Quick Diachronics Challenge

A forum for all topics related to constructed languages
User avatar
sangi39
moderator
moderator
Posts: 3080
Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2010, 00:53
Location: North Yorkshire, UK

Re: Quick Diachronics Challenge

Post by sangi39 » Thu 15 Mar 2018, 16:51

10 days without any further guesses, I'm going to call Ixals the winning of this particular challenge [:)]

The two proto-words were *skʰlə'ti: and *skʰlat'ti: respectively, with the following changes (I hope. I stupidly saved this in a notepad document, so it didn't save a chunk of the characters properly):

Code: Select all

LPS         : skʰlə'ti:   <>  skʰlot'ti:
> PS        : skʰəl'ti:   <>  skʰlot'ti:
 >> PE      : skʰal'tsʲi: <>  skʰlat'tsʲi:
   >>>      : skʰar'tsʲi: <>  skʰjat'tsʲi:
    >>>> 11 : kʰar'tɕaj   <>  kʰjat'tɕaj
    >>>> 14 : kʰar'θi:    <>  cʰaθ'θi:
   >>>      : kʰar'dʑej   <>  kʰjat'tɕej
    >>>> 13 : kʰa:'xej    <>  kʰja'tɕej
    >>>> 12 : kʰar'dʑi    <>  kʰjat'tɕi
 >> NE      : skʰil'tsʲi: <>  skʰlɔt'tsʲi:
   >>>      : skʰiw'tsʲi: <>  skʰrɔ'tsʲi:
    >>>> 16 : skʰi:'tɕi:  <>  ʂʈʂɔ'tɕi:
    >>>> 15 : ɕcʰu'θi:    <>  ɕkʰrɔ'θi:
   >>>      : kʰil'tsʲi:  <>  kʰlɔt'tsʲi:
    >>>> 10 : kʰì:'tɕí:   <>  ló'tɕí:
    >>>>  9 : kʰil'zi     <>  kʰlɔt'tsi
 > W        : skʰal'ti:   <>  skʰlat'ti:
   >>>      : skʰaw'die   <>  skʰla'tie
    >>>>  8 : kʰɔ:'dej    <>  l̥a'dej
    >>>>  7 : kʰɔ:'die    <>  kʰla'tie
   >>>      : sxal'ti:    <>  sxlat'ti:
    >>>>  6 : ʂal'di:     <>  ʂlat'ti:
    >>>>  5 : sxal'ti:    <>  slat'ti:
> PN        : skʰlə'ti:   <>  skʰlot'ti:
 >> N       : skʰla'ti:   <>  skʰlot'ti:
   >>>      : 'skʰra:.ti  <>  'skʰrot.ti:
    >>>>  4 : 'skʰrau.ti  <>  'skʰro.ti:
    >>>>  3 : 'skʰrɔ:.ti  <>  'skʰro.ti
   >>>      : 'kʰwa.di    <>  'kʰwot.ti
    >>>>  1 : 'kʰja.ri    <>  'kʰjo.si
    >>>>  2 : 'cʰua.li    <>  'cʰuo.si
You can tell the same lie a thousand times,
But it never gets any more true,
So close your eyes once more and once more believe
That they all still believe in you.
Just one time.
User avatar
ixals
sinic
sinic
Posts: 339
Joined: Tue 28 Jul 2015, 17:43

Re: Quick Diachronics Challenge

Post by ixals » Thu 15 Mar 2018, 17:11

Sometimes I forgot that schwas exist, wow. Seeing the schwa now makes the vowel outcomes look so obvious :roll: [:D] I'll go out with some friends in a minute, so I try to come up with a quick challenge tomorrow!
Native: :deu:
Learning: :gbr:, :fra:, :por:, :tur:

Цiски a Central Slavic conlang
Noattȯč a future German conlang [on hold]
Tungōnis Vīdīnōs Proto-Germanic goes Romance [on hold]
User avatar
sangi39
moderator
moderator
Posts: 3080
Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2010, 00:53
Location: North Yorkshire, UK

Re: Quick Diachronics Challenge

Post by sangi39 » Fri 16 Mar 2018, 05:40

ixals wrote:
Thu 15 Mar 2018, 17:11
Sometimes I forgot that schwas exist, wow. Seeing the schwa now makes the vowel outcomes look so obvious :roll: [:D] I'll go out with some friends in a minute, so I try to come up with a quick challenge tomorrow!
I might be wrong, but I think I've thrown a schwa into every one of my challenges so far [:P]
You can tell the same lie a thousand times,
But it never gets any more true,
So close your eyes once more and once more believe
That they all still believe in you.
Just one time.
User avatar
ixals
sinic
sinic
Posts: 339
Joined: Tue 28 Jul 2015, 17:43

Re: Quick Diachronics Challenge

Post by ixals » Fri 16 Mar 2018, 15:49

sangi39 wrote:
Fri 16 Mar 2018, 05:40
I might be wrong, but I think I've thrown a schwa into every one of my challenges so far [:P]
If that's the case, then it's even worse that I didn't think of it [:P]


Anyways, here's the next challenge. "à" is low tone and "á" is high tone, just in case. The last vowel in 15 is /æo̯/, it looks a bit off somehow. I think this challenge should be fairly easy, but if anyone needs a hint, just say so! [:D]

Image
Native: :deu:
Learning: :gbr:, :fra:, :por:, :tur:

Цiски a Central Slavic conlang
Noattȯč a future German conlang [on hold]
Tungōnis Vīdīnōs Proto-Germanic goes Romance [on hold]
User avatar
sangi39
moderator
moderator
Posts: 3080
Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2010, 00:53
Location: North Yorkshire, UK

Re: Quick Diachronics Challenge

Post by sangi39 » Fri 16 Mar 2018, 19:29

Spoiler:
So I think I've managed to work out the groupings, mostly:

Image

The blue group seems to have a northern and southern branch, and also seems to be most closely related to the yellow branch in the south-east.

6 and 14 seem to be immediately related, but 4 is really stumping me. I think it might be an off-shoot of the pink family to the west, given the palatal fricative.

The peripheral 1, 8, 13, and the central 14, all seem to suggest that there's a final consonant, possibly a velar.

There also seems to be a north-south divide in the languages which have developed tone (2, 3, 4, 5 and 7 vs. 6, 9, 10, 11 and 12), in which the final tone is either high or low respectively. The potential link between 14 and 6 suggests that this is due to the voicing of the final consonant, so it might be that a final *g was original, but devoiced in various languages, eventually being lost either way in most languages, affecting tone in some.

Something's going on with the medial *k in the pink group, possibly palatalisation, but I can't tell if that down to some original feature which otherwise disappeared elsewhere, or some innovation.

At a guess, I'm going to say that the proto-word might be something like *ə.plai'ka:.xag
You can tell the same lie a thousand times,
But it never gets any more true,
So close your eyes once more and once more believe
That they all still believe in you.
Just one time.
User avatar
Creyeditor
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4409
Joined: Tue 14 Aug 2012, 18:32

Re: Quick Diachronics Challenge

Post by Creyeditor » Sat 17 Mar 2018, 01:51

Sorry for not posting more stuff:
Spoiler:
Proto-all: *iplakakwak
1. ?
2-4: *plaksaka
5.-7.-8.-9.-10.: *itsakakwak
6. ?
14. ?
11-12-13: *pilakaxah
15-16-17: *ipraka
Creyeditor
"Thoughts are free."
Produce, Analyze, Manipulate
1 :deu: 2 :eng: 3 :idn: 4 :fra: 4 :esp:
:con: Ook & Omlűt & Nautli languages & Sperenjas
[<3] Papuan languages, Morphophonology, Lexical Semantics [<3]
vo1dwalk3r
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 111
Joined: Mon 17 Mar 2014, 22:37
Location: dʰǵʰémi
Contact:

Re: Quick Diachronics Challenge

Post by vo1dwalk3r » Sat 17 Mar 2018, 02:41

Spoiler:

Final answer: *i.pa.laːxˈkaː.xak͡x

Reasoning below

The first group I noticed was 15, 16, 17. This seems to come from something like *jip.rɑːˈkɑː

Proto-15-17 → 15
*p → f
*j → Ø
*Vː → V
*ɑ → æo̯ / _[+stress]

Proto-15-17 → 16
*p → (*b →) β
*Vː → V

Proto-15-17 → 17
*p → b
*j → d͡ʑ
syllabification change

The next one I noticed was 1, 2, 3, 4. The proto-word here seems to be *plaːˈksaː.haʔ

Proto-1-4 → 1
*l → w
*aː → aːi̯
*aː → oː
*ks → sk
*sk → ɕc / i̯_
*a → æ

You could further group 2, 3, 4 by the proto-word *plaːˈksaː.há, with a shared Vʔ → V́. The sound changes then are:

Proto-2-4 → 2
*h → ŋ

Proto-2-4 → 3
*h → ʔ

Proto-2-4 → 4
*ks → ɕ

The rest seems trickier. 5, 7 seem to be in a group, with *a.t͡ɕàˈkaː.há

Proto-5-7 → 5
*Vː → V

Proto-5-7 → 7
*aː → ao
*h → Ø

In fact, it seems workable to include 8 in the 5, 7 group. At first I was slightly hesitant due to 8 having the -k, but it made more sense when I remembered that many languages instead had a word final low tone. We then have *i.t͡sʲàˈkaː.hak

Proto-5-8 → Proto-5-7
*i → *a / #_
*t͡s → *t͡ɕ
*Vk → *V́ / _#

Proto-5-8 → 8
*t͡sʲ → t͡s
*aː → aw (suspiciously similar to a 7 sound shift)
*h → Ø (again)
tone lost

9, 10 seem closely linked; in fact I'd reconstruct their proto-word identically to 9's, *t͡sʲàˈkɑː.xà, with

Proto-9-10 → 10
*t͡s → s
*sʲ → s
*x → ɣ
*ɑ → a
*Vː → V

And then we can group 5, 7, 8, 9, 10 with *i.t͡sʲà.kaː.xak

Proto-5-10 → Proto-5-8
*x → *h

Proto-5-10 → Proto-9-10
*i → *Ø / #_
*aː → *ɑː
*Vk → *V̀ / _#

11, 12 seem groupable too, with *pʲlàːˈka.χà

Proto-11-12 → 11
*l → Ø
*Vː → V
*a → ɑ / _[+stress]

Proto-11-12 → 12
*ʲl > ʎ
*k > kʰ / _V[+stress]
stress shifts → word initial

I'm a bit confused about the state of 13. It looks a lot like part of the 11-12 group, but it seems to preserve what I though caused the low tone in the second syllable of many of the languages (i.e. V(ː)xC → V̀(ː)C). But the /x/ could just be an innovation, and the /-h/ could be preserved. Hmm.

I'm going to tentatively group 1-12 together (including 6, which doesn't seem to fit strongly in any group) with *i.plàːˈkaː.xak

Proto-1-12 → Proto-1-4
*i → *Ø / #_
*k → (*kʰ →) *ks / _V[+stress]
*x → *h
*k → *ʔ / _#

Proto-1-12 → Proto-5-10
*p → (*pʲ → *tʲ →) *tsʲ / i_
*l → *Ø / tsʲ_
*Vː → *V / _[-stress]
*x → *h

Proto-1-12 → Proto-11-12
*p → *pʲ / i_
*i → *Ø / #_
*x → *χ
*Vk → *V̀ / _#

Proto-1-12 → 6
*i → a / #_
*l → Ø
*x → h
*Vk → *V̀ / _#

A lot of these sound changes are shared or partially shared across groups, so I probably haven't found the true grouping but it seems to work well enough. After this I don't think there's too much more I can do. I'm don't think I can explain the low tone, so I'll reconstruct that for Proto-1-17. 14 seems to fit nicely, although the g͡ɣ is strange, except for the a.pa.lo- which might indicate a vowel in between the *p and *l.

In fact... it having the g͡ɣ could be important. If it was originally *-k͡x in Proto-1-17, and remained that in Proto-1-12 (or was originally *-g͡ɣ and devoiced everywhere else), we could get a *-k in Proto-1-4 (→ *-ʔ) and in Proto-5-10, but *-x in Proto-11-12 and in 6. That would explain the -h of 13, and it would also mean that the languages only developed high tones before plosives (possibly after being reduced to *-ʔ) and low tones after fricatives (again, perhaps all -h).

One could then even posit that the kʰ in 14 had also been a *k͡x, as in 13. This would be even better to explain the *ks in Proto-1-4, and perhaps even provide an explanation for the word-medial low tones—which doesn't occur in Proto-1-4! Of course, we would need some metathesis like *k͡x → *xk / V_V in Proto-5-10, Proto-11-12 and 6, and the xk͡x of 13 makes it even more confusing. I'm going to guess that the -kʰ-, -k͡x- found in the languages are just a result of the stresses syllable, and it was originally -xk-. This would require metathesis then only for Proto-1-4, which works better I think.

Okay okay, I'm going with *i.pa.laːxˈkaː.xak͡x.
User avatar
ixals
sinic
sinic
Posts: 339
Joined: Tue 28 Jul 2015, 17:43

Re: Quick Diachronics Challenge

Post by ixals » Sat 17 Mar 2018, 23:30

So far I would say that sangi's reconstruction looks the closest to the proto-word whereas vo1dwalk3r definitely has the right ideas, groupings, etc. Everyone didn't get the relationship between the eastern languages right by the way, so that was interesting to see actually! [:D]

Creyeditor:
Spoiler:
Creyeditor wrote:
Sat 17 Mar 2018, 01:51
Proto-all: *iplakakwak
1. ?
2-4: *plaksaka
5.-7.-8.-9.-10.: *itsakakwak
6. ?
14. ?
11-12-13: *pilakaxah
15-16-17: *ipraka
There are no vowel length distinctions and tones in your reconstruction so if I'd disregard them for a second, some of your reconstructions are pretty close but not 100% right and Proto-5/7/8/9/10 is off. The language share a lot of later innovative sound changes but not all of them are related. I feel like your final proto-word relies too much on the reconstructed *itsakakwak, which unfortunately results in your guess being less close to the proto-word than the others' guesses.
sangi39:
Spoiler:
Your red group is correct, your pink one is also close to being completely correct. The east is where it starts to be a bit more wrong, or well, the groups are wrong but the subgroups are close to being correct.
sangi39 wrote:
Fri 16 Mar 2018, 19:29
6 and 14 seem to be immediately related, but 4 is really stumping me.
[tick] , I thought this would be one of the harder ones. You're also right with 4, it's not related to 6/14.
sangi39 wrote:
Fri 16 Mar 2018, 19:29
The peripheral 1, 8, 13, and the central 14, all seem to suggest that there's a final consonant, possibly a velar.
[tick] , the other languages deleted that final consonants.
sangi39 wrote:
Fri 16 Mar 2018, 19:29
There also seems to be a north-south divide in the languages which have developed tone (2, 3, 4, 5 and 7 vs. 6, 9, 10, 11 and 12), in which the final tone is either high or low respectively. The potential link between 14 and 6 suggests that this is due to the voicing of the final consonant, so it might be that a final *g was original, but devoiced in various languages, eventually being lost either way in most languages, affecting tone in some.
You're right that the final consonant's voicing is the reason for the difference in tone, but not in all languages. The north-south being so prominent is purely coincidental.
sangi39 wrote:
Fri 16 Mar 2018, 19:29
Something's going on with the medial *k in the pink group, possibly palatalisation, but I can't tell if that down to some original feature which otherwise disappeared elsewhere, or some innovation.
It's not palatalisation, it's a different kind of sound change. [;)]
vo1dwalk3r:
Spoiler:
First off, can I just say that I'm impressed that you put so much work into your reconstructions? I loved reading that and compare your sound changes to what I've got in my own list! [:D]
vo1dwalk3r wrote:
Sat 17 Mar 2018, 02:41
The first group I noticed was 15, 16, 17. This seems to come from something like *jip.rɑːˈkɑː
Your grouping is correct. The problem with the 15/16/17 group is that it has been an individual group for quite some time and diverged quite late I'd say, so your reconstruction is not what I had in my mind but you clearly understood all the sound changes that happened here and I don't think you should worry about this group much anymore.
vo1dwalk3r wrote:
Sat 17 Mar 2018, 02:41
The next one I noticed was 1, 2, 3, 4. The proto-word here seems to be *plaːˈksaː.haʔ
[tick] , and the proto-word is also almost correct. There's just one thing that's off. Maybe language 1 will help a bit more with that.
vo1dwalk3r wrote:
Sat 17 Mar 2018, 02:41
You could further group 2, 3, 4 by the proto-word *plaːˈksaː.há, with a shared Vʔ → V́. The sound changes then are:
[tick]
vo1dwalk3r wrote:
Sat 17 Mar 2018, 02:41
The rest seems trickier. 5, 7 seem to be in a group, with *a.t͡ɕàˈkaː.há

[...]

In fact, it seems workable to include 8 in the 5, 7 group. At first I was slightly hesitant due to 8 having the -k, but it made more sense when I remembered that many languages instead had a word final low tone. We then have *i.t͡sʲàˈkaː.hak
[tick] , although I have a different proto-word again. Your proto-word has some of the later sound changes (aka the /t͡sʲ/ and the tone) that I didn't include so I think we can say your right with this one again.
vo1dwalk3r wrote:
Sat 17 Mar 2018, 02:41
(suspiciously similar to a 7 sound shift)
Haha yes, that was actually the sound change I introduced so the relation between 5/7 and 8 is more visible [:P]
vo1dwalk3r wrote:
Sat 17 Mar 2018, 02:41
9, 10 seem closely linked;
[tick] , but this is where it starts to be less correct
vo1dwalk3r wrote:
Sat 17 Mar 2018, 02:41
And then we can group 5, 7, 8, 9, 10 with *i.t͡sʲà.kaː.xak
These are not in the same group even though they look quite similar.
vo1dwalk3r wrote:
Sat 17 Mar 2018, 02:41
11, 12 seem groupable too, with *pʲlàːˈka.χà

[...]

I'm a bit confused about the state of 13. It looks a lot like part of the 11-12 group,
Not really correct, but you're right that they look alike and in the end they're closely related, just not in this way.
vo1dwalk3r wrote:
Sat 17 Mar 2018, 02:41
but it seems to preserve what I though caused the low tone in the second syllable of many of the languages (i.e. V(ː)xC → V̀(ː)C). But the /x/ could just be an innovation, and the /-h/ could be preserved. Hmm.
Hmm indeed.
vo1dwalk3r wrote:
Sat 17 Mar 2018, 02:41
A lot of these sound changes are shared or partially shared across groups, so I probably haven't found the true grouping but it seems to work well enough.
As I've said, nobody got the east right so yeah. But yes, some changes are shared across groups which blurs everything a bit.
vo1dwalk3r wrote:
Sat 17 Mar 2018, 02:41
14 seems to fit nicely, although the g͡ɣ is strange, except for the a.pa.lo- which might indicate a vowel in between the *p and *l.

In fact... it having the g͡ɣ could be important. If it was originally *-k͡x in Proto-1-17, and remained that in Proto-1-12 (or was originally *-g͡ɣ and devoiced everywhere else), we could get a *-k in Proto-1-4 (→ *-ʔ) and in Proto-5-10, but *-x in Proto-11-12 and in 6. That would explain the -h of 13, and it would also mean that the languages only developed high tones before plosives (possibly after being reduced to *-ʔ) and low tones after fricatives (again, perhaps all -h).
You're on the right track here I think (disregarding the groupings).
vo1dwalk3r wrote:
Sat 17 Mar 2018, 02:41
One could then even posit that the kʰ in 14 had also been a *k͡x, as in 13. This would be even better to explain the *ks in Proto-1-4, and perhaps even provide an explanation for the word-medial low tones—which doesn't occur in Proto-1-4! Of course, we would need some metathesis like *k͡x → *xk / V_V in Proto-5-10, Proto-11-12 and 6, and the xk͡x of 13 makes it even more confusing. I'm going to guess that the -kʰ-, -k͡x- found in the languages are just a result of the stresses syllable, and it was originally -xk-. This would require metathesis then only for Proto-1-4, which works better I think.
[tick] , 14 and 13 share a sound changes that happened independently in these languages.
I have no problem with letting you guess again with everything I've said now, but I could also give you a "hint" (either new variations of the current word or a new word for some of the current languages) if you want.
Native: :deu:
Learning: :gbr:, :fra:, :por:, :tur:

Цiски a Central Slavic conlang
Noattȯč a future German conlang [on hold]
Tungōnis Vīdīnōs Proto-Germanic goes Romance [on hold]
Auvon
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 117
Joined: Sat 27 Aug 2016, 07:48

Re: Quick Diachronics Challenge

Post by Auvon » Sun 18 Mar 2018, 06:27

https://mega.nz/#!RS41yBCA!51YSAdJ-LUWi ... KOjA_ptlV0

Here's a link to a badly-formatted handwritten pdf of rules applied for my challenge. Some notation was inconsistent, but application should've been consistent. You can view the file without downloading.

If I have time I'll take a shot at the current.
User avatar
sangi39
moderator
moderator
Posts: 3080
Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2010, 00:53
Location: North Yorkshire, UK

Re: Quick Diachronics Challenge

Post by sangi39 » Sun 18 Mar 2018, 07:15

I'll try and have another go at this after I get back from work in about 8 hours or so. Really want to try and pin this one down.

And yay, thanks Auvon. I'll read through those as soon as I can. Really want to see where I went wrong.
You can tell the same lie a thousand times,
But it never gets any more true,
So close your eyes once more and once more believe
That they all still believe in you.
Just one time.
User avatar
sangi39
moderator
moderator
Posts: 3080
Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2010, 00:53
Location: North Yorkshire, UK

Re: Quick Diachronics Challenge

Post by sangi39 » Sun 18 Mar 2018, 18:07

Spoiler:
1: pwo:i̯'ɕca:.hæʔ
2: pla:'ksa:.ŋá
3: pla:'ksa:.ʔá
4: pla:'ɕa:.há

I'd say 2 and 3 are the most closely related of the group, with rhinoglottophilia being the only thing differentiating the two, with a proto-word of *pla:'ksa:.ʔá.

1 and 4 then seem to be their closest relatives, but I can't quite figure out what the actual proto-word might be. The first syllable most likely has *pl- as an onset cluster for the first syllable, and *-a:.haʔ later on (the glottal stop triggered the development of high tone in languages 2, 3 and 4 before being dropped, remaining only in language 1). The second syllable is stressed, and then that's all I can work out from there. The middle portion could be *-aisk-, with palatalisation in 1 and 4, but metathesis in 2 and 3. Perhaps, *pla(i)s'ka:.haʔ.



6: a.pà:'ka:.hà
14: a.pa.lo'kʰo.hagɣ

14 seems to have undergone some cluster breaking. I would have said resyllabification, in the vein of Slavic, but it maintains the final affricate, so it's most likely just breaking up consonant clusters. The final affricate would most likely be a retention, either completely or a shifted version of some older sound. Given the final low tone in language 6 it was also likely still a voiced sound. The aspirated velar in 14, though, would appear to be a stress-related innovation.

I get the feeling that language 6 shows signs of earlier metathesis (which could further explain what's going on in 14), since an open syllable which a voiceless onset followed by an another voiceless onset would usually lead to a high tone rather than a low tone. This suggests to me that pre-language 6 had *a.pàl'ka:.hàg.

I'd take a guess at a proto-word of *a.pal'ka:.hag for this group (the long *a: eventually rising and shortening, similar to the development of Old Norse <á> in Swedish).



5: a.tɕà'ka.há
7: a.tɕà'kao̯.á
8: i.tsa.ka.wak

Of these, 5 and 7 seem the most closely related, the only difference being the non-syllabic /o̯/ in 7. The /h/ in 5 seems most likely to be a retention, so proto-5/7 might have been something like *a.tɕà'ka.há, with the *h dropping out, causing hiatus.

However, two similar vowels in hiatus very rarely do anything but create a phonetic long vowel, not diphthongise the first vowel. Given the form in language 8, this suggests that the stress vowel became a diphthong before the *h dropped out, was maintained in hiatus in language 7 but was reanalysed in language 8.

The tone of the final syllable in languages 5 and 7, and the final consonant of 8, points to the likelihood of tone being an innovation rather than a retention in languages 5 and 7, with a proto-language for all 3 languages being *ə.tɕa'ka(:).hák, with two overlapping isoglosses, one covering 5 and 7 which caused the development of tone and the loss of final *k, and another covering 7 and 8 which caused the diphthongisation of the stressed vowel and the loss of *h.



9: tsʲà'ka:.xà
10: sà'ka.ɣà

These two seem to be pretty closely related, sharing a number of similar features. /ɣ/ in language 10 seems to be the result of intervocalic voicing. /tsʲ/ can deaffricate (I believe it happened in languages like Mari), and /sʲ/ to simple /s/ doesn't seem unlikely (especially if the /s/ is laminal rather than apical). I'd take a guess at a proto-word of *tsʲà'ka(:).xà (the vowel length might be stress related.



11: pʲà'kɑ.χà

I honestly can't tell where this one fits right now. It looks like an intermediary between 9/10 and 12/13 (and honestly at this point I'm not sure whether 9/10 is more closely related to 5/7/8 or 12/13). And older form of 11 like *pjà'ka.xà doesn't seem too unlikely, so I'll stop there for now.



12: 'pʎà:.kʰa:.χà
13: pi'ʎa:x.kxa:.xah

12 and 13 are definitely more closely related to each other that to anything further afield. The velar affricate in 13 seems to be an innovation, likely a further development of the aspiration in 12 (which I assume is related to stress.

The coda /x/ in 13 is quite interesting. I can't tell if it's a back-projection of the affricate, or if it's some sort of retention. If it is, it's a very, very old retention because no other language seems to have a consonant in that position besides language 1. The word-final *h seems to be related to the development of tone in language 12, suggesting it's a retention in language 13. The /i/ in the first syllable could be there to break of the cluster.

Stress also seems to have shifted back one syllable, causing aspiration to become phonemic on this group. I'd take a guess at something like *'pʎa:x.kʰa:.xah being the immediate ancestral form, with an older *pʎa:x'kʰa(:).xah before the shift in stress.



15: if.rɑ'kæo̯
16: jiβ.rɑ'kɑ
17: dʑi.brɑ:'kɑ:

This one's a bit tricky, given the disparity in voicing, but the initial /j/ in 16 seems to be an example of glide prothesis, with the resulting /j/ fortifying to /dʑ/ in language 17, suggesting only the /i/ was original. The proto-word likely ended in *-rɑ'kɑ (vowels lengthening in open syllables in language 17, and a stressed *a resulting in /æo̯/ in language 15. I can't tell though whether the long vowel is original or not. There's an entire syllable missing, which would normally yield a long vowel, but the long vowel and the diphthong also appear only in the stressed vowels, and normally, as far as I can tell, long vowels in stressed open syllables remain long, but it's short in 16.

I get the feeling the origin of /f/, /β/ and /b/ might be in *p, undergoing frication in language 15, voicing in 16, and then fortifying to /b/ in 17. This might give the proto-word *ip.rɑ'kɑ(:), also showing signs of reanalysis of the syllable boundary (although it's also possibly that the reanalysis took place everywhere else except this branch, and that *p was always a coda).


So far that gives us:

1/2/3/4: *plais'ka:.haʔ. (northern)
6/14: *a.pal'ka:.hag (central)
5/7/8: *ə.tɕa'ka(:).hak
9/10: *tsʲà'ka(:).xà
11: pʲà'kɑ.χà
pre-12/13: *pʎa:x'kʰa(:).xah
15/16: *ip.rɑ'kɑ(:) (southern)

Okay, so, 15/16 seems to be something completely different from the rest, the approximant is *r rather than a lateral, it's missing an entire syllable and the syllable structure as a whole is different. If it is completely different, though, that points to there being an initial vowel which was dropped in a number of branches, rather than being something that popped up here and there.

There's got to be a sort of major eastern group comprising 5/7/8, 9/10, 11 and 12/13, but the exact groups above that are really bugging me, especially because of a) the retention of the initial vowel in 5/7/8, b) the difference in tone between 5/7/8 and the rest of the group, and c) the order in which palatalisation arose.

I get the feeling that 9 might be most closely related to 10/11, giving *pʲà'ka.xà as the proto-word, with an older *pja'ka.xaʔ, where the glottal stop caused the development of low tone (as opposed to the high tone that it causes in the north-west).

If that's the case, then 5/7/8 might have an older proto-word in *ə.tsʲa'ka(:).hak, and the palatal lateral might be common to all of the eastern languages, being retained only in 12/13, but shifting to /j/ independently in 5/7/8 and 9/10/11 (this pre-proto-5/7/8 would be *ə.pʲa'ka(:).hak).

This would give a proto-word for 5/7/8/9/10/11/12/13 (eastern) of *ə.pʎaC'ka(:).hak. (with the division going 5/7/8 vs. 9/10/11/12/13 > 9/10/11 vs. 12/13). The C is whatever the coda /h/ in language 13 comes from (assuming it's a retention at all, but for now I'll assume it is).

So we've got:

Northern: *pla(i)s'ka:.haʔ
Eastern: *ə.pʎaC'ka:.hak
Central: *a.pal'ka:.hag
Southern: *ip.rɑ'kɑ:

Spontaneous palatalisation of post-plosive /l/ can happen (IIRC, it happened in the development of a number of Romance languages), so I think we can assume the the approximant was *l. There was most likely an initial unstressed vowel that was lost in a number of branches and groups independently (IE). Final plosives going from voiceless to voiced is less common in the other direction, so the final consonant was most likely *g, devoicing in Northern and Eastern independently, and further becoming a glottal stop in Northern.

I think the loss of the final syllable in the Southern branch went something along the lines of *-a.hag > *-a.ha > *-a.a > *ɑ:.



So far that gives is *ə.plaX'ka:hag

The X is whatever the explanation for sibilant in the Northern branch and the coda *x is in language 13. There's a chance is was always an *s, became an *h in some proto-not-Northern branch, was lost in Central and Southern, retained in Eastern and survived only in one language.

Pre-aspiration does occur as a result of aspiration, IIRC, in Scottish Gaelic, so *C might not be a feature of Proto-Eastern at all. That leaves *X solely as a means of explaining *s in Proto-Northern. Again, this could have been *s in the proto-world, becoming *h and dropping out in every other language, which does seem somewhat more reasonable. It could have been *h as well if Ixals was right about *h > *s being a change that could happen.

For the moment I'm going to go with *a.plas'ka:.hag, or *a.plah'ka:.hag (I get the feeling the initial vowel became *ə in a couple of areas before dropping out or becoming *i, rather than originally being *a. I'm also still not sure vowel length is an original feature, but for now I'll mark it anyway).
You can tell the same lie a thousand times,
But it never gets any more true,
So close your eyes once more and once more believe
That they all still believe in you.
Just one time.
User avatar
ixals
sinic
sinic
Posts: 339
Joined: Tue 28 Jul 2015, 17:43

Re: Quick Diachronics Challenge

Post by ixals » Sat 24 Mar 2018, 16:11

sangi39:
Spoiler:
sangi39 wrote:
Sun 18 Mar 2018, 18:07
1: pwo:i̯'ɕca:.hæʔ
2: pla:'ksa:.ŋá
3: pla:'ksa:.ʔá
4: pla:'ɕa:.há

[...] Perhaps, *pla(i)s'ka:.haʔ.
This grouping is correct, your sound changes as well, the reconstruction has a little mistake in the first syllable, otherwise everything's right.
sangi39 wrote:
Sun 18 Mar 2018, 18:07
6: a.pà:'ka:.hà
14: a.pa.lo'kʰo.hagɣ

[...]

I'd take a guess at a proto-word of *a.pal'ka:.hag for this group (the long *a: eventually rising and shortening, similar to the development of Old Norse <á> in Swedish).
Yes, these two belong together and your right with the Swedish-like sound change, but the second syllable is still off here.
sangi39 wrote:
Sun 18 Mar 2018, 18:07
5: a.tɕà'ka.há
7: a.tɕà'kao̯.á
8: i.tsa.ka.wak

[...]
[tick]
sangi39 wrote:
Sun 18 Mar 2018, 18:07
9: tsʲà'ka:.xà
10: sà'ka.ɣà

These two seem to be pretty closely related, sharing a number of similar features. /ɣ/ in language 10 seems to be the result of intervocalic voicing. /tsʲ/ can deaffricate (I believe it happened in languages like Mari), and /sʲ/ to simple /s/ doesn't seem unlikely (especially if the /s/ is laminal rather than apical). I'd take a guess at a proto-word of *tsʲà'ka(:).xà (the vowel length might be stress related.
[tick] , I'd say except for one little thing.
sangi39 wrote:
Sun 18 Mar 2018, 18:07
11: pʲà'kɑ.χà

I honestly can't tell where this one fits right now. It looks like an intermediary between 9/10 and 12/13 (and honestly at this point I'm not sure whether 9/10 is more closely related to 5/7/8 or 12/13). And older form of 11 like *pjà'ka.xà doesn't seem too unlikely, so I'll stop there for now.
Yeah, this language seems to have confused everyone [xD] I think the new map will clear this one up though!
sangi39 wrote:
Sun 18 Mar 2018, 18:07
12: 'pʎà:.kʰa:.χà
13: pi'ʎa:x.kxa:.xah

[...]

Stress also seems to have shifted back one syllable, causing aspiration to become phonemic on this group. I'd take a guess at something like *'pʎa:x.kʰa:.xah being the immediate ancestral form, with an older *pʎa:x'kʰa(:).xah before the shift in stress.
Yes, these two are very closely related and I'd also say the reconstruction is pretty close.
sangi39 wrote:
Sun 18 Mar 2018, 18:07
15: if.rɑ'kæo̯
16: jiβ.rɑ'kɑ
17: dʑi.brɑ:'kɑ:

[...]
Consonant changes feel correct, vowel changes not so much.
sangi39 wrote:
Sun 18 Mar 2018, 18:07
Okay, so, 15/16 seems to be something completely different from the rest, the approximant is *r rather than a lateral, it's missing an entire syllable and the syllable structure as a whole is different. If it is completely different, though, that points to there being an initial vowel which was dropped in a number of branches, rather than being something that popped up here and there.
I think you mean 15/16/17, right? [:P] Otherwise, [tick] .
sangi39 wrote:
Sun 18 Mar 2018, 18:07
[the rest about the eastern languages]
The subgroupings are correct now, but they don't belong together this way.
sangi39 wrote:
Sun 18 Mar 2018, 18:07
Spontaneous palatalisation of post-plosive /l/ can happen (IIRC, it happened in the development of a number of Romance languages), so I think we can assume the the approximant was *l. There was most likely an initial unstressed vowel that was lost in a number of branches and groups independently (IE). Final plosives going from voiceless to voiced is less common in the other direction, so the final consonant was most likely *g, devoicing in Northern and Eastern independently, and further becoming a glottal stop in Northern.

I think the loss of the final syllable in the Southern branch went something along the lines of *-a.hag > *-a.ha > *-a.a > *ɑ:.
Three out of four things are right here [;)]
sangi39 wrote:
Sun 18 Mar 2018, 18:07
So far that gives is *ə.plaX'ka:hag

[...]

For the moment I'm going to go with *a.plas'ka:.hag, or *a.plah'ka:.hag [...]
I didn't know about this sound change in Scottish Gaelic, I'll definitely read up on that! Your first guess is actually closer though (the "*ə.plaX'ka:hag" one) [:D]
Here's more, I hope this will clear everything up!

Image
Native: :deu:
Learning: :gbr:, :fra:, :por:, :tur:

Цiски a Central Slavic conlang
Noattȯč a future German conlang [on hold]
Tungōnis Vīdīnōs Proto-Germanic goes Romance [on hold]
User avatar
sangi39
moderator
moderator
Posts: 3080
Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2010, 00:53
Location: North Yorkshire, UK

Re: Quick Diachronics Challenge

Post by sangi39 » Sat 24 Mar 2018, 16:27

Thanks for the response. If it's okay, I'm not going to be able to look at this properly until Tuesday (clocks change in the UK tonight and I'm at work at 6am, then back at work on Monday so no real free time until Tuesday).

It looks like the new information should help clear things up a bit. Think I've spotted a few things already.
You can tell the same lie a thousand times,
But it never gets any more true,
So close your eyes once more and once more believe
That they all still believe in you.
Just one time.
User avatar
sangi39
moderator
moderator
Posts: 3080
Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2010, 00:53
Location: North Yorkshire, UK

Re: Quick Diachronics Challenge

Post by sangi39 » Tue 27 Mar 2018, 00:00

ixals wrote:
Sat 24 Mar 2018, 16:11
Here's more, I hope this will clear everything up!
Spoiler:
Wait, are 5/7/8 and 6/14 more closely related to each other than to anything else, with palatalisation of *l being an areal feature in the east?
You can tell the same lie a thousand times,
But it never gets any more true,
So close your eyes once more and once more believe
That they all still believe in you.
Just one time.
User avatar
ixals
sinic
sinic
Posts: 339
Joined: Tue 28 Jul 2015, 17:43

Re: Quick Diachronics Challenge

Post by ixals » Tue 27 Mar 2018, 00:05

Spoiler:
[tick] [:P] , but I do see how that was very difficult to find out in hindsight, so I apologise!
Native: :deu:
Learning: :gbr:, :fra:, :por:, :tur:

Цiски a Central Slavic conlang
Noattȯč a future German conlang [on hold]
Tungōnis Vīdīnōs Proto-Germanic goes Romance [on hold]
User avatar
sangi39
moderator
moderator
Posts: 3080
Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2010, 00:53
Location: North Yorkshire, UK

Re: Quick Diachronics Challenge

Post by sangi39 » Tue 27 Mar 2018, 00:18

ixals wrote:
Tue 27 Mar 2018, 00:05
Spoiler:
[tick] [:P] , but I do see how that was very difficult to find out in hindsight, so I apologise!
Spoiler:
You have no idea [:P] I was like "nope, Ixals said this grouping of "Eastern" was wrong, and this one, and this one... but there's no other way of... wait a minute!!!"
Spoiler:
I'm taking on last stab at this and then I'm done:

Image

The initial *s in 10 seems to come from *pʲ > *c > *s (first step attested in Cyriot Greek or Lhasa Tibetan, I think, and the second might be attested in Burmese(?), always forget where that happened), with 9 going through *pʲ > *tʃʲ > *tsʲ instead?

I'm guessing that Proto-Northern was *pla:ɕ'ka:.haʔ

Various other bits and pieces like 5/7/8 undergoing final consonant devoicing before tones developed (the Norther branch seems to have done something else with its final *k vs. *g but can't work that one out
You can tell the same lie a thousand times,
But it never gets any more true,
So close your eyes once more and once more believe
That they all still believe in you.
Just one time.
User avatar
sangi39
moderator
moderator
Posts: 3080
Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2010, 00:53
Location: North Yorkshire, UK

Re: Quick Diachronics Challenge

Post by sangi39 » Tue 24 Apr 2018, 16:58

Did anyone else want to take a stab at this, or might Ixals want to declare a winner? [:)] I'm quite interested in seeing how this actually turned out
You can tell the same lie a thousand times,
But it never gets any more true,
So close your eyes once more and once more believe
That they all still believe in you.
Just one time.
User avatar
Inkcube-Revolver
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 162
Joined: Thu 05 Nov 2015, 23:20
Location: Miami, FL

Re: Quick Diachronics Challenge

Post by Inkcube-Revolver » Tue 24 Apr 2018, 18:51

Y'know, it's pretty crazy how, despite the hectic lifestyles and long stretches of inactivity, users still keep returning to this thread, putting in their reconstructions through good and bad weather. In fact, I find it so admirable, I would like to set a day sometime in the summer where as many users as possible (that are interested, of course) are at work to reconstruct a protolang challenge all at once.

Now, I don't know if this is something that can be done here on CBB, or if we'd have to go elsewhere like Skype or Twitch or something, but I'd definitely want to do a live competition of sorts. It'd be all for sport, of course, and can be a nifty way for some of the users on this site to get to know each other and gain a sense of good ol' camaraderie.
There can even be teams pitted against each other that work together to reconstruct the protowords first. Not sure how it'd work, but if anyone's game, I'll be more than happy to figure it out.

You can PM me through CBB, or if there's enough people interested, I'll make a new thread dedicated to how we go about this.

Best regards, and good luck on finals to our collegefolk and high schoolers,

- Inkcube Revolver
I like my languages how I like my women: grammatically complex with various moods and tenses, a thin line between nouns and verbs, and dozens upon dozens of possible conjugations for every single verb.
Nortaneous
earth
earth
Posts: 594
Joined: Sat 14 Aug 2010, 12:28

Re: Quick Diachronics Challenge

Post by Nortaneous » Tue 24 Apr 2018, 19:00

Spoiler:
*pl *gl seem clear.

Initial vowel vacillation is probably from schwa. 7/8 a-/i- vs. ʔa-/ʔi- suggests C@ sequence. Maybe word-initial schwa was deleted in most branches, or schwa was appended to the first word in 5-8 and 14-17. Whatever consonant it was, it probably didn't occur anywhere in the first word. Let's say *əpl- *Cəgl-. Moving on...

Vowel length. 6 and 9 have long vowels but don't preserve(?) length in the first one. 14 o seems to be from *a:. Length vacillation implies something going on - possibly a tone-conditioning coda consonant. What are the tone correspondences?

Code: Select all

1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
y  -  -  -  -  L  L  -  L  L  L  L  x  *  *  -  -   pl_k
ʔ  H  H  H  H  L  H  k  L  L  L  L  h  gG w  -  :   h_ʔ
y  -  ?  ?  ?  ?  L  -  ?  ?  L  L  ?  *  *  -  -   gl_t
Hk H  ?  ?  ?  ?  H  k  ?  ?  AH H  ?  kx k  ?  ?   ʔ_:k
So we're probably dealing with three different things. One low tone, two different high tones. More cover symbols.

*əpla:L- -a[H1]
*CəgluL- -a:[H2]

Onward to the stressed syllables. We'll say *ks *ts for now, pin down later. Obviously the first one is long.

*əpla:Lksa:- -a[H1]
*CəgluLtsa- -a:[H2]

Now we're left with two consonant correspondence sets:

1,4,5,6,14 h
9,11,12,13 x
7,8,15 w
2 ŋ
3 ʔ
10 G

7,8,14 g
11,12 h
1 ʔ
2 ŋ

This is a little weird, but whatever.

*əpla:Lksa:xaH1
*CəgluLtsaŋa:H2

12, 14 aspiration on the following consonant, 15 ATR, 1 -y-, and 2 -Cs- seem to correspond with low tone. Maybe this was actually *-sC-. But 12 and 14 could've aspirated all nonfinal voiceless stops, or something.

*əpla:ska:xaH1
*Cəglustaŋa:H2

One thing that's a little interesting is 1 -ʔ, ʔ- ~ 8 -k, g- ~ 14 -g, g-. 1 g > ʔ? Maybe also *ŋ(?) > g in 1 as in 7, 8, 14. It's tempting to call this *g, but then we lose *g for *-gl-. -g -k, however, have the useful trait of permitting the postulation of *a-diphthongization before velars in 15 (after the loss of *ŋ).

*əpla:ska:xag
*Cəglustaŋa:k

We still have *g for 15 -- frication and devoicing before *l > r.

Our *x and *ŋ seem to have been deleted in the 15-17 group, which has a proto-form of *iβrahkaɣ or so. From there:
15: Devoicing of approximants, breaking of *a before velars, loss of some coda consonants (but not *k)
16: Deletion of coda consonants, possibly with backing of vowels
17: Coda consonants > length and backing

The 13-14 group looks pretty conservative, aside from the merger of what were probably three different consonants to /g/. 13 preserves some remnant of coda *-s, which only 1 does. 14 maybe even preserves initial schwa. 12 might also belong in this group. Might be areal stuff going on and also including 11.

It would be really nice to get that unification, so let's go for an uvular. This could just as well be a weird *g or something. Could there be a 7-8-14 group sharing *q > g?

*əpla:ska:xaq
*qəglustaŋa:k

Actually, it'd be interesting to subgroup based on the reflexes of *q. We have:

1 ʔ ʔ
2 H ʔ
3 H -
4 H -
5 H -
6 L -
7 H g
8 k g
9 L -
10 L -
11 L h
12 L h
13 h -
14 g g
15 w 0
16 0 0
17 : -

One obvious problem here is that 15 doesn't seem to want the unification. At least not with the velar symmetry. Maybe we can reconstruct *ɣ, which triggered breaking and then deleted. But what sorts of subgroups do we get?

6-9-10-11-12-13 *q > h
7-8-14 *q > g
1-2-3-4-5 *q > ʔ (note that 1-2-3-4 retain some consonantal vestige of *-s-, so this seems reasonable)
15-16-17 *q > ɣ?

I don't have any more time to look at this. Sad!

Stress was penultimate.
User avatar
ixals
sinic
sinic
Posts: 339
Joined: Tue 28 Jul 2015, 17:43

Re: Quick Diachronics Challenge

Post by ixals » Tue 24 Apr 2018, 22:31

sangi39 wrote:
Tue 24 Apr 2018, 16:58
Did anyone else want to take a stab at this, or might Ixals want to declare a winner? I'm quite interested in seeing how this actually turned out
I wanted to wait a week and now it's been over a month again? Oh wow [D:] But now that Nortaneous posted, I think I'll post the solution so I won't forget to do it again! [:P]

Probably a bit big of a picture, but here's the overview:

Spoiler:
Image
Here are the detailed sound changes for each language:

ʔ-group:
Spoiler:
> plaːçˈkaːhaʔ
ə > ∅
h > ç
q > ʔ

1
> pwoːi̯ˈɕcaːhæʔ
l > ɬ > w
aː > oː / w_
ç > i̯ç > i̯ɕ / V_
k > c / C[+palatal]_
a[-stress] > æ / _ʔ

Proto-2/3/4
> plaːsˈkaːhaʔ
ç/ɕ/_
ɕ/s/_

2
> plaːˈksaːŋá
sk > ks
h > ʔ > ŋ
Vʔ > V[+hightone] / _C ; _#

3
> plaːˈksaːʔá
sk > ks
h > ʔ
Vʔ > V[+hightone] / _C ; _#

4
> plaːˈɕaːhá
sk > sx > ɕ
Vʔ > V[+hightone] / _C ; _#
g-group
Spoiler:
> aplaːhˈkaːhag
ə > a
q > g

Proto-5/7/8
> apjahˈkaːhak
C[+voice] > C[-voice] / _#
Vː > V / _[-stress]
l > j / C_

5
> at͡ɕàˈkahá
pj > pʲ > t͡sʲ > t͡ɕ
Vh > V[+lowtone] / _C ; _#
VC[-voice] > V[+hightone] / _C ; _#
Vː > V

7
> at͡ɕàˈkao̯á
pj > pʲ > t͡sʲ > t͡ɕ
aː > ao̯
Vh > V[+lowtone] / _C ; _#
VC[-voice] > V[+hightone] / _C ; _#
h > ∅

8
> it͡saˈkawak
a > i / _Cj
pj > pʲ > t͡sʲ > t͡s
aː > ao̯ > aw
h > ∅

Proto-6/14
> aplaːhˈkaːhag


6
> apàːˈkaːhà
l > ∅ / C_
Vh > V[+lowtone] / _C ; _#
VC[+voice] > V[+lowtone] / _C ; _#

14
> apaloˈkʰohag͡ɣ
∅ > V₀ / C_lV₀(ː)
hk > kː > kʰ
aː > o
g > g͡ɣ / _#
h-group:
Spoiler:
> pʎaːhˈkaːxah
ə > ∅
l > ʎ / C_
h > x / V_V
q > h

Proto-9/10/11
> pjahˈkaːxah
Vː > V / _CC
ʎ > j

9
> t͡sʲàˈkɑːxà
pj > pʲ > t͡sʲ
Vh > V[+lowtone] / _C ; _#
aː > ɑː

10
> sàˈkaɣà
pj > pʲ > t͡sʲ > sʲ > s
Vh > V[+lowtone] / _C ; _#
Vː > V
x > ɣ / V_V

11
> pʲàˈkɑχà
pj > pʲ
Vh > V[+lowtone] / _C ; _#
aː > ɑː
Vː > V
x > χ

Proto-12/13
> ˈpʎaːhkʰaːxah
hk > hkʰ
stress shift to first syllable

12
> ˈpʎàːkʰaχà
Vː > V / _[-stress]
Vh > V[+lowtone] / _C ; _#
x > χ

13
> piˈʎaːxk͡xaːxah
Cʎ > Ciʎ
hkʰ > hk͡x > xk͡x
∅-group:
Spoiler:
> ibraːˈkaː
q > ∅
ə > i
l > r / C_
C[-voice] > C[+voice] / V_rV
h > ∅
aːa > aːː > aː

15
> ifrɑˈkæo̯
aː > ɑː > ɑ / _[-stress]
aː > æː > æo̯ / _[+stress]
b > β / V_rV
β > ɸ > f

16
> jiβrɑˈkɑ
aː > ɑː > ɑ
b > β / V_rV
∅ > j / #_i

17
> d͡ʑibrɑːˈkɑː
aː > ɑː
∅ > j > ʝ > d͡ʑ / #_i
Now to declaring the winner, well, I'm actually on the fence. While vo1dwalk3r was the closest in the beginning, sangi worked out a lot of the groupings and sound changes, but then Nortaneous comes pretty much out of nowhere with a reconstructed *q which I was trying to get everyone to find out so badly! :roll: [:D] I would say it's between Nortaneous and sangi and if Nortaneous is up for it, I would propose that he could do the next challenge since he hasn't done one yet [:)]
Native: :deu:
Learning: :gbr:, :fra:, :por:, :tur:

Цiски a Central Slavic conlang
Noattȯč a future German conlang [on hold]
Tungōnis Vīdīnōs Proto-Germanic goes Romance [on hold]
Post Reply