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

A forum for all topics related to constructed languages
User avatar
Davush
greek
greek
Posts: 500
Joined: Sat 10 Jan 2015, 14:10

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

Post by Davush » Thu 03 May 2018, 16:24

Reyzadren wrote:
Wed 02 May 2018, 22:39
What natlang does this griuskant sample audio recording sound like?

I'm curious to get some soundcheck from (linguistic ears of) other members here. Ignore the English bias within the voice pls. #shamelessadvertisement
Intonation and general sound remind me very much of Scandinavian. Was this an aesthetic you had in mind?
User avatar
Reyzadren
sinic
sinic
Posts: 341
Joined: Sun 14 May 2017, 09:39
Contact:

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

Post by Reyzadren » Thu 03 May 2018, 23:07

Creyeditor wrote:
Wed 02 May 2018, 22:49
To me, it sounds like Siwss German with a Scandinavian touch. This might be because of the accentuation patterns. It could also sound like Japanese, but the consonant clusters (there are some, right?) destroy that for me.
Yes, there are consonant clusters. The transcription, IPA, gloss and translation are available at the most recent post in the griuskant conlang thread.
Davush wrote:
Thu 03 May 2018, 16:24
Intonation and general sound remind me very much of Scandinavian. Was this an aesthetic you had in mind?
I did not strive for any natlang resemblance, but I don't mind it having the aesthetic of another known natlang. Anything in a conworld is bound to have some small similarity to something in the real world after all, intentionally or unintentionally.


Scandinavian from 2 people, huh? Cool~ [B)]
Image Soundcloud Profile | Image griuskant conlang
User avatar
Shemtov
runic
runic
Posts: 2723
Joined: Mon 29 Apr 2013, 03:06

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

Post by Shemtov » Fri 04 May 2018, 00:55

Which of these systems for polypersonal agreement is more naturalistic?
The agent is a prefix and the object is a suffix or
There is a marker separating them, that denotes that the next affix is agreeing with the object
Many children make up, or begin to make up, imaginary languages. I have been at it since I could write.
-JRR Tolkien
User avatar
sangi39
moderator
moderator
Posts: 3116
Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2010, 00:53
Location: North Yorkshire, UK

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

Post by sangi39 » Fri 04 May 2018, 01:21

Shemtov wrote:
Fri 04 May 2018, 00:55
Which of these systems for polypersonal agreement is more naturalistic?
The agent is a prefix and the object is a suffix or
There is a marker separating them, that denotes that the next affix is agreeing with the object
At first I would have said the first would be more "naturalistic", but I started thinking that you might be able to get away with the second one as well. I know some languages have explicit transitive morphemes, but I'm not actually sure how they work... *to the research*
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
Vlürch
sinic
sinic
Posts: 229
Joined: Wed 09 Mar 2016, 21:19
Location: Finland
Contact:

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

Post by Vlürch » Fri 04 May 2018, 01:27

Reyzadren wrote:
Wed 02 May 2018, 22:39
What natlang does this griuskant sample audio recording sound like?
I'd say a cute cross between some Iranian language, some Slavic language and some Turkic language with a dose of Japanese and Korean thrown in. Sounds really nice. I don't really hear anything Scandinavian in it since that would just be due to the impression of it having pitch accent, which is found in Japanese, Korean, some Turkic languages and some Slavic languages, so basically most of the languages that it reminds me of anyway. If I had to say one language it makes me think the most of, I'd probably say Uyghur.
Shemtov wrote:
Fri 04 May 2018, 00:55
Which of these systems for polypersonal agreement is more naturalistic?
The agent is a prefix and the object is a suffix or
There is a marker separating them, that denotes that the next affix is agreeing with the object
I don't really know anything about polypersonal agreement, so take what I say with a grain of salt, but based on literally nothing except a misinformed gut feeling I'd say I think the former would make more sense if the language had SOV word order but the latter if it had any other word order. No idea why, though, so yeah...
User avatar
Pabappa
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 191
Joined: Sat 18 Nov 2017, 02:41
Contact:

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

Post by Pabappa » Fri 04 May 2018, 04:53

I think polypersonal setups have different forms for the agent and patient, and often they are fused into a single morpheme. So no separation marker should be necessary. Also, id think the object would be closer to the stem of the verb, since objects are tied to their verbs while subjects are not.
Image
User avatar
Shemtov
runic
runic
Posts: 2723
Joined: Mon 29 Apr 2013, 03:06

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

Post by Shemtov » Fri 04 May 2018, 05:44

Pabappa wrote:
Fri 04 May 2018, 04:53
I think polypersonal setups have different forms for the agent and patient, and often they are fused into a single morpheme. So no separation marker should be necessary. Also, id think the object would be closer to the stem of the verb, since objects are tied to their verbs while subjects are not.
I want the forms to be the same. Is that unattested?
Edit: l am basing my language on the Bantu languages, and for the most part, their subject and object morphed are the same, just separated by the TAM marker
Many children make up, or begin to make up, imaginary languages. I have been at it since I could write.
-JRR Tolkien
User avatar
Reyzadren
sinic
sinic
Posts: 341
Joined: Sun 14 May 2017, 09:39
Contact:

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

Post by Reyzadren » Fri 04 May 2018, 23:33

Vlürch wrote:
Fri 04 May 2018, 01:27
I'd say a cute cross between some Iranian language, some Slavic language and some Turkic language with a dose of Japanese and Korean thrown in. Sounds really nice. I don't really hear anything Scandinavian in it since that would just be due to the impression of it having pitch accent, which is found in Japanese, Korean, some Turkic languages and some Slavic languages, so basically most of the languages that it reminds me of anyway. If I had to say one language it makes me think the most of, I'd probably say Uyghur.
Slavic + Turkic languages? Well, griuskant has initial stress like Czech and has 8 similar vowels as Turkish does, so I guess those features might have latched on :P

Nice, thanks for all the replies.
Image Soundcloud Profile | Image griuskant conlang
Mako
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat 05 May 2018, 11:01

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

Post by Mako » Sat 05 May 2018, 12:36

I’m interested in designing a conlang that is suitable for Artificial Intelligence. However before doing so I’m interested in finding any existing conlangs that use a smallish number (500 to 1000) of root words to make compound nouns. I’m particularly interested in any conlang that makes compound nouns where the root words describe what the noun means. So if I’ve never seen the noun I can a very good idea what the noun means. If any one has any idea of existing conlang that make compound nouns with bounded morphemes I’d be appreciative if they leave a reply

Cheers Mako
User avatar
Pabappa
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 191
Joined: Sat 18 Nov 2017, 02:41
Contact:

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

Post by Pabappa » Sat 05 May 2018, 13:16

https://mw.lojban.org/papri/gismu has about 1500, if my memory is accurate...
Image
User avatar
k1234567890y
runic
runic
Posts: 2960
Joined: Sat 04 Jan 2014, 04:47
Contact:

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

Post by k1234567890y » Sat 05 May 2018, 13:32

Mako wrote:
Sat 05 May 2018, 12:36
I’m interested in designing a conlang that is suitable for Artificial Intelligence. However before doing so I’m interested in finding any existing conlangs that use a smallish number (500 to 1000) of root words to make compound nouns. I’m particularly interested in any conlang that makes compound nouns where the root words describe what the noun means. So if I’ve never seen the noun I can a very good idea what the noun means. If any one has any idea of existing conlang that make compound nouns with bounded morphemes I’d be appreciative if they leave a reply

Cheers Mako
I think I have done somethig similar more than once...I helped Ridley making Kavrinian...it now has 8000CWS entities, with 1692 non-derived entities(roots and affixes)

Lonmai Luna now has 6000+ CWS entities, with 2003 non-derived entities(roots and affixes)

Also, there's something called Globish, basically it is a reduced version of English with 1500 words
私のアツい人工言語活動!言カツ!始まります!!
holbuzvala
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 160
Joined: Sun 01 Jan 2017, 14:03

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

Post by holbuzvala » Tue 08 May 2018, 16:11

So I've got an idea for an auxlang. I've noticed most auxlangs tend to go for the smallest possible phonetic inventory so that anyone can pronounce all of its words. However, I think this is not an appropriate way to go about it, as instead of having absolute sounds, one can have prototypical(? - this might not be the right word) sounds. For instance, you can say the phonology contains a /p/ and /b/ contrast; but depending on the speaker's original tongue this may manifest as a [ph]-[p] contrast, or a ejective-voiceless contrast etc. My groupings (allowed allophonic variation, in parentheses) and contrasts (dash-linked) thus far are as follows:

p-b
k-g
t-d

(w/v)
(j)
(s/ʃ/h/ç)

Now, based on this paradigm, do we think 1, it's worth including an '(l/r)' grouping?
and 2, should there be a voiced contrast between the sibilants to create a minimal pair of /s/ with /z/ (and their likenesses)?
User avatar
ixals
sinic
sinic
Posts: 341
Joined: Tue 28 Jul 2015, 17:43

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

Post by ixals » Wed 09 May 2018, 13:12

So I've been trying to organise Cissian's consonant inventory into a table like the ones used in language grammars or Wikipedia articles but I don't know which approach to take. Should I be more superficial where everything is paired up but isn't the exact pronunciation (with actual phonemes listed below) like this? Or should I be precise and just do it like this? Or should I even leave out the soft consonants completely and treat them as allophones before /ʲa ʲe ʲi ʲo ʲu/ so it lines up with the Cyrillic script?
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
Creyeditor
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4467
Joined: Tue 14 Aug 2012, 18:32

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

Post by Creyeditor » Wed 09 May 2018, 14:43

I would do both. The best grammars always give a phoneme inventory and a segment inventory
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]
shimobaatar
darkness
darkness
Posts: 10719
Joined: Fri 12 Jul 2013, 22:09
Location: PA → IN

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

Post by shimobaatar » Wed 09 May 2018, 15:40

I'd say go with both as well.
Ælfwine
greek
greek
Posts: 807
Joined: Mon 21 Sep 2015, 00:28
Location: New Jersey

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

Post by Ælfwine » Wed 09 May 2018, 19:06

I say go with the more broad approach, you could probably leave out the palatalization like you said as well.
My Blog
Current Projects:
Mannish — A North Germanic language spoken on the Calf of Man
Pelsodian — A Romance language spoken around Lake Balaton
Jezik Panoski — A Slavic language spoken in the same area
User avatar
Void
sinic
sinic
Posts: 256
Joined: Mon 15 Aug 2016, 15:15
Location: ܬܩܠܡܟܢܓܝܕܪ

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

Post by Void » Thu 10 May 2018, 22:58

Can a nominative-accusative language derive from an absolutive-ergative proto-language?

Theoretically by making the passive tense into a regular present one, by some other eldritch means?
ܣܐ ܚܘܡ ܐܝ ܩܟܝܙܘܐ ܝܗܟܝܐ ܘܫܫܠ
User avatar
k1234567890y
runic
runic
Posts: 2960
Joined: Sat 04 Jan 2014, 04:47
Contact:

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

Post by k1234567890y » Fri 11 May 2018, 03:20

Void wrote:
Thu 10 May 2018, 22:58
Can a nominative-accusative language derive from an absolutive-ergative proto-language?

Theoretically by making the passive tense into a regular present one, by some other eldritch means?
yes, it is said that some Aleut-Eskimo languages are evolving into nominative languages. maybe you can do this: ergative-absolutive > neutral > nominative-accusative with differential object marking > full nominative-accusative language

as for the "making the passive tense into a regular present one, by some other eldritch means?" part, I am not sure.
私のアツい人工言語活動!言カツ!始まります!!
Birdlang
greek
greek
Posts: 632
Joined: Thu 25 Dec 2014, 20:17
Location: Virginia

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

Post by Birdlang » Sat 12 May 2018, 16:47

How could I evolve this protolang?
/m n ŋ/ m n ŋ or m n ng
/p pʰ t tʰ k kʰ ʔ/ b p d t g k q or b p d t g k j
/f s ʂ ʐ~ɻ ɕ ç x h/ f s z r x j ĥ h or f s sh r x xy h xh
/l j ɥ w/ l y ÿ w or l y~i ÿ~ü w~u
/ɬ ʎ̝̊ ʟ̝̊/ Ɨ ⱡ ɫ or lh ly ll

/i y ʉ ɯ u e ø ɵ ɤ o ɛ œ ɞ ʌ ɔ a ɶ ɒ̈ ɑ ɒ/ plus length i ü ů ï u é ö ô e o è õ ø ŏ ò a ơ ä ɑ ɒ plus macron or i ue ui iu u e oe oh eu o ei ou ao oi oa a ee oo au aa plus : for length
/Ṽ/ Vƞ or Vnh
I’m trying to make 3-5 different languages out of thus
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
eldin raigmore
fire
fire
Posts: 6190
Joined: Sat 14 Aug 2010, 18:38
Location: SouthEast Michigan

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

Post by eldin raigmore » Mon 14 May 2018, 21:24

k1234567890y wrote:
Fri 11 May 2018, 03:20
Void wrote:
Thu 10 May 2018, 22:58
Can a nominative-accusative language derive from an absolutive-ergative proto-language?

Theoretically by making the passive tense into a regular present one, by some other eldritch means?
yes, it is said that some Aleut-Eskimo languages are evolving into nominative languages. maybe you can do this: ergative-absolutive > neutral > nominative-accusative with differential object marking > full nominative-accusative language

as for the "making the passive tense into a regular present one, by some other eldritch means?" part, I am not sure.
Is eldritch a voice? Or a case?
Post Reply