If natlangs were conlangs

A forum for discussing linguistics or just languages in general.
User avatar
All4Ɇn
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1736
Joined: Sat 01 Mar 2014, 07:19

Re: If natlangs were conlangs

Post by All4Ɇn » Tue 24 Jan 2017, 05:13

Imralu wrote:
Axiem wrote:
Imralu wrote:
qwed117 wrote:Look, creator of the Austronesian languages: changing one letter doesn't make a new language. At best it's a dialect. And this is for virtually every language you made. Seriously, in every language you made, the word for eye is "mata"
No, it's maka in Hawaiian. #creativity
Aren't /k/ and /t/ allophonic in Hawaiian?
Yes, but as I understand it, [t] only occurs in certain dialects and is absent from most Hawaiian.
Even where it does exist, [t] mostly only occurs before /i/
User avatar
k1234567890y
runic
runic
Posts: 2955
Joined: Sat 04 Jan 2014, 04:47
Contact:

Re: If natlangs were conlangs

Post by k1234567890y » Sun 29 Jan 2017, 14:50

All4Ɇn wrote:
Imralu wrote:
Axiem wrote:
Imralu wrote:
qwed117 wrote:Look, creator of the Austronesian languages: changing one letter doesn't make a new language. At best it's a dialect. And this is for virtually every language you made. Seriously, in every language you made, the word for eye is "mata"
No, it's maka in Hawaiian. #creativity
Aren't /k/ and /t/ allophonic in Hawaiian?
Yes, but as I understand it, [t] only occurs in certain dialects and is absent from most Hawaiian.
Even where it does exist, [t] mostly only occurs before /i/
pretty much the opposite to Japanese, where [t] never occurs before high vowels like /i/ except for some recent loanwords.

speakng of Hawaiian, I have read somewhere that Jennifer is "Kinipela" in Hawaiian.
私のアツい人工言語活動!言カツ!始まります!!
User avatar
GrandPiano
runic
runic
Posts: 2466
Joined: Sun 11 Jan 2015, 23:22
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: If natlangs were conlangs

Post by GrandPiano » Mon 30 Jan 2017, 02:25

k1234567890y wrote:speakng of Hawaiian, I have read somewhere that Jennifer is "Kinipela" in Hawaiian.
And Christmas is "Kalikimaka".
:eng: - Native
:chn: - B2
:esp: - A2
:jpn: - A2
Iyionaku
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1595
Joined: Sun 25 May 2014, 13:17

Re: If natlangs were conlangs

Post by Iyionaku » Mon 06 Feb 2017, 13:31

Someone who must have been a real beginner just thought "Hey look, French has some strange things on their letters, I will do this but I will totally overdo it so everyone thinks my language is super cool and special"

Tất cả mọi người sinh ra đều được tự do và bình đẳng về nhân phẩm và quyền. Mọi con người đều được tạo hoá ban cho lý trí và lương tâm và cần phải đối xử với nhau trong tình bằng hữu.

Plus, it seems like he uses <d> for /j/, <gi> for /z/ and <x> for /s/ ...really!? You didn't even invent any grammar, dude.
Edit:
Spoiler:
I used "grammar" instead of "morphology" in order to match the purpose of this thread - entire jocular sillyness :D I am currently learning Chinese and so I know what a pain in the ass a merely syntactical language can be, even without morphology. But thanks for highlighting, Frislander :)
Last edited by Iyionaku on Mon 06 Feb 2017, 14:08, edited 3 times in total.
Heaven and Earth, but I feel the color of the cake when you keep the Victoria.
I had a mantra on the moss and I had to go to bed.


Oh, and there is a [ɕ] in my name!
User avatar
Frislander
runic
runic
Posts: 2805
Joined: Sat 14 May 2016, 17:47
Location: The North

Re: If natlangs were conlangs

Post by Frislander » Mon 06 Feb 2017, 13:46

Iyionaku wrote:Someone who must have been a real beginner just thought "Hey look, French has some strange things on their letters, I will do this but I will totally overdo it so everyone thinks my language is super cool and special"

Tất cả mọi người sinh ra đều được tự do và bình đẳng về nhân phẩm và quyền. Mọi con người đều được tạo hoá ban cho lý trí và lương tâm và cần phải đối xử với nhau trong tình bằng hữu.

Plus, it seems like he uses <d> for /j/, <gi> for /z/ and <x> for /s/ ...really!? You didn't even invent any grammar, dude.
And they have like, crazy gaps in their phonology, like no word-initial /p/ in native words, but having /ɓ/, and the only aspirate being /tʰ/.

And then they try and claim that they derived this from someone else's proto-language with infixing morphology and loads of clusters, but they didn't like that so they got rid of it all to leave just boring-old syntax.
Spoiler:
Important note: Vietnamese does have grammar, just not morphology: don't confuse the two.
User avatar
Creyeditor
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4399
Joined: Tue 14 Aug 2012, 18:32

Re: If natlangs were conlangs

Post by Creyeditor » Mon 06 Feb 2017, 15:38

Iyionaku wrote:Someone who must have been a real beginner just thought "Hey look, French has some strange things on their letters, I will do this but I will totally overdo it so everyone thinks my language is super cool and special"

Tất cả mọi người sinh ra đều được tự do và bình đẳng về nhân phẩm và quyền. Mọi con người đều được tạo hoá ban cho lý trí và lương tâm và cần phải đối xử với nhau trong tình bằng hữu.

Plus, it seems like he uses <d> for /j/, <gi> for /z/ and <x> for /s/ ...really!? You didn't even invent any grammar, dude.
Edit:
Spoiler:
I used "grammar" instead of "morphology" in order to match the purpose of this thread - entire jocular sillyness :D I am currently learning Chinese and so I know what a pain in the ass a merely syntactical language can be, even without morphology. But thanks for highlighting, Frislander :)
A masterpiece of diachronic and dialectal conlanging [:)]
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]
User avatar
All4Ɇn
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1736
Joined: Sat 01 Mar 2014, 07:19

Re: If natlangs were conlangs

Post by All4Ɇn » Mon 06 Feb 2017, 22:10

I mean if you're going to have a heavily Chinese influenced conlang, complete with tones and everything, at least have the audacity to use Chinese characters like that Japanese one.
User avatar
Frislander
runic
runic
Posts: 2805
Joined: Sat 14 May 2016, 17:47
Location: The North

Re: If natlangs were conlangs

Post by Frislander » Mon 06 Feb 2017, 22:19

All4Ɇn wrote:I mean if you're going to have a heavily Chinese influenced conlang, complete with tones and everything, at least have the audacity to use Chinese characters like that Japanese one.
They tried and it worked fairly well, but the creator must have chickened out, what with all the effort it would have taken.
User avatar
All4Ɇn
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1736
Joined: Sat 01 Mar 2014, 07:19

Re: If natlangs were conlangs

Post by All4Ɇn » Mon 06 Feb 2017, 22:42

Frislander wrote:
All4Ɇn wrote:I mean if you're going to have a heavily Chinese influenced conlang, complete with tones and everything, at least have the audacity to use Chinese characters like that Japanese one.
They tried and it worked fairly well, but the creator must have chickened out, what with all the effort it would have taken.
At least they tried being creative with it what with all the new characters for words that already had Chinese characters
User avatar
GrandPiano
runic
runic
Posts: 2466
Joined: Sun 11 Jan 2015, 23:22
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: If natlangs were conlangs

Post by GrandPiano » Mon 06 Feb 2017, 23:08

Iyionaku wrote:Plus, it seems like he uses <d> for /j/, <gi> for /z/ and <x> for /s/ ...really!? You didn't even invent any grammar, dude.
Spoiler:
According to Wikipedia, <d> and <gi> actually represent the same sound, but it's [z] in Northern Vietnamese and [j] in Southern Vietnamese.
:eng: - Native
:chn: - B2
:esp: - A2
:jpn: - A2
User avatar
Shemtov
runic
runic
Posts: 2656
Joined: Mon 29 Apr 2013, 03:06

Re: If natlangs were conlangs

Post by Shemtov » Tue 14 Feb 2017, 02:59

Iyionaku wrote: Plus, it seems like he uses <d> for /j/, <gi> for /z/ and <x> for /s/ ...really!?
All makes sense in the conhistory, given the state of the language where he put that De Rhodes Charachter in.
Many children make up, or begin to make up, imaginary languages. I have been at it since I could write.
-JRR Tolkien
User avatar
Znex
roman
roman
Posts: 1162
Joined: Mon 12 Aug 2013, 13:05
Location: Australia

Re: If natlangs were conlangs

Post by Znex » Tue 14 Feb 2017, 09:46

All4Ɇn wrote:
Frislander wrote:
All4Ɇn wrote:I mean if you're going to have a heavily Chinese influenced conlang, complete with tones and everything, at least have the audacity to use Chinese characters like that Japanese one.
They tried and it worked fairly well, but the creator must have chickened out, what with all the effort it would have taken.
At least they tried being creative with it what with all the new characters for words that already had Chinese characters
I've always been a fan of this Chinese-influenced script. The creator didn't feel like they had to stick with pictographs; they just made their own from bits and pieces and forcing character parts together. The Chinese conlanger would look at it with complete horror, but I think it just ends up being such an interesting deconstruction and creative way to work with a predecessor conscript.
:eng: : [tick] | :grc: :wls: : [:|] | :chn: :isr: : [:S] | :nor: :deu: :rom: :ind: :con: : [:x]
Conlangs: Pofp'ash, Ikwawese, Old Quelgic, Nisukil Pʰakwi, Apsiska
Iyionaku
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1595
Joined: Sun 25 May 2014, 13:17

Re: If natlangs were conlangs

Post by Iyionaku » Tue 14 Feb 2017, 14:51

Creator of Basque... it's ok to have some complexity in the language, and I'm always fund of some peculiarities that are hardly explainable, especially in verbal inflection. And as you did an a priori language, you are of course free to go.

But this?? Honestly? Did you even look twice about your verbal pattern?? Plus, either go through with it or leave it altogether. But don't create 5-10 super fancy monstrous verbs, get bored/disappointed/overstrained/demotivated over it and decide that all other verbs don't have any finite forms.

On the other hand, I laughed a straight 10 minutes after I stumbled upon your inside joke of the word eztabaida. Good work on that!
Spoiler:
Eztabaida means 'debate, discussion' and is formed out of the two complete sentences "ez da" and "bai da", literally "No, it's not! Yes, it is!"
Heaven and Earth, but I feel the color of the cake when you keep the Victoria.
I had a mantra on the moss and I had to go to bed.


Oh, and there is a [ɕ] in my name!
User avatar
KaiTheHomoSapien
greek
greek
Posts: 551
Joined: Mon 15 Feb 2016, 06:10
Location: Napa Valley, California

Re: If natlangs were conlangs

Post by KaiTheHomoSapien » Tue 14 Feb 2017, 19:26

PIE creator: I think the reason you never finished this language is because it's too complicated for its own good. Why should a noun ablaut in three different ways in the same paradigm? No /b/ but /bʰ/, only voiced aspirates with no voiceless counterparts, syllabic laryngeals, only mid vowels (if you're only going to have two vowels, at least make one of them /a/!). And I love all the initial syllable reduplication that can mean whatever you want depending on the verb, and the nasal infix with no semantic function at all, but some of this seems a bit arbitrary. This language just makes no sense. It'll die out before it even gets a chance ;)
Don't live to conlang; conlang to live.

My conlang: Image Lihmelinyan
Iyionaku
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1595
Joined: Sun 25 May 2014, 13:17

Re: If natlangs were conlangs

Post by Iyionaku » Tue 14 Feb 2017, 20:15

KaiTheHomoSapien wrote:PIE creator: I think the reason you never finished this language is because it's too complicated for its own good. Why should a noun ablaut in three different ways in the same paradigm? No /b/ but /bʰ/, only voiced aspirates with no voiceless counterparts, syllabic laryngeals, only mid vowels (if you're only going to have two vowels, at least make one of them /a/!). And I love all the initial syllable reduplication that can mean whatever you want depending on the verb, and the nasal infix with no semantic function at all, but some of this seems a bit arbitrary. This language just makes no sense. It'll die out before it even gets a chance ;)
As far as I'm informed, the creator had already been aware of this problem and tried to simplify the language with diachronic conlanging. But he might have thought two or three subfamilies were not enough, so he created about a dozen :roll: And to make them different enough, he did some shit that his very hardly justifible, like a sound shift /dʰ/ > /jɛɾk/ in the Armenian subfamily or just switched out a third of the lexicon in the Germanic subfamily.
Heaven and Earth, but I feel the color of the cake when you keep the Victoria.
I had a mantra on the moss and I had to go to bed.


Oh, and there is a [ɕ] in my name!
User avatar
Creyeditor
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4399
Joined: Tue 14 Aug 2012, 18:32

Re: If natlangs were conlangs

Post by Creyeditor » Tue 14 Feb 2017, 20:34

I feel like this thread is far to negative.
So, kudos to the conlangers creating the Papuan languages. Looks like a collaborative project of the best conlangers in the world. Minimalist phonologies (with some nice quirks), delicious morphophonology, they put a lot of work into the lexicon, created some unique syntactical constructions.
And because everyone is talking about diachronics, they really used every possible feature. Massive borrowings, crazy sound changes. Nobody can figure out what is a family and what is a Sprachbund. I really like it [:)]
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]
User avatar
Frislander
runic
runic
Posts: 2805
Joined: Sat 14 May 2016, 17:47
Location: The North

Re: If natlangs were conlangs

Post by Frislander » Tue 14 Feb 2017, 20:58

What's going on with Australia? It's like this one guy has gone through several hundred drafts of the same language, gutting the vocabulary, but keeping bits of the morphology and altering the syntax while making at most minimal changes to the phonology. They even had a strong polysynthetic phase with pervasive noun-incorporation, but they have been mostly dependent marking.
User avatar
All4Ɇn
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1736
Joined: Sat 01 Mar 2014, 07:19

Re: If natlangs were conlangs

Post by All4Ɇn » Tue 14 Feb 2017, 22:02

Frislander wrote:What's going on with Australia? It's like this one guy has gone through several hundred drafts of the same language, gutting the vocabulary, but keeping bits of the morphology and altering the syntax while making at most minimal changes to the phonology. They even had a strong polysynthetic phase with pervasive noun-incorporation, but they have been mostly dependent marking.
And instead of creating something truly unique when it came to the conworld they just had all of the languages become endangered due to British imperialism. Really? England conquered an entire continent? Seems unlikely
User avatar
Frislander
runic
runic
Posts: 2805
Joined: Sat 14 May 2016, 17:47
Location: The North

Re: If natlangs were conlangs

Post by Frislander » Tue 14 Feb 2017, 22:13

All4Ɇn wrote:
Frislander wrote:What's going on with Australia? It's like this one guy has gone through several hundred drafts of the same language, gutting the vocabulary, but keeping bits of the morphology and altering the syntax while making at most minimal changes to the phonology. They even had a strong polysynthetic phase with pervasive noun-incorporation, but they have been mostly dependent marking.
And instead of creating something truly unique when it came to the conworld they just had all of the languages become endangered due to British imperialism. Really? England conquered an entire continent? Seems unlikely
Well the US and Canada happened, so it's not without precendent.
User avatar
All4Ɇn
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1736
Joined: Sat 01 Mar 2014, 07:19

Re: If natlangs were conlangs

Post by All4Ɇn » Wed 15 Feb 2017, 03:54

Frislander wrote:Well the US and Canada happened, so it's not without precendent.
There's still Mexico [;)]
Post Reply