Frislander's IE-lang scratchpad

A forum for all topics related to constructed languages
User avatar
Frislander
runic
runic
Posts: 3106
Joined: 14 May 2016 17:47
Location: The North

Re: Frislander's IE-lang scratchpad

Post by Frislander » 27 Oct 2018 14:39

I've just realised I've missed out the ruki rule (I seem to have a habit of forgetting that. This would give the following i-stem paradigm (I've also realised I ave no idea where the zero-marked instrumental comes from so that's been restored):

Code: Select all

    SING    PLUR
NOM mɑ̃tiʂ   mɑ̃təj
ACC mɑ̃tim   mɑ̃tin
INS mɑ̃tiː   mɑ̃tip
DAT mɑ̃təjiː mɑ̃tip
GEN mɑ̃tiːʂ  mɑ̃tiːm
Suddenly I have more of a reason to keep this declension class separate, however I am still tempted to do some remodelling. We can import the instrumental singular -t from the o-stems, or alternatively the -p from the -eH2 stems, and then replace the dative singular with the locative as before, and leave it there fore now.

Code: Select all

    SING     PLUR
NOM mɑ̃tiʂ    mɑ̃təj
ACC mɑ̃tim    mɑ̃tin
INS mɑ̃tiːt/p mɑ̃tip
DAT mɑ̃tiː    mɑ̃tip
GEN mɑ̃tiːʂ   mɑ̃tiːm
Similarly the u-stems. We'll use huːnuʂ "son" as our example:

Code: Select all

NOM huːnuʂ
ACC huːnum
INS huːnuː
DAT huːnəwiː
GEN huːnuːʂ
LOC huːnuː
This is pretty much the same as the i-stems above, and once again I think I will have the locative replace the dative and the instrumental gain the -t from the o-stems or -p from the -eH2 stems. Note that the neuter θən "knee" is zero-marked in the nominative/accusative singular.

Now for the plural.

Code: Select all

NOM huːnəw
ACC huːnun
INS huːnup
DAT huːnup
GEN huːnuːm
LOC huːnuʂ
No alteration needed here aside from the loss of the locative. Note that the neuter shows the syncretic θənuː in the nominative/accusative here.

So for u-stems the paradigm is

Code: Select all

    SING      PLUR
NOM huːnuʂ    huːnəw
ACC huːnum    huːnun
INS huːnuːt/p huːnup
DAT huːnuː    huːnup
GEN huːnuːʂ   huːnuːm
Finally a note on -uH stems like huːʂ "pig".

Code: Select all

NOM huːʂ
ACC huːɑ̃
INS huːp
DAT huːiː
GEN huː
LOC huː
The locative is definitely being lost, but other than that this is probably just going to remain an irregular declension for now.

Code: Select all

NOM huː
ACC huːɑ̃
INS huːp
DAT huːp
GEN huːɑ̃ː
Again, not much to say here for now, just lots of irregularity and syncretism.

Code: Select all

    SING  PLUR
NOM huːʂ  huː
ACC huːɑ̃  huːɑ̃
INS huːp  huːp
DAT huːiː huːp
GEN huː   huːɑ̃ː

Birdlang
greek
greek
Posts: 640
Joined: 25 Dec 2014 20:17
Location: Virginia

Re: Frislander's IE-lang scratchpad

Post by Birdlang » 27 Oct 2018 22:28

I’ve been wanting to make an IE-Lang all my life. Can you give me any tips? Anyways, cool, reminds me of Sanskrit, and also Pashto a little. Have you made a romanization yet?
Also, is there a book you’d recommend to help me. I’m trying to make both a kentum and satem language. And descendents of both.
Ꭓꭓ Ʝʝ Ɬɬ Ɦɦ Ɡɡ Ɥɥ Ɫɫ Ɽɽ Ɑɑ Ɱɱ Ɐɐ Ɒɒ Ɓɓ Ɔɔ Ɖɖ Ɗɗ Əə Ɛɛ Ɠɠ Ɣɣ Ɯɯ Ɲɲ Ɵɵ Ʀʀ Ʃʃ Ʈʈ Ʊʊ Ʋʋ Ʒʒ Ꞵꞵ Ʉʉ Ʌʌ Ŋŋ Ɂɂ Ɪɪ Ææ Øø Ð𠌜 Ɜɜ Ǝɘ

User avatar
Frislander
runic
runic
Posts: 3106
Joined: 14 May 2016 17:47
Location: The North

Re: Frislander's IE-lang scratchpad

Post by Frislander » 30 Oct 2018 12:39

I think today we shall first tackle r/n-stems. We'll look at wət "water" first, as it is definitely going to survive and can probably afford to be a little irregular.

Code: Select all

NOM wət
INS wətɑ̃ː
DAT wətəniː
GEN wətɑ̃ːh
(Note the presence of a full/o-grade in all forms by analogy). This seems like the locative is definitely being lost as usual, but I also fancy extending the instrumental again, though this time there's less reason for me to choose the -t rather than the -p suffix, so I'll leave it up in the air until I've finished with all these different declensions.

Now for a noun with both singular and plural forms jəkət (note I'm assuming the final -t of Sanskrit is original in some way for the moment).

Code: Select all

NOM jəkət
INS jəknɛː~jəkɑ̃ː
DAT jəkniː
GEN jəknəh~jəkɑ̃t
LOC jəkni
On again there is no good reason to retain the locative. The varying forms of the instrumental and genitive are dependent on whether there is an e-grade or zero-grade in the suffix respectively. My current inclination is towards the e-grade forms, but first let us consider the plurals:

Code: Select all

NOM jəknɛː~jəkɑ̃ː
INS jəknəp
DAT jəknəp
GEN jəknɛːm
LOC jəknəh
I wasn't entirely sure how to form the plural of this subclass, but I assume all-nasal is correct. Again the locative will be lost without trace, and there will be dative-instrumental syncretism. My current suspicion is that the e-grades will win out in the singular but the zero-grade in the nominative/accusative plural to maximise distinctiveness. The instrumental singular may then get a further extension on top of this. I also think I will keep the nominative singular -t as, while it is redundant, it is not ambiguous with any other form and also serves as an additional helpful marker of this noun's irregularity.

Just quickly for comparison we will consider the other version of this stem-class, represented by uːtkɛː "udder".

Code: Select all

    SING   PLUR
NOM uːtkɛː uːtkɑ̃ː
INS uːknɛː uːknəp
DAT uːkniː uːknəp
GEN uːknəh uːknɛːm
This is effectively identical except for the nominative singular, which looks very similar to the -eH2-stem. However otherwise the similarities are few, and not grounds for collapsing the declensions per se. However, the rarity and abject irregularity of this declension may give grounds for moving at least a few of the nouns involved into other declensions, and in this case I am tempted to do so, creating in the process what is in effect a class of neuter -eH2-stems. There could still be room for dialectal variation based on whether it is the uːtk- or uːkn- stem which is generalised: I will assume for now that the standard language shows the -tk- form.

Code: Select all

    SING    PLUR
NOM uːtkɛː  uːtkɛːh
INS uːtkɛːp uːtkɛːp
DAT uːtkiː  uːtkɛːp
GEN uːtkɛː  uːtkɛːm
So this leaves us with the following paradigm for "liver", and probably also for θəkət "shit" as well:

Code: Select all

    SING   PLUR
NOM jəkət  jəkɑ̃ː
INS jəknɛː jəknəp
DAT jəkniː jəknəp
GEN jəknəh jəknɛːm
Next time: finally tackling these -r and -n stems.

Birdlang wrote:
27 Oct 2018 22:28
I’ve been wanting to make an IE-Lang all my life. Can you give me any tips? Anyways, cool, reminds me of Sanskrit, and also Pashto a little. Have you made a romanization yet?
Also, is there a book you’d recommend to help me. I’m trying to make both a kentum and satem language. And descendents of both.
Wow, that's quite a bit of work there! I think you'd probably be best off working off of a handbook. I'm using Sihler's Comparative Grammar of Greek and Latin coupled with some of James Clackson's Indo-European Linguistics: an Introduction, as well as Wikipedia a bit, but really you should be consulting a wide variety of sources as there's no one set text. Furthermore I would strongly advise getting familiar with a few of the daughter languages, especially the ones you most want your respective kentum and satem languages to most resemble, because that will inform your choice of word-shapes quite a bit more than even PIE itself, because quite a bit of what's reconstructed for PIE (especially nominal ablaut) is more an explanatory device for the varying reflexes found in the daughter languages that can't be explained by regular sound laws (see Zekoslav and me's discussion of the -i stems for example).

User avatar
Frislander
runic
runic
Posts: 3106
Joined: 14 May 2016 17:47
Location: The North

Re: Frislander's IE-lang scratchpad

Post by Frislander » 02 Nov 2018 08:57

OK, let's see if I can finish these consonant stems now (probably not, I'll have to save a draft most likely and come back to it). Let's start with the n-stem θuː "dog".

Code: Select all

NOM θuː
ACC θunɑ̃
INS θunɛː
DAT θuniː
GEN θun
LOC θ(w)ɑ̃ː
Standard procedure: lost the locative, contaminate the instrumental. For now the genitive looks like it'll experience some contamination, but let's look at the plural first.

Code: Select all

NOM θun
ACC θunɑ̃
INS θ(w)ɑ̃p
DAT θ(w)ɑ̃p
GEN θunɛːm
LOC θ(w)ɑ̃h
It looks like we'll have to reshape the genitive singular, and the instrumental singular, but to what? Let's take a look at uʂɛːn "pack animal" < "ox":

Code: Select all

    SING  PLUR
NOM uʂɛːn uʂən
ACC uʂənɑ̃ uʂənɑ̃
INS uʂɑ̃ɛː uʂɑ̃p
DAT uʂɑ̃iː uʂɑ̃p
GEN uʂɑ̃   uʂɑ̃ɛːm
From this the pattern is clear: the instrumental/dative plural should have the form -ɑ̃p not -əp. Also for "dog" we will add the o-stem genitive to avoid homophony with the nominative plural, and add to the instrumental as usual. This gives the following paradigm for n-stems:

Code: Select all

    SING     PLUR
NOM θuː      θun
ACC θunɑ̃     θunɑ̃
INS θunɛːt/p θunɑ̃p
DAT θuniː    θunɑ̃p
GEN θunəh    θunɛːm
Now for the r-stems. We'll take pətɛː "father" as our example word.

Code: Select all

NOM pətɛː
ACC pətəɾɑ̃
INS pəʂɛː
DAT pəʂiː
GEN pəʂ
LOC pətər
As we can see the -r- of the stem is almost lost, but does have funny effects on the preceding consonant in the oblique cases. This alternation may end up being mostly levelled out (with again corresponding restoration of the o-stem genitive), however for kinship terms I think it likely that it will stick around a bit longer. Ignore the locative as before.

Code: Select all

NOM pətəɾ
ACC pətəɾɑ̃
INS pətəp
DAT pətəp
GEN pəʂɛːm
OK, this gives us more support for levelling, since the syllabified rhotics don't affect the preceding consonant in the same way. Still, however, I think we shall retain the alternation for at least the kinship terms, giving the following paradigm.

Code: Select all

    SING     PLUR
NOM pətɛː    pətəɾ
ACC pətəɾɑ̃   pətəɾɑ̃
INS pəʂɛːt/p pətəp
DAT pəʂiː    pətəp
GEN pəʂ      pəʂɛːm
OK, and now let's just tackle the root nouns. We'll look at nək "night" as our example word.

Code: Select all

NOM nək
ACC nəktɑ̃
INS nəktɛː
DAT nəktiː
GEN nək
LOC nək
The genitive is probably being restored and there's no reason to keep the locative again. Probably I'll restore the genitive from o-stem contamination again.

Code: Select all

NOM nək
ACC nəktɑ̃
INS nəkpi
DAT nək(p)
GEN nəktɛːm
Yeah, there's definitely going to be some levelling, the instrumental/dative plural will take an oblique affix, extend the oblique and restore the o-stem genitive. however I'm not sure how to restore the nominative plural. Perhaps we shall look at pɛːt "foot" for inspiration:

Code: Select all

    SING  PLUR
NOM pɛːt  pət
ACC pətɑ̃  pətɑ̃
INS pətɛː pətəp
DAT pətiː pətəp
GEN pətəh pətɛːm
The answer is simple then: we'll extend the long vowel in the nominative singular to nək and other root nouns which did not show a lengthening to preserve the contrast, until the paradigms are reshaped again as will inevitably happen.

Code: Select all

    SING      PLUR
NOM nɛːk      nək
ACC nəktɑ̃     nəktɑ̃
INS nəktɛːt/p nəktəp
DAT nəktiː    nəktəp
GEN nəktəh    nəktɛːm
So I think that covers all the main stem types, next time I'll just go over a couple of irregular nouns before moving onto the new stuff.

User avatar
Frislander
runic
runic
Posts: 3106
Joined: 14 May 2016 17:47
Location: The North

Re: Frislander's IE-lang scratchpad

Post by Frislander » 03 Nov 2018 18:11

Finally I'll just cover a couple of the irregular set of IE nouns before I move onto adjectives. I won't discuss these in detail since I've basically covered all the points I've wanted to cover so far. The first will be the mono-syllabic diphthongal stem nuːʂ "boat".

Code: Select all

    SING      PLUR
NOM nuːʂ      nɛːw
ACC nɛːwɑ̃     nɛːwɑ̃
INS nɛːwɛːt/p nuːp
DAT nɛːwiː    nuːp
GEN nɛːwəh    nɛːwɛːm
Next we have ɾiːʂ "riches" (note this is a mass noun).

Code: Select all

NOM ɾiːʂ
ACC ɾɛːjɑ̃
INS ɾɛːjɛːt/p
DAT ɾɛːjiː
GEN ɾɛːj
Next we have Tjuːʂ the name of the sky god (I realised that the rule as I'd written it implies that the post-vocalic glide merges with the vowel first, which is why this is the form not tiːwʂ as I imagined it to be previously. The feminine form however would still be Tiːwɛː).

Code: Select all

NOM Tjuːʂ
ACC Tiːm
INS Tiwɛːt/p
DAT Tiwiː
GEN Tiwəh
I think I'll pull a Latin here and use the oblique stems to form the word for "sky" and remake the "sky-god" paradigm accordingly, giving a regular neuter o/s-stem tiw for "sky" and a u-stem Tjuːʂ for the sky-god along the lines of "pig", like so.

Code: Select all

NOM tiw
INS tiwɛːt
DAT tiwiː
GEN tiwəh

NOM Tjuːʂ
ACC Tjuːɑ̃
INS Tjuːp
DAT Tjuːiː
GEN Tjuː
Finally there's hɛːwiː/hɛːwɛːɾ/hɛːwɛː "sun", where the -l- in the stem has screwed everything up completely (note I'm assuming a stage where the noun was assimilated to an ablauting paradigm like that found in r-stems).

Code: Select all

NOM hɛːwiː/hɛːwɛːɾ/hɛːwɛː
ACC hɛːwəjɑ̃/hɛːwəɾɑ̃/hɛːwɑ̃
INS hɛːwjɛːp/hɛːwɾɛːp/hɛːwɛːp
DAT hɛːwjiː/hɛːwɾiː/hɛːwiː
GEN hɛːwjəh/hɛːwɾəh/hɛːwəh
With this multiplicity of forms, I think it is likely that the ɕəʂ dialect forms with -ɾ will win out, simply because they preserve the case contrasts the best.

Oh and I also forgot n-stem neuters. We'll give as an example nəmɑ̃ "custom" (ablaut has been levelled out).

Code: Select all

    SING    PLUR
NOM nəmɑ̃    nəmɛːn
INS nəmnɛːt nəmɑ̃p
DAT nəmniː  nəmɑ̃p
GEN nəmnəh  nəmnɛːm
We will next cover adjectives, before we consider creating new cases.

User avatar
Frislander
runic
runic
Posts: 3106
Joined: 14 May 2016 17:47
Location: The North

Re: Frislander's IE-lang scratchpad

Post by Frislander » 03 Nov 2018 18:16

I have an idea now to reshape the r-stems in the same manner as Vedic Sanskrit to something like -rs not -ros, which would give the following paradigm:

Code: Select all

    SING     PLUR
NOM pətɛː    pətəɾ
ACC pətəɾɑ̃   pətəɾɑ̃
INS pəʂɛːt/p pətəp
DAT pəʂiː    pətəp
GEN pətəʂ    pəʂɛːm
This will give further strength to the levelling of the paradigm with -t- in all forms.

User avatar
Frislander
runic
runic
Posts: 3106
Joined: 14 May 2016 17:47
Location: The North

Re: Frislander's IE-lang scratchpad

Post by Frislander » 14 Nov 2018 16:13

OK, it's time for some adjectives damnit! I'm gonna assume that the late-PIE three-gender system is still operative. As in IE, adjectives follow nominal inflection, with the simplest type being o-stem for masculine/neuter and eH2-stem for feminine, like so, taking nəw "new" as our example:

Singular

Code: Select all

    MASC   FEM    NEUT
NOM nəw    nəwɛː  nəwɑ̃ː
ACC nəwɑ̃ː  nəwɛːm nəwɑ̃ː
INS nəwɛːt nəwɛːp nəwɛːt
DAT nəwiː  nəwiː  nəwiː
GEN nəwəh  nəwɛːh nəwəh
Plural

Code: Select all

    MASC   FEM    NEUT
NOM nəwɛːh nəwɛːh nəwɛː(h)
ACC nəwɑ̃ːh nəwɛːm nəwɛː(h)
INS nəwiːh nəwɛːp nəwiːh
DAT nəwəp  nəwɛːp nəwəp
GEN nəwɛːm nəwɛːm nəwɛːm
It is likely this, out of all the factors, that will likely prompt the expansion of the -t instrumental. We will also consider the u-stems, taking huːtuʂ "happy" (originally "sweet"). This might be a context where I'm tempted to keep the iH2-stems as a feminine marker (though see below):

Singular

Code: Select all

    MASC    FEM       NEUT
NOM huːtuʂ  huːtwiː   huːt
ACC huːtum  huːtwiːm  huːt
INS huːtuːt huːtujɛːt huːtuːt
DAT huːtuː  huːtujiː  huːtuː
GEN huːtuːʂ huːtujɛːh huːtuːʂ
Plural

Code: Select all

    MASC    FEM       NEUT
NOM huːtəw  huːtwiːh  huːtəw
ACC huːtun  huːtwiːm  huːtəw
INS huːtup  huːtujɛːp huːtup
DAT huːtup  huːtujɛːp huːtup
GEN huːtuːm huːtujɛːm huːtuːm
The nature of the phonological changes leads to the loss of -ro as a separate adjectival derivation: all such adjectives, such as ɾuʂ "angry, fierce" (from the same root as ɾuːtk- "red").

I have an idea, however, for a potential restructuring of the adjectival system. I haven't covered this yet, but as in Uralic the language will grammaticalise possessive suffixes, which may free up the genitive for alternative uses, and one I'm currently entertaining is freeing it up to make it a kind of particle linking modifier and head, like so:

Old: nəwɛːt jukɛːt "with (the) new yoke", New: nəw-əh jukɛːt of the same meaning.

Furthermore, I can also see the seeds of a collapse of the gender system, since abstract nouns will take the eH2-stems, so this may end up becoming a marker of abstract nouns rather than feminine gender. As part of this therefore this may further permit the case system simplification which I already have planned, and would spell the end of iH2-stems for good.

For that, though, we will need to look at pronouns.

User avatar
Frislander
runic
runic
Posts: 3106
Joined: 14 May 2016 17:47
Location: The North

Re: Frislander's IE-lang scratchpad

Post by Frislander » 14 Nov 2018 19:26

So before I go onto pronouns, I've been thinking ahead a little to the verbs. I'm currently considering an Arapaho/Tocharian-type shift of the unmarked present indicative to a "non-affirmative" context, used with negatives and other things, while the derive present in *-ye/o- comes to mark the new present, and later by extension other indicatives, due to its collapse with a following vowel. Note that original *-ye/o- verbs with velar initials show the palatal glide fusing with the preceding stop, and will be reshaped accordingly. Similarly the "optative" (from thematic *-oy-) will end up as effectively a potential. We'll look at the verb pəɾ- "to carry": the non-affrmative includes the negative prefix in brackets.

Code: Select all

   IND     NON-AFF    POT
1s pəɾiː   (nə)pəɾɛː  pəɾəjɛː
2s pəɾih   (nə)pəɾəh  pəɾiːh
3s pəɾit   (nə)pəɾət  pəɾiːt
1p pəɾim   (nə)pəɾəm  pəɾiːm
2p pəɾik   (nə)pəɾək  pəɾiːk
3p pəɾjɑ̃ːt (nə)pəɾɑ̃ːt pəɾəjɑ̃t

User avatar
Frislander
runic
runic
Posts: 3106
Joined: 14 May 2016 17:47
Location: The North

Re: Frislander's IE-lang scratchpad

Post by Frislander » 15 Nov 2018 18:36

OK, some pronouns. Pronouns are clearly much reduced in terms of case-marking vis-à-vis nouns: they only really distinguish nominative, dative and instrumental. Genitive enclitic pronouns have already become possessive affixes, and there is also a set of direct object clitics (derived from the non-tonic datives as well: the pronominal accusative in 1st and 2nd person has bee entirely lost), though not necessarily fused with the verb just yet. The paradigms for 1st and 2nd person are as follows:

Code: Select all

1st SING PLUR
NOM θɛː  wiː
DAT məp  ɑ̃hmiː
INS mət  ɑ̃hmət

2nd SING PLUR
NOM tuː  juːh
DAT təp  uhmiː
INS tut  uhmət
The instrumental forms are probably on the way out, for obvious semantic reasons.

Third person pronouns have also been grammatialised from demonstratives, while new demonstratives have been formed (this for another time). These undergo the same reduction of cases as the 1st and 2nd person ones.

Code: Select all

3rd m/ns    fs      m/npl   fpl
NOM hə/tət  hɛː     tiː/tɛː tɛːh
DAT təhmiː  təhiː   tiːp    tɛːp
INS təhmɛːt təhmɛːt tiːp    tɛːp
I'm assuming that the gender contrast survives, but it again seems ripe to be lost. It certainly will be lost in the following suffixes.

We will now turn to the clitics/suffixes. The direct object clitics are gammaticalised, as mentioned above, from the dative in the 1st and 2nd person, but for the 3rd person it's from the accusative, as evidenced by the nasal element:

Code: Select all

  SING PLUR
1 =miː =nəh
2 =tiː =wəh
3 =tɑ̃ː =tɑ̃ːh~tɛː
The variation in the 3rd person plural stems from whether the clitic is derived from the masculine or neuter. Note the lack of gender.

Similarly the possessive suffixes.

Code: Select all

  SING     PLUR
1 -məh     -nɛːh
2 -təh~təw -wɛːh
3 -təh~əh  -tiːʂɑ̃ː~iːʂɑ̃ː
Note that there is some variation, due to the potential homophony of the 2nd and 3rd person singular form. The -təw form derives from the equivalent free pronoun, while the t-less 3rd person forms are also derived from alternative forms without the prefix, also found in Latin.

User avatar
Frislander
runic
runic
Posts: 3106
Joined: 14 May 2016 17:47
Location: The North

Re: Frislander's IE-lang scratchpad

Post by Frislander » 19 Nov 2018 17:48

OK, time to rejiggle the case system methinks.

As mentioned above, the current system of declensions seems ripe for some degree of simplification, though the earliest stages will likely still exhibit the system currently reached. Probably the most notable changes currently envisaged are the dative/accusative merger and the loss of the genitive. Given the results of the current set of sound changes, it seems likely that the merger will see the dative singular replace the accusative singular, while the accusative plural will remain and replace the dative plural, which in most declensions is syncretic with the instrumental plural anyway. This gives the following paradigms (again omitting the genitive singular; also note that I have chosen the p-variant of the instrumental outside of the nominative singular, for reasons I will explain below):

Code: Select all

    SING   PLUR
NOM wək    wəkɛːh
DAT wəkiː  wəkɑ̃ːh
INS wəkɛːt wəkiːh

NOM jukɑ̃ː  jukɛːh
DAT jukiː  jukəp
INS jukɛːt jukiːh

NOM wəkɛː  wəkɛːh
DAT wəkiː  wəkɛːm
INS wəkɛːp wəkɛːp

NOM nəp   nəpɛːh
DAT nəpiː nəpəp
INS nəpəh nəpəp

NOM mɑ̃tiʂ  mɑ̃təj
DAT mɑ̃tiː  mɑ̃tin
INS mɑ̃tiːp mɑ̃tip

NOM huːnuʂ  huːnəw
DAT huːnuː  huːnun
INS huːnuːp huːnup

NOM jəkət  jəkɑ̃ː
DAT jəkniː  jəknəp
INS jəknɛːp jəknəp

NOM θuː    θun
DAT θuniː  θunɑ̃
INS θunɛːp θunɑ̃p

NOM uʂɛːn  uʂən
DAT uʂɑ̃iː  uʂənɑ̃
INS uʂɑ̃ɛːp uʂɑ̃p

NOM nəmɑ̃    nəmɛːn
DAT nəmniː  nəmɑ̃p
INS nəmnɛːp nəmɑ̃p

NOM pətɛː  pətəɾ
DAT pəʂiː  pətəɾɑ̃
INS pəʂɛːp pətəp

NOM nɛːk   nək
DAT nəktiː nəktɑ̃
INS nəktɛːp nəktəp

NOM nuːʂ    nɛːw
DAT nɛːwiː  nɛːwɑ̃
INS nɛːwɛːp nuːp

NOM ɾiːʂ
DAT ɾɛːjiː
INS ɾɛːjɛːp

NOM hɛːwɛːɾ
DAT hɛːwɾiː
INS hɛːwrɛːp
New cases will in all likelihood be grammaticalised onto this new dative. I'm currently thinking that the instrumental/dative plural forms in -p will be significantly reshaped, and the wide distribution of the -p suffix in instrumentals makes it likely that this will be the form which wins out.

Now onto the potential list of new cases. Here there are some significant issues regarding distinctiveness, as some of the adpositions of PIE such as h₂epo "from" would merge through sound change with the already existing case endings (in this case the instrumental -əp). However, I have come up with the following set of postpositions-turned-cases: ət < *h2ed "allative", pəs < *bʰeǵʰ "without", əs < *h1eǵʰs "ablative", ɑ̃ːtɛː < *h1enter "inessive", kɑ̃k < *km̩th2 "comitative", ʂəh < *trh2os "perlative" , ɑ̃tkəɾ < *n̩dʰeri "subessive", upɛː < *uper "superessive". For an example we'll give a full paradigm of wək once more.

Code: Select all

    SING       PLUR
NOM wək        wəkɛːh
DAT wəkiː      wəkɑ̃ːh
INS wəkɛːt     wəkiːh~wəkəp
ALL wəkiːt     wəkɑ̃ːhət
SAN wəkiːpəs   wəkɑ̃ːhpəs
ABL wəkiːs     wəkɑ̃ːhs
INE wəkiːɑ̃ːtɛː wəkɑ̃ːhɑ̃ːtɛː
COM wəkiːkɑ̃k   wəkɑ̃ːhkɑ̃k
PER wəkiːʂəh   wəkɑ̃ːhʂəh
SUB wəkiːɑ̃tkəɾ wəkɑ̃ːhɑ̃tkər
SUP wəkəjupɛː  wəkɑ̃ːhupɛː

User avatar
Frislander
runic
runic
Posts: 3106
Joined: 14 May 2016 17:47
Location: The North

Re: Frislander's IE-lang scratchpad

Post by Frislander » 23 Nov 2018 12:09

Oh, and some stuff on comparatives, seeing how I'm currently writing an essay on the topic for my supervisor.

So no-one's really sure we can reconstruct comparative inflections for PIE, but that's fine caus I'm gonna ditch them anyway. At least, I'm gonna ditch them as comparatives. See, there's good reason to suspect that the PIE suffix *-yos- from which comparatives in the daughter languages are based was actually an intensive, and that's brilliant for me, because the sound changes of the different forms result in some rather disconcertingly different forms, notably "long" tɛːk/ʂɛːɕəh~tiːɕəh~tɛːɕəh (damn *l really does screw everything up in this language doesn't it) and "strong"/"slow" kətuʂ/ʂətih (note, the slash doesn't represent the different reflexes, the two forms genuinely merge in both the normal and the intensive). This lets me have some fun with lexicalisation: I'm currently thinking for instance that "strong"/"slow" will split, with "slow" taking the normal form kətuʂ and "strong" the intensive ʂətih.

Comparison in this language therefore will have to be marked by some other means, which is easy enough: adpositions! I'm currently leaning towards the ablative əs, simply due to its relatively simple shape, though other options will be available and potentially different daughter languages could end up using different forms. I'm currently thinking comparand-standard-adjective ordering like so. In predicate constructions the "genitive" in adjectives will be dropped (I'm also thinking that in u-stems like huːtuʂ there will be a reanalysis of the -uʂ ending as part of the stem like the -ih in ʂətih and gain a -əh suffix when used attributively).

ɕənməh məpəs huːtuʂ
woman-1sgPOSS 1sg.DAT-ABL happy
My wife is happier than I am

wiː uhmiːs ʂətih
1pl.NOM 2pl.DAT-ABL strong
We are stronger than you
Last edited by Frislander on 27 Nov 2018 11:08, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Leo
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 22
Joined: 28 Nov 2012 19:07

Re: Frislander's IE-lang scratchpad

Post by Leo » 26 Nov 2018 03:55

Yes! New cases!
I'm confused why "we" is dative in your second example for expressing comparison.

User avatar
Frislander
runic
runic
Posts: 3106
Joined: 14 May 2016 17:47
Location: The North

Re: Frislander's IE-lang scratchpad

Post by Frislander » 27 Nov 2018 11:08

Leo wrote:
26 Nov 2018 03:55
Yes! New cases!
I'm confused why "we" is dative in your second example for expressing comparison.
An error on my part, is has been corrected.

User avatar
Frislander
runic
runic
Posts: 3106
Joined: 14 May 2016 17:47
Location: The North

Re: Frislander's IE-lang scratchpad

Post by Frislander » 06 Dec 2018 13:11

OK, some things on verbs, but before I do, one final sound change: I will now permit nasal vowels to merge with glides in the same manner as the non-nasal *a vowels, producing nasalised mid vowels. These will be fairly marginal, however they are relevant for today's discussion as they appear in the 3rd person subject markers.

As mentioned before, there is going to be some reshaping of the verbal system to allow for the creation of some more mood distinctions (because I reckon it's areally appropriate), and this will be done by creating a new regular indicative present from *-ye/yo- stems, and relegating other present tense formations to non-affirmative contexts (note that this means athematic verbs will likely end up being reshaped into thematics, which may prompt some spreading/merging of the athematic and thematic conjugations). Note that this is the regular *-ye/yo- formation giving suffixes in -i-: irregular forms produced by palatalisation of /k/ or other changes will show reanalysis, e.g. (nə)kɑ̃jɛː "come" < *gʷm̩joh2, reshaped affirmative kɑ̃jiː). So for the imperfective We have the following formations, taking wəhiː "wear", ɾiːkiː "leave", θəwiː "to hear"1.

Code: Select all

   AFFIR  NONAFF
1s wəhiː  (nə)wəhɛː
2s wəhih  (nə)wəhəh
3s wəhit  (nə)wəhət
1p wəhim  (nə)wəhəm
2p wəhik  (nə)wəhək
3p wəhẽːt (nə)wəhɑ̃ːt

1s ɾiːkiː  (nə)ɾinəkmi
2s ɾiːkih  (nə)ɾinəkhi
3s ɾiːkit  (nə)ɾinəkti
1p ɾiːkim  (nə)ɾinkməh
2p ɾiːkik  (nə)ɾinktə
3p ɾiːkẽːt (nə)ɾinkɑ̃ːt

1s θəwiː  (nə)θənuːm
2s θəwih  (nə)θənuːh
3s θəwit  (nə)θənuːt
1p θəwim  (nə)θənum
2p θəwik  (nə)θənuk
3p θəwẽːt (nə)θənõːt
The second person plural forms are derived from *-tH2-, with the laryngeal causing aspiration and later velarisation of the preceding stop.

Also note that the athematic nasal infix forms seen in (nə)ɾinəkmi are highly provisional, and are due for some reshaping themselves (particularly due to that retention of the full endings without cluster redution: it's just asking to have the paradigm reshaped), and I've a good mind to do the same to θənuːm and similar forms to something like the following:

Code: Select all

1s θənuː
2s θənuh
3s θənut
1p θənum
2p θənuk
3p θənõːt
This is effectively identical to having a thematic ending *-nwe- instead of an athematic *-new-, and I think I'll probably make this general as a result.

The language also preserves the optative in *-oy-, and like the *-ye/yo- suffix it has been extended across the paradigm, like so, using the same three roots as our examples (note the athematic formation of the 1sg).

Code: Select all

1s wəhəjɑ̃   ɾiːkəjɑ̃   θəwəjɑ̃
2s wəhəjəh  ɾiːkəjəh  θəwəjəh
3s wəhəjət  ɾiːkəjət  θəwəjət
1p wəhəjəm  ɾiːkəjəm  θəwəjəm
2p wəhəjək  ɾiːkəjək  θəwəjək
3p wəhəjɑ̃ːt ɾiːkəjɑ̃ːt θəwəjɑ̃ːt
Finally, a note on copulae. The formation of simple present *H1esmi "be" in the language ends up being so complex and indeterminate (mainly due to the issues arising from vowel deletion and clusters arising from athematic endings more generally), that I'm going to leave the language zero-copula in affirmative contexts, however with the accompanying particle *ne things become much simpler, so in light of the already existing Uralic tendencies in this language I'm going to give it a negative copula (potentially later a true negative verb) formed from a collocation *ne H1esmi and so forth.

Code: Select all

1s nɛːm
2s nɛːh
3s nɛːt
1p nɛːm
2p nɛːk
3p nɛːhɑ̃ːt
I'm happy to leave this form as-is, even if it is mildly defective, and leave any reshapings to the daughter languages.

1note that this present has also been majorly reshaped on the basis of the old present: it appears to reflect a formation along the lines of *ḱléwyoH2, however the regular reflex of that in the dominant ɕəʂ dialect would be something like *ʂuːyɛː; what appears to have happened is that a ɕək dialect form has been borrowed widely to remove the irregular alternation, and a new present has been formed from that.

Post Reply