(Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

A forum for all topics related to constructed languages
shimobaatar
darkness
darkness
Posts: 10910
Joined: 12 Jul 2013 22:09
Location: PA → IN

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by shimobaatar » 03 Sep 2018 18:51

yangfiretiger121 wrote:
03 Sep 2018 18:35
Both answers are "no." Thus, it's allophony. However, would /h/ or /ʔ/ be the parent phoneme? Considering [ʔ]'s limited distribution, /h/ seems to be the parent phoneme. Yet, I'd like confirmation before outlining the subject's allophony rules.
Yeah, I'd represent the phoneme as /h/, since the allophone [h] can be described as occurring "everywhere else" in relation to the other allophone, [ʔ].

Odkidstr
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 133
Joined: 27 May 2015 19:26

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by Odkidstr » 04 Sep 2018 00:24

I'm confused about how to create my derivational morphology (is that the right word?). Basically how to make nouns into verbs, verbs into nouns, etc.

It seems like, generally, English just uses the word with no sort of inflection. Do a lot of languages do this? For instance, shine (n) vs shine (v). Or would it be more likely that they would use something like a suffix to indicate the change (such as -ly for adverbs)?

I assume that many languages might all do this by inflecting the word as it would be if it were that category (so shine-Nom vs shine-PFV).

Basically just wanting to know the more common ways this is done. If it helps, the conlang I'm working on has agreement in number and case between adjectives & nouns, while verbs have little to no marking (and adverbs have no marking).

User avatar
eldin raigmore
fire
fire
Posts: 6229
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 18:38
Location: SouthEast Michigan

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by eldin raigmore » 04 Sep 2018 04:05

Yes, a lot of languages do indeed use “zero-derivation”.
You can look it up and find some examples.
(Now that you know what “they” call it!)

Salmoneus
MVP
MVP
Posts: 1533
Joined: 19 Sep 2011 18:37

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by Salmoneus » 04 Sep 2018 13:05

One problem with zero-derivation is that it's paradoxically quite restrictive. It leaves ambiguous just how, semantically, the derivative is related to the source, which means that, while sometimes you get polysemous derivatives, often the derivative's meaning is fixed and has to be learnt word-by-word, with little room for easy further derivation from the same source.

So, for instance "to dog s.o." means "to act like a dog toward s.o.", and specifically in the sense of following them. Other forms of acting like a dog aren't covered. Likewise, it can't be used for "to treat s.o. like a dog", "to set a dog upon s.o.", "to gift a dog to s.o.", "to remove a dog from s.o.", "to send s.o. to live among dogs", etc. [it also leads to potential awkwardness with the entirely different meaning used in the intransitive...]

English often gets around this by resorting to its extensive synonyms and near-synonyms. So, for instance, "to roof" is "to put a sheltering roof over", whereas "to shelter" is "to act as a sheltering roof toward", and "to ceiling" is "to be obstructed in upward travel as though by a roof".

A language with more complex derivation, then, can often do without so many unanalysable roots, becaus they can be less ambiguously and more productive derived.

On the other hand, many affixes eventually wear away. And many languages will have derivativational affixes of relative vague meaning, which can then become default affixes, which can become sole affixes, so that the value of non-zero-derivation is lost, and those affixes can wear away or fuse into the root.

User avatar
lsd
roman
roman
Posts: 896
Joined: 11 Mar 2011 21:11
Contact:

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by lsd » 04 Sep 2018 15:01

Salmoneus wrote:
04 Sep 2018 13:05
It leaves ambiguous just how, semantically, the derivative is related to the source, which means that, while sometimes you get polysemous derivatives, often the derivative's meaning is fixed and has to be learnt word-by-word, with little room for easy further derivation from the same source.
That's how languages do: any compound is more than the sum of the combined roots ...
the proper of languages is to baptize every occurrence of the world ...
Except, perhaps, a priori languages (in the classical sense ...) that are not baptist languages ...

yangfiretiger121
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 126
Joined: 17 Jun 2018 02:04

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by yangfiretiger121 » 04 Sep 2018 18:32

My conlang will reintroduce <l> via influence from a Greek-inspired Creole. Is cold insertion (Leonidas, for example), re-lateralization (Lizolda [ʎi.zo.ʎdɑ]→Jizojda [ʝi.zo.ʝdɑ]→Lizolda [li.zo.ldɑ]), or some combination of the two the best way of doing so considering <l> only survived to prevent exact pairing (ji [ʝi] (they (sg.)) and li [ʝi] (ten), for example)?
Ddoean's document
Paleofonts (for Linear-B characters)

User avatar
Reyzadren
sinic
sinic
Posts: 348
Joined: 14 May 2017 09:39
Contact:

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by Reyzadren » 04 Sep 2018 23:00

Odkidstr wrote:
04 Sep 2018 00:24
I assume that many languages might all do this by inflecting the word as it would be if it were that category (so shine-Nom vs shine-PFV).
In the realm of conlangs, that isn't always true though. I've seen conlangs that have things like house-PST that result in a noun with tense, instead of a verb.

Also, in another natlang that I speak, there are things that apparently resemble "meaningless affixes" that can be applied to words from any category, so in these situations, one wouldn't know what the result is.
Image Soundcloud Profile | Image griuskant conlang

User avatar
eldin raigmore
fire
fire
Posts: 6229
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 18:38
Location: SouthEast Michigan

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by eldin raigmore » 05 Sep 2018 03:34

wife-PST for exwife
wife-FUT for fiancée
wife-POTENTIAL for potential wife (duh!)
wife-MIRATIVE for “I shouldn’t have gotten drunk in Las Vegas!”
Etc. ... verbal inflections applied to nouns.

User avatar
lsd
roman
roman
Posts: 896
Joined: 11 Mar 2011 21:11
Contact:

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by lsd » 05 Sep 2018 19:26

that's what I do...
but in my defense, I do not have verbs ...
in truth I do not have names either ...
just roots...

User avatar
Ahzoh
korean
korean
Posts: 6192
Joined: 20 Oct 2013 01:57
Location: Toma-ʾEzra lit Vṛḵaža

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by Ahzoh » 06 Sep 2018 03:31

How do I turn /a ə ɨ/ into /a ɒ e ø i y ɤ o ɯ u/? I have tried many strategies but nothing seems to work to the intended effect and I am at a complete loss. Additionally the later inventory is supposed to have vowel harmony with all vowels having front harmony with the first vowel of a word.

The language starts with this consonant inventory:
/m mˠ/
/b bˠ t̪ t̪ˠ d̪ d̪ˠ t tˠ d dˠ ʈ ʈˠ ɖ ɖˠ k kˠ g gˠ/
/t̪͡s̪ t̪͡s̪ˠ d̪͡z̪ d̪͡z̪ˠ t͡s t͡sˠ d͡z d͡zˠ ʈ͡ʂ ʈ͡ʂˠ ɖ͡ʐ ɖ͡ʐˠ/
/f fˠ s̪ s̪ˠ z̪ z̪ˠ s sˠ z zˠ ʂ ʂˠ ʐ ʐˠ ħ ʕ/
And these allophonic rules:
/ɨ/:
[e] after laryngeal consonants
[ i] after plain coronal consonants
[ɨ] after velarized coronal consonants
[ɯ] after velar consonants
[ u] after labial consonants
/ə/:
[æ] after laryngeal consonants
[e] after plain coronal consonants
[ə] after velarized coronal consonants
[ɤ] after velar consonants
[o] after labial consonants
/a/:
[æ] after laryngeal consonants
[æ] after plain coronal consonants
[ä] after velarized coronal consonants
[ɑ] after velar consonants
[ɒ] after labial consonants
Image Ӯсцӣ (Onschen) [ CWS ]
Image Šat Vṛḵažaẇ (Vrkhazhian) [ WIKI | CWS ]

this_is_an_account
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 84
Joined: 14 Aug 2018 05:33

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by this_is_an_account » 06 Sep 2018 05:05

I've got an idea for a vowel system, but I'm not sure it's naturalistic. Basically, each vowel can be either heavy or light. The first heavy syllable (or first light syllable if their aren't any heavy ones) gets stressed. For example, take these made up words (in which heavy vowels are marked with acute accents) and them again with a suffix:
ant [ˈant], ant-á [an.ˈta]
ánt [ˈant], ánt-á [ˈan.ta]
Do any natlangs do something like this?

User avatar
All4Ɇn
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1789
Joined: 01 Mar 2014 07:19

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by All4Ɇn » 06 Sep 2018 08:57

this_is_an_account wrote:
06 Sep 2018 05:05
I've got an idea for a vowel system, but I'm not sure it's naturalistic. Basically, each vowel can be either heavy or light. The first heavy syllable (or first light syllable if their aren't any heavy ones) gets stressed. For example, take these made up words (in which heavy vowels are marked with acute accents) and them again with a suffix:
ant [ˈant], ant-á [an.ˈta]
ánt [ˈant], ánt-á [ˈan.ta]
Do any natlangs do something like this?
Are there any sound changes that created this heavy-light distinction? If so then there are certainly languages with similar situations. In Yaqui some words starting with a long vowel move the stress over to the second syllable when grammatical suffixes are added. When the stress is moved, the first vowel of the word (even if it's the one that was once long) is then is shortened. I could easily a system similar to this being extrapolated to your language [:)]

User avatar
Zekoslav
hieroglyphic
hieroglyphic
Posts: 72
Joined: 07 Oct 2017 15:54

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by Zekoslav » 06 Sep 2018 10:28

this_is_an_account wrote:
06 Sep 2018 05:05
I've got an idea for a vowel system, but I'm not sure it's naturalistic. Basically, each vowel can be either heavy or light. The first heavy syllable (or first light syllable if their aren't any heavy ones) gets stressed. For example, take these made up words (in which heavy vowels are marked with acute accents) and them again with a suffix:
ant [ˈant], ant-á [an.ˈta]
ánt [ˈant], ánt-á [ˈan.ta]
Do any natlangs do something like this?
This is exactly how Proto-Balto-Slavic is thought to have worked (In fact I'm about to write a thread about it), and is completely naturalistic. From a phonetical perspective, "heavy" vowels could be long, or have a high tone, or the distinction could simply be underlying and surface only in the position of stress.
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

User avatar
Pabappa
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 198
Joined: 18 Nov 2017 02:41
Contact:

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by Pabappa » 06 Sep 2018 21:33

Ahzoh wrote:
06 Sep 2018 03:31
How do I turn /a ə ɨ/ into /a ɒ e ø i y ɤ o ɯ u/? I have tried many strategies but nothing seems to work to the intended effect and I am at a complete loss. Additionally the later inventory is supposed to have vowel harmony with all vowels having front harmony with the first vowel of a word.
You may find some inspiration at http://www.frathwiki.com/Baeba_Swamp#Vowels , though I caution that I wrote this quite a long time ago, and except for one recent touchup, Ive abandoned the project and don't remember any of the sound changes I was intending to have.

Does your language have phonemic /j/ and /w/? What types of clusters are allowed? You could perhaps grow new /j/ and /w/ from consonant elision, and then make new vowels from these. If you can get to a state where you have contrasts like /ɨ/ vs /ɨw/ vs /ɨj/, you'd be in a good position to spread your vowels throughout the space.

I would consider reworking your allophony from scratch. If contrasts like [e]~[ i]~[ɯ] are dependent on the place of articulation of the preceding consonant, these vowels are very unlikely to be phonemicized, since to do so you would need to merge /b d g/ all into one sound. Also, to add [ u], you would need to lose the laryngeals by either shifting them to silence or merging with other consonants. Sorry, but I just dont think those rules can be saved. They may be stable for the protolanguage, but for a daughter language to undergo shifts that would introduce all those new vowels, the allophony would need to change to something not based on the primary PoA.

If this language allows robust codas, i would suggest deriving new diphthongs from the coda consonants, and then shifting these into new monophthongs. alternatively, delete weak medial consonants instead and reduce the number of syllables in such words by one. i know I was planning to have Baeba get its vowels mostly from diphthongs .... e.g. /əi ə əu/ > /e ə o/, and /ai a au/ > /æ a ɒ/. These would arise after the deletion of voiced medial consonants and perhaps some voiceless ones. If you did something similar, you could have a nine-vowel square of /æ a ɒ/ + /e ɤ o/ + /i ɯ u/, an d then pull the two front rounded vowels /ø y/ from some other process.
Image

this_is_an_account
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 84
Joined: 14 Aug 2018 05:33

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by this_is_an_account » 07 Sep 2018 05:33

All4Ɇn wrote:
06 Sep 2018 08:57
Are there any sound changes that created this heavy-light distinction? If so then there are certainly languages with similar situations. In Yaqui some words starting with a long vowel move the stress over to the second syllable when grammatical suffixes are added. When the stress is moved, the first vowel of the word (even if it's the one that was once long) is then is shortened. I could easily a system similar to this being extrapolated to your language [:)]
That makes sense. I'll probably have these heavy vowels come from long vowels that were shortened, but left the stress where it was.
Zekoslav wrote:
06 Sep 2018 10:28
This is exactly how Proto-Balto-Slavic is thought to have worked (In fact I'm about to write a thread about it), and is completely naturalistic. From a phonetical perspective, "heavy" vowels could be long, or have a high tone, or the distinction could simply be underlying and surface only in the position of stress.
Good to know there is a language that (theoretically) did this already [:)]



New question: Imagine a conlang that allows clusters of any two consonants for the coda of a syllable, including two of the same consonant. This conlang also has geminate consonants. This creates pairs of words like, for example, /amm/ and /amː/. These are both pronounced [amː]. The only way these are distinguished is when you add infixes, which are inserted before the final consonant of the coda. With the infix </ja/>, the two words above become /amjam/ and /ajamː/ respectively. Is this naturalistic?

User avatar
cedh
metal
metal
Posts: 370
Joined: 07 Sep 2011 21:25
Location: Tübingen, Germany
Contact:

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by cedh » 07 Sep 2018 12:11

this_is_an_account wrote:
07 Sep 2018 05:33
New question: Imagine a conlang that allows clusters of any two consonants for the coda of a syllable, including two of the same consonant. This conlang also has geminate consonants. This creates pairs of words like, for example, /amm/ and /amː/. These are both pronounced [amː]. The only way these are distinguished is when you add infixes, which are inserted before the final consonant of the coda. With the infix </ja/>, the two words above become /amjam/ and /ajamː/ respectively. Is this naturalistic?
I think it'd be likely to collapse at some point, but it can definitely be derived in a naturalistic way. Suppose an earlier stage of the language had */aməm/ and */aᵐb/, with the infixed forms */aməjam/ and */ajaᵐb/. Then you need only two sound changes to happen: Prenasalised stops become geminate nasals, and *ə is deleted in all positions.

User avatar
Shemtov
runic
runic
Posts: 2753
Joined: 29 Apr 2013 03:06

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by Shemtov » 07 Sep 2018 20:04

Can a Measure word system be started by requiring that the appropriate demonstratives be put between the number and noun? Is the second construction even attested? If not, what would be needed in a protolang for a MW system to develop?
Many children make up, or begin to make up, imaginary languages. I have been at it since I could write.
-JRR Tolkien

User avatar
eldin raigmore
fire
fire
Posts: 6229
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 18:38
Location: SouthEast Michigan

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by eldin raigmore » 08 Sep 2018 17:49

Shemtov wrote:
07 Sep 2018 20:04
Can a Measure word system be started by requiring that the appropriate demonstratives be put between the number and noun? Is the second construction even attested? If not, what would be needed in a protolang for a MW system to develop?
I am GUESSING that the answers are:
1. Yes
2. IDK
3. Up to you — you’re the ‘lang’s creator.
Last edited by eldin raigmore on 09 Sep 2018 04:01, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
elemtilas
runic
runic
Posts: 3223
Joined: 22 Nov 2014 04:48

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by elemtilas » 08 Sep 2018 18:33

Shemtov wrote:
07 Sep 2018 20:04
Can a Measure word system be started by requiring that the appropriate demonstratives be put between the number and noun? Is the second construction even attested? If not, what would be needed in a protolang for a MW system to develop?
Perhaps if the demonstrative is, in some way, governed by the law of unattachability, they'd have to place the measure word(s) before the inviolable DEMONST+NOUN unit.
Image

If we stuff the whole chicken back into the egg, will all our problems go away? --- Wandalf of Angera

yangfiretiger121
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 126
Joined: 17 Jun 2018 02:04

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by yangfiretiger121 » 09 Sep 2018 14:28

How should the portion of my language's allophony rules for [ʔ] of [h] below be formatted? The brackets around "[ʔ] of [h]" are for understanding. There've been [t→θ] and [d→ð] sound changes as well.

[[ʔ] of [h]] adjacent to [θ(ː)ʝ ð(ː)ʝ s z p͡ç b͡ʝ ʑ ç h i y]
Ddoean's document
Paleofonts (for Linear-B characters)

Post Reply