Yay or Nay?

A forum for all topics related to constructed languages
User avatar
loglorn
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1990
Joined: Mon 17 Mar 2014, 03:22

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by loglorn » Wed 23 Aug 2017, 23:27

I much prefer the old one with fortition. So Nay.
Diachronic Conlanging is the path to happiness, given time. [;)]

Gigxkpoyan Languages: CHÍFJAEŚÍ RETLA TLAPTHUV DÄLDLEN CJUŚËKNJU ṢATT

Other langs: Søsøzatli Kamëzet
User avatar
Ælfwine
greek
greek
Posts: 585
Joined: Mon 21 Sep 2015, 00:28
Location: Canada

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Ælfwine » Thu 24 Aug 2017, 00:01

Nay
The worst thing you can do to an idea is forget about it.
User avatar
eldin raigmore
fire
fire
Posts: 5636
Joined: Sat 14 Aug 2010, 18:38
Location: SouthEast Michigan

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by eldin raigmore » Thu 24 Aug 2017, 02:32

DesEsseintes wrote:Is that too inconsistent/weird?
I don't think it's too inconsistent, nor too weird.
It may be a matter of personal tastes.
If we go by the responders on this thread so far, two out of three prefer fortition, one out of three has no preference.
User avatar
DesEsseintes
cleardarkness
cleardarkness
Posts: 4382
Joined: Sun 31 Mar 2013, 12:16

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by DesEsseintes » Thu 24 Aug 2017, 03:35

eldin raigmore wrote:
DesEsseintes wrote:Is that too inconsistent/weird?
I don't think it's too inconsistent, nor too weird.
It may be a matter of personal tastes.
If we go by the responders on this thread so far, two out of three prefer fortition, one out of three has no preference.
Thanks, eldin.

[:$] I actually put this in the wrong thread. This should have gone in QQ, because I was more asking about the viability of the continuants undergoing fortition after another comtinuant and not being affected by a preceding affricate rather than an opinion on whether to implement it. My mistake, and my apologies, loglorn and Ælf.

I'm not sure whether to repost this over in QQ.
User avatar
Ælfwine
greek
greek
Posts: 585
Joined: Mon 21 Sep 2015, 00:28
Location: Canada

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Ælfwine » Thu 24 Aug 2017, 04:54

To me the "unmolested" affricates can get sort of...unintuitive phonologically speaking.

For example, in "arqłna" you seem to have what appears to be a sonorant followed by a uvular and then what I recall is a lateral fricative and then another sonorant. There would probably be some sort of simplification going on there, and your earlier fortition rule seems to work.
The worst thing you can do to an idea is forget about it.
User avatar
loglorn
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1990
Joined: Mon 17 Mar 2014, 03:22

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by loglorn » Thu 24 Aug 2017, 05:09

eldin raigmore wrote:
DesEsseintes wrote:Is that too inconsistent/weird?
I don't think it's too inconsistent, nor too weird.
It may be a matter of personal tastes.
If we go by the responders on this thread so far, two out of three prefer fortition, one out of three has no preference.
Yeah i don't think it's inherently inconsistent either not to have fortition there, but i do find the forms that have it much more pleasing.
Diachronic Conlanging is the path to happiness, given time. [;)]

Gigxkpoyan Languages: CHÍFJAEŚÍ RETLA TLAPTHUV DÄLDLEN CJUŚËKNJU ṢATT

Other langs: Søsøzatli Kamëzet
alynnidalar
roman
roman
Posts: 922
Joined: Sun 17 Aug 2014, 02:22
Location: Michigan, USA

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by alynnidalar » Fri 25 Aug 2017, 15:25

Could always throw in some sort of metathesis, if you didn't want to just use the original fortition rule?
Nachtuil
sinic
sinic
Posts: 365
Joined: Wed 20 Jul 2016, 23:16

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Nachtuil » Sun 27 Aug 2017, 04:42

I am thinking of allowing double stop consonants in Nexürsin mid vocalically even though current phonotacatics. Currently the phonotactics dissallow stops and affricates in coda, though fricatives, nasals and some aproximants are allowed. So a word like /tas/ is allowed but /sat/ not. Words like /tassa/ are permitted. I am wondering if I should allow words like /satta/ but not words like /sakta/? Yay?
Last edited by Nachtuil on Sun 27 Aug 2017, 05:08, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
DesEsseintes
cleardarkness
cleardarkness
Posts: 4382
Joined: Sun 31 Mar 2013, 12:16

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by DesEsseintes » Sun 27 Aug 2017, 04:51

Nachtuil wrote:I am thinking of allowing double stop consonants in Nexürsin mid vocalically even though current phonotacatics. Currently the phonotactics dissallow stops and affricates in coda, though fricatives, nasals and some aproximants are allowed. So a word like /tas/ is allowed but /sat/ not. Words like /tassa/ are permitted. I am wondering if I should allow words like /satta/? Yay?
Gemination can be entirely independent of whether you otherwise allow stop codas, so if the fear of inconsistency is the only thing stopping you from using them, then that's not a problem. Italian has plenty of geminated stops but otherwise avoids coda stops (at least in formal registers).

So yay.
Ashtăr Balynestjăr
sinic
sinic
Posts: 201
Joined: Wed 18 Jan 2017, 07:17

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Ashtăr Balynestjăr » Sun 27 Aug 2017, 06:02

That sounds pretty much exactly like Italian phonotactics, so I say go for it.
[ˈaʃt̪əɹ ˈbalɨˌnɛsʲtʲəɹ]
Nachtuil
sinic
sinic
Posts: 365
Joined: Wed 20 Jul 2016, 23:16

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Nachtuil » Sun 27 Aug 2017, 14:30

Wonderful, thank you guys :) It's funny, how languages which are radically different in some ways can share features like that.
Davush
sinic
sinic
Posts: 347
Joined: Sat 10 Jan 2015, 14:10

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Davush » Tue 29 Aug 2017, 12:49

I'm thinking of changing the diphthong inventory of Qutrussan from /ai au eǝ oǝ/ to /ai au ia ua eo oe/. I don't like large amounts of diphthongs in general, but if I expand them, I can have words like 'theom' and 'nuatru' which look nice.

Also, prompted partly by DesEsseintes suggestion of <ă> for /ǝ/, I am thinking of marking the schwa with a breve, but the allophony will also be partially present in the orthography, meaning I can have <ă ĭ ŭ> for /ǝ/ ~ [ǝ~ɐ ɨ ɯ] which might look a bit more varied. I could explain this by Qutrussan scholars deciding it was a short version of the full vowels - maybe similar to the Hebrew extra-short vowels. Even though the schwa does function as a normal full vowel.

Final /ǝ/ always ă: thimúnë ~ thimúnă [θimu:nǝ]
If the previous syllable is <ú u ó>, the schwa will be <ĭ>: úcrën ~ úcrĭn [u:krɨn]
If the previous syllable is <í i é>, the schwa will be <ŭ>: íthmësh ~ íthmŭsh [i:θmɯʃ]

Initial syllables beginning with <p b f v m sh y> have <ŭ>: mëldë ~ mŭldă [mɯldǝ]
All others have <ĭ>: tsëmpëq ~ tsĭmpăq [tsɨmpǝq]

If both syllables have a schwa and the word type is CVC(C)VC, <ĭ> and <ŭ> alternate: mërësh ~ mŭrĭsh [mɯrǝʃ]

Does this seem overly complicated for a single phoneme? I think it might help break up the look of too many breves over one single letter.
Iyionaku
roman
roman
Posts: 1420
Joined: Sun 25 May 2014, 13:17

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Iyionaku » Tue 29 Aug 2017, 13:01

Davush wrote:I'm thinking of changing the diphthong inventory of Qutrussan from /ai au eǝ oǝ/ to /ai au ia ua eo oe/. I don't like large amounts of diphthongs in general, but if I expand them, I can have words like 'theom' and 'nuatru' which look nice.

(...)

Does this seem overly complicated for a single phoneme? I think it might help break up the look of too many breves over one single letter.
Just for understanding: ë was the old romanization? Well, I wouldn't say that it's too complicated for a single phoneme. Some languages use up to four symbols for the same phoneme (Thai, for example, although apparently the used symbol somewhat indicates the syllable's tone).
I personally like ă and ŭ very much. ĭ? Not so much. Maybe alternation between ă and ŭ, depending on whether the last vowel was a back vowel or a front vowel?
Heaven and Earth, but I feel the color of the cake when you keep the Victoria.
I had a mantra on the moss and I had to go to bed.


Oh, and there is a [ɕ] in my name!
User avatar
DesEsseintes
cleardarkness
cleardarkness
Posts: 4382
Joined: Sun 31 Mar 2013, 12:16

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by DesEsseintes » Tue 29 Aug 2017, 13:22

Davush wrote:Does this seem overly complicated for a single phoneme? I think it might help break up the look of too many breves over one single letter.
I think it looks great and I disagree with iyionaku regarding <ĭ>. Go for it!
User avatar
Omzinesý
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2220
Joined: Fri 27 Aug 2010, 07:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Omzinesý » Tue 29 Aug 2017, 13:27

Davush wrote:I'm thinking of changing the diphthong inventory of Qutrussan from /ai au eǝ oǝ/ to /ai au ia ua eo oe/. I don't like large amounts of diphthongs in general, but if I expand them, I can have words like 'theom' and 'nuatru' which look nice.

Also, prompted partly by DesEsseintes suggestion of <ă> for /ǝ/, I am thinking of marking the schwa with a breve, but the allophony will also be partially present in the orthography, meaning I can have <ă ĭ ŭ> for /ǝ/ ~ [ǝ~ɐ ɨ ɯ] which might look a bit more varied. I could explain this by Qutrussan scholars deciding it was a short version of the full vowels - maybe similar to the Hebrew extra-short vowels. Even though the schwa does function as a normal full vowel.

Final /ǝ/ always ă: thimúnë ~ thimúnă [θimu:nǝ]
If the previous syllable is <ú u ó>, the schwa will be <ĭ>: úcrën ~ úcrĭn [u:krɨn]
If the previous syllable is <í i é>, the schwa will be <ŭ>: íthmësh ~ íthmŭsh [i:θmɯʃ]

Initial syllables beginning with <p b f v m sh y> have <ŭ>: mëldë ~ mŭldă [mɯldǝ]
All others have <ĭ>: tsëmpëq ~ tsĭmpăq [tsɨmpǝq]

If both syllables have a schwa and the word type is CVC(C)VC, <ĭ> and <ŭ> alternate: mërësh ~ mŭrĭsh [mɯrǝʃ]

Does this seem overly complicated for a single phoneme? I think it might help break up the look of too many breves over one single letter.
I say nay, when it comes to changing the diphthongs. Diphthongs with schwa appear too rarely in conlangs.
I didn't quite get your system of marking schwa, so it is complicated, but good writing systems are.
Davush
sinic
sinic
Posts: 347
Joined: Sat 10 Jan 2015, 14:10

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Davush » Tue 29 Aug 2017, 13:45

Thanks all - I will probably start to use breves, although I need to work out the details. The first attempt was a combination of representing allophony with what looks nice visually. I also liked the diphthongs with schwa, so I might go halfway and just use /iǝ uǝ/ instead, I think <ia ua> look nicer than <ea oa>.
User avatar
DesEsseintes
cleardarkness
cleardarkness
Posts: 4382
Joined: Sun 31 Mar 2013, 12:16

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by DesEsseintes » Tue 29 Aug 2017, 13:57

Davush wrote:Thanks all - I will probably start to use breves, although I need to work out the details. The first attempt was a combination of representing allophony with what looks nice visually. I also liked the diphthongs with schwa, so I might go halfway and just use /iǝ uǝ/ instead, I think <ia ua> look nicer than <ea oa>.
If you do decide to retain diphthongs with schwa offglides, I personally think <eă oă> would look great in Qutrussan.

íthmoăsh [/experiments]
User avatar
Frislander
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2060
Joined: Sat 14 May 2016, 17:47
Location: The North

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Frislander » Sun 03 Sep 2017, 22:11

Right so after reconstructing the sound changes for my Algonquian a-posteriori project after the original file was lost when my old computer died, I remembered I'm still completely in the dark as to what I'm gonna do for negation. The problem is that the forms of the negative vary wildly acrss the Algonquian family, almost to the point where each language has its own affix/particle. There's apparently an article by Ives Goddard which tries to sort it out, but the guy who was supposed to send it to me hasn't been active on the ZBB in months.

I do have one option I'm becoming increasingly drawn to. The language is meant to be spoken by an Algonquian group which has been in a long-term alliance/relationship with the Crow-Hidatsa, and as such has seen much influence from that language, most notably with relation to phonology but also in other areas of the grammar as well. So I was thinking what I would do would be to incorporate the Proto-Crow-Hidatsa negative suffix *-tha· into the language, which would give it a modern form something like -ta/táa/taá (I have this form because I have the PDF of the Comparative Siouan Dictionary).

Should I go for it or should I look for some other etymology?
Keenir
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2435
Joined: Tue 22 May 2012, 02:05

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Keenir » Mon 04 Sep 2017, 21:31

Frislander wrote:I do have one option I'm becoming increasingly drawn to. The language is meant to be spoken by an Algonquian group which has been in a long-term alliance/relationship with the Crow-Hidatsa, and as such has seen much influence from that language, most notably with relation to phonology but also in other areas of the grammar as well. So I was thinking what I would do would be to incorporate the Proto-Crow-Hidatsa negative suffix *-tha· into the language, which would give it a modern form something like -ta/táa/taá (I have this form because I have the PDF of the Comparative Siouan Dictionary).

Should I go for it or should I look for some other etymology?
yes - go for it!
At work on Apaan: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=4799
User avatar
Ælfwine
greek
greek
Posts: 585
Joined: Mon 21 Sep 2015, 00:28
Location: Canada

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Ælfwine » Tue 05 Sep 2017, 18:17

I'm thinking of making my romlang, Pannonian, a topic prominent language, probably through eliminating the passive voice early on.

Another feature I am including is converbs. My "yay/nay" is whether it would be a plausible idea if I had some sort of prepositional passives morph into "true" converbs? I have to research more to see if I could be done.
The worst thing you can do to an idea is forget about it.
Post Reply