grammar pdf.
Omzinesý wrote: 20 Oct 2021 15:12
Creyeditor wrote: 19 Oct 2021 19:54 Should I reverse the order of restrictive and non-restrictive adjectives in Kobardon? Right now non-restrictive (topicalized) adjectives precede their head noun and restrictive (focused) adjectives follow their head noun.
Yay, I find the new way more natural. I think Romance languages use the older version.
Great [:)] Can you poimt me to some examples maybe?
I'm no expert of these. So I have understood.
My meta-thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5760
User avatar
Man in Space
roman
roman
Posts: 1304
Joined: 03 Aug 2012 08:07
Location: Ohio

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Man in Space »

A few questions about Classical Ĝare n Tim Ar. First, the phonology, in its current state, is as follows:

/m n ŋ/ m n ĝ
/θ s x h/ d s ḫ h
/ɬ/ ł
/ɹ ʕ/ r g
/l/ l

/à è ø̀ ì ỳ ɤ̀ ò ɯ̀ ù/ a e ö i ü ë o ï u
/á é ǿ í ý ɤ́ ó ɯ́ ú/ á é ô í û ê ó î ú
/m̩ n̩ ŋ̩ l̩ ɹ̩/ m n ĝ l r

(C)V(C), unless V is one of the syllabic resonants, which cannot take codas

Question 1. Should I add clicks to CT? I've been thinking about this a lot lately. On the one hand, CT has been more or less like this for about fifteen years. On the other hand, I absolutely love clicks and think they're underutilized and sound cool.

The following sub-questions are only applicable if the answer to Question 1 is "yes":

Question 1a. Should bilabial clicks be added to CT? The only bilabial consonant in CT currently is /m/, and I have half a mind to keep it that way. However, I'd only have clicks at three places of articulation (+ lateral alveolars) if I did this.

Question 1b. Which click series should be included? I wouldn't include a voicing distinction amongst the clicks (to fit in with the rest of the language), but I'd be inclined to include nasalized versions of the clicks as well. So something like /kʘ ŋʘ kǀ ŋǀ kǃ ŋǃ kǁ ŋǁ kǂ ŋǂ/. But would ejectives make sense with this phonology, or aspirates (given how fast and loose /h/ can behave in CT)? And/or preglottalized clicks, perhaps? What about fricated ones?

Question 1c. How should the clicks be romanized? The font family I am fond of using, TT Marxiana, doesn't support clicks (or the velar nasal), so I'd have to find alternate means. My inclination is to romanize in one of the following manners:

/kʘ ŋʘ kǀ ŋǀ kǃ ŋǃ kǁ ŋǁ kǂ ŋǂ/ b mb z nz j nj q nq
/kʘ ŋʘ kǀ ŋǀ kǃ ŋǃ kǁ ŋǁ kǂ ŋǂ/ k@ n@ k| n| k|| n|| k! n! k# n#

The first option reminds me of Xhosa, but doesn't get across the unusual nature of clicks (IMO anyway). The second looks egregious (especially the @ and #), but otherwise gets things across in a clear—and font-supported—manner.

Question 2. Should I axe the syllabic resonants? I don't like them much, but they do have some applicability vis-à-vis genitives and measure-words.
Twin Aster megathread

AVDIO · VIDEO · DISCO

CC = Common Caber
CK = Classical Khaya
CT = Classical Ĝare n Tim Ar
Kg = Kgáweq'
PB = Proto-Beheic
PO = Proto-O
PTa = Proto-Taltic
STK = Sisỏk Tlar Kyanà
Tm = Təmattwəspwaypksma
shimobaatar
korean
korean
Posts: 10373
Joined: 12 Jul 2013 23:09
Location: UTC-04:00

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by shimobaatar »

Man in Space wrote: 21 Feb 2022 00:28 Question 1. Should I add clicks to CT? I've been thinking about this a lot lately. On the one hand, CT has been more or less like this for about fifteen years. On the other hand, I absolutely love clicks and think they're underutilized and sound cool.
Nay.
Man in Space wrote: 21 Feb 2022 00:28 Question 2. Should I axe the syllabic resonants? I don't like them much, but they do have some applicability vis-à-vis genitives and measure-words.
Since you don't like them very much, I'm be inclined to vote "yea". Out of curiosity, though, how are they used in genitives and measure words?
ɶʙ ɞʛ
greek
greek
Posts: 729
Joined: 02 Aug 2019 18:47

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by ɶʙ ɞʛ »

Can these sound changes realistically happen?

pl bl ml fl vl > t̼ d̼ n̼ ɬ̼ l̼~ɮ̼
User avatar
eldin raigmore
korean
korean
Posts: 6352
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 19:38
Location: SouthEast Michigan

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by eldin raigmore »

ɶʙ ɞʛ wrote: 11 Oct 2022 23:33 Can these sound changes realistically happen?

pl bl ml fl vl > t̼ d̼ n̼ ɬ̼ l̼~ɮ̼
In my probably under-informed opinion: not in just one step.
But a chain of sound-changes —— possibly as few as two? —— might accomplish it.
I hope somebody who knows more than I do comments!
User avatar
Ahzoh
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4191
Joined: 20 Oct 2013 02:57
Location: Canada

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Ahzoh »

Should Vrkhazhian only express attributes as relativized verbs and nouns in the equative case?

rēbis satīsēzi bēdas sagiltēzes lēˀebnakki
man-MASC.ACC NFUT-be_hostile-3ms book-NEUT.ACC NFUT-be_old-3ns.REL NFUT-have\APPL-1cs>3ms
"I gave the aggressive man an old book" (lit. man who-is-hostile book who-is-old I-gave-him)

Usually:
rēbis sattîs bēdas saggalas lēˀebnakki
man-MASC.ACC hostile-MASC.ACC book-NEUT.ACC old-NEUT.ACC NFUT-have\APPL-1cs>3ms
"I gave the aggressive man an old book"
Last edited by Ahzoh on 14 Oct 2022 09:11, edited 2 times in total.
Image Śād Warḫallun (Vrkhazhian) [ WIKI | CWS ]
User avatar
Creyeditor
MVP
MVP
Posts: 5091
Joined: 14 Aug 2012 19:32

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Creyeditor »

I don't understand. I don't see any equative in the glosses :wat:
Creyeditor
"Thoughts are free."
Produce, Analyze, Manipulate
1 :deu: 2 :eng: 3 :idn: 4 :fra: 4 :esp:
:con: Ook & Omlűt & Nautli languages & Sperenjas
[<3] Papuan languages, Morphophonology, Lexical Semantics [<3]
User avatar
Ahzoh
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4191
Joined: 20 Oct 2013 02:57
Location: Canada

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Ahzoh »

Creyeditor wrote: 14 Oct 2022 08:26 I don't understand. I don't see any equative in the glosses :wat:
In my sentences there was a noun in the equative case but I removed it since the usage of equative-cased nouns does not change whether I decide adjectives have a dedicated form or are simply relativized verbs; I will still have them either way. So demonstrating it in the sentences does not serve to emphasize the difference.

my initial thought was "well I could have three classes: nouns, verbs, and particles" and "I could modify the other classes by having adjective-like nouns and adjective-like verbs" though my issue is many-fold: the adjective-like nouns and verbs do not share the repeatable endings that so elegantly display concord between noun and modifier, the adjective-like verbs do not feel "marked" enough or they feel too "weighted" to one side, and they don't really allow for semantic shifting away from the verbal meaning (no "oppose, defy" > "opposed, defied" > "enemy")

Conversely, I now have to decide how I form my adjectives if I make the geminated stem indicate applicative voice or decide how I form the applicative if I make the geminated stem indicate deverbal adjectives.
Image Śād Warḫallun (Vrkhazhian) [ WIKI | CWS ]
User avatar
Omzinesý
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4080
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 08:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Omzinesý »

Ahzoh wrote: 14 Oct 2022 09:10
Creyeditor wrote: 14 Oct 2022 08:26 I don't understand. I don't see any equative in the glosses :wat:
In my sentences there was a noun in the equative case but I removed it since the usage of equative-cased nouns does not change whether I decide adjectives have a dedicated form or are simply relativized verbs; I will still have them either way. So demonstrating it in the sentences does not serve to emphasize the difference.

my initial thought was "well I could have three classes: nouns, verbs, and particles" and "I could modify the other classes by having adjective-like nouns and adjective-like verbs" though my issue is many-fold: the adjective-like nouns and verbs do not share the repeatable endings that so elegantly display concord between noun and modifier, the adjective-like verbs do not feel "marked" enough or they feel too "weighted" to one side, and they don't really allow for semantic shifting away from the verbal meaning (no "oppose, defy" > "opposed, defied" > "enemy")

Conversely, I now have to decide how I form my adjectives if I make the geminated stem indicate applicative voice or decide how I form the applicative if I make the geminated stem indicate deverbal adjectives.
What abaut a relative pronoun or a relativizer that agrees the head?

I gave man.M REL.M be.aggressive book.N REL.N be.old

If adjectives are replaced by nouns, the second question is how they work as predicates.

The girl is a beauty. or The girl has beauty.
My meta-thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5760
User avatar
Ahzoh
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4191
Joined: 20 Oct 2013 02:57
Location: Canada

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Ahzoh »

Omzinesý wrote: 14 Oct 2022 12:59
Ahzoh wrote: 14 Oct 2022 09:10
Creyeditor wrote: 14 Oct 2022 08:26 I don't understand. I don't see any equative in the glosses :wat:
In my sentences there was a noun in the equative case but I removed it since the usage of equative-cased nouns does not change whether I decide adjectives have a dedicated form or are simply relativized verbs; I will still have them either way. So demonstrating it in the sentences does not serve to emphasize the difference.

my initial thought was "well I could have three classes: nouns, verbs, and particles" and "I could modify the other classes by having adjective-like nouns and adjective-like verbs" though my issue is many-fold: the adjective-like nouns and verbs do not share the repeatable endings that so elegantly display concord between noun and modifier, the adjective-like verbs do not feel "marked" enough or they feel too "weighted" to one side, and they don't really allow for semantic shifting away from the verbal meaning (no "oppose, defy" > "opposed, defied" > "enemy")

Conversely, I now have to decide how I form my adjectives if I make the geminated stem indicate applicative voice or decide how I form the applicative if I make the geminated stem indicate deverbal adjectives.
What abaut a relative pronoun or a relativizer that agrees the head?
I have a relative pronoun, which I use mainly for clauses where the head is not the subject of the relative clause. I developed relativizing verb subject suffixes exactly so I wouldn't have to use relative pronouns for subjects of relative clauses
Image Śād Warḫallun (Vrkhazhian) [ WIKI | CWS ]
User avatar
eldin raigmore
korean
korean
Posts: 6352
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 19:38
Location: SouthEast Michigan

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by eldin raigmore »

Creyeditor wrote: 14 Oct 2022 08:26 I don't understand. I don't see any equative in the glosses :wat:
Isn’t there a degree-of-comparison in some languages called “equative”?
Positive: High
Comparative: Higher
Equative: As high as
Superlative: Highest

If so wouldn’t it apply to all modifiers, whether adjectives or adverbs?
User avatar
Ahzoh
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4191
Joined: 20 Oct 2013 02:57
Location: Canada

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Ahzoh »

eldin raigmore wrote: 14 Oct 2022 19:49
Creyeditor wrote: 14 Oct 2022 08:26 I don't understand. I don't see any equative in the glosses :wat:
Isn’t there a degree-of-comparison in some languages called “equative”?
Positive: High
Comparative: Higher
Equative: As high as
Superlative: Highest

If so wouldn’t it apply to all modifiers, whether adjectives or adverbs?
No, it's the equative case, it basically translates to "X-like"
Image Śād Warḫallun (Vrkhazhian) [ WIKI | CWS ]
shimobaatar
korean
korean
Posts: 10373
Joined: 12 Jul 2013 23:09
Location: UTC-04:00

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by shimobaatar »

ɶʙ ɞʛ wrote: 11 Oct 2022 23:33 Can these sound changes realistically happen?

pl bl ml fl vl > t̼ d̼ n̼ ɬ̼ l̼~ɮ̼
You're probably already familiar with this note on the Wikipedia page for linguolabial consonants. Based on that, the relationship between [j] & [i], and the historical shift from [pl bl fl] > [pj bj fj] in (for example) Italian, maybe you could have something like [plV] > [pjV] > [pijV] > [t̼ijV] > [t̼V]?
Knox Adjacent
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 172
Joined: 24 Oct 2022 04:34

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Knox Adjacent »

So I want a language with robust gender marking and have settled on eight as a good number. Typical masculine and feminine and animal and arboreal and abstract distinctions exist. The last three are inanimates based on shape: long, flat and round, but I'm unsure if this is interesting enough.
User avatar
Creyeditor
MVP
MVP
Posts: 5091
Joined: 14 Aug 2012 19:32

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Creyeditor »

The shape classes are interesting enough to me. Maybe syncretism in the plural could spice it up a bit.
Creyeditor
"Thoughts are free."
Produce, Analyze, Manipulate
1 :deu: 2 :eng: 3 :idn: 4 :fra: 4 :esp:
:con: Ook & Omlűt & Nautli languages & Sperenjas
[<3] Papuan languages, Morphophonology, Lexical Semantics [<3]
Knox Adjacent
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 172
Joined: 24 Oct 2022 04:34

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Knox Adjacent »

I had pondered reducing contrasts for object agreement. It works, thanks.

(Also a plurale tantum class, but eight and no more)
User avatar
loglorn
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1728
Joined: 17 Mar 2014 03:22

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by loglorn »

shimobaatar wrote: 20 Oct 2022 18:46
ɶʙ ɞʛ wrote: 11 Oct 2022 23:33 Can these sound changes realistically happen?

pl bl ml fl vl > t̼ d̼ n̼ ɬ̼ l̼~ɮ̼
You're probably already familiar with this note on the Wikipedia page for linguolabial consonants. Based on that, the relationship between [j] & [i], and the historical shift from [pl bl fl] > [pj bj fj] in (for example) Italian, maybe you could have something like [plV] > [pjV] > [pijV] > [t̼ijV] > [t̼V]?
A few days later but palatalized bilabials are crosslinguistically unstable (i have a paper about it somewhere in here if anyone wants it) and there's sound changes in a few different languages that would corroborate the pl > pj > t̼ pathway, like greek pj > pt (e.g. klepto < klep-ye-ti) and the portuguese pl > t͡ʃ > ʃ.

So yeah those changes could happen probably.
Diachronic Conlanging is the path to happiness, given time. [;)]

Gigxkpoyan Languages: CHÍFJAEŚÍ RETLA TLAPTHUV DÄLDLEN CJUŚËKNJU ṢATT

Other langs: Søsøzatli Kamëzet
Post Reply