Yay or Nay?

A forum for all topics related to constructed languages
Keenir2
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon 06 Aug 2018, 22:51

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Keenir2 » Thu 09 Aug 2018, 23:45

I'm mutating all <th>s [T]s in my Faux Greek&Anatolian into <t>s [t]s...and I was contemplating turning all <pn>s* and <pt>s into <t>s as well.

(or should I turn <pn> and <pt> into <th> [T] instead?)

thank you.



* = I got the <pn>s from Carian, not Greek...names like <Pneith>
Ælfwine
greek
greek
Posts: 779
Joined: Mon 21 Sep 2015, 00:28
Location: New Jersey

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Ælfwine » Thu 09 Aug 2018, 23:56

Keenir2 wrote:
Thu 09 Aug 2018, 23:45
I'm mutating all <th>s [T]s in my Faux Greek&Anatolian into <t>s [t]s...and I was contemplating turning all <pn>s* and <pt>s into <t>s as well.

(or should I turn <pn> and <pt> into <th> [T] instead?)

thank you.



* = I got the <pn>s from Carian, not Greek...names like <Pneith>
Maybe you could get [θ] from [pt] through a stage like [pt] -> [ft] -> [ʰt] -> [θ], otherwise I would not overload the language with [t]s.
My Blog
Current Projects:
Mannish — A North Germanic language spoken on the Calf of Man
Pelsodian — A Romance language spoken around Lake Balaton
Jezik Panoski — A Slavic language spoken in the same area
tseren
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon 12 Dec 2016, 20:19

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by tseren » Fri 10 Aug 2018, 00:43

I'm spirantizing intervocalically, but [θ] needs to go. How? The second is tempting because fewer consonants drop out, but is it as weirdly unnatural as I think it is?

Geminates are shortening with compensatory lengthening of the previous vowel as usual.

t tt → θ t → h t → ∅ t / V_V
s ss → h s → ∅ s / V_V

or

t tt → θ t → s t / V_V
s ss → r ss / V_V
shimobaatar
darkness
darkness
Posts: 10179
Joined: Fri 12 Jul 2013, 22:09
Location: PA → IN

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by shimobaatar » Fri 10 Aug 2018, 00:58

tseren wrote:
Fri 10 Aug 2018, 00:43
but [θ] needs to go.
Alas…
tseren wrote:
Fri 10 Aug 2018, 00:43
t tt → θ t → h t → ∅ t / V_V
s ss → h s → ∅ s / V_V
No problems here. θ (> s) > h > Ø is totally reasonable, if you ask me.
tseren wrote:
Fri 10 Aug 2018, 00:43
t tt → θ t → s t / V_V
s ss → r ss / V_V
s (> z) > r doesn't feel weird to me either, especially not intervocalically.

I think that ss would be likely to shorten, especially since s no longer exists intervocalically, and tt shortens. However, I don't think it's too glaringly unnatural to leave it as a geminate, and there's probably some natlang precedent out there that I don't know about.
Keenir2
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon 06 Aug 2018, 22:51

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Keenir2 » Fri 10 Aug 2018, 01:29

tseren wrote:
Fri 10 Aug 2018, 00:43
I'm spirantizing intervocalically, but [θ] needs to go. How? The second is tempting because fewer consonants drop out, but is it as weirdly unnatural as I think it is?
t tt → θ t → h t → ∅ t / V_V
s ss → h s → ∅ s / V_V

or

t tt → θ t → s t / V_V
s ss → r ss / V_V[/quote]

if I'm reading these right...
tott -> thot ->hot -> ot
vs
tott -> thot -> sot

soss -> hos -> os
vs
soss -> ross

my first thought is that I like the second row's second option (maybe end with ros instead of ross?), but the first option for the first row (good ol ot )....but if its a package deal, then the second set (sot and ross, though I stand by my suggestion of ros)

hope that helps at least a little

Ælfwine wrote:
Thu 09 Aug 2018, 23:56
Keenir2 wrote:
Thu 09 Aug 2018, 23:45
* = I got the <pn>s from Carian, not Greek...names like <Pneith>
Maybe you could get [θ] from [pt] through a stage like [pt] -> [ft] -> [ʰt] -> [θ], otherwise I would not overload the language with [t]s.
makes sense; don't want to have too many phrases like "Praise Te Great TeoTanatos Teit!" :)


seriously, thank you.


(from theo-thanatos = god-death)
Last edited by Keenir2 on Fri 10 Aug 2018, 01:32, edited 1 time in total.
shimobaatar
darkness
darkness
Posts: 10179
Joined: Fri 12 Jul 2013, 22:09
Location: PA → IN

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by shimobaatar » Fri 10 Aug 2018, 02:06

Keenir2 wrote:
Fri 10 Aug 2018, 01:29
if I'm reading these right...
tott -> thot ->hot -> ot
vs
tott -> thot -> sot

soss -> hos -> os
vs
soss -> ross
Aren't the changes just intervocalic, though?
User avatar
k1234567890y
runic
runic
Posts: 2953
Joined: Sat 04 Jan 2014, 04:47
Contact:

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by k1234567890y » Sat 11 Aug 2018, 06:22

In respect of morphosyntax...I guess I need to try an open pronominal system based on social relationship and something like, as in Japanese, Korean and Southeast Asian languages...
私のアツい人工言語活動!言カツ!始まります!!
shimobaatar
darkness
darkness
Posts: 10179
Joined: Fri 12 Jul 2013, 22:09
Location: PA → IN

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by shimobaatar » Sat 11 Aug 2018, 16:26

k1234567890y wrote:
Sat 11 Aug 2018, 06:22
In respect of morphosyntax...I guess I need to try an open pronominal system based on social relationship and something like, as in Japanese, Korean and Southeast Asian languages...
If you're only considering this because you feel like you need to, then I'd recommend not doing it. But if you genuinely want to do it, then go for it!
tseren
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon 12 Dec 2016, 20:19

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by tseren » Sat 11 Aug 2018, 22:29

shimobaatar wrote:
Fri 10 Aug 2018, 00:58
tseren wrote:
Fri 10 Aug 2018, 00:43
but [θ] needs to go.
Alas…
tseren wrote:
Fri 10 Aug 2018, 00:43
t tt → θ t → h t → ∅ t / V_V
s ss → h s → ∅ s / V_V
No problems here. θ (> s) > h > Ø is totally reasonable, if you ask me.
tseren wrote:
Fri 10 Aug 2018, 00:43
t tt → θ t → s t / V_V
s ss → r ss / V_V
s (> z) > r doesn't feel weird to me either, especially not intervocalically.

I think that ss would be likely to shorten, especially since s no longer exists intervocalically, and tt shortens. However, I don't think it's too glaringly unnatural to leave it as a geminate, and there's probably some natlang precedent out there that I don't know about.
I know that the first set, with t → ∅, is the tried and true. My worry with option 2 is that an intervocalic t → θ → s doesn't seem to have any natlang precedent I can find. That worries me for some reason. It makes me think my logic is off. Still, it's tempting to not throw out so many consonants. Some homophones are fine, but I don't want a language of them.

You're right about the geminate ss. I'm considering reversing the order on that one to leave s from t,
s ss → r ss / V_V
t tt → θ t → s t / V_V
shimobaatar
darkness
darkness
Posts: 10179
Joined: Fri 12 Jul 2013, 22:09
Location: PA → IN

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by shimobaatar » Sun 12 Aug 2018, 00:33

tseren wrote:
Sat 11 Aug 2018, 22:29
I know that the first set, with t → ∅, is the tried and true. My worry with option 2 is that an intervocalic t → θ → s doesn't seem to have any natlang precedent I can find. That worries me for some reason. It makes me think my logic is off. Still, it's tempting to not throw out so many consonants. Some homophones are fine, but I don't want a language of them.
Well, t → θ is attested intervocalically, right? And θ → s isn't unusual in any position, I'd say. I don't think you have anything to worry about on that front.
yangfiretiger121
hieroglyphic
hieroglyphic
Posts: 63
Joined: Sun 17 Jun 2018, 02:04

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by yangfiretiger121 » Sun 12 Aug 2018, 00:47

[ls sl → rs sr → ʂ͡ɽ]
[lz zl → rz zr → ʐ͡ɽ]
User avatar
k1234567890y
runic
runic
Posts: 2953
Joined: Sat 04 Jan 2014, 04:47
Contact:

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by k1234567890y » Sat 01 Sep 2018, 06:14

I think to introduce preposition stranding to Town Speech-Plattdytch, should I?
yangfiretiger121 wrote:
Sun 12 Aug 2018, 00:47
[ls sl → rs sr → ʂ͡ɽ]
[lz zl → rz zr → ʐ͡ɽ]
maybe yes?
私のアツい人工言語活動!言カツ!始まります!!
Ælfwine
greek
greek
Posts: 779
Joined: Mon 21 Sep 2015, 00:28
Location: New Jersey

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Ælfwine » Sat 01 Sep 2018, 06:46

yangfiretiger121 wrote:
Sun 12 Aug 2018, 00:47
[ls sl → rs sr → ʂ͡ɽ]
[lz zl → rz zr → ʐ͡ɽ]
I feel like [ɽʂ] and [ɽʐ] iss more likely. Faroese retroflexes its consonants similarly, where [ɹ] becomes [ɻ] and retroflexes a following consonant as well.
My Blog
Current Projects:
Mannish — A North Germanic language spoken on the Calf of Man
Pelsodian — A Romance language spoken around Lake Balaton
Jezik Panoski — A Slavic language spoken in the same area
User avatar
Zekoslav
hieroglyphic
hieroglyphic
Posts: 58
Joined: Sat 07 Oct 2017, 15:54

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Zekoslav » Sat 01 Sep 2018, 10:14

Yesterday, while researching Indo-European, I decided to rethink the way that Pinault's law and laryngeal vocalization will interact in Tewanian.

At first, I thought I simply wouldn't include Pinault's law in my conlang since it shows multiple exceptions in Greek and Latin. Later, I found out that these apparent exceptions could be explained through analogical leveling - apparently, in verbs, the reflex of vocalized laryngeals (*e, *a*, *o in Greek, *a in Latin) was reintroduced before the suffix *-ye- through analogy with forms derived by other consonantal suffixed such as *-tro-.

I had decided that in Tewanian the result of laryngeal vocalization would be /i(ː)/ before PIE. *y and /a(ː)/ otherwise, which would result in these verbs joining the "i-conjugation":


PIE. *stenh2yeti "it thunders", *stenh2dhlom "thunder" > PTw. *steni(ˑ)yeti, *stenadlun


However, with the new understanding of Pinault's law, it is possible (maybe even probable) that the analogical leveling takes place after the vocalized laryngeal had already become /a(ː)/:


PIE. *stenh2yeti, *stenh2dhlom > post-PIE. *stenyeti, *stenadhlom > PTw. *stenayeti, *stenadlun


This would result in these verbs joining the "a-conjugation", which is what they did in Latin, and Proto-Tewanian would loose a bit of it's uniqueness - it is still possible to have these verbs join the "i-conjugation", but that would require 1. a very early reintoduction of the vocalized laryngeal before the suffix *-ye- and 2. multiple rounds of analogical leveling between different verb stems, namely the present and the participle, and I don't like this analogical ping-pong [D;]:


*stenh2yeti, *stenh2to- > *stenyeti, *stenəto- > *stenəyeti, *stenəto- (participle influences present) > *steniyeti, *stenəto- > *steniyeti, *stenito- (present influences participle)


What should I do?
Languages:
:hrv: [:D], :bih: :srb: [;)], :eng: [:D], :fra: [:|], :lat: [:(], :deu: [:'(]

A linguistics enthusiast who would like to make a conlang, but can't decide what to call what.

- Tewanian languages
- Guide to Slavic accentuation
Post Reply