If natlangs were conlangs

A forum for discussing linguistics or just languages in general.
User avatar
Mándinrùh
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 137
Joined: 21 Aug 2016 20:37
Location: New England

Re: If natlangs were conlangs

Post by Mándinrùh »

Salmoneus wrote: 15 Nov 2021 03:51 To be fair, the creator of English hasn't bothered creating new words for almost anything in the last... what, 1,200 years? They just cycle through which languages to borrow from.

OK, so I'll grant you that "network", "internet" and "software" are innovations. But "web" and "film" are inherited; "pizza", "click", "sport" and "computer" are loanwords (Neapolitan 'pizza', Middle Dutch "clicken", Old French 'desport' and French 'computeur'); "hamburger" is a phonological borrowing that may or may not be a semantic borrowing (it's unclear when and by whom it was specifically associated with hamburgers).

I mean, they call English a language, but 80% of its vocabulary is loanwords! That includes 30% of the vocabulary stolen from French alone (rising to 40% in business contexts, apparently), and another 30% from Latin. Ridiculously, the only language English HASN'T borrowed from at all is Brythonic, its direct historical substrate and longest, closest neighbour, which is totally unrealistic...
But unlike Italian, English adapted the pronunciations and spellings to match the rest of the language. It's /kʌmˈpju.ɾɚ/, not /kõ.pɯˈtʊʀ̥/. Italian borrows words whole cloth with no regard for its own phonology or orthography.

For example, Italian doesn't typically allow words to end in consonants except for some small particles that don't tend to have their own stress. But most of these borrowings end in consonants: sport, computer, clic, internet.
Creator of Image Redentran
Creator of Image Bwángxùd
Creator of Image Atili
My website | My blog
Salmoneus
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2676
Joined: 19 Sep 2011 19:37

Re: If natlangs were conlangs

Post by Salmoneus »

English has anglicised older layers of loanwords, yes, because they're old. They very much weren't anglicised for the first few hundred years, giving us /Z/ and /y/ and /ui/ and things like that. And more modern loanwords are only sporadically anglicised, which is why words like 'envelope' still violate English phonotactics!
[of course, it helps that English phonotactics are much more accepting than most of the languages it borrows from...]
User avatar
Omzinesý
runic
runic
Posts: 3547
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 08:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: If natlangs were conlangs

Post by Omzinesý »

Mándinrùh wrote: 13 Nov 2021 19:41 The creator of :ita: Italian got lazy. They stopped creating new words for things invented after the mid 20th century and just borrowed everything from English without even trying to make the words match the phonology of the rest of the language:
  • Lo sport /lo sport/ = "The sport" (Even though Italian doesn't normally allow coda clusters)
  • Il computer /il kom'pju.ter/ = "The computer" (Even though anywhere else "pu" is /pu/ and not /pju/)
  • Fare clic /'fa.re klik/ = "Click" (at least they changed the spelling on this one)
  • Il software /il 'sɔft.wer/ = "The software" (Italian doesn't have silent "e" anywhere else)
  • Il Web /il wɛb/ = "The web"
  • Gli Internet /ʎi 'in.ter.nɛt/ = "The Internet"
  • Il film /il film/ = "The movie"
  • La pizza /la 'pi.tsa/ = "The pizza"
  • Il hamburger /il am'bur.ger/ = "The hamburger" (and it's a hard g, even though normally g would be soft before e)
I don't know if Finnish is really more 'naturalistic', having gained its own word or adapted to loans phonetically.
  • urheilu = "sport" from "urhea" 'brave'
  • tietokone= "computer" ("tieto" 'information + "kone" machine', if the context is clear just "kone")
  • klikata = "to click" (adapted to the conjugation that usually takes borrowed verbs)
  • ohjelmisto = "software" (ohjelma 'program' + -sto 'collective')
  • verkko = "web"
  • internet = "internet" (direct borrowing but often adapted in everyday language "internetti" or "netti")
  • elokuva= "movie" (elo 'life' (poetic) + "kuva" 'picture', Finnish also has word "leffa", which is surely not native but I don't know the source. "Filmi" only means the concrete 'film tape' RIP)
  • pizza = "pizza" (I personally spell it "pitsa")
  • hampurilaine = "hamburger" (calque, "Hampuri" 'Hamburg' -lainen 'inhabitant of', I have even seen that nativized as "porilainen", Pori being a town in Finland)
    [/quote]
My meta-thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5760
User avatar
Shemtov
runic
runic
Posts: 3229
Joined: 29 Apr 2013 04:06

Re: If natlangs were conlangs

Post by Shemtov »

I want to congratulate the conlanger who did Assamese. When I first read your grammar, I hated it. It just seemed like Bangla pushed TO THE EXTREME with a lot of Tibeto-Burman influence. Then I thought about what you were trying to do, have a language descended from Apabhramsha Abahatta, closely allied with Bangla, that lived alongside and grew up with Tibeto-Burman. I reanalyzed that as a context for your language, not as an aim, and now it's one of the most beautiful diachronic projects I've ever seen.
Many children make up, or begin to make up, imaginary languages. I have been at it since I could write.
-JRR Tolkien
Porphyrogenitos
sinic
sinic
Posts: 359
Joined: 21 Jul 2012 08:01
Location: Buffalo, NY

Re: If natlangs were conlangs

Post by Porphyrogenitos »

Salmoneus wrote: 27 Nov 2021 18:06 English has anglicised older layers of loanwords, yes, because they're old. They very much weren't anglicised for the first few hundred years, giving us /Z/ and /y/ and /ui/ and things like that. And more modern loanwords are only sporadically anglicised, which is why words like 'envelope' still violate English phonotactics!
[of course, it helps that English phonotactics are much more accepting than most of the languages it borrows from...]
Wait, how does 'envelope' violate English phonotatics?
Salmoneus
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2676
Joined: 19 Sep 2011 19:37

Re: If natlangs were conlangs

Post by Salmoneus »

Porphyrogenitos wrote: 18 Apr 2022 01:28
Salmoneus wrote: 27 Nov 2021 18:06 English has anglicised older layers of loanwords, yes, because they're old. They very much weren't anglicised for the first few hundred years, giving us /Z/ and /y/ and /ui/ and things like that. And more modern loanwords are only sporadically anglicised, which is why words like 'envelope' still violate English phonotactics!
[of course, it helps that English phonotactics are much more accepting than most of the languages it borrows from...]
Wait, how does 'envelope' violate English phonotatics?
English phonotactics don't usually permit nasal vowels outside of loanwords; "envelope" is /Q~v@l@Up/ (in the letter sense; /Env@l@up/ in the ambit sense, demonstrating the sporadicity of anglicisation; c.f. the nasal vowels in "bonbon" or "soupcon", vs comple anglicisation of "tampon"...)
Porphyrogenitos
sinic
sinic
Posts: 359
Joined: 21 Jul 2012 08:01
Location: Buffalo, NY

Re: If natlangs were conlangs

Post by Porphyrogenitos »

Salmoneus wrote: 18 Apr 2022 02:38
Porphyrogenitos wrote: 18 Apr 2022 01:28

Wait, how does 'envelope' violate English phonotatics?
English phonotactics don't usually permit nasal vowels outside of loanwords; "envelope" is /Q~v@l@Up/ (in the letter sense; /Env@l@up/ in the ambit sense, demonstrating the sporadicity of anglicisation; c.f. the nasal vowels in "bonbon" or "soupcon", vs comple anglicisation of "tampon"...)
Oh, I see. I checked Wiktionary and apparently that's an RP pronunciation. Which makes sense, since I understand that British English tends to nativize recent French loanwords less than American English. As an American I've never in my life heard any pronunciation for that word except [ˈɑnvəloʊp] or [ˈɛnvəloʊp]
User avatar
Egerius
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1594
Joined: 12 Sep 2013 21:29
Location: Not Rodentèrra
Contact:

Re: If natlangs were conlangs

Post by Egerius »

Salmoneus wrote: 15 Nov 2021 03:51 To be fair, the creator of English hasn't bothered creating new words for almost anything in the last... what, 1,200 years? They just cycle through which languages to borrow from.

I mean, they call English a language, but 80% of its vocabulary is loanwords! That includes 30% of the vocabulary stolen from French alone (rising to 40% in business contexts, apparently), and another 30% from Latin. Ridiculously, the only language English HASN'T borrowed from at all is Brythonic, its direct historical substrate and longest, closest neighbour, which is totally unrealistic...
That's because the creator of English was robbed of his lang by the creator of French, who was so overwhelmed that he just scrapped that very nice™ orthography and let Norse, Latin, Greek and basically everybody else ghost-write the vocab after a while.
Brythonic snuck in details of grammar when Norse lost the page on nominal and adjectival inflections and French had to improvise.

I am still bummed that none of them did a collab with the creator of English to keep that lovely West Saxon.
I mean the Norse guy could have done it in a similar fashion to Icelandic later (but nuuuh... Françoyyyyys had to steal it). :mrred:
Languages of Rodentèrra: Buonavallese, Saselvan Argemontese; Wīlandisċ Taulkeisch; More on the road.
Conlang embryo of TELES: Proto-Avesto-Umbric ~> Proto-Umbric
New blog: http://argentiusbonavalensis.tumblr.com
Aseca
sinic
sinic
Posts: 359
Joined: 04 Jun 2012 14:34

Re: If natlangs were conlangs

Post by Aseca »

Tbf, /envelope/ should be invelop (like develop but for paper) to be consistent with English rules but not everything is consistent in English.
Sikatāyām kaṇam lokasya darśasi, svargam phale vanye ca.
See a world in a grain of sand, and a heaven in a wild flower.
Ānantam tava karatalena darasi, nityatām ghaṇṭabhyantare ca.
Hold infinity in the palm of your hand, and eternity in an hour.
Salmoneus
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2676
Joined: 19 Sep 2011 19:37

Re: If natlangs were conlangs

Post by Salmoneus »

Aseca wrote: 04 Jul 2022 05:07 Tbf, /envelope/ should be invelop (like develop but for paper) to be consistent with English rules but not everything is consistent in English.
Huh?
Khemehekis
runic
runic
Posts: 3255
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 09:36
Location: California über alles

Re: If natlangs were conlangs

Post by Khemehekis »

Aseca wrote: 04 Jul 2022 05:07 Tbf, /envelope/ should be invelop (like develop but for paper) to be consistent with English rules but not everything is consistent in English.
1. Your use of the slashes is odd, because slashes before and after a word are normally used for phonemes.

2. English speakers don't pronounce the E at the end of "envelope". It's silent, like the E in "cake".

3. We do have a word "envelop"; it's a verb, not a noun, and it means "to form a sheath around". Like the limerick (warning: dirty limerick ahead)
Spoiler:
A woman I know from Uttoxeter
A prurient, pleas'rable cock-sitter
Her prehensile hole
Envelops my pole
Then she squeals up and down as my rocks hit her
4. "Envelop", unlike "envelope", rhymes with "develop".

5. And it's spelt with en-, not in-.
♂♥♂♀

Squirrels chase koi . . . chase squirrels

My Kankonian-English dictionary: 80,000 words and counting

31,416: The number of the conlanging beast!
Post Reply