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

[Ahzoh]

The gender system has to already be there before the construct state, not the other way around, if you develop things along these lines.

Yes, I mean that the gender system exists in the form of determiners, but the nouns themselves have no gender markings.

[Ahzoh]

Does it make sense that Vrkhazhian could maybe reanalyze derived forms as roots in themselves?
E.g. lomnash is a reflexive derivative of m-n-sh (write), but it would eventually be analyzed as it's own root l-m-n-sh and would be used to derive new words. Contrasts with Semitic languages where they would still perceive such derivation as still being of m-n-sh rather than l-m-n-sh.

[Micamo]

Does it make sense that Vrkhazhian could maybe reanalyze derived forms as roots in themselves?

Yes. This is very very common and how new roots get formed in the first place.

[HoskhMatriarch]

I'd say having a somewhat large number of syllables per word is common in highly agglutinative languages that not fusional. Japanese has 4 syllable inflections for adjectives in very common categories, while having the base stem have in most, like at least 90%, of the cases be 2+ syllables.

a.o.ku.na.kat.ta
(it) aas not blue (inflection in bold)

Ok. Japanese adjectives are verb-like, while yours seem to be noun-like, but my point remais.

That's really why I'm wondering if three-syllable adjective endings for noun-like adjectives would work or not. They're not completely noun-like, since predicate adjectives are verbs (having predicate adjectives be verb-like and attributive adjectives noun-like seems to be more common in natlangs than most people think). Not that the current forms are three syllables (the current forms are also decently fusional, as you've seen), but the fact that a historical one was seems like it might be unlikely. Also, I can't just tack the two-syllable adjective endings onto definite articles (maybe I could just make a non-declining definite article but decline the rest of the determiners like adjectives except maybe indefinite articles).

[clawgrip]

For the record, I have made a language that has one- to three-syllable endings on all attributive adjectives, and they are declined identically to nouns, making them quite noun-like.

Naduta (underline shows the inflections):

gen.day bay "small person (OBJ)"
gen.da.re.ta a.tre.ta "small seeds (NOM)"

First, every adjective takes the attributive suffix -da, which is then declined identically to the noun.

You can judge if you find this unrealistic or not. I do sometimes share your feeling of it being too much, as, for example, when you add a genitive phrase, you get the same ending three times:

ita yareta gendareta atreta "the woman's small seeds"
woman-ANIM.NOM GEN-PL.UKN.NOM small-ATTR-PL.UKN.NOM seed-PL.UKN.NOM

But I just accepted it as just a feature of this language.

[Lambuzhao]

I forget how strict word-order is in Naduta, but my Greco-Latin (and other langs with) free-syntax buzzer goes off with -

ita yareta gendareta atreta

I'm sure a native speaker could tell that it's the seeds that are small and not the woman, yet I can't help feeling that somehow mebbe this:

ita yareta atreta gendareta (prolly not, though)

or mebbe more naturalistically this-

gendareta atreta ita yareta

Just wondering how comfortable/restricted Naduta is with postpositional Adjective Ordering.

[clawgrip]

Naduta is strongly head-final, so all modifiers must come before the word they modify. Adjectives are still distinct from nouns in both attributive form (where they carry the attributive suffix -da) and in complement form (where they combine with the copula without any case suffixes at all, which would be required of a noun in complement position), so they are not likely to switch positions. Genitives also need to come before the noun they modify. These also are distinct from nouns since they take a nominative subject and and thus follow the same pattern as relative clauses (the verb of a relative clause also declines identically to what it modifies).

However, since they all end in the appropriate case ending for the head noun, anything to the right can be dropped, so the following are all possible:

ita yareta gendareta atreta "the woman's small seeds"
ita yareta gendareta "the woman's small ones"
ita yareta "the woman's ones"

I suspect the displacement you suggest could be possible in informal speech, when a person halfway through a sentence feels they have not provided enough information and adds it in before finishing, but this is not standard.

[Lambuzhao]

Naduta is strongly head-final, so all modifiers must come before the word they modify. Adjectives are still distinct from nouns in both attributive form (where they carry the attributive suffix -da) and in complement form (where they combine with the copula without any case suffixes at all, which would be required of a noun in complement position), so they are not likely to switch positions. Genitives also need to come before the noun they modify. These also are distinct from nouns since they take a nominative subject and and thus follow the same pattern as relative clauses (the verb of a relative clause also declines identically to what it modifies).

However, since they all end in the appropriate case ending for the head noun, anything to the right can be dropped, so the following are all possible:

ita yareta gendareta atreta "the woman's small seeds"
ita yareta gendareta "the woman's small ones"
ita yareta "the woman's ones"

I suspect the displacement you suggest could be possible in informal speech, when a person halfway through a sentence feels they have not provided enough information and adds it in before finishing, but this is not standard.

[HoskhMatriarch]

For the record, I have made a language that has one- to three-syllable endings on all attributive adjectives, and they are declined identically to nouns, making them quite noun-like.

Naduta (underline shows the inflections):

gen.day bay "small person (OBJ)"
gen.da.re.ta a.tre.ta "small seeds (NOM)"

First, every adjective takes the attributive suffix -da, which is then declined identically to the noun.

You can judge if you find this unrealistic or not. I do sometimes share your feeling of it being too much, as, for example, when you add a genitive phrase, you get the same ending three times:

ita yareta gendareta atreta "the woman's small seeds"
woman-ANIM.NOM GEN-PL.UKN.NOM small-ATTR-PL.UKN.NOM seed-PL.UKN.NOM

But I just accepted it as just a feature of this language.

Well, I could get rid of the three-syllable-ness if I made the genitive ending -s instead of -as. But I really like all the umlaut that results from it being -as (and then being reduced to -s most of the time), plus, I don't want geminates on words that already end in -s (no geminates please). I'm not sure it's even good to have two-syllable adjective endings if you're going to be sticking them on determiners. Maybe I need to go read more about adjective endings then make another table...

[cromulant]

Ok, folks: name the language you can think of with the largest number of fricatives that does NOT have /s/.

Feel free to consider this a contest. The Victor will be awarded my thoughts being with them in their next time of need.

[sangi39]

Turkmen has /ɸ θ ʃ h β ð ʒ/

[Keenir]

For the record, I have made a language that has one- to three-syllable endings on all attributive adjectives, and they are declined identically to nouns, making them quite noun-like.

Naduta (underline shows the inflections):

gen.day bay "small person (OBJ)"
gen.da.re.ta a.tre.ta "small seeds (NOM)"

First, every adjective takes the attributive suffix -da, which is then declined identically to the noun.

You can judge if you find this unrealistic or not. I do sometimes share your feeling of it being too much, as, for example, when you add a genitive phrase, you get the same ending three times:

ita yareta gendareta atreta "the woman's small seeds"
woman-ANIM.NOM GEN-PL.UKN.NOM small-ATTR-PL.UKN.NOM seed-PL.UKN.NOM

But I just accepted it as just a feature of this language.

Well, I could get rid of the three-syllable-ness if I made the genitive ending -s instead of -as. But I really like all the umlaut that results from it being -as (and then being reduced to -s most of the time), plus, I don't want geminates on words that already end in -s (no geminates please).

are geminates the only form of suffix available? if not, use another form; if geminates are the only option, then maybe make geminates the exception that proves the rule {you like exceptions, right?

for example...
normally, it'd be "klaustens-sas-ummat" where -sas- is the geminate.

but geminates turn it into "klaustens_sas-ummat" where one word (with all the suffixes) trails behind the word like a loyal puppy (with or without a sweater and antlers taped to its head)

disclaimer: that was off the top of my head, and without looking at wiki or language books or a dictionary or anything.

I'm not sure it's even good to have two-syllable adjective endings if you're going to be sticking them on determiners.

Good?

[eurasianon]

Do you guys think this is a good use of my language's subjunctive mood: subjunctive copulas are used to form existential/'there is' statements.

copula: 'tai'
subjunctive copula: 'tes'

kanon tai
person.M.ACC COP.IND
It is a man.

kanon tes
person.M.ACC COP.SJV
There is a man.

Are there any natlangs that use the subjunctive in this manner, or any mood for that matter?

[Sumelic]

What else is subjunctive used for?

[eurasianon]

What else is subjunctive used for?

At this point I haven't completely made up my mind yet. Of course it will have more uses. I was thinking it could also express probability and/or permisiveness.

[HoskhMatriarch]

For the record, I have made a language that has one- to three-syllable endings on all attributive adjectives, and they are declined identically to nouns, making them quite noun-like.

Naduta (underline shows the inflections):

gen.day bay "small person (OBJ)"
gen.da.re.ta a.tre.ta "small seeds (NOM)"

First, every adjective takes the attributive suffix -da, which is then declined identically to the noun.

You can judge if you find this unrealistic or not. I do sometimes share your feeling of it being too much, as, for example, when you add a genitive phrase, you get the same ending three times:

ita yareta gendareta atreta "the woman's small seeds"
woman-ANIM.NOM GEN-PL.UKN.NOM small-ATTR-PL.UKN.NOM seed-PL.UKN.NOM

But I just accepted it as just a feature of this language.

Well, I could get rid of the three-syllable-ness if I made the genitive ending -s instead of -as. But I really like all the umlaut that results from it being -as (and then being reduced to -s most of the time), plus, I don't want geminates on words that already end in -s (no geminates please).

are geminates the only form of suffix available? if not, use another form; if geminates are the only option, then maybe make geminates the exception that proves the rule {you like exceptions, right?

for example...
normally, it'd be "klaustens-sas-ummat" where -sas- is the geminate.

but geminates turn it into "klaustens_sas-ummat" where one word (with all the suffixes) trails behind the word like a loyal puppy (with or without a sweater and antlers taped to its head)

disclaimer: that was off the top of my head, and without looking at wiki or language books or a dictionary or anything.

Well, I just don't like geminates for this language. The genitive of thoss [tʰɔs] should be thåsas [tʰɔasas] because I like how it sounds, not [tʰɔsː], because I don't like how that sounds. I really like the genitive a-umlaut, even more than not having to have geminates. I'm not just going to use the m-genitive on all nouns that end with sibilants. I just don't think noun-like adjectives that historically have three-syllable endings like sjennuasa really work. Are there any agglutinating languages with noun-like adjectives that just pile affixes onto single-syllable adjectives until they're 4 syllables? If there are, sjennuasa might work.

I'm not sure it's even good to have two-syllable adjective endings if you're going to be sticking them on determiners.

Good?

Well, what kind of language with complex syllable shapes has three-syllable words for "an" and "some"?

räuesa ħwitte
of some smacks

(Well, only the genitive plural masculine and feminine would have three-syllable determiners)

[Creyeditor]

For the record, I have made a language that has one- to three-syllable endings on all attributive adjectives, and they are declined identically to nouns, making them quite noun-like.

Naduta (underline shows the inflections):

gen.day bay "small person (OBJ)"
gen.da.re.ta a.tre.ta "small seeds (NOM)"

First, every adjective takes the attributive suffix -da, which is then declined identically to the noun.

You can judge if you find this unrealistic or not. I do sometimes share your feeling of it being too much, as, for example, when you add a genitive phrase, you get the same ending three times:

ita yareta gendareta atreta "the woman's small seeds"
woman-ANIM.NOM GEN-PL.UKN.NOM small-ATTR-PL.UKN.NOM seed-PL.UKN.NOM

But I just accepted it as just a feature of this language.

Well, I could get rid of the three-syllable-ness if I made the genitive ending -s instead of -as. But I really like all the umlaut that results from it being -as (and then being reduced to -s most of the time), plus, I don't want geminates on words that already end in -s (no geminates please).

are geminates the only form of suffix available? if not, use another form; if geminates are the only option, then maybe make geminates the exception that proves the rule {you like exceptions, right?

for example...
normally, it'd be "klaustens-sas-ummat" where -sas- is the geminate.

but geminates turn it into "klaustens_sas-ummat" where one word (with all the suffixes) trails behind the word like a loyal puppy (with or without a sweater and antlers taped to its head)

disclaimer: that was off the top of my head, and without looking at wiki or language books or a dictionary or anything.

Well, I just don't like geminates for this language. The genitive of thoss [tʰɔs] should be thåsas [tʰɔasas] because I like how it sounds, not [tʰɔsː], because I don't like how that sounds. I really like the genitive a-umlaut, even more than not having to have geminates. I'm not just going to use the m-genitive on all nouns that end with sibilants. I just don't think noun-like adjectives that historically have three-syllable endings like sjennuasa really work. Are there any agglutinating languages with noun-like adjectives that just pile affixes onto single-syllable adjectives until they're 4 syllables? If there are, sjennuasa might work.

I'm not sure it's even good to have two-syllable adjective endings if you're going to be sticking them on determiners.

Good?

Well, what kind of language with complex syllable shapes has three-syllable words for "an" and "some"?

Well you could argue that German has "einige", which is a three syllable word that has the meaning "some".

[loglorn]

The feminine form of algum (some), alguma in Portuguese is also three syllables long. I feel like the general american has a tendency to overestimate the difficulty of producing "long" words, which i usually perceive as having normal length.

[HoskhMatriarch]

The feminine form of algum (some), alguma in Portuguese is also three syllables long. I feel like the general american has a tendency to overestimate the difficulty of producing "long" words, which i usually perceive as having normal length.

So four syllables for the shortest possible genitive plural masculine or feminine adjective is fine? Cool, I can leave my declension tables as-is then (especially considering the actual current form is three syllables, not four).

Also, the guy I know who said "no words should be more than three syllables long" is from Quebec. I think words with more than three syllables are cool, they should just have a lot of grammatical information in them, like sarnsaikgazjnittŋ̇pfararlailochsjärthzüzṛn "it is said he went out guiltily after the puppy singing for her" (which is an actual grammatical word from Hoskh). Of course, adjectives aren't going to be quite that long, except for verbal adjectives with incorporated subjects and stuff like that.

[Keenir]

I'm not sure it's even good to have two-syllable adjective endings if you're going to be sticking them on determiners.

Good?

Well, what kind of language with complex syllable shapes has three-syllable words for "an" and "some"?

"Oh, I'm going to have a hereforeundetermined number of bowls of cereal, and, ooh, chocolate is moreplusgood* in any quantity Thishere** box is empty of all but a littleittybitty bit left."

Or, if you don't like that answer, I'll give a different answer:

Well, what kind of language with complex syllable shapes has three-syllable words for "an" and "some"?

Yours.



* = Orwell? regardless, its not my coining.
** = this+here