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

A forum for all topics related to constructed languages
User avatar
Lambuzhao
earth
earth
Posts: 7317
Joined: Sun 13 May 2012, 01:57

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

Post by Lambuzhao » Mon 15 Jan 2018, 19:31

For comparison & contrastion, here are the same concepts in ASL:

Eat/Food
http://asluniversity.com/asl101/images-signs/eat-01.jpg


Speak/Talk
http://www.lifeprint.com/asl101/signjpegs/t/talk4.jpg
User avatar
Lambuzhao
earth
earth
Posts: 7317
Joined: Sun 13 May 2012, 01:57

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

Post by Lambuzhao » Mon 15 Jan 2018, 19:57

Salmoneus wrote:
Mon 15 Jan 2018, 15:22
Evynova wrote:
Mon 15 Jan 2018, 10:05
Hey all. I come to you with a conundrum regarding a new project I want to start working on.

I want to begin working on a personal conlang, for my own personal use and not as a part of my conworld. This relieves me of the constraints of naturalism to an extent, but I still want to do things right. I have decided to go for a Polynesian feel with a small phonemic inventory and a mostly isolating grammar with tons of particles. So far so good.

Another feature I've been thinking of, and the one that's causing me some problems, is to have verbs be a closed class. My idea is to only have a few verbs that only vaguely describe a concept; incorporating nouns is the solution for more precise meaning. Using a verb describing states, I would also get rid of adjectives. But here's the issue: how do I create verbs, using incorporation, that would not be awfully ambiguous? Using a single verb describing actions and incorporating mouth into it, as mouth-do could describe speaking. But who's to say it cannot translate as "to eat"? Or even "to kiss"? Admittedly, since this is a personal lang, it shouldn't really be a problem to me but I don't like so much ambiguity.
Who's to say that "speak" doesn't mean "to eat"? It's just a fact about the language. If your language has mouth-do mean 'speak', then it does, and speakers will know it doesn't mean 'eat' because... that's not the word for 'eat'.
In one of my :con:, Yauchuan, there is a verbalizer that is prefixed to nouns to make verbs like what you describe.

In fact,

zakuabai
za.kuabai
<VBLZ>mouth
"to bite"; "to eat"

besides unrelated roots

darupa "to eat"

wato "to speak"



You could get a little more specific:

teeth<VBLZ> = "to chew", "to bite", "to eat"
tongue<VBLZ> = "to speak"


And sometimes natlangs are helpful, sometimes not.

Proto-Semitic *lišān-
PIE *dn̥ǵʰwéh₂s
both "tongue" & "language"

:lat: osculum "kiss" from os "mouth" (Dim. os+culum)


But like Sal suggests, it's kind of up to you.
User avatar
Lambuzhao
earth
earth
Posts: 7317
Joined: Sun 13 May 2012, 01:57

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

Post by Lambuzhao » Mon 15 Jan 2018, 20:57

And in all the three gestural systems, the concept of 'talking' or 'speaking' has the interlocutor make some kind of hand-motion away from the mouth. In Native American Hand Talk, the gesture for 'speaking' carries this motion.

Sort of like the sound-waves/exhalations emanating from the mouth in the Chinese radical
Salmoneus
MVP
MVP
Posts: 1281
Joined: Mon 19 Sep 2011, 18:37

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

Post by Salmoneus » Tue 16 Jan 2018, 02:23

Lambuzhao wrote:
Mon 15 Jan 2018, 19:23
It wouldn't break it down into this sort of make-mouth-move-sound-comes-out pantomime-language.
Well, let's just see.
In Native American Sign Language, for example
Emphasis added.
User avatar
Lambuzhao
earth
earth
Posts: 7317
Joined: Sun 13 May 2012, 01:57

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

Post by Lambuzhao » Tue 16 Jan 2018, 03:47

Salmoneus wrote:
Tue 16 Jan 2018, 02:23
Lambuzhao wrote:
Mon 15 Jan 2018, 19:23
It wouldn't break it down into this sort of make-mouth-move-sound-comes-out pantomime-language.
Well, let's just see.
In Native American Sign Language, for example
Emphasis added.

http://www.modaruniversity.org/silent/S ... ankYou.jpg
User avatar
Tuyono
hieroglyphic
hieroglyphic
Posts: 48
Joined: Sun 06 Aug 2017, 14:09

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

Post by Tuyono » Wed 17 Jan 2018, 22:02

I'm looking for a way to represent /ʎ]/.
At first I used <lj> but I want <j> to be /ɟ/. <ly> would be confusing for me at the end of words or in clusters, because it looks like it has a vowel. I could go with <ll>, but are there other ideas?
User avatar
sangi39
moderator
moderator
Posts: 2717
Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2010, 00:53
Location: North Yorkshire, UK

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

Post by sangi39 » Wed 17 Jan 2018, 22:09

Tuyono wrote:
Wed 17 Jan 2018, 22:02
I'm looking for a way to represent /ʎ]/.
At first I used <lj> but I want <j> to be /ɟ/. <ly> would be confusing for me at the end of words or in clusters, because it looks like it has a vowel. I could go with <ll>, but are there other ideas?
What's the rest of the phoneme inventory and orthography look like?
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
Tuyono
hieroglyphic
hieroglyphic
Posts: 48
Joined: Sun 06 Aug 2017, 14:09

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

Post by Tuyono » Wed 17 Jan 2018, 23:09

sangi39 wrote:
Wed 17 Jan 2018, 22:09
What's the rest of the phoneme inventory and orthography look like?
I have some more places where I'm not sure about the orthography, but these are the options:
/m n ɲ/ <m n ń>
/p t c k/ <p t c k>
/b d ɟ g/ <b d j g>
/mb nd ɲɟ ŋg/ <mb nd ńj ng>
/s ʃ x h/ <s ś x h> OR <s sh kh h>
/v~β z ʒ/ <v z ź> OR <v z zh>
/l ʎ/ <l ?>
/r/ <r>

[j] occurs but is not really phonemic so right now I'm not using <y> for anything
shimobaatar
darkness
darkness
Posts: 9115
Joined: Fri 12 Jul 2013, 22:09
Location: PA → IN

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

Post by shimobaatar » Wed 17 Jan 2018, 23:38

Maybe <lh> or <ľ>?
User avatar
sangi39
moderator
moderator
Posts: 2717
Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2010, 00:53
Location: North Yorkshire, UK

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

Post by sangi39 » Thu 18 Jan 2018, 00:09

shimobaatar wrote:
Wed 17 Jan 2018, 23:38
Maybe <lh> or <ľ>?
I'd agree with that, although I'd suggest <ĺ> rather than <ľ> unless you're against diacritics over ascenders.

<lh> would fit in with <sh> and <zh>, although that option does then leave <ń> feeling a little out of place (<nh> would be more consistent there, and <nj> for /ɲɟ/ might only be an problem if it contrasted /nɟ/).

<ĺ> would fit with <ń>, and since /ʃ/ and /ʒ/ aren't "truly" palatal, then having them as <sh> and <zh> instead of <ś> and <ź> wouldn't necessarily be all that unreasonable.

You could go with several options if you're dealing with a pre-standardised orthography [:)]
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.
clawgrip
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2352
Joined: Sun 24 Jun 2012, 06:33
Location: Tokyo

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

Post by clawgrip » Thu 18 Jan 2018, 00:44

I use ļ for that sound in one of my languages. The Romanization I use has only four letters with diacritics: ç ļ ĝ š, so it kind of matches up.
<lh> would fit in with <sh> and <zh>, although that option does then leave <ń> feeling a little out of place (<nh> would be more consistent there, and <nj> for /ɲɟ/ might only be an problem if it contrasted /nɟ/).
I think I agree with this statement most.
Tuyono wrote:
Wed 17 Jan 2018, 22:02
<ly> would be confusing for me at the end of words or in clusters, because it looks like it has a vowel.
Sometimes this can be fun. I use ny in one language for /ɲ/, e.g. Zemany /zemaɲ/.
User avatar
Pabappa
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 87
Joined: Sat 18 Nov 2017, 02:41
Contact:

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

Post by Pabappa » Thu 18 Jan 2018, 01:09

You could reverse it to yn at the end of the wortd, or even just y if it doesn't conflict.
Image
User avatar
sangi39
moderator
moderator
Posts: 2717
Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2010, 00:53
Location: North Yorkshire, UK

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

Post by sangi39 » Thu 18 Jan 2018, 02:07

Pabappa wrote:
Thu 18 Jan 2018, 01:09
You could reverse it to yn at the end of the wortd, or even just y if it doesn't conflict.
I think Old French use to do something similar, with <il> for /ʎ/ (I think some dialects of Basque do something similar), and of course Irish and Scottish Gaelic use <il> and <in> for /ʎ/ and /ɲ/ because of their orthographic rules regarding "broad" and "slender" consonants
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
Ahzoh
korean
korean
Posts: 6072
Joined: Sun 20 Oct 2013, 01:57
Location: Tom-ʾEzru lit Yat-Vṛḵažu

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

Post by Ahzoh » Thu 18 Jan 2018, 20:59

I want to know if this is plausible/naturalistic:

There are two copular verbs -іуп- and -буту- and their negative counterparts -агні- and -цал-.

The verbs -іуп-/-агні- are used when the predicate is a noun and functions like a transitive verb.
The verbs -буту-/-цал- are used when the complement is an adjective and functions like an intransitive verb. Additionally, adjective affixes are affixed to the verb.

лу-іуп-ач лу-н-ѕер-е-нш-е
3.ERG-be-3.ABS 3.ERG-NFUT-save-2.ABS-NMLZ-AN.ABS
"She will be your saviour."

н-инк-буту-ч чос-о
NFUT-white-be-3.ABS snow-INAN.ABS
"The snow is white."

л-агніа-ч ліок-е
3.ERG-not_be-3.ABS fish-AN.ABS
"They will not be a fish."

на-мин-цал-ч іӣп-еі
NFUT-hot-not_be-3.ABS man-HUM.ABS
"Man's not hot."
Image Ӯсцӣ (Onschen) [ CWS ]
Image ʾEšd Yatvṛḵažaẇ (Vrkhazhian) [ WIKI | CWS ]
User avatar
Tuyono
hieroglyphic
hieroglyphic
Posts: 48
Joined: Sun 06 Aug 2017, 14:09

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

Post by Tuyono » Fri 19 Jan 2018, 11:10

sangi39 wrote:
Thu 18 Jan 2018, 00:09
<lh> would fit in with <sh> and <zh>, although that option does then leave <ń> feeling a little out of place (<nh> would be more consistent there, and <nj> for /ɲɟ/ might only be an problem if it contrasted /nɟ/).

<ĺ> would fit with <ń>, and since /ʃ/ and /ʒ/ aren't "truly" palatal, then having them as <sh> and <zh> instead of <ś> and <ź> wouldn't necessarily be all that unreasonable.

You could go with several options if you're dealing with a pre-standardised orthography
It's far from standardised. I did use <nj> for /ɲ/ and <dj> for /ɟ/ but that left me without a good way to write /ɲɟ/ - <ndj> is too long and ugly for what the language considers one sound. <nh> and <lh> will probably have the same issues. I also have some clusters that would make the whole thing messy.
<ĺ> is a good idea.
Pabappa wrote:
Thu 18 Jan 2018, 01:09
You could reverse it to yn at the end of the wortd, or even just y if it doesn't conflict.
I like this one. Digraphs with <y> will be less confusing.

Thanks everyone :)
User avatar
Ahzoh
korean
korean
Posts: 6072
Joined: Sun 20 Oct 2013, 01:57
Location: Tom-ʾEzru lit Yat-Vṛḵažu

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

Post by Ahzoh » Sun 21 Jan 2018, 08:48

Ahzoh wrote:
Thu 18 Jan 2018, 20:59
I want to know if this is plausible/naturalistic:

There are two copular verbs -іуп- and -буту- and their negative counterparts -агні- and -цал-.

The verbs -іуп-/-агні- are used when the predicate is a noun and functions like a transitive verb.
The verbs -буту-/-цал- are used when the complement is an adjective and functions like an intransitive verb. Additionally, adjective affixes are affixed to the verb.

лу-іуп-ач лу-н-ѕер-е-нш-е
3.ERG-be-3.ABS 3.ERG-NFUT-save-2.ABS-NMLZ-AN.ABS
"She will be your saviour."

н-инк-буту-ч чос-о
NFUT-white-be-3.ABS snow-INAN.ABS
"The snow is white."

л-агніа-ч ліок-е
3.ERG-not_be-3.ABS fish-AN.ABS
"They will not be a fish."

на-мин-цал-ч іӣп-еі
NFUT-hot-not_be-3.ABS man-HUM.ABS
"Man's not hot."
So, is this naturalistic/plausible?
Image Ӯсцӣ (Onschen) [ CWS ]
Image ʾEšd Yatvṛḵažaẇ (Vrkhazhian) [ WIKI | CWS ]
User avatar
Reyzadren
sinic
sinic
Posts: 201
Joined: Sun 14 May 2017, 09:39
Contact:

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

Post by Reyzadren » Sun 21 Jan 2018, 09:14

Ahzoh wrote:
Sun 21 Jan 2018, 08:48
Ahzoh wrote:
Thu 18 Jan 2018, 20:59
I want to know if this is plausible/naturalistic:

There are two copular verbs -іуп- and -буту- and their negative counterparts -агні- and -цал-.

The verbs -іуп-/-агні- are used when the predicate is a noun and functions like a transitive verb.
The verbs -буту-/-цал- are used when the complement is an adjective and functions like an intransitive verb. Additionally, adjective affixes are affixed to the verb.
So, is this naturalistic/plausible?
Well, in another natlang that I speak, there is a set of 2 equalizers and 2 negators, of which 1 pair of them is used for nouns, and the other pair is for adjectives, as you describe it here.

However, they don't work the same way as shown in your provided sample sentences. Also, their function with regard to transitivity is probably not the same, as they have properties from a trigger language.
Image Soundcloud Profile | Image griuskant conlang
User avatar
Ahzoh
korean
korean
Posts: 6072
Joined: Sun 20 Oct 2013, 01:57
Location: Tom-ʾEzru lit Yat-Vṛḵažu

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

Post by Ahzoh » Sun 21 Jan 2018, 09:32

Reyzadren wrote:
Sun 21 Jan 2018, 09:14
However, they don't work the same way as shown in your provided sample sentences. Also, their function with regard to transitivity is probably not the same, as they have properties from a trigger language.
The language you speak is a trigger language or are you guessing my conlang is? If the latter, then my conlang is not a trigger language. It is just that adjectives are more life affixes and attach to what they modify.
Image Ӯсцӣ (Onschen) [ CWS ]
Image ʾEšd Yatvṛḵažaẇ (Vrkhazhian) [ WIKI | CWS ]
User avatar
Reyzadren
sinic
sinic
Posts: 201
Joined: Sun 14 May 2017, 09:39
Contact:

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

Post by Reyzadren » Sun 21 Jan 2018, 09:54

Ahzoh wrote:
Sun 21 Jan 2018, 09:32
Reyzadren wrote:
Sun 21 Jan 2018, 09:14
However, they don't work the same way as shown in your provided sample sentences. Also, their function with regard to transitivity is probably not the same, as they have properties from a trigger language.
The language you speak is a trigger language or are you guessing my conlang is? If the latter, then my conlang is not a trigger language. It is just that adjectives are more life affixes and attach to what they modify.
When I said trigger language, I was indeed referring to the properties of verbs from the natlang. I know that your conlang wasn't a trigger language from your examples, so I provided an additional comparison, just in case you wanted the same type of transitivity.

EDIT: Note: To reclarify, I do not claim to speak a trigger natlang, but merely a natlang that has trigger-like properties, because apparently linguists and wikipedia can't decide if it should be classified as a trigger language or a nom-acc language.
Image Soundcloud Profile | Image griuskant conlang
clawgrip
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2352
Joined: Sun 24 Jun 2012, 06:33
Location: Tokyo

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

Post by clawgrip » Sun 21 Jan 2018, 23:25

What language is it you're talking about?
Post Reply