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

A forum for all topics related to constructed languages
User avatar
DesEsseintes
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4331
Joined: 31 Mar 2013 13:16

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

Post by DesEsseintes »

CarsonDaConlanger wrote: 09 Nov 2019 07:38 How naturalistic is it for a language to have an auxiliary (derived from a verb meaning do) that takes person/maybe tense (its an agglutinative language so the two are completely separate) that comes after a serial verb construction? It would replace person/tense on the meaning verbs in the construction.
That sounds entirely reasonable. Although a serial verb interpretation may well be the best analysis for your language (as this depends on other aspects of grammar and syntax), I could also see this as a kind of nominalisation of the preceding verb string.

A: What did you do yesterday?
B: Oh, I just did some go.out-buy.stuff-ing.
User avatar
Creyeditor
MVP
MVP
Posts: 5091
Joined: 14 Aug 2012 19:32

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

Post by Creyeditor »

CarsonDaConlanger wrote: 09 Nov 2019 07:38 How naturalistic is it for a language to have an auxiliary (derived from a verb meaning do) that takes person/maybe tense (its an agglutinative language so the two are completely separate) that comes after a serial verb construction? It would replace person/tense on the meaning verbs in the construction.
If you wonder about the position of the auxiliary, I think there is a crosslinguistic tendency. SOV languages tend to be head final. In these languages auxiliaries tend to follow verbs. So a possible order would be Subject - Object - Verb (-Verb) - Auxiliary. Was that also what you were asking for?
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: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by Ahzoh »

I don't know how naturalistic it is that the gender endings tend to be phonological opposites to the voice vowels.

e.g. /a u/ is basically the ablaut vowel for tenses in the active voice while /e i/ are the ablaut vowels for tenses in the passive voice. [saras vs sares, sarus vs saris]
But /a u/ are also the case endings for nouns in the feminine gender while /e i/ are the case endings for nouns in the masculine gender. [haze/hazi "man" vs sama/samu "woman"]

To compound the weirdness, deverbal nouns derived from verbs in the passive voice tend to have masculine gender while deverbal nouns derived from verbs in the passive voice tend to have feminine gender. Thus, it creates this weird alternation in words like such as a-mlek-a (passive deverbal) and a-mlak-e (active deverbal) which feels artificial.
Image Śād Warḫallun (Vrkhazhian) [ WIKI | CWS ]
User avatar
Dormouse559
moderator
moderator
Posts: 2945
Joined: 10 Nov 2012 20:52
Location: California

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

Post by Dormouse559 »

Ahzoh wrote: 12 Nov 2019 23:25To compound the weirdness, deverbal nouns derived from verbs in the passive voice tend to have masculine gender while deverbal nouns derived from verbs in the passive voice tend to have feminine gender. Thus, it creates this weird alternation in words like such as a-mlek-a (passive deverbal) and a-mlak-e (active deverbal) which feels artificial.
This sounds like the sort of unplanned order emerging from interlocking systems that would give me the most exquisite of conlanging satisfaction. I will gladly take it off your hands if you don't want it. [:P]
User avatar
kiwikami
roman
roman
Posts: 1203
Joined: 26 May 2012 17:24
Location: Oh, I don't know, I'm probably around here somewhere.

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

Post by kiwikami »

Given all the changes I've made to Alál in the last few years, I'd like to get back to putting together proper documentation for it. Since I'll have to rewrite almost all of what I wrote in the existing Alál thread to bring it up to date, do y'all think it'd be more efficient / less messy to just start a new thread for it? I'm not certain if that'd be a forum faux pas (you'd think I'd pick up on these things after seven years here, but no), but it'd be nice to have a clean slate since I'll be starting the write-up from scratch.
Edit: Substituted a string instrument for a French interjection.

:eng: :mrgreen: | :fra: [:)] | ASL [:S] | :deu: [:|] | :tan: [:(] | :nav: [:'(]
User avatar
Dormouse559
moderator
moderator
Posts: 2945
Joined: 10 Nov 2012 20:52
Location: California

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

Post by Dormouse559 »

kiwikami wrote: 15 Nov 2019 05:42 Given all the changes I've made to Alál in the last few years, I'd like to get back to putting together proper documentation for it. Since I'll have to rewrite almost all of what I wrote in the existing Alál thread to bring it up to date, do y'all think it'd be more efficient / less messy to just start a new thread for it? I'm not certain if that'd be a forum faux pas (you'd think I'd pick up on these things after seven years here, but no), but it'd be nice to have a clean slate since I'll be starting the write-up from scratch.
I don't believe there'd be a problem with that. It's been done before without issue.
User avatar
DesEsseintes
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4331
Joined: 31 Mar 2013 13:16

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

Post by DesEsseintes »

Dormouse559 wrote: 15 Nov 2019 07:40
kiwikami wrote: 15 Nov 2019 05:42 Given all the changes I've made to Alál in the last few years, I'd like to get back to putting together proper documentation for it. Since I'll have to rewrite almost all of what I wrote in the existing Alál thread to bring it up to date, do y'all think it'd be more efficient / less messy to just start a new thread for it? I'm not certain if that'd be a forum faux pas (you'd think I'd pick up on these things after seven years here, but no), but it'd be nice to have a clean slate since I'll be starting the write-up from scratch.
I don't believe there'd be a problem with that. It's been done before without issue.
I think it’s more efficient and less confusing for others to start a new thread when languages have been overhauled, especially when said langs haven’t been posted on for a while.

I plan to start a new Híí thread if I ever start posting on it again.

As a rather keen Alál aficionado, I look forward to seeing the new stuff. [:D]
yangfiretiger121
sinic
sinic
Posts: 337
Joined: 17 Jun 2018 03:04

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

Post by yangfiretiger121 »

Are rhotacized long monophthongs better transcribed as [Vːʴ] or [Vʴː]?
Alien conlangs (Font may be needed for Vai symbols)
dva_arla
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 184
Joined: 25 Oct 2019 21:03
Location: Realm of Ideas

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

Post by dva_arla »

Is a gap in the voiceless and voiced plosives/affricates natural/realistic in a language with the 3-way distinction? My naturalistic conlang has:

/p ph b/
/t th d/
/k kh g/
/ts tsh dz/
/t̠ʃ t̠ʃh d̠ʒ/
/ʈʂh/

i.e. no /ʈʂ/ or /ɖʐ/.

I also plan to neutralise the distinctions between voiceless and aspirated plosives (but not affricates) word-medially i.e. word medially only the following sounds are permitted :

/p b/
/t d/
/k g/
/ts tsh dz/
/t̠ʃ t̠ʃh d̠ʒ/
/ʈʂh/

Plausible?

If possible, do give real-language examples (past or present) to support your stand.

N.B. the letter h I use to mark aspiration is unsuperscripted, because I am currently on a phone, and superscripting them would be quite tedious.
Conlangs in progress:
Modern Khotanese
Modern Gandhari
?? - Japonic language in the Mekong Delta
Locna - Indo-European language in N. Syria
Wexford Norse
A British romlang, &c.
User avatar
Zekoslav
sinic
sinic
Posts: 340
Joined: 07 Oct 2017 16:54

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

Post by Zekoslav »

yangfiretiger121 wrote: 16 Nov 2019 13:36 Are rhotacized long monophthongs better transcribed as [Vːʴ] or [Vʴː]?
I'd choose [Vʴː]. Quality modifiers before quantity modifiers.
Languages:
:hrv: [:D], :bih: :srb: [;)], :eng: [:D], :fra: [:|], :lat: [:(], :deu: [:'(]

A linguistics enthusiast who occasionally frequents the CBB.

- Guide to Slavic accentuation
User avatar
Sequor
sinic
sinic
Posts: 438
Joined: 30 Jun 2012 06:13

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

Post by Sequor »

Zekoslav wrote: 16 Nov 2019 15:13
yangfiretiger121 wrote: 16 Nov 2019 13:36 Are rhotacized long monophthongs better transcribed as [Vːʴ] or [Vʴː]?
I'd choose [Vʴː]. Quality modifiers before quantity modifiers.
It's always pretty awkward though. This works well for vowels, but for affricate consonants it gets trickier, e.g. Italian razzo 'rocket' and ragazzo 'boy' [ˈradzːo raˈgatsːo] don't look like what they are, even with that joiner on top, [ˈrat͡sːo raˈgad͡zːo]... So [ˈradːzo raˈgatːso] is better, or also the usual convention, [ˈraddzo raˈgattso].
hīc sunt linguificēs. hēr bēoþ tungemakeras.
User avatar
Zekoslav
sinic
sinic
Posts: 340
Joined: 07 Oct 2017 16:54

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

Post by Zekoslav »

Chechen or some related Caucasian language which has phonemic long consonants in both onsets and codas, specifically has long /t͡sː/ with a long [s ] rather than a long [t]. Croatian /tt͡s/ and /dt͡s/ are realised as [t͡s] with a long [t], while /ts/ and /ds/ are realised as [t͡s] with a long [s ], and in careful speech they both contrast with /t͡s/ [t͡s] with both parts short. So marking length probably has to be adjusted based on what suits the language best. In languages where geminates are heterosyllabic, i.e. [at.ta], I prefer to just write both consonants and put the stress mark between them if needed.
Languages:
:hrv: [:D], :bih: :srb: [;)], :eng: [:D], :fra: [:|], :lat: [:(], :deu: [:'(]

A linguistics enthusiast who occasionally frequents the CBB.

- Guide to Slavic accentuation
User avatar
Ahzoh
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4191
Joined: 20 Oct 2013 02:57
Location: Canada

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

Post by Ahzoh »

My conlang's stress rules are that stress always falls on the last heaviest syllable. Pretonic short vowels syncopate except in CVCVC syllables.
So, this creates syllables (a and ā here represent short and long vowels, respectively) like CaC.Ca(C) and CCā.Ca(C) and Cā.Cā.Ca(C) but what natural processes (aside from simple vowel coalescence) can I do so that CāC.Ca(C) and CCa.Ca(C) Cā.Ca.Ca(C) are also valid syllable shapes.

Additional information:
  • It has a triconsonantal root system, not sure if that makes a huge difference for this question
  • Inventory:
    /a e i u /<a e i u>
    /aː eː iː uː/<ā ē ī ū>
    /aj əj aw əw/<ay ey aw ew>
    /aːj əːj aːw əːw/<āy ēy āw ēw>

    /m n ŋ/
    /p pʼ b t tʼ d k kʼ g ʔ/
    /s sʼ z ɬ ɬʼ ɮ x xʼ ɣ h/
    /r j w/
Image Śād Warḫallun (Vrkhazhian) [ WIKI | CWS ]
User avatar
Zekoslav
sinic
sinic
Posts: 340
Joined: 07 Oct 2017 16:54

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

Post by Zekoslav »

I'd love to help, but I can't accurately picture your conlang's syllable structure. Is it underlyingly CVC or CV with a coda consonant allowed word-finally? Where does stress fall if there are no long vowels in the word?

In an underlyingly CVC structure I see no reason why CāC.Ca(C) and Cā.Ca.Ca(C) wouldn't be there from the get go, especially if only pretonic, but not posttonic vowels are syncopate (syncope of posttonic vowels would turn Cā.Ca.Ca(C) into CāC.Ca(C) so it's good it's not there). CCa.Ca(C) is trickier to derive from an underlying CVC structure with the stress rules you've given and assuming in words without long syllables the initial syllable would be stressed. Maybe if it used to be CCā.Ca(C) and then the vowel was shortened for whatever reason.
Languages:
:hrv: [:D], :bih: :srb: [;)], :eng: [:D], :fra: [:|], :lat: [:(], :deu: [:'(]

A linguistics enthusiast who occasionally frequents the CBB.

- Guide to Slavic accentuation
User avatar
Ahzoh
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4191
Joined: 20 Oct 2013 02:57
Location: Canada

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

Post by Ahzoh »

Zekoslav wrote: 20 Nov 2019 09:34 I'd love to help, but I can't accurately picture your conlang's syllable structure. Is it underlyingly CVC or CV with a coda consonant allowed word-finally? Where does stress fall if there are no long vowels in the word?
The syllable is CV(:)(C) and classed into light (CV), heavy (CVC or CV:) and superheavy (CV:C) but the language does not like clusters of more than two consonants but also doesn't like word-final clusters or CCV(:)C monosyllables. If the word consists entirely of light open syllables, the stress is either always on the last vowel (the last heaviest vowel) or always on the second last vowel. I rather like the idea of having both stress patterns.

If stress is always on the last vowel than I can explain CV́C.CV(C) by way of CV.CV.CV́ > CVC.CV́ with a stress shift, but if stress is penultimate then I can explain CCV́.CV by way of CV.CV́.CV > C.CV́.CV. Neither stress patterns can, however, explain CV́:C.CV.
Image Śād Warḫallun (Vrkhazhian) [ WIKI | CWS ]
Salmoneus
MVP
MVP
Posts: 3030
Joined: 19 Sep 2011 19:37

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

Post by Salmoneus »

Ahzoh wrote: 20 Nov 2019 16:49
Zekoslav wrote: 20 Nov 2019 09:34 I'd love to help, but I can't accurately picture your conlang's syllable structure. Is it underlyingly CVC or CV with a coda consonant allowed word-finally? Where does stress fall if there are no long vowels in the word?
The syllable is CV(:)(C) and classed into light (CV), heavy (CVC or CV:) and superheavy (CV:C) but the language does not like clusters of more than two consonants but also doesn't like word-final clusters or CCV(:)C monosyllables. If the word consists entirely of light open syllables, the stress is either always on the last vowel (the last heaviest vowel) or always on the second last vowel. I rather like the idea of having both stress patterns.

If stress is always on the last vowel than I can explain CV́C.CV(C) by way of CV.CV.CV́ > CVC.CV́ with a stress shift, but if stress is penultimate then I can explain CCV́.CV by way of CV.CV́.CV > C.CV́.CV. Neither stress patterns can, however, explain CV́:C.CV.
I'm not sure what you mean. Given your rules, CV:C.CV shouldn't need any explaining? Superheavy syllable plus light syllable, cluster of only two consonants. What's the problem?
User avatar
Pabappa
greek
greek
Posts: 577
Joined: 18 Nov 2017 02:41

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

Post by Pabappa »

i think he wants a diachronic solution from a previous CV-only stage. in which case, i dont see one either.
Kavunupupis, šiŋuputata.
When I see you pointing at me, I know I'm in trouble. (Play)
User avatar
Zekoslav
sinic
sinic
Posts: 340
Joined: 07 Oct 2017 16:54

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

Post by Zekoslav »

There could be a situation, after syncope, that vowels are lengthened before some coda consonants, but not before others, resulting in CV.CV.CV́ > CVC.CV́ or CVːC.CV́ > CV́C.CV or CV́ːC.CV. The relevant consonants could then merge, making this distinction unpredictable.

If you want to have both penultimate and ultimate stress patterns for light roots while keeping predictable stress, you could make them depend on vowel quality or the presence of a coda consonant (possibly later lost, making this distinction, once again, unpredictable).

CV.CV́.CV > CCV́.CV
CV.CV.CV́C > CV́C.CV / CV́ːC.CV

Make this potentially lost coda consonant a suffix and voilà, ablaut!
Languages:
:hrv: [:D], :bih: :srb: [;)], :eng: [:D], :fra: [:|], :lat: [:(], :deu: [:'(]

A linguistics enthusiast who occasionally frequents the CBB.

- Guide to Slavic accentuation
Nloki
hieroglyphic
hieroglyphic
Posts: 65
Joined: 15 Dec 2018 16:01

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

Post by Nloki »

I'm thinking on starting a conlang with the following features:
•Diverse number affixation sources (derivationality/optionalism).
•Head-marking.
•Animacy based alignment split.
•Selective pro-dropping.
An then;
•¿Inherent noun classifiers/noun class suffixes functioning as referent pronouns on their own...?

My question is: which strategy would I need to use for that last feature?

As far as I know about Swahili (please correct me if I'm wrong), its referent tracking system is based on a set if noun-class preffixes which then can be used as independent morphology for verb-agreement.
If that's not the case for Swahili, I'm sorry, but it is one option for what I would like to do.
So, how should I call such a grammatical feature?

And also, are this features naturalistic to you altogether?
User avatar
Pabappa
greek
greek
Posts: 577
Joined: 18 Nov 2017 02:41

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

Post by Pabappa »

I've done the last feature, bringing it to its fullest extent in Late Andanese. There's not a whole lot of grammar info on that page, but if it can somehow help even a little bit, Im glad to help out. I should note, though, that Late Andanese is not intended to be naturalistic, and I think not even Swahili has quite so many noun classes as Andanese. More importantly perhaps, I dont think there is any natlang in which the same root can appear in a dozen or more noun classes. but i like it, and i especially like the wild semantic drifts I've come up with such as himaku "money" ~ mimaku "poison" just by changing the noun class prefix.

Some Bantu languages, such as Bemba, mark noun case with a classifier prefix as well, which I think means that the normal classifier is omitted, and words merge. I dont do this in Andanese because there are so many roots that are spread across multiple noun classes ... e.g. if I did what Bemba does, i would have no way to distinguish between "to the book" and "to the school" since both words use the same root. You could do something like this on purpose if you want a quirky grammar, but my guess is that the speakers would just stop borrowing words across multiple noun classes. My solution is to just stack the case markers on top of the classifiers, which gets a little clumsy but I'm okay with it.

i think Pirahã might also get 3rd person pronouns from the syllables of the antecedent, which is similar, but there's not much info about Piraha online. I dont think Piraha has proper noun classifiers.
Kavunupupis, šiŋuputata.
When I see you pointing at me, I know I'm in trouble. (Play)
Locked