Frislander's IE-lang scratchpad

A forum for all topics related to constructed languages
User avatar
Frislander
runic
runic
Posts: 3028
Joined: Sat 14 May 2016, 17:47
Location: The North

Frislander's IE-lang scratchpad

Post by Frislander » Fri 19 Oct 2018, 14:09

Seeing how this has started to become a recurring theme I've decided to make an actual thread for this thing, so here comes my current version of the phonology. I'm currently reckoning with the language being spoken somewhere eastwards, maybe round the Urals area? and that these people probably tagged along with the Iranians and/or Tocharians for a while before they split off north, hence several phonological commonalities can be found. Shared with Iranian we find satemisation, ruki and the complete merger of non-high vowels with accompanying palatalisation from *e. Shared with Tocharian we have the collapse of the three obstruent rows, though the exacts means and path this takes differs markedly from Tocharian. I'm not discussing sound changes for now, just presenting the inventory as it currently stands. I reckon this language is fairly old, something like 2 thousand years BP, and I'm not certain whether I'll have a modern daughter or not.

But anyway, onto the phonology.

/p t k/
/s ʂ ɕ h/
/m n/
/w ɾ j/

/i iː u uː/
/ɛː ə/
/ɑ̃ ɑ̃ː/

Note that this latest version contains glides, which the previous version lacked. This is because I've decided against *jə *wə > /i u/ when the glides don't immediately follow a consonant. Other than there though the glides still tend to merge with the vowels a lot.

Syllable structure is currently turning out (C)V(C), where vowel-initial syllables are word-initial. Stress seems to be fairly boringly word-initial, blame the Uralic-speakers I guess.
User avatar
Frislander
runic
runic
Posts: 3028
Joined: Sat 14 May 2016, 17:47
Location: The North

Re: Frislander's IE-lang scratchpad

Post by Frislander » Sat 20 Oct 2018, 15:42

OK, so I'm gonna make a couple of modifications to the inventory, specifically I'm gonna add /θ/.

OK, sound changes.

First of all we have satemisation (I'm inclined to take the centum situation to be the PIE one, but that's irrelevant for these purposes). The reflexes of the palato-velars universally end up as the dental fricatives /θ s/ eventually (probably passing through a sibilant affricate stage), while the plain velars and labiovelars are merged as plain velars.

Laryngeals are lost, with the usual colouring of the vowels a seen elsewhere in IE, and lengthening of syllabic resonants also occurs. Syllabic laryngeals become short non-high vowels; There is possible indirect evidence for a triple reflex, however otherwise it is unclear due to the general collapse of non-high vowels. As in Indo-Iranian, h2 causes aspiration on a voiceless plosive before it. Word-initial pre-consonantal laryngeals are lost.

Then we have the ruki sound change. This retracted *s back to what would eventually become a retroflex sibilant /ʂ/. Remaining *s is lenited to /h/.

*l is lost, however there is variation as to whether it merges with *j or *r or is lost completely (the ɕəɕ/ɕəʂ/ɕək isogloss).

The new plain velars are palatalised before front vowels (*i *e in short and long, and also *j). This is what pushes the satemised palatovelars to dental position. Note that those varieties which merged *l with *j palatalise before this new *j as well ("ɕəɕ" varieties). *j before a vowel is then lost after these new palatalised consonants.

Voicing is lost in plosives. Voiced stops merge with plain voiceless, while voiced aspirates become voiceless.

Non-high vowels collapsed, probably as *a in long or short. Note the absence of Brugmann's Law.

Syllabic resonants are lost. *r̩/l̩ merge with *a, while *m̩/n̩ continue as nasalised ɑ̃ (long forms arising from laryngeal loss stay long). Furthermore *an/*am when not before a vowel became long nasalised ɑ̃ː.

Aspiration came to be realised as strong velar frication with plosives, while aspirated affricates (from satemisation and palatalisation) became corresponding fricatives (so *tsʰ from *ǵʰ becomes modern /s/, *tɕʰ from palatalised *gʰ/gʷʰ becomes /ɕ/). Note that this is likely to have taken place after the second palatalisation, since we do not see a palatalisation of the velar element (so *tx from *dʰ never becomes *tɕ).

*tx become *tk, and velar frication is lost (resulting in a merger of *dʰ with unpalatalised *k, *kʷ, *g, *gʷ, *gʰ and *gʷʰ). This *tk cluster is simplified to /k/ when not inter-vocalic.

Obstruent + r and r/ʂ + plus obstruent clusters (where the obstruent is non-labial, i.e. not *p) become retroflex fricatives/affricates (*rʂ clusters from the ruki rule had presumeably already simplified by this point, but *kʂ clusters probably simplified here). Dialects which turned *l into *r also show retroflexion here ("ɕəʂ" varieties). Remaining coda-r is lost with compensatory vowel lengthening.

*wr clusters metathesise to *rw. Then *a(ː)j *a(ː)w are raised to /iː uː/ when not before a vowel. Post consonantal *ja(ː) *wa(ː) are similarly simplified to /i(ː) u(ː)/.

*a *aː are raised/fronted to /ə ɛː/.

Stress has at some point become almost completely word-initial, however it is post-initial if the first vowel is schwa and second is not.

Coda -h in an unstressed syllable is lost, shortly followed by all word-final non-nasal short vowels (byebye o-stem nominative singular). Similarly unstressed word-initial schwa is lost. /h/ is also lost after a consonant word-finally.

*ts is fronted to /θ/, while other affricates merge with there fricative counterparts.

So, some example words.

pətɛː "father" < *ph2tēr
ɕɛːn "woman" < *gʷēn
nəp "cloud" < *nebʰos
pɑ̃ːɕ "five" < *penkʷe
θu "horse" < *eḱwos
wək "wolf" < *wl̩kʷos
wəʂ "name" < *werdʰo-
θɑ̃t "hundred" < *ḱm̩tom
sɑ̃ː "goose" < *ǵʰans-
ʂəj "three" < *treyes
niʂ "nest" < *nisdos
ɕəɕ/ɕəʂ/ɕək "wheel" < *kʷekʷlos
mɑ̃ːt "mind" < *mentis
ɾuːt "root" < *wreh2ds
tiː "sky" < *deiwos
tɑ̃ːt "tooth" < *Hdonts
kəsɑ̃ː "earth" < *dʰeǵʰom
wət "water" < *wodr̩
tɑ̃θuː "tongue" < *dn̩ǵweh2s
jiːmɑ̃ː/ɾiːmɑ̃ː/iːmɑ̃ː "lake" < *leymon
θuː "dog" < *ḱwō
təɾ "tree" < *doru
rutkɛː- "to be red" < *h1rudʰeh1-
nək "night" < *nokʷts
Last edited by Frislander on Fri 02 Nov 2018, 08:33, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
Tristan Radicz
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri 21 Sep 2018, 00:56
Location: už devynių jūrų

Re: Frislander's IE-lang scratchpad

Post by Tristan Radicz » Sun 21 Oct 2018, 04:16

Interesting. It does look vaguely Tocharian-like, which is something I don't remember seeing done in conlangs before.

You mention that the speakers of this language were (possibly) situated somewhere near the Urals; have they been in contact with Finno-Ugric peoples?
User avatar
Frislander
runic
runic
Posts: 3028
Joined: Sat 14 May 2016, 17:47
Location: The North

Re: Frislander's IE-lang scratchpad

Post by Frislander » Sun 21 Oct 2018, 13:33

Tristan Radicz wrote:
Sun 21 Oct 2018, 04:16
Interesting. It does look vaguely Tocharian-like, which is something I don't remember seeing done in conlangs before.
Someone must have done a Tocharian-esque IE-lang at some point, I doubt I'm being entirely original here.
You mention that the speakers of this language were (possibly) situated somewhere near the Urals; have they been in contact with Finno-Ugric peoples?
Yes that's what I'm assuming, however the effects probably won't be that strong just yet, but the modern descendants will likely show it a lot more. As the sound changes indicate, a lot of the early stuff is shared with Indo-Iranian, which I'm reckoning at the stage the language is currently at will have had the most effect on the sound system, whereas Finno-Ugric influence will be more recent and smaller-scale.
User avatar
Leo
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed 28 Nov 2012, 19:07

Re: Frislander's IE-lang scratchpad

Post by Leo » Sun 21 Oct 2018, 23:59

I'm a bit puzzled by /a/ aperture always nasal when it could simplify with apparently no confusion. Do you care to explain? Also wondering about the morphosyntax and its evolution, have you sketched it?
User avatar
Frislander
runic
runic
Posts: 3028
Joined: Sat 14 May 2016, 17:47
Location: The North

Re: Frislander's IE-lang scratchpad

Post by Frislander » Mon 22 Oct 2018, 10:29

Leo wrote:
Sun 21 Oct 2018, 23:59
I'm a bit puzzled by /a/ aperture always nasal when it could simplify with apparently no confusion. Do you care to explain? Also wondering about the morphosyntax and its evolution, have you sketched it?
Actually the open vowel having some degree of nasalisation is actually fairly common cross-linguistically due to the connection between the lowered tongue position and the lowering of the velum. See for instance Thai which shows variable nasalisation of the low vowel /a/, the spontaneous nasalisation of long /a:/ in some Eastern Algonquian languages, and also Iau, where the low vowel is also nasalised and nasalises preceding voiced stops.

As for morphosyntax, I'm working on it. I'm currently wondering how much the case system will have been simplified by this point, because the sound changes as they stand wreak havoc on the markers. As for verbs ideas are sketchier, but I'm thinking grammaticalise some auxilliaries to rebuild the verb system, more so in the daughters.
User avatar
Frislander
runic
runic
Posts: 3028
Joined: Sat 14 May 2016, 17:47
Location: The North

Re: Frislander's IE-lang scratchpad

Post by Frislander » Mon 22 Oct 2018, 22:31

Ok, let's make a start on this morphology shall we?

Let's start simple, masculine thematic o-stem nouns. The current sound changes result in these reflexes of the PIE singular case forms (using wək "wolf" as our example word):

Code: Select all

NOM wək
VOC wəɕ
ACC wəkɑ̃ː
INS wəkɛː
DAT wəkiː
GEN wəkəh
ABL wəkɛːt
LOC wəkiː
Of these the vocative is undoubtedly the first to go. The locative/dative contrast is probably also going to quietly dis-appear as well. I also feel like the ablative is not likely to survive, as it only occurs in the singular of this declension, though I might decide to repurpose the form, as it is highly distinctive. I'm using the *-osyo genitive, in line with Indo-Iranian and Tocharian.

The nominative-accusative dual would end up as wəkɛː, being homophonous with the instrumental singular. Assuming Uralic contact, there may yet be a future for the dual as a category, however it is unlikely this ending will survive to fulfill that role, and indeed at this stage the language will probably lack it.

And now the plural cases.

Code: Select all

NOM wəkɛːh~wəkiː
ACC wəkɑ̃ːh
INS wəkiːh
GEN wəkɛːm
DAT wəkəp
LOC wəkəh
Note that the language is an *-obʰos branch like Indo-Iranian, as opposed to Slavic/Germanic's *-omos.

So here is further support for the loss of the locative, since the plural is homophonous with the genitive singular. The homophony of the *-oy variant of the nominative plural with he locative/dative singular lends support for the *-ōs variant of the nominative plural. This lends further support additionally for the repurposing of the -t of the ablative singular for the instrumental to enhance its distinctiveness.

So as it stands we currently have the following o-stem paradigm.

Code: Select all

    SING   PLUR
NOM wək    wəkɛːh
ACC wəkɑ̃ː  wəkɑ̃ːh
INS wəkɛːt wəkiːh
GEN wəkəh  wəkɛːm
DAT wəkiː  wəkəp
Next: *-eh2 stems.
Edit: An addendum: I forgot the neuter o-stems. As usual, the nominative and accusative of neuter nouns are identical. With the current sound changes the singular and plural of the nominative/accusative (using "yoke") look like they're going to be jukɑ̃ː/jukɛː. I'm unsure whether to reshape the plural to match the masculine, but ether way the resulting paradigm is as follows:

Code: Select all

    SING   PLUR
NOM jukɑ̃ː  jukɛː(h)
INS jukɛːt jukiːh
GEN jukəh  jukɛːm
DAT jukiː  jukəp
Last edited by Frislander on Tue 23 Oct 2018, 14:06, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Leo
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed 28 Nov 2012, 19:07

Re: Frislander's IE-lang scratchpad

Post by Leo » Tue 23 Oct 2018, 00:25

Thank you for the bit on the spontaneous nasalisation of open vowels, I wasn't aware. At first I imagined /ɛ/ had so wide an allophony that it reached up to a.
So, the declension cases are definitely going one by one. And no new ones will be created - is it because the postpositions are going the prepositional way?
By the way I have to switch the forum to the Gentium font to be able to see some of your IPA with diacritics the correct way, especially in the monotype blocks.
Nortaneous
earth
earth
Posts: 600
Joined: Sat 14 Aug 2010, 12:28

Re: Frislander's IE-lang scratchpad

Post by Nortaneous » Tue 23 Oct 2018, 13:48

Frislander wrote:
Sun 21 Oct 2018, 13:33
Tristan Radicz wrote:
Sun 21 Oct 2018, 04:16
Interesting. It does look vaguely Tocharian-like, which is something I don't remember seeing done in conlangs before.
Someone must have done a Tocharian-esque IE-lang at some point, I doubt I'm being entirely original here.
Pannonian is a little like this, but there wasn't enough Uralic contact to entirely obliterate the plosive MOA distinction. It's primarily Paleo-Balkan, but there is some evidence that the Tocharians were around there for a while, and there are some developments in common: *d > ts (> s, because *s > *x > h), some *e > ʲə (but schwa is mostly lost later on due to extensive umlaut of mid vowels), an expansion of the case system (although the core NOM/GEN/DAT/ACC system is preserved)...

However, at some point they migrated north, and the overall effect is Shit Balto-Germanic.
User avatar
Frislander
runic
runic
Posts: 3028
Joined: Sat 14 May 2016, 17:47
Location: The North

Re: Frislander's IE-lang scratchpad

Post by Frislander » Tue 23 Oct 2018, 14:12

Leo wrote:
Tue 23 Oct 2018, 00:25
So, the declension cases are definitely going one by one. And no new ones will be created - is it because the postpositions are going the prepositional way?
No, that's not the reason; postpositions are going to remain as such. It's a bit complicated really. I guess I don't want to start grammaticalising postpositions before serious Uralic contact, though I guess Tocharian did it anyway so I guess I could do some. It's also a methodological thing - I'm currently working through the inherited morphology, seeing how the case system is likely to end up assuming no new stuff is grammaticalised, and doing so for each declension, before grammaticalising new stuff.
By the way I have to switch the forum to the Gentium font to be able to see some of your IPA with diacritics the correct way, especially in the monotype blocks.
Yeah sorry about that, IPA typeit just doesn't use precomposed characters, all its diacritics are added post hoc, but In any case wherever you see ɑ you'll know it's nasalised as it isn't used anywhere else without nasalisation.
User avatar
spanick
greek
greek
Posts: 682
Joined: Thu 11 May 2017, 00:47
Location: California

Re: Frislander's IE-lang scratchpad

Post by spanick » Tue 23 Oct 2018, 21:42

Just commenting to let you know I'm following and that I really like this so far (it's even inspired me to start working on my PIE lang again). Haven't commented yet because I have nothing substantive to say so far.
User avatar
Frislander
runic
runic
Posts: 3028
Joined: Sat 14 May 2016, 17:47
Location: The North

Re: Frislander's IE-lang scratchpad

Post by Frislander » Wed 24 Oct 2018, 13:18

Ok, -eH2 stems now. Again we'll start with the singular cases, using wəkɛː "she-wolf" as my regular example word.

Code: Select all

NOM wəkɛː
ACC wəkɛːm
INS wəkɛːp
DAT wəkiː
GEN wəkɛːh
LOC wəkiː
So here we can see a significantly different picture to what we saw in the singular o-stem cases. Again the dative-locative distinction looks like it is going to collapse, however the other cases look fairly stable so far. Note however that if a non-schwa vowel were found in the root syllable the genitive would lose the /h/, becoming identical to the nominative.

Now for the plural forms.

Code: Select all

NOM wəkɛːh
ACC wəkɛːm
INS wəkɛːp
DAT wəkɛːp
GEN wəkɛːm
LOC wəkɛːh
As we can see, the -eH2 stems show great syncretism in the plural forms - the accusative singular and plural are homophonous, and both are also identical to the genitive plural. The instrumental singular and plural are homophonous, and both are also identical to the dative plural. Finally the genitive singular, nominative plural and locative plural are also identical. The locative is being lost anyway, but that still leaves a massively defective paradigm in comparison to the o-stems. From this we might predict that massive amounts of reshaping are likely, or that the language might reduce its inherited case system at a later stage, or indeed that this stem class may be lost entirely and re-assigned to some other class.

Let us just recapitulate what we currently have so far for this declension class before we survey the alternatives.

Code: Select all

    SING   PLUR
NOM wəkɛː  wəkɛːh
ACC wəkɛːm wəkɛːm
INS wəkɛːp wəkɛːp
DAT wəkiː  wəkɛːp
GEN wəkɛːh wəkɛːm
As a side note I will consider the -iH2~-yeH2 stems.. Let's create a word Tiːwiː, perhaps the name of a sky goddess (the consort of Tiːwʂ pətɛː). We'll look at the following singular cases to begin with.

Code: Select all

NOM tiːwiː
ACC tiːwiːm
GEN tiwiːh
From this we can see that the current set of sound changes level the alternation in the suffix, but there is quantitative ablaut in the root. We can probably add an instrumental tiwiːp to this as well, but the dative is harder to securely derive, and would likely be syncretic with the nominative singular anyway. So I don't think I'll keep this declension type - the female sky goddess will be Tiːwɛː, using the -eH2 stem form.

Next: some consonant stems.
User avatar
Omzinesý
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2444
Joined: Fri 27 Aug 2010, 07:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: Frislander's IE-lang scratchpad

Post by Omzinesý » Wed 24 Oct 2018, 13:57

Tristan Radicz wrote:
Sun 21 Oct 2018, 04:16
Interesting. It does look vaguely Tocharian-like, which is something I don't remember seeing done in conlangs before.
Knowing basically nothing of Tocharian, what is Tocaharian-like in this lang?
User avatar
Frislander
runic
runic
Posts: 3028
Joined: Sat 14 May 2016, 17:47
Location: The North

Re: Frislander's IE-lang scratchpad

Post by Frislander » Wed 24 Oct 2018, 16:41

Omzinesý wrote:
Wed 24 Oct 2018, 13:57
Tristan Radicz wrote:
Sun 21 Oct 2018, 04:16
Interesting. It does look vaguely Tocharian-like, which is something I don't remember seeing done in conlangs before.
Knowing basically nothing of Tocharian, what is Tocaharian-like in this lang?
I think they're referring in particular to the collapse of the stop system and the new fricatives. Aside from that there's not that much in common, at least not yet (when I'm done with inherited noun morphology I might start making it more Tocharian-esque with the new stuff that's coming along).
User avatar
Frislander
runic
runic
Posts: 3028
Joined: Sat 14 May 2016, 17:47
Location: The North

Re: Frislander's IE-lang scratchpad

Post by Frislander » Fri 26 Oct 2018, 11:36

OK, where shall we start with these then? I think we'll start with simple: s-stems. We'll take nəp "cloud" as our example (note the lack of nominative/accusative due to neuter):

Code: Select all

NOM nəp
INS nəpəh
DAT nəpəhiː
GEN nəpəh
LOC nəpəh
As you can see, there is loads of syncretism in the paradigm as we can see. Interestingly the locative case appears to syncretise with the genitive & instrumental, not the dative as with the previous declensions, however I still think collapsing of the dative and locative is likely.

Now for the plural forms.

Code: Select all

NOM nəpɛːh
INS nəpəp
DAT nəpəp
GEN nəpəhɛːm
LOC nəpəh
This is interesting: the cases are distinguished, however the forms themselves do not entirely with those of the o-stem nouns despite being shared, notably the -p form being used for the instrumental as opposed to the dative. Nevertheless some collapse does seem inevitable to me. Thus I am content for now to partially re-analyse the -s suffix as being part of the inflection, and thus reshape the dative singular and genitive plural along the lines of the o-stems, which, coupled with the loss of the locative, gives the following paradigm.

Code: Select all

    SING  PLUR
NOM nəp   nəpɛːh
INS nəpəh nəpəp
DAT nəpiː nəpəp
GEN nəpəh nəpɛːm
From this I can now see a few possibilities for reshaping the o-stem neuters in turn. Furthermore it is likely that the daughter languages will merge this declension with the o-stems completely, due to the evident similarities.

Now for the i-stems. Let us take mɑ̃ːt "though, plan" as our example:

Code: Select all

NOM mɑ̃ːt
ACC mɑ̃ːtim
INS mɑ̃t
DAT mɑ̃təjiː
GEN mɑ̃tiːh
LOC mɑ̃tiː
Once again we collapse the dative and locative, though with the actual form of the locative winning out due to its identity with the o-stem dative. I'm not entirely sure what to make of the length alternation (where long reflects and original full grade and short reflects an original zero grade). It appears to be the only thing currently distinguishing the nominative and instrumental, so for the ancient language I think I will retain it, with the daughter languages levelling it, probably once there has been innovated a new means of distinguishing the two cases.

Now the plural.

Code: Select all

NOM mɑ̃ːtəj
ACC mɑ̃ːtin
INS mɑ̃tip
DAT mɑ̃tip
GEN mɑ̃tiːm
LOC mɑ̃tih
Note again the importance of length in this declension, as the genitive plural is also distinguished from the accusative singular solely by this means. And again as in the -eH2 stems note the dative/instrumental plural homophony.

So as it currently stands the i-stem paradigm is as follows:

Code: Select all

    SING   PLUR
NOM mɑ̃ːt   mɑ̃ːtəj
ACC mɑ̃ːtim mɑ̃ːtin
INS mɑ̃t    mɑ̃tip
DAT mɑ̃tiː  mɑ̃tip
GEN mɑ̃tiːh mɑ̃tiːm
Next: u-stems
Last edited by Frislander on Sat 03 Nov 2018, 17:22, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Tristan Radicz
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri 21 Sep 2018, 00:56
Location: už devynių jūrų

Re: Frislander's IE-lang scratchpad

Post by Tristan Radicz » Fri 26 Oct 2018, 16:45

Omzinesý wrote:
Wed 24 Oct 2018, 13:57
Knowing basically nothing of Tocharian, what is Tocaharian-like in this lang?
Frislander wrote:
Wed 24 Oct 2018, 16:41
I think they're referring in particular to the collapse of the stop system and the new fricatives.
Yep, plus the overall aesthetics the resulting phonology and phonotactics has.
User avatar
KaiTheHomoSapien
greek
greek
Posts: 571
Joined: Mon 15 Feb 2016, 06:10
Location: Stanford, California

Re: Frislander's IE-lang scratchpad

Post by KaiTheHomoSapien » Fri 26 Oct 2018, 16:53

I think it resembles Tocharian too, which is awesome, because Tocharian is so underrated :)

Either way, this is interesting, as someone who is also making an IE-lang.
Don't live to conlang; conlang to live.

My conlang: Image Lihmelinyan
User avatar
Zekoslav
hieroglyphic
hieroglyphic
Posts: 67
Joined: Sat 07 Oct 2017, 15:54

Re: Frislander's IE-lang scratchpad

Post by Zekoslav » Fri 26 Oct 2018, 17:31

Frislander wrote:
Fri 26 Oct 2018, 11:36
Once again we collapse the dative and locative, though with the actual form of the locative winning out due to its identity with the o-stem dative. I'm not entirely sure what to make of the length alternation (where long reflects and original full grade and short reflects an original zero grade). It appears to be the only thing currently distinguishing the nominative and instrumental, so for the ancient language I think I will retain it, with the daughter languages levelling it, probably once there has been innovated a new means of distinguishing the two cases.
Concerning root ablaut in i- and u-stems, there's an important fact that non-professionals are mostly unaware of: it's reconstructed entirely due to structural reasons (root ablaut is preserved some consonant stems, which must be archaic), and no attested IE. language has preserved it as such - all that remain are isolated doublets such as firth (e-grade) ~ ford (zero grade).

Rather, it seems that already by late PIE., root ablaut was eliminated in i- and u-stems (i-stems tend to generalize zero grade, u-stems tend to generalize e-grade), and they started to behave as vowel stems in terms of ablaut and accent (fixed, barytone/oxytone accent closely but not entirely following ablaut: there were also e-grade oxytones and zero grade barytones).
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
Clio
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 188
Joined: Thu 27 Dec 2012, 23:45

Re: Frislander's IE-lang scratchpad

Post by Clio » Fri 26 Oct 2018, 18:12

I was looking forward to your post on the s-stems, and as expected it was a good one. I really enjoy reading through your thought process as you work through syncretism in and analogy from the output forms, especially here where they have a few really notable features (instrumental -p, tons of syncretism in the singular but none in the plural, etc.). When you derive the daughter languages, I'll be excited to see what happens to them.
Niûro nCora
Getic: longum Getico murmur in ore fuit
User avatar
Frislander
runic
runic
Posts: 3028
Joined: Sat 14 May 2016, 17:47
Location: The North

Re: Frislander's IE-lang scratchpad

Post by Frislander » Fri 26 Oct 2018, 18:30

KaiTheHomoSapien wrote:
Fri 26 Oct 2018, 16:53
I think it resembles Tocharian too, which is awesome, because Tocharian is so underrated :)

Either way, this is interesting, as someone who is also making an IE-lang.
Thank you!
Zekoslav wrote:
Fri 26 Oct 2018, 17:31
Frislander wrote:
Fri 26 Oct 2018, 11:36
Once again we collapse the dative and locative, though with the actual form of the locative winning out due to its identity with the o-stem dative. I'm not entirely sure what to make of the length alternation (where long reflects and original full grade and short reflects an original zero grade). It appears to be the only thing currently distinguishing the nominative and instrumental, so for the ancient language I think I will retain it, with the daughter languages levelling it, probably once there has been innovated a new means of distinguishing the two cases.
Concerning root ablaut in i- and u-stems, there's an important fact that non-professionals are mostly unaware of: it's reconstructed entirely due to structural reasons (root ablaut is preserved some consonant stems, which must be archaic), and no attested IE. language has preserved it as such - all that remain are isolated doublets such as firth (e-grade) ~ ford (zero grade).

Rather, it seems that already by late PIE., root ablaut was eliminated in i- and u-stems (i-stems tend to generalize zero grade, u-stems tend to generalize e-grade), and they started to behave as vowel stems in terms of ablaut and accent (fixed, barytone/oxytone accent closely but not entirely following ablaut: there were also e-grade oxytones and zero grade barytones).
You know we actually spent half of my philology lecture this morning talking about this exact thing in the case of *sweH2dus, I probably should have remembered that.

[Also yeah just a meta note: part of the reason I'm doing this is because I'm taking an IE philology paper this year, which is under the classics faculty in Cambridge, so if I'm seeming a bit out of date with my IE stuff that's why]
Edit: EDIT: because Sanskrit shows a reflex which reflects a syllabic nasal, and I need an excuse to have more short ɑ̃ in the language, I've decided on mɑ̃t, with a short vowel throughout the paradigm. Other such nouns which don't have syllabic sonorants will likely instead get full grade.
Post Reply