Večʼapruga

A forum for all topics related to constructed languages
Post Reply
User avatar
ixals
sinic
sinic
Posts: 440
Joined: 28 Jul 2015 18:43

Večʼapruga

Post by ixals »

Večʼapruga

Večʼapruga, or otherwise known with its anglicised name Vechaprian, is a language spoken in the Caspian Sea on a fictional island which splits the lake into two major parts. Due to this favourable position, the island became comparatively wealth thanks to trade routes, but these routes also caused it to be a desirable place to conquer. It is spoken by about five million people, the exact number has not been decided yet.

When it comes to aesthetics, Armenian was a notable inspiration - and probably the only one. However, vocabulary and grammar is not influenced by Armenian and non-native vocabulary mostly comes from Persian, Greek, Arabic and Russian (though sound changes have made some earlier loans unrecognisable on first sight), so the similarities with Armenian already end after the romanisation.

1. Phonology

1.1 Consonants

/b p pʰ d t tʰ g k kʰ/ <b p pʼ d t tʼ g k kʼ>
/dz ts tsʰ dʒ tʃ tʃʰ/ <j c cʼ ǰ č čʼ>
/(f) v s z ʃ ʒ x/ <(f) v s z š ž x>
/m n l r j/ <m n l r y>
just seeing the messed up ǰ makes me want to throw everything overboard AAAARGH

Vechaprian's consonant inventory is fairly average and doesn't contain any unusual gaps. The most defining aspect of its inventory is the consistent distinction between voiced, voiceless and voiceless aspirated stops similar to Ancient Greek, but Vechaprian also features this distinction in its affricates.

Notes:
- I normally use a normal apostrophe to romanise the aspirated consonants, but on this website the ejective apostrophe looks better to me.
- The voiced stops can be [β ð ɣ] intervocally for some speakers.
- To the east, /s z/ are realised as [θ ð], a feature shared with the Turkmen language. Thus, /d/ and /z/ partially merge for these speakers.
- /x/ is pronounced as [h] intervocally, and for some speakers also at the beginning of an utterance. In other instances, the pronunciation varies between [x] or [χ] (voiceless uvular fricative for those who get shown the same letter twice) and [ɣ] or [ʁ] in voiced clusters respectively.
- /v/'s realisation in coda position is always [w]. Some dialects' pronunciation of /v/ is [w] everywhere.

1.2. Vowels

/i ɨ u/ <i u o>
/e ə o/ <ẹ e ọ>
/ɑ/ <a>

The vowel inventory of Vechaprian is a standard five vowel system with two additional central vowels. The romanisation might raise questions, but when looking at the earlier qualities, they are pretty clear. In a condensed version, /aw > o > u > ɨ/ and /aj > e > ə/ is all that happened.

Notes:
- Most speakers pronounce /e o/ as [e̞ o̞] or even as [ɛ ɔ]. The pronunciation depends solely on the speaker similar to Italian.
- The eastern regions closer to Turkmenistan tend to pronounce /ɨ ə/ as [y ø]. The latter of course can lower to [ø̞] or [œ] depending on the speaker.
- When a word starts with two consonants, the cluster gets broken up with a schwa in fast speech if the preceding word ended in a consonant.

1.3. Stress

Stress in Vechaprian is consistently placed on the last syllable of a lemma's stem. As most suffixes are just one syllable, most Vechaprian words are thus pronounced on the penultimate, while there are some pronounced on the last syllable or the antepenultimate. Recent loanwords can deviate from this rule and have their stress placed on a syllable that is not the stem's last syllable.

meskutʼ /məsˈkɨtʰ/ 'mosque'
meskutʼe /məsˈkɨ.tʰə/ 'mosques'
Sajora /sɑˈdzu.rɑ/ 'Greece'
Sajoracan /sɑˈdzu.rɑ.tsɑn/ 'from Greece'

Derivational suffixes - of course - count as the word stem, so they can be stressed compared to inflectional suffixes which never receive stress.

2. Alphabet

Vechaprian has its own alphabet which was created during the 4th century just as the Armenian and Georgian alphabets with the introduction of Christianity. Most letters derive from the Greek alphabet, but some were taken from surrounding alphabets for sounds that the Greek alphabet did not have any letters for. I do not have the alphabet ready yet, because when coming up with a natural development for each letter, a lot of them look too much to their Greek/Latin counterpart or they merge with too many other letters. So as a placeholder, I am using the Cyrillic alphabet.

а п к т ц х е в з ѕ д
a p k t c x e v z j d
и кı чı л џ м н ь с о пı
i kʼ čʼ l ǰ m n y s o pʼ
ж р ч ш тı цı у б г е̄ о̄
ž r č š tʼ cʼ u b g ẹ ọ

For the cyrillisation, I have chosen the palochka to mark the aspiration as it does in another language. In my dictionary's font, the palochka's miniscule looks like a dotless i, hence I am using the dotless i in here to reflect that.

The alphabetic order of the Vechaprian alphabet is/was based on the Greek ordering of letters, but the added letters and the sound changes have obscured it a bit. Some of the glyphs stem from older digraphs, those are <c> (ti), <čʼ> (kʼi), <ǰ> (li), <y> (ni), <cʼ> (tʼi), <ẹ> (ai) and <ọ> (av), which for the consonants may explain their position in the alphabet. There were more letters in the past, but some of them merged in pronunciation, therefore only one letter for each sound survived. Maybe I'll add them back in in the future, just to have some naturalistic spelling quirks? Who knows.



I would've liked to put a farewell in Vecheprian at the end, but I haven't found a construction I am happy with, so: Thanks for reading!
Last edited by ixals on 20 Aug 2021 03:18, edited 1 time in total.
Native: :deu:
Learning: :gbr:, :chn:, :tur:, :fra:

Zhér·dûn a tonal Germanic conlang

old stuff: Цiски | Noattȯč | Tungōnis Vīdīnōs
User avatar
Davush
greek
greek
Posts: 638
Joined: 10 Jan 2015 14:10

Re: Večʼapruga

Post by Davush »

I like the look of this! Looking forward to seeing some examples. [:D]
User avatar
ixals
sinic
sinic
Posts: 440
Joined: 28 Jul 2015 18:43

Re: Večʼapruga

Post by ixals »

Note: I exchanged <ǰ> for <ǯ> in this post only for the sake of making the example sentences look a bit cleaner. The official romanisation of /dʒ/ is still <ǰ>.

3. Nouns

Nouns in Vechaprian are inflected for up to seven cases. Not all nouns are inflected for all seven of them, in fact, most nouns are only inflected for five cases, similar to how the Armenian locative case can't be used for animate nouns. A noun is declined by simply suffixing the case affixes onto the verb. Between a noun's stem and the case affix comes a theme vowel (e.g. the final <a> in večʼapruga 'Vechaprian' and Sajora 'Greece' is the theme vowel). Only one case deletes the theme vowel but more on that later.

Apart from case, Vechaprian possesses two genders and generally two numbers.

3.1. Number

Grammatical number in nouns is for the most part not really noteworthy. The majority of nouns have a singular and a plural, but a small subset of nouns also has a distinct dual form. The dual mainly exists in nouns in body parts (e.g. xog 'eye') and some other nouns that come in pairs.

A noun's number is changed by changing its theme vowel to a different one (e.g. ikʼleši 'church' becomes ikʼleše 'churches').

3.2. Gender

Like it has just been mentioned, Vechaprian nouns belong to one of two genders: masculine or feminine. The gender of each word has to be memorised as there is no way of deducing a noun's gender just by looking at it (except for recognising a derivational suffix of course), because both masculine and feminine are declined exactly the same. Grammatical gender and natural gender coincide for the most part and sometimes nouns in the same category (?) like month names belong to the same gender.

3.3. Case

Vechaprian's nouns can be declined for up to seven cases as aforementioned. Those cases are the nominative, the accusative, the dative, the genitive, the prepositional, the locative and the ablative. The nouns that are declined for five cases lack the locative and ablative cases, as these two cases are only used with locational nouns.

Note: some cases get more functions added to them as I have just worked on the most basic uses of each case so far.
I do not have a lot of vocabulary yet, so I had some fun with the limited set of words I had available

3.3.1. Nominative

The nominative in Vechaprian has no case affix, instead the bare noun is used to convey the nominative function. Thus, the nominative singular also functions as the citation form. As any other nominative-accusative language, the nominative case is used to indicate the subject of a sentence.

Dọva biren.
/ˈdo.vɑ ˌbi.rən/
dọv-a-∅ bir-e-n
bull-SG-NOM drink-NFUT-3PS

'A bull drinks.'

The nominative is also used for the subject complement in copulative verbs, most notably jẹ 'to be'.

Xvizni nevo 'n.
/ˈxviz.ni ˌnə.vun/
xvizn-i-∅ nev-o-∅ u-n
queen-SG-NOM kidney-SG-NOM be.PRS-3PS

'The queen is a kidney.'

Furthermore, the nominative also serves a vocative function. No example needed for that though. [:P]

3.3.2. Accusative

The accusatives main function is to mark the direct object of a transitive verb. The accusative is formed by suffixing an -n onto the noun, nothing more. There are two types of nouns that do not have a distinct accusative form but more about that later.

Saxǯaza zanan aven.
/sɑxˈdʒɑ.zɑ ˌzɑ.nɑn ˌɑ.vən/
saxǯaz-a-∅ zan-a-n av-e-n
royals-SG-NOM small.intestine-SG-ACC sell-NFUT-3PS

'The royals sell a small intestine.'

Apart from marking the direct object, the accusative can also be found after some prepositions. This is getting continuously rarer as the accusative is replaced by the dative case in colloquial speech and historically has been replaced by the dative in a lot of instances already.

Čʼvara ti xmuvan en.
/ˈtʃʰvɑ.rɑ ti ˌxmɨ.vɑn ən/
čʼvar-a-∅ ti xmuv-a-n e-n
crane-SG-NOM through fog-SG-ACC go.NFUT-3PS

'The crane walks through the fog.'

3.3.3. Dative

The third case, the dative, is often used to mark the indirect object of a ditransitive verb, most common example of this would be the verb cʼare 'to give'. The ending for the dative case is -m.

Večʼapru jorim balalaykan cʼarun.
/vəˈtʃʰɑp.rɨ ˌdzu.rim bɑ.lɑˈlɑj.kɑn ˌtsʰɑ.run/
večʼapr-u-∅ jor-i-m balalayk-a-n cʼar-u-n
Vechaprian-PL-NOM Greek-SG.F-DAT balalaika-SG-ACC give-NFUT-3PS

'The Vechaprians give a balalaika to the Greek woman.'

Furthermore, the dative can also be used to denote the purpose or the benefit of something. In some cases, both uses can be kind of ambiguous like in the following example in which it can be interpreted as doing the action for the queen as in 'gaining' the queen as a consequence or for the queen as in being ordered to do it by her.

Xviznim pʼalten.
/ˈxviz.nim ˌpʰɑl.tən/
xvizn-i-m pʼalt-e-n
queen-SG-DAT fight-NFUT-3PS

'They fight for the queen.'

Probably the most notable function of the dative in Vecheprian is its use to denote the meaning of 'towards', in other words its use as an undercover lative case. It's this usage that is supplanting the accusative in a lot of cases. The accusative often denoted motion towards something in many prepositions, but the dative is taking that meaning over. This is a Turkic influence as that language family also uses its dative oftentimes for the lative case's typical functions.

Pʼil ib ikʼlešim en.
/ˈpʰil ib ikʰˌlə.ʃim ən/
pʼil-∅ ib ikʼleš-i-m e-n
elephant-NOM on church-SG-DAT go.NFUT-3PS

'The elephant goes up on the church.'
(what would be the best translation here? motion towards and onto the top of something)

3.3.4. Genitive

The genitive case has two functions. It's main function is to mark the possessor in a genitive construction. This is done by suffixing to the possessor. The possessor generally comes before the possessee in Vechaprian genitive constructions.

Sajoraš tʼažun pʼaltem.
/sɑˌdzu.rɑʃ ˈtʰɑ.ʒɨn ˌpʰɑl.təm/
Sajora-š tʼaž-u-n pʼalt-e-m
Greece-GEN tongue-PL-ACC fight-NFUT-1PS

'I fight against the languages of Greece.'

Additionally, the genitive is also one of the cases that can be found after some prepositions. The one used in the accusative example sentence is such a preposition. Used with the genitive, it's meaning changes into 'among' rather than 'through'.

Čʼara ti Salekʼaš xǯazeš šan.
/ˈtʃʰɑ.rɑ ti sɑˈlə.kʰɑʃ ˌxdʒɑ.zəʃ ʃɑn/
čʼar-a-∅ ti Salekʼa-š xǯaz-e-š ša-n
woman-SG-NOM among Poland-GEN king-PL-GEN be.PST-3PS

'There was a woman among the Polish kings.'

3.3.5. Prepositional

As the name of this case already implies, the prepositional case is used after prepositions to signify a stationary location for the most time. Locative would have therefore been a pretty fitting name, however, there is another locative case already, so prepositional it is. The prepositional case is a special case (huh, get it?) in Vechaprian noun morphology, because it is the only case that deletes the theme vowel of a noun and replaces it with a different vowel. Which vowel it gets changed to depends on the theme vowel of a noun, but we'll get to that.

Ib xoje kʼixem.
/ib ˈxu.dzə ˌkʰi.xəm/
ib xoj-ẹ kʼix-e-m
on egg-SG.PRP live-NFUT-1PS

'I live on top of the egg.'

3.3.6. Locative

The locative is the first of two cases which are only used for nouns denoting a place. It's used to convey the general sense of 'in/at/on X' when there is no need to specify it any further with a preposition for example. The suffix for the locative case is -t.

Ikʼlešit ọken.
/ikʰˌlə.ʃit ˈo.kən/
ikʼleš-i-t ọk-e-n
church-SG-LOC pray-NFUT-3PS

'They pray in church.'

3.3.7. Ablative

The seventh and last case is the ablative which is created by adding -can to the noun. Just like the locative, it's only used with locational nouns and it is used to show a motion away from or out of a place.

Ikʼlešican čakim.
/ikʰˌlə.ʃi.tsɑn ˈtʃɑ.kim/
ikʼleš-i-can čak-i-m
church-SG-ABL run-FUT-1PS

'I will run away from the church.' or 'I will run out of the church.'

In colloquial speech, especially that of the Eastern parts, the ablative is starting to get used with nouns other than locational nouns. This is another influence of Turkic languages and their coincidentally very similar looking ablative suffix.

3.4. Case Syncretism

Some nouns in Vechaprian are rather special, because they do not have distinct nominative and accusative forms and share the same form for both of these cases. Most of these nouns are those that lack a theme vowel and therefore end in a consonant, such as irom 'name' or xǯaz 'king'. This rarely causes any problem with ambiguity, because oftentimes determiners, which do decline for the accusative, accompany these nouns.

The other instance of such nominative-accusative case syncretism is for some nouns that use the accusative form for the nominative as well, meaning that the nominative also ends with the suffix -n. Those are comparatively rare and only exist for some inanimate nouns.

Nouns ending in -n can belong to either one of these. The -n in the nominative is either the accusative suffix or it is part of the stem of a noun without a theme vowel. For example:

xojon 'egg (nom./acc.)' > xojoš 'egg (gen.)'
xtʼon 'tooth (nom./acc.)' > xtʼonuš 'tooth (gen.)'

3.5. Noun Class

Nouns in Vechaprian can be divided into different classes depending on the theme vowel they use. Apart from that, there is barely no difference between the classes as they decline the same and don't belong solely to one semantic category, etc. This just serves as an overview of what theme vowels there are, what their prepositional case looks like and what their regular plural looks like.

zero-class: This class is for nouns that lack a theme vowel. For cases other than the accusative, -u- is inserted between the stem and the case affix. The prepositional case is also formed with -u. The plural for this type of noun is formed with the change to e as a theme vowel.

a-class: The most common theme vowel in Vechaprian. Its prepositional case is formed with -e and the theme vowel in the plural changes to u.

o-class: In native words this class can only be masculine. Its prepositional case is also -e and the plural's theme vowel is also u.

i-class: Most of the i-class nouns are feminine but there are many exceptions to this rule. Here, the prepositional class is -ẹ and the plural uses e for the plural. For i-class nouns denoting a female nationality or job with a male counterpart, the same plural form as the masculine is used. Hence večʼapri '(female) Vechaprian' becomes večʼapru and shares this plural form with večʼapra '(male) Vechaprian' whereas xvizni 'queen' becomes xvizne because there is no male counterpart with this noun's stem.

u-class: This class is used for plural nouns only. The prepositional for this class is -ẹ.

e-class: Another class used for plural nouns. For this class, -u is the prepositional case suffix.


Davush wrote: 18 Aug 2021 10:32 I like the look of this! Looking forward to seeing some examples. [:D]
Thank you! I hope this post offered you enough examples [:D]
Last edited by ixals on 22 Aug 2021 05:58, edited 1 time in total.
Native: :deu:
Learning: :gbr:, :chn:, :tur:, :fra:

Zhér·dûn a tonal Germanic conlang

old stuff: Цiски | Noattȯč | Tungōnis Vīdīnōs
User avatar
Davush
greek
greek
Posts: 638
Joined: 10 Jan 2015 14:10

Re: Večʼapruga

Post by Davush »

ixals wrote: 20 Aug 2021 03:14
Davush wrote: 18 Aug 2021 10:32 I like the look of this! Looking forward to seeing some examples. [:D]
Thank you! I hope this post offered you enough examples [:D]
Yes thank you! I love the look of it so far. Quite Armenian feeling but also unique. I am wondering if it is actually a "lost" IE language (or para-IE?) as I can spot several IE-looking things...

I wonder if I'm right about any of the following being IE? (They could possibly also be loans from earlier stages of Armenian, etc.?)

1sg verbs in -im
3pl verbs in -n
Accusative in -n

xt'on- from > *h1dont~h3dont- (this would possible make Vec'apruga have a reflex of *h1 [D:] )
xojo- from *h2owyom
xvizni- from some form of *gwhen-
tʼaž- possibly from *dhngweh2-
biren possibly with bi- from *piph3eti (or similar)

I imagine <ikʼleši> is a Greek loan (this is a great word). <P'il> is possibly an Arabic loan from <fīl>?
I love the preposition <ib> and was coincidentally thinking of using <ab> in Osroene, it also reminds me of Gulf Arabic <əb>.
User avatar
ixals
sinic
sinic
Posts: 440
Joined: 28 Jul 2015 18:43

Re: Večʼapruga

Post by ixals »

Davush wrote: 20 Aug 2021 09:55Yes thank you! I love the look of it so far. Quite Armenian feeling but also unique. I am wondering if it is actually a "lost" IE language (or para-IE?) as I can spot several IE-looking things...
Damnit! I wanted to see how long I can pull through without saying it is Indo-European. I didn't expect it to happen right after the first post, but you got me [:P] I hoped some things would come off as just coincidental like -m being quite common for first person crosslinguistically, but I think the accusative in -n is a dead giveaway.
Davush wrote: 20 Aug 2021 09:551sg verbs in -im
3pl verbs in -n
Accusative in -n
You're right about all of those! I just checked and noticed I accidently glossed a lot of the verbs with 1SG and 3SG even though it's meant to say 1PS and 3PS. Gotta fix that.
Davush wrote: 20 Aug 2021 09:55xt'on- from > *h1dont~h3dont- (this would possible make Vec'apruga have a reflex of *h1 [D:] )
xojo- from *h2owyom
xvizni- from some form of *gwhen-
tʼaž- possibly from *dhngweh2-
biren possibly with bi- from *piph3eti (or similar)
Most of these are right. The only one you're wrong about is xvizni, which is from *h₃rḗǵnih₂. Večʼaprian does not have a laryngeal reflex though.
Davush wrote: 20 Aug 2021 09:55I imagine <ikʼleši> is a Greek loan (this is a great word). <P'il> is possibly an Arabic loan from <fīl>?
Yes, ikʼleši is from Greek. I didn't like it at the beginning, because it looked too much like its Greek source, but I've come to like it more. But pʼil is actually a Persian loan, not an Arabic one. Same source word nonetheless.
Native: :deu:
Learning: :gbr:, :chn:, :tur:, :fra:

Zhér·dûn a tonal Germanic conlang

old stuff: Цiски | Noattȯč | Tungōnis Vīdīnōs
User avatar
Omzinesý
runic
runic
Posts: 3220
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 08:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: Večʼapruga

Post by Omzinesý »

I think the normal direction of grammaticalization is from a goal case to an indirect-object case, from concrete to abstract, but if grammaticalization is contact-induced, I think the other direction is not too odd.

The lang has some IE feeling but a Turkic or Uralic language could well develop the same endings.

Have you considered phonotactics, yet?

Nice start! Waiting for syntax constructions!
My meta-thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5760
User avatar
ixals
sinic
sinic
Posts: 440
Joined: 28 Jul 2015 18:43

Re: Večʼapruga

Post by ixals »

4. Adjectives

Compared to nouns, Vechaprian adjectives are considerably easier to understand. There are only two types of adjectives, o-class and e-class. Also, in attributive position, adjectives always precede the noun they modify.

The adjectival declension has eroded heavily over time so that there is barely any kind of declination left for adjectives in Modern Vechaprian. While nouns decline heavily for case, adjectives do not at all, but instead only do so for gender which is something nouns don't do.

4.1. Gender

Gender in adjectives is marked by changing the vowel at the end of the adjective. Adjectives in the o-class end in -o in their masculine form and with -a in the feminine. In the e-class, the masculine ending is -e while the feminine form ends in -e. There is no difference between singular and plural forms.

čiko xtʼone 'long teeth (m.)' vs. čika tʼaža 'long tongue (f.)'
tubotʼe čʼvara 'two-legged crane (m.)' vs. tubotʼi čʼara 'two-legged woman'

4.2. Nominalisation

Adjectives in Vechaprian can easily be nominalised. As adjectives already end in vowels that are also used for nouns, the normal form of the adjective is identical to that of the nominative of an nominalised adjective. The case suffixes are regularly added onto that and for the o-class, the pluralisation also happens regularly with a change to -u. As -e is already used for plurals, nominalised e-class adjectives also make use of -u for their plural form.

Tubotʼem pʼaltem.
/tɨˈbu.tʰəm ˌpʰɑl.təm/
tubotʼ-e-m pʼalt-e-m
two.legged-SG-DAT fight-NFUT-1PS

'I fight for the two-legged one.'

4.3. Comparison

Another feature of adjectives is the elative form. The elative form is used for the comparative degree as well as the superlative degree. It is formed by the suffix -ušo, which is the suffix for both classes of adjectives. This means that adjectives of the e-class join the o-class for this form. In some rural dialects, this suffix is not considered a derivational affix but instead a inflectional one, so there are differences in stress placement (e.g. čikušo has standard /tʃiˈkɨ.ʃu/ and rural /ˈtʃi.kɨ.ʃu/ as a pronunciation).

4.3.1. Comparative

Using the elative form of an adjective on its own conveys the meaning of a comparative form, when used predicatively as well as attributively. If there is something that is compared to, the compared noun comes with the preposition i 'to' which traditionally needs the accusative case but is also encountered with the dative case colloquially.

Marcʼo čikušo 'n.
/ˈmar.tsʰu tʃiˈkɨ.ʃun/
marcʼ-o čik-uš-o u-n
March-SG long-EL-M be.PRS-3PS

'March is longer.'

Marcʼo i pʼriǯon čikušo 'n.
/ˈmar.tsʰu i ˈpʰri.dʒun tʃiˈkɨ.ʃun/
marcʼ-o i pʼriǯ-o-n čik-uš-o u-n
March-SG to April-SG-ACC long-EL-M be.PRS-3PS

'March is longer than April.'

4.3.2. Superlative

The superlative is formed by the word voǯẹ which can simply be translated as 'most'. It arose from the Old Vechaprian construction /aw ˈo.ʎaj/, meaning 'out of all'. It precedes the adjective in its elative form in attributive use.

Voǯẹ jorugušo ozon birem.
/ˈvu.dʒe dzu.rɨˈgɨ.ʃuˈu.zun ˌbi.rəm/
voǯẹ jorug-uš-o oz-o-n bir-e-m
most Greek-EL-M ouzo-SG-ACC drink-NFUT-1PS

'We drink the Greek-est ouzo.'

In predicative use, the word voǯẹ also follows the elative adjective. It is also possible to add what noun the superlative refers to with the preposition 'from'. In that case however, voǯẹ disappears. Thus, the difference between comparative and superlative is solely that of the preposition used.

Voǯẹ vitʼušo 'd.
/ˈvu.dʒe viˈtʰɨ.ʃud/
voǯẹ vitʼ-uš-o u-d
most cute-EL-M be.PRS-2PS

'You're the cutest.'

Ọ lekʼe vitʼušo 'n.
/o ˈlə.kʰə viˈtʰɨ.ʃun/
ọ lekʼ-e vitʼ-uš u-n
from Pole-PL.PREP sweet-EL be.PRS-3PS

'Out of the Poles, he is the cutest.'

In the latter sentence, voǯẹ is sometimes erroneously added before the adjective due to analogy.

4.3.3. Less & Least

For comparisons of inferiority, the adverb muro is used to modify the adjective which is used in its normal form, not the elative one. Muro stands in front of the adjective it modifies and after voǯẹ in case of the superlative.

Muruš voǯẹ muro zvulun biren.
/ˈmɨ.rɨʃ ˌvu.dʒe ˌmɨ.ru ˈzvɨ.lun ˌbi.rən/
muruš voǯẹ muro zvul-u-n bir-e-n
at.least most less green-PL-ACC drink-NFUT-3PS

'At least they are drinking the least yellow ones.'

There is also a very jocular construction to form this kind of comparison which is done by adding the prefix nu- 'anti-' to the adjective but using it with a positive comparison. It is mostly used for emphasis and exaggerations in a jokey way.

Voǯẹ nučikušo xoš aved.
/ˌvu.dʒe nɨ.tʃiˈkɨ.ʃu xuʃ ˌɑ.vəd/
voǯẹ nu-čik-uš-o xoš-∅ av-e-d
most anti-long-EL-M bone-ACC sell-NFUT-2PS

'You sell the anti-longest bone.' > 'You sell the shortest bone.'


Omzinesý wrote: 20 Aug 2021 19:24 I think the normal direction of grammaticalization is from a goal case to an indirect-object case, from concrete to abstract, but if grammaticalization is contact-induced, I think the other direction is not too odd.
Oh, TIL! I think I could additionally justify it by the case endings of the accusative and dative? They're very similar and it happens in some German dialects sometimes IIRC which also have -n and -m. So that confusion, plus the dative being associated with purpose (and direction due to Turkic languages) would be the biggest factor of movement related prepositions being used with the dative.

The lang has some IE feeling but a Turkic or Uralic language could well develop the same endings.
Omzinesý wrote: 20 Aug 2021 19:24Have you considered phonotactics, yet?
I always move phonotactics aside because I don't want to write it down when I have too few words to be sure of it. But so far it seems to be (C)(C)V(C) with clusters of more than two consonants not allowed within a word. Onset clusters don't have many restrictions, the only one I have noticed so far that sonorants cannot be the first consonant.
Native: :deu:
Learning: :gbr:, :chn:, :tur:, :fra:

Zhér·dûn a tonal Germanic conlang

old stuff: Цiски | Noattȯč | Tungōnis Vīdīnōs
User avatar
DesEsseintes
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4255
Joined: 31 Mar 2013 13:16

Re: Večʼapruga

Post by DesEsseintes »

Fun stuff. [:D]
ixals wrote: 24 Aug 2021 13:43 zvulun
/ˈzvɨ.lun/
Should that be zvulon or did I miss an orthographic nuance?
User avatar
ixals
sinic
sinic
Posts: 440
Joined: 28 Jul 2015 18:43

Re: Večʼapruga

Post by ixals »

DesEsseintes wrote: 24 Aug 2021 14:06 Fun stuff. [:D]
Thanks! [:D]
DesEsseintes wrote: 24 Aug 2021 14:06
ixals wrote: 24 Aug 2021 13:43 zvulun
/ˈzvɨ.lun/
Should that be zvulon or did I miss an orthographic nuance?
No, it's supposed to be zvulun, the IPA is wrong. That's what I get for constantly altering the example sentences while writing. [:'(]
Native: :deu:
Learning: :gbr:, :chn:, :tur:, :fra:

Zhér·dûn a tonal Germanic conlang

old stuff: Цiски | Noattȯč | Tungōnis Vīdīnōs
User avatar
ixals
sinic
sinic
Posts: 440
Joined: 28 Jul 2015 18:43

Re: Večʼapruga

Post by ixals »

Note: I'm not done with verbs as a whole (I basically only did conjugation and tense), so a lot of this may change in the future, stuff gets added later on etc. Also, I'm not sure what to do with a certain thing but I've put it in a spoiler further down so if anyone could help me with that, I'd appreciate that [:P]

5. Verbs

Verbs are one of the more morphologically reach word classes in Vechaprian. They can be conjugated for five tenses and three persons. However, they do not conjugate for number, so context is needed to know whether a verb refers to one person or more. And among the aforementioned five tenses, there are two past tenses as well as two future tenses apart from the present tense. One of each non-present tenses belong are a perfect tense.

Each of the three persons in Vechaprian uses a different personal suffix which is added onto the vowel suffix which marks the verb's tense. The three affixes are the following:

-m '1PS'
-d '2PS'
-n '3PS'

5.1. Present

The present tense is used for anything that is currently happening, but it can also imply habitual actions or describe general statements and facts. There are two different vowel suffixes to mark the present tense which are -e and -a. The latter is used for many verbs that were once or are still stative verbs in addition to verbs formed with the verbaliser -acʼ which is very prominent in new verb formation. There also some irregularities such as jẹ 'to be' and cʼare 'to give' which use -u as a tense marker.

Xojun neged.
/ˈxu.dzɨn ˌnə.gəd/
xoj-u-n neg-e-d
egg-PL-ACC sort-NFUT-2PS

'You sort the eggs.'

Vitʼa čʼaran xogacʼam.
/ˌvi.tʰɑ ˌtʃʰɑ.rɑn xuˈgɑ.tsʰɑm/
vitʼ-a čʼar-a-n xogacʼ-a-m
charming-FEM woman-SG-ACC make.eyes.at-NFUT-1PS

'I make eyes at the charming woman.'

5.2. Past

The past tense functions like a usual past imperfect tense and is sometimes also referred to with that name. It describes past states or conditions and habitual, repetitive or ongoing actions in the past. To put a verb into the past tense, the verb first has to be put into the present tense and all that is needed to do in addition is to add a prefix to the present tense verb. There are many different versions of this past prefix depending on the verb's first consonant(s). In some cases the prefix merges with the starting consonant.

j-: Used for any verb beginning with a vowel, any sonorant except /r/ or /v/.
z-: Used for any verb beginning with a voiced plosive or affricate.
s-: Used for any verb beginning with a voiceless plosive, affricate and /f/ or /x/.
je-: Used for any verb with a monosyllabic stem beginning with a consonant cluster.
ja-: Used for any verb with a polysyllabic stem beginning with a consonant cluster.

The four sibilants /z s ʒ ʃ/ fuse with the prefix into their affricate counterparts /dz ts dʒ tʃ/. The consonant /r/ is seemingly irregular in that it transforms into /dʒ/ as well.

Meskutʼut jọkem.
/məsˈkɨ.tʰɨt ˌdzo.kəm/
meskutʼ-u-t j-ọk-e-m
mosque-SG-LOC PST-pray-NFUT-1PS

'I was praying in the mosque.'

Ǯemacʼan al remacʼin.
/dʒəˈmɑ.tsʰɑn ɑl rəˈmɑ.tsʰin/
ǯemacʼ-a-n al remacʼ-i-n
PST.be.windy-NFUT-3SG therefore be.windy-FUT-3SG

'It was windy, therefore it will be windy.'

5.3. Future

The future tense is quicker to explain so than the other two non-future tenses. As the name implies, the future tense is used for any action that has yet to be completed. It is formed by the use of the vowel suffix -i- that is added in front of the personal suffix. This is the only suffix used for the future tense so there is no difference unlike in the other two tenses.

Salekʼat kʼixim.
/sɑˈlə.kʰɑt ˌkʰi.xim/
Salekʼa-t kʼix-i-m
Poland-LOC live-FUT-1PS

'We will live in Poland.'

5.4. Perfect Tenses

Both of the perfect tenses, the past perfect and the future perfect, compare well to the perfect aspect in other Proto-Indo-European languages. It is used when the past action has a result relevant to the present - or for the latter a future action being relevant to a further future -, when the action is concluded or it was or will be a one-time occurrence. The perfect tenses are derived by the use of ablaut from the present tense (for the past perfect) and the future tense. For some verbs, no ablaut is used and instead a different verb stem is used, sometimes one related to the present stem but sometimes a suppleted verb stem comes into use. The ablauted vowel is usually the last vowel of the verbal stem.
Spoiler:
This is what I need help with though. A lot of the non-perfect tenses are derived from the PIE e-grade with the perfect tense being derived from the zero-grade or o-grade. However, this means not all vowels are present in native non-perfect tenses so what would I do to vowels from loaned verbs with vowels that didn't have an ablaut in PIE?

e ~ ∅/o > a ~ ∅/o > a ~ o
ew ~ u/ow > aw ~ u/o: > ọ ~ o
ey ~ i/oy > e: ~ i/ay > e ~ u/ẹ (which one to choose?)
eh1 ~ h1/oh1 > i: ~ e/u: > i ~ e/u
eh2 ~ h2/oh2 > a: ~ a/u: > a ~ a/u (most changed to a ~ o ablaut class)
eh3 ~ h3/oh3 > u: ~ o/u: > u ~ o/u

So Old Vechaprian /ay a: o: e i o u/ do not have an ablaut vowel for the perfect. The short vowels /i u/ could just work like their long counterparts and /a:/ like the short counterpart:

i ~ e/u > u ~ e/o (which would funnily merge with eh3)
u ~ o/u > o ~ o (oh well, but it can move to other ablaut classes like e, ew and eh3)
a: ~ o: > a ~ o

/ay o: e o/ left then

If I use Old Vechaprian e: ~ ay for PIE *ey, would it be too weird to analogically do o: ~ aw when nothing like that existed before? For /e/ I could just ablaut it like its long counterpart? So e:/e ~ ay

That leaves /ay o/ and maybe /o:/. If doing o: ~ aw through analogy is realistic enough, I could also do o ~ aw just like with /e/. Leaving only /ay/

I could also leave some of them non-ablauting and move them into other classes in Modern Vechaprian after the vowel changes, because five of the modern vowels will have ablaut only <ẹ> will not and <o> wouldn't either if I don't do o: ~ aw

a ~ o/u
e ~ ẹ
i ~ e
u ~ o
ọ ~ o
(o ~ ọ)
(ẹ ~ ???)

Although (but I don't think it would be realistic at all??), if there is aw ~ o:, e: ~ ay and o: ~ aw, I could also add ay ~ e:? So that would give Modern ẹ ~ e

It feels weird creating these ablauts out of nowhere especially when aw/ay ablaut into o:/e: and o:/e: ablaut into aw/ay. But then, Romance also does indicative -a > subjunctive -e and subjunctive -e > indicative -a so it wouldn't be too out there?

Waaay too much blathering, any opinions on all of this? Please [:$]
Nevo mon ovem, zana mon avim.
/ˈnə.vu.mun ˌu.vəm ˈzɑ.nɑ.mun ˌɑ.vim/
nev-o m-o-n ov-e-m | zan-a m-o-n av-i-m
kidney-SG my-MASC-ACC sell.PRF-NFUT-1PS | small.intestine-SG my-MASC-ACC sell-FUT-1PS

'I have sold my kidney, and I will sell my small intestine.'

I Sajoran xolked, al am i Sajoran jin.
/i sɑˈdzu.rɑn ˌxul.kəd ɑl ɑm i sɑˈdzu.rɑn dzin/
i Sajora-n xolk-e-d al am i Sajora-n ji-n
to Greece-ACC go.PRF-NFUT-2PS therefore too to Greece-ACC go.FUT-3PS

'You have gone to Greece, so they will go to Greece as well.'
Native: :deu:
Learning: :gbr:, :chn:, :tur:, :fra:

Zhér·dûn a tonal Germanic conlang

old stuff: Цiски | Noattȯč | Tungōnis Vīdīnōs
User avatar
ixals
sinic
sinic
Posts: 440
Joined: 28 Jul 2015 18:43

Re: Večʼapruga

Post by ixals »

I haven't worked on Večʼapruga since the last post yet, but I've got another question I'd like to have an opinion on. And I'd still like to have some on my ablaut problem from the last post, too, please!

So I've been thinking about Greek loanwords and how I should loan the aspirated stop (/fricative) series. Armenian and Georgian loan them as stops, but I think I read that at the time of loaning (around 4th century AD, like Armenian and Georgian) they have already been fricatives for a long time. I think I also read once that higher registers of Greek kept the stop pronunciation longer than the colloquial forms so I'm not sure which pronunciation to chose for loaned Greek words. What do you think?
Native: :deu:
Learning: :gbr:, :chn:, :tur:, :fra:

Zhér·dûn a tonal Germanic conlang

old stuff: Цiски | Noattȯč | Tungōnis Vīdīnōs
User avatar
Davush
greek
greek
Posts: 638
Joined: 10 Jan 2015 14:10

Re: Večʼapruga

Post by Davush »

I'm liking all of this so far - very much IE but unique at the same time.

For your questions (bearing in mind I'm no expert either):

a) For the Greek loans, it might depend on whether they are mostly "learned" loans, in which case spelling/archaic pronunciations (i.e. stops) might be more likely. If the loans are via contact with contemporary Greek speakers, then probably whatever realization (i.e. possible fricative) they had at the time. Or of course (and the more interesting option imo), multiple layers reflecting various stages of Greek.

b) I haven't had a chance to look through the exact sound changes and ablaut system, but analogy/levelling can be very pervasive forces, so I don't see why ablaut couldn't be extended for verbs with vowels that don't have a diachronic ablaut (after all, Semitic is basically full of this type of analogical "ablaut"; if e~ay exists, I don't think that being extended to o~aw is unreasonable). This would presumably mean ablaut becomes even more pervasive (and semi-regular)? Alternatively, as seems to be more common throughout IE, ablaut might be only semi-preserved in inherited verbs, with newer verbs / derivations (usually) using different morphemes/strategies as ablaut becomes unproductive.

Look forward to seeing more!
User avatar
Omzinesý
runic
runic
Posts: 3220
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 08:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: Večʼapruga

Post by Omzinesý »

A) If you want to be 'natural' and do how IE langs usually do, you should rather level most ablauts out and leave it in some frequent 'irregular' verbs. If ablaut also affects endings, they can also be reanalysed as suffixes.

B) 'Finland' is "Phin-eth-i" (with aspiration) in Georgian. So, it is possible to replace fricatives with aspirated stops.
My meta-thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5760
User avatar
eldin raigmore
korean
korean
Posts: 5949
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 19:38
Location: SouthEast Michigan

Re: Večʼapruga

Post by eldin raigmore »

@Davush:
… and the more interesting option imo), multiple layers reflecting various stages of …
Like English’s frail/fragile and priest/presbyter doublets?
User avatar
ixals
sinic
sinic
Posts: 440
Joined: 28 Jul 2015 18:43

Re: Večʼapruga

Post by ixals »

Davush wrote: 11 Sep 2021 21:57a) For the Greek loans, it might depend on whether they are mostly "learned" loans, in which case spelling/archaic pronunciations (i.e. stops) might be more likely. If the loans are via contact with contemporary Greek speakers, then probably whatever realization (i.e. possible fricative) they had at the time. Or of course (and the more interesting option imo), multiple layers reflecting various stages of Greek.
I think the biggest part of Greek loans would come from the church so I assume the stop pronunciation might be more likely. But using the fricative pronunciation for other words not related to Christianity might be nice.
Davush wrote: 11 Sep 2021 21:57b) I haven't had a chance to look through the exact sound changes and ablaut system, but analogy/levelling can be very pervasive forces, so I don't see why ablaut couldn't be extended for verbs with vowels that don't have a diachronic ablaut (after all, Semitic is basically full of this type of analogical "ablaut"; if e~ay exists, I don't think that being extended to o~aw is unreasonable).
Does Semitic's analogical ablaut come up with unprecedented patterns? I know Semitic is doing lots with analogy but if it also does it like that, then Vechaprian can do that as well. Do you have an example though?
Davush wrote: 11 Sep 2021 21:57This would presumably mean ablaut becomes even more pervasive (and semi-regular)? Alternatively, as seems to be more common throughout IE, ablaut might be only semi-preserved in inherited verbs, with newer verbs / derivations (usually) using different morphemes/strategies as ablaut becomes unproductive.
My goal is indeed to have a well retained ablaut system in verbs and I'd rather not have new verbs have the same stem for the perfect and imperfect because that just screams losing the distinction. I could use prefixes like Slavic or maybe use the Greek -k- for the perfect and make it spread to all non-ablauting verbs. As I want the lang to be rather close to Greek and Germanic, the latter would also fit quite well.
Omzinesý wrote: 12 Sep 2021 10:56 A) If you want to be 'natural' and do how IE langs usually do, you should rather level most ablauts out and leave it in some frequent 'irregular' verbs. If ablaut also affects endings, they can also be reanalysed as suffixes.
Yeah, that's my fear. I see it as the most natural thing to happen but I'd really like to retain it as much as I can. It doesn't affect endings sadly so I can't go with that idea even though it's a great solution. [:(]
Native: :deu:
Learning: :gbr:, :chn:, :tur:, :fra:

Zhér·dûn a tonal Germanic conlang

old stuff: Цiски | Noattȯč | Tungōnis Vīdīnōs
User avatar
Davush
greek
greek
Posts: 638
Joined: 10 Jan 2015 14:10

Re: Večʼapruga

Post by Davush »

I think that a) just because most IE languages developed in such a way that disfavoured extensive ablaut, doesn't mean Veca'pruga can't, especially if it was isolated early on (and also especially since PIE itself was full of ablaut). Also, b) just because that particular ablaut isn't present in the earliest stages of the language doesn't mean it couldn't develop parallel to ay~e, especially if ay~e is already common and regular correspondence. After all, parallel development of ay aw > e o is very common, so if there was enough pressure for "aw" to develop ablaut, I don't think that would be unreasonable. Weirder things have certainly happened. [:D]

For an Arabic example: Some loans with more than 4 consonants show an "unprecedented" process where they actually *lose* a consonant to fit into the existing system – this doesn't happen elsewhere in the language, so in one sense it is a "new" pattern (and unusual, considering other more transparent pluralisation options exist). E.g. barnāmij (sg.) barāmij (pl.); zanbarak (sg.) zanābīk (pl.). Although this example isn't exactly the same as what you describe, I think the principle is the same: if there's enough (analogical/phonological) pressure for a word to fit into the existing system, then it can likely happen, even by quite an innovative process.
Post Reply