(L&N) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

A forum for discussing linguistics or just languages in general.
User avatar
DesEsseintes
cleardarkness
cleardarkness
Posts: 4463
Joined: Sun 31 Mar 2013, 12:16

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

Post by DesEsseintes » Wed 06 Dec 2017, 15:06

Creyeditor wrote:
Tue 05 Dec 2017, 15:02
I don't know how Chinese converbs started out, were they verbs or prepositions. Does anyone know?
Maybe the new Conlangery episode will reveals the answer.
Chinese coverbs were verbs, and many of them retain the ability to function as verbs in their own right.

我跟他一起去。
Wǒ gēn tā yìqǐ qù

I follow he together go
I’m going with him.

我会跟着他。
Wǒ huì gēnzhe tā

I will follow-CONT he
I will follow him.
Edit: This is my 4444th post! [:O]
shimobaatar
darkness
darkness
Posts: 8851
Joined: Fri 12 Jul 2013, 22:09
Location: PA → IN

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

Post by shimobaatar » Wed 06 Dec 2017, 17:15

DesEsseintes wrote:
Wed 06 Dec 2017, 15:06
Edit: This is my 4444th post! [:O]
Congrats!
neutloika
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed 18 Jan 2017, 20:15

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

Post by neutloika » Sat 09 Dec 2017, 23:14

Correct me if i'm wrong.
My thought experiment tells me that of a topic comment language, topicarized noun is similar to interjection.
I'm wrong if there is fusional topicarizer.
Aside suffix and vocative case.

See you later.
User avatar
Vlürch
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 96
Joined: Wed 09 Mar 2016, 21:19
Location: Finland

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

Post by Vlürch » Sun 10 Dec 2017, 16:58

All4Ɇn wrote:
Sun 15 Oct 2017, 18:23
Not really an objective question, but what would you guys consider to be really cool looking Hanzi that are underused that I should incorporate into one of my conlangs?
𩇓, 惢, 䖘, 䘊, 䆐, 龘, 龖, 𪚥, 圞, 𭂼... basically any complex characters are cool in my opinion, so I could go on forever. I have no idea what the last one even means, and there are only five results on Google for it, so it's definitely rare. [xD]
Xonen wrote:
Tue 07 Nov 2017, 20:51
I firmly believe that Turkish uses <z̧> for /ʒ/ and <j> for /dʒ/, since I refuse to participate in a reality where a major language gets away with using <c> for the latter.
I wish there was a precomposed character in Unicode for the Z with cedilla because a lot of fonts turn it into an ugly ass thing where the cedilla doesn't even touch the Z. It just boggles me that there still isn't one, and that it wasn't included when letters like Ṷ, Ṥ and Ḝ were added...

Then a few questions about Uzbek: why have some of the vowels corresponding to /ɑ/ and /o/ in other Turkic languages merged as /ɒ/ while in other words /ɑ/ has become /æ/? I get that it was influenced by Persian /æ/ and /ɒː/, but it seems pretty random considering how sometimes both <a> and <o> are pronounced [ɒ] in different words. Also, if all the back vowels have front variants as allophones (or even as phonemes simply represented by the same letter in writing) depending on the rules of the supposedly lost vowel harmony, why is the vowel harmony even considered to have been lost? I mean, wouldn't it make more sense to call them incomplete mergers? Is it just because inflectional suffixes lost the distinction and thus /ɒ/ and /æ/, etc. can coexist in the same word? I mean, sure, that's a huge chunk of vowel harmony taken out, but wouldn't it have to be lost in roots as well for it count as a complete loss?

...but most importantly, why does my fantasy of every vowel in Uzbek being /o/ keep withering away with time? Why is Uzbek not the memey rounding language I was led to believe it was? [:'(]
User avatar
Creyeditor
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 3948
Joined: Tue 14 Aug 2012, 18:32

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

Post by Creyeditor » Sun 10 Dec 2017, 17:05

neutloika wrote:
Sat 09 Dec 2017, 23:14
Correct me if i'm wrong.
My thought experiment tells me that of a topic comment language, topicarized noun is similar to interjection.
I'm wrong if there is fusional topicarizer.
Aside suffix and vocative case.

See you later.
I think the answer is no. Someone with more knowledge about a really topic prominent might know more about it. Clawgrip maybe.
Creyeditor
"Thoughts are free."
Produce, Analyze, Manipulate
1 :deu: 2 :eng: 3 :fra: 4 :esp: 4 :ind:
:con: Ook & Omlűt & Nautli languages & Sperenjas
[<3] Papuan languages, Morphophonology, Lexical Semantics [<3]
Keenir
runic
runic
Posts: 2456
Joined: Tue 22 May 2012, 02:05

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

Post by Keenir » Sun 10 Dec 2017, 18:32

Xonen wrote:
Tue 07 Nov 2017, 20:51
I firmly believe that Turkish uses <z̧> for /ʒ/ and <j> for /dʒ/, since I refuse to participate in a reality where a major language gets away with using <c> for the latter.
I believe you're thinking of <ğ>, not any form of <z>
At work on Apaan: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=4799
User avatar
Xonen
moderator
moderator
Posts: 1390
Joined: Sat 15 May 2010, 23:25

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

Post by Xonen » Sun 10 Dec 2017, 19:31

Keenir wrote:
Sun 10 Dec 2017, 18:32
Xonen wrote:
Tue 07 Nov 2017, 20:51
I firmly believe that Turkish uses <z̧> for /ʒ/ and <j> for /dʒ/, since I refuse to participate in a reality where a major language gets away with using <c> for the latter.
I believe you're thinking of <ğ>, not any form of <z>
It seems your beliefs concerning my beliefs are about as well-founded as my beliefs concerning Turkish orthography, then. So fair enough, I guess.
Keenir
runic
runic
Posts: 2456
Joined: Tue 22 May 2012, 02:05

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

Post by Keenir » Sun 10 Dec 2017, 19:44

Xonen wrote:
Sun 10 Dec 2017, 19:31
Keenir wrote:
Sun 10 Dec 2017, 18:32
Xonen wrote:
Tue 07 Nov 2017, 20:51
I firmly believe that Turkish uses <z̧> for /ʒ/ and <j> for /dʒ/, since I refuse to participate in a reality where a major language gets away with using <c> for the latter.
I believe you're thinking of <ğ>, not any form of <z>
It seems your beliefs concerning my beliefs are about as well-founded as my beliefs concerning Turkish orthography, then. So fair enough, I guess.
well, my belief is predicated(?) on my belief you're referring to the Turkish of the Turkish Republic, rather than any of the Turkic peoples north or east of Anatolia.
At work on Apaan: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=4799
shimobaatar
darkness
darkness
Posts: 8851
Joined: Fri 12 Jul 2013, 22:09
Location: PA → IN

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

Post by shimobaatar » Sun 10 Dec 2017, 19:49

In Turkish, /ʒ d͡ʒ/ are <j c>. From what I can tell, it sounds like Xonen was saying that they don't like that, and that they'd prefer it if it were /ʒ d͡ʒ/ <z̧ j>.

<ğ> is not /ʒ/. It's complicated.
User avatar
All4Ɇn
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1552
Joined: Sat 01 Mar 2014, 07:19

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

Post by All4Ɇn » Sun 10 Dec 2017, 23:06

Vlürch wrote:
Sun 10 Dec 2017, 16:58
𩇓, 惢, 䖘, 䘊, 䆐, 龘, 龖, 𪚥, 圞, 𭂼... basically any complex characters are cool in my opinion, so I could go on forever. I have no idea what the last one even means, and there are only five results on Google for it, so it's definitely rare. [xD]
I can't even see 𩇓, 𪚥, 𭂼 on my computer [:(]
User avatar
Pabappa
hieroglyphic
hieroglyphic
Posts: 41
Joined: Sat 18 Nov 2017, 02:41
Contact:

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

Post by Pabappa » Mon 11 Dec 2017, 00:03

Cenk Uygur of The Young Turks has said that he can tell his critics apart by how they pronounce his first name .... If it's /sEnk/ then they likely haven't watched a single clip. Joe Manchin's interview of him had Joe repeatedly using /dZEnks/ and seeming not to question it.
Image
User avatar
DesEsseintes
cleardarkness
cleardarkness
Posts: 4463
Joined: Sun 31 Mar 2013, 12:16

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

Post by DesEsseintes » Mon 11 Dec 2017, 08:23

All4Ɇn wrote:
Sun 10 Dec 2017, 23:06
Vlürch wrote:
Sun 10 Dec 2017, 16:58
𩇓, 惢, 䖘, 䘊, 䆐, 龘, 龖, 𪚥, 圞, 𭂼... basically any complex characters are cool in my opinion, so I could go on forever. I have no idea what the last one even means, and there are only five results on Google for it, so it's definitely rare. [xD]
I can't even see 𩇓, 𪚥, 𭂼 on my computer [:(]
[+1]
User avatar
Xonen
moderator
moderator
Posts: 1390
Joined: Sat 15 May 2010, 23:25

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

Post by Xonen » Mon 11 Dec 2017, 12:44

shimobaatar wrote:
Sun 10 Dec 2017, 19:49
In Turkish, /ʒ d͡ʒ/ are <j c>. From what I can tell, it sounds like Xonen was saying that they don't like that, and that they'd prefer it if it were /ʒ d͡ʒ/ <z̧ j>.

<ğ> is not /ʒ/. It's complicated.
I'm me, and I approve this message.
User avatar
Vlürch
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 96
Joined: Wed 09 Mar 2016, 21:19
Location: Finland

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

Post by Vlürch » Mon 11 Dec 2017, 13:12

DesEsseintes wrote:
Mon 11 Dec 2017, 08:23
All4Ɇn wrote:
Sun 10 Dec 2017, 23:06
Vlürch wrote:
Sun 10 Dec 2017, 16:58
𩇓, 惢, 䖘, 䘊, 䆐, 龘, 龖, 𪚥, 圞, 𭂼... basically any complex characters are cool in my opinion, so I could go on forever. I have no idea what the last one even means, and there are only five results on Google for it, so it's definitely rare. [xD]
I can't even see 𩇓, 𪚥, 𭂼 on my computer [:(]
[+1]
Always remember to download the newest version of the Babelstone Han and HanaMin and you'll never see boxes on your screen again where there should be CJK characters. [:)] Unless said characters look like boxes like 口, of course, but you know what I mean.

If you still can't see them for some reason:
𩇓 is an ancient variant of 雷 (thunder) and is made up of ⻗ at the top, two 田 that both have 回 under them, which both have 田 under them.
𪚥 is 龍 (dragon) four times, for some reason meaning "talkative".
𭂼 is made up of two rows of four 𡿨 inside a 凵. Like I said, I have no idea what it means, but it looks interesting (like everything in the Extension F block).

There's also this character that looks kinda like stairs, 𮍌, and at least according to Japanese Wiktionary is a variant of 臣 (vassal). I guess I can see some logic behind that...?

Regarding the Turkish alphabet, personally I like it. Using <c> for /d͡ʒ/ makes sense, since at least it doesn't leave <c> unused and makes a nice pair for <ç> /t͡ʃ/. So, even though <j> for /d͡ʒ/ and z̧ for /ʒ/ would be better, that'd require a diacritic to be added using a dead key or always copy-pasted, making typing slower as well as many fonts not displaying it correctly (including this one, where it goes a little bit too much to the right compared to <ç> and <ş>). Then again, that wouldn't be a problem in the first place if there was a precomposed Z with cedilla in Unicode, but considering the fact that misspellings and lack of font support for easily typable letters like İ, ı, Öö and Üü have literally gotten people killed, any more complications to the alphabet would probably not be welcomed by Turks themselves...

...but the disgusting apostrophe mess that's now being pushed for Kazakh will likely cause even more problems. The Cyrillic Kazakh alphabet is one of my all-time favourite orthographies so it depresses the shit out of me if this really is going to be implemented.
shimobaatar wrote:
Sun 10 Dec 2017, 19:49
<ğ> is not /ʒ/. It's complicated.
If I ever got good enough at Turkish that I could speak it with people, I'd pronounce <ğ> as /ɣ~ʁ/ because that's how it's pronounced in other Turkic languages. I've also heard some say that that's how it's still pronounced in certain dialects, IIRC in the eastern part of the country, so it shouldn't cause any problems... especially if every other part of the pronunciation is legit butchered beyond comprehension. [:P]
User avatar
Xonen
moderator
moderator
Posts: 1390
Joined: Sat 15 May 2010, 23:25

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

Post by Xonen » Mon 11 Dec 2017, 18:43

Vlürch wrote:
Mon 11 Dec 2017, 13:12
Using <c> for /d͡ʒ/ makes sense
Your face makes sense.

since at least it doesn't leave <c> unused and makes a nice pair for <ç> /t͡ʃ/.
Right, in the same way as <s> /ʒ/ makes a nice pair for <ş> /ʃ/... no, wait.

Now, perhaps this is to some degree a matter of taste, but having been originally introduced to linguistics by Tolkien and Zompist back when the internet was young, I can't help but feel that inconsistent use of diacritics when creating an orthography is, at best, a rookie mistake.

So, even though <j> for /d͡ʒ/ and z̧ for /ʒ/ would be better, that'd require a diacritic to be added using a dead key or always copy-pasted, making typing slower as well as many fonts not displaying it correctly (including this one, where it goes a little bit too much to the right compared to <ç> and <ş>). Then again, that wouldn't be a problem in the first place if there was a precomposed Z with cedilla in Unicode
Well, Unicode didn't exactly support <ş> or <ı>, either, at the time the Turkish orthography was being created, but somehow, that didn't stop them from adding those to the orthography.

but considering the fact that misspellings and lack of font support for easily typable letters like İ, ı, Öö and Üü have literally gotten people killed
Yikes, what? [:S]

In any case, yes, I recognize there are plenty of reasons for staying with an orthography once it's established. My problem is with whoever it was who designed this system in the first place. Back then, they could pretty much have gone with anything they wished, and this is what we get?

No disagreement on this assessment, except maybe that "disgusting" is putting it a bit mildly.
User avatar
Pabappa
hieroglyphic
hieroglyphic
Posts: 41
Joined: Sat 18 Nov 2017, 02:41
Contact:

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

Post by Pabappa » Mon 11 Dec 2017, 22:12

http://www.eurasianet.org/node/86051
The internet agrees with you ..... everybody hates it. The ' just doesn't blend in with the rest of the letters. Apparently ''s shape requires it to have full spacing underneath. If enough people complain they might decide to make the use of the "'" optional.
Image
User avatar
sangi39
moderator
moderator
Posts: 2663
Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2010, 00:53
Location: North Yorkshire, UK

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

Post by sangi39 » Tue 12 Dec 2017, 01:10

Xonen wrote:
Mon 11 Dec 2017, 18:43
Vlürch wrote:
Mon 11 Dec 2017, 13:12
but considering the fact that misspellings and lack of font support for easily typable letters like İ, ı, Öö and Üü have literally gotten people killed
Yikes, what? [:S]
I think Vlürch was referring to this unfortunate incident (and apparently it's not the only time incomplete support of <ı> has caused issues)
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
All4Ɇn
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1552
Joined: Sat 01 Mar 2014, 07:19

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

Post by All4Ɇn » Tue 12 Dec 2017, 02:01

Pabappa wrote:
Mon 11 Dec 2017, 22:12
http://www.eurasianet.org/node/86051
The internet agrees with you ..... everybody hates it. The ' just doesn't blend in with the rest of the letters. Apparently ''s shape requires it to have full spacing underneath. If enough people complain they might decide to make the use of the "'" optional.
Oh man I really hope Kazakhstan doesn't actually go through with that orthography. Any word on a website where the people on this site could send them better ones [xD]
Iyionaku
roman
roman
Posts: 1462
Joined: Sun 25 May 2014, 13:17

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

Post by Iyionaku » Tue 12 Dec 2017, 07:57

Vlürch wrote:
Sun 10 Dec 2017, 16:58

Would you like to have some 蕊 ?
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
Vlürch
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 96
Joined: Wed 09 Mar 2016, 21:19
Location: Finland

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

Post by Vlürch » Tue 12 Dec 2017, 11:26

Xonen wrote:
Mon 11 Dec 2017, 18:43
Now, perhaps this is to some degree a matter of taste, but having been originally introduced to linguistics by Tolkien and Zompist back when the internet was young, I can't help but feel that inconsistent use of diacritics when creating an orthography is, at best, a rookie mistake.
I'd agree if it wasn't universally done in pretty much literally every language that uses diacritics. I mean, sure, Finnish is consistent, but that's only because Finnish has the smallest phonemic inventory in Europe and likely of any language officially written using the Latin alphabet... but when you consider that Estonian, which is more consistent by writing /y/ as <ü>, is less consistent in using the weird ass letter <õ> for /ɤ/... well, I've yet to see any natural language with an orthography that's perfectly 100% consistent, especially when it comes to diacritics.

It really is just a matter of taste, though, and any orthography could be made up for any language that was entirely consistent, but it's just not going to happen in the future because Unicode has pretty much come to dictate which letters can be used in a practical orthography; field linguists travelling to document previously undocumented languages may not care, coming up with unique practical orthographies on the spot to write notes in a physical notebook or something, but none of their unique squiggles will be included in Unicode and as such will be replaced by ones that are as soon as the people who speak the language get computers and/or smartphones.

Of course, the best solution would be for "hypothetical characters" to be included in Unicode. Unfortunately, that's never going to happen because the list of character sets to be included in Unicode that are actually used by thousands (if not millions) of people keeps growing, as well as historical orthographies and whatnot. Also, font support for shit like Z with cedilla or X with caron or whatever would not be a priority, and even if they were included in Google's Noto fonts or some other big font, most people would still see boxes for years; I mean, some of the big Latin alphabet fonts still don't include Extended-C, let alone anything more recent...
Xonen wrote:
Mon 11 Dec 2017, 18:43
Well, Unicode didn't exactly support <ş> or <ı>, either, at the time the Turkish orthography was being created, but somehow, that didn't stop them from adding those to the orthography.
True... I guess if they had used Z with cedilla, then it would have been included in Unicode when Unicode became a thing, but they didn't.
sangi39 wrote:
Tue 12 Dec 2017, 01:10
Xonen wrote:
Mon 11 Dec 2017, 18:43
Vlürch wrote:
Mon 11 Dec 2017, 13:12
but considering the fact that misspellings and lack of font support for easily typable letters like İ, ı, Öö and Üü have literally gotten people killed
Yikes, what? [:S]
I think Vlürch was referring to this unfortunate incident (and apparently it's not the only time incomplete support of <ı> has caused issues)
Yeah, that's what I meant. I could've sworn there was something similar that happened over <ö> or <ü>, but I couldn't find anything except a bunch of sites reporting on that one over <ı>, so I was probably just having a brain fart or thinking of something with less fatal results.
Xonen wrote:
Mon 11 Dec 2017, 18:43
In any case, yes, I recognize there are plenty of reasons for staying with an orthography once it's established. My problem is with whoever it was who designed this system in the first place. Back then, they could pretty much have gone with anything they wished, and this is what we get?
Yeah, I agree. Except, like I said, I don't really have a problem with <c>; it's not that I'd like it, but there is no /t͡s/ or even /ʕ/ in Turkish to use it for, so it's basically the best option when <j> is used for /ʒ/. They could've gone with something like <ģ>, in which case everyone would be complaining that they didn't use <ķ> for /t͡ʃ/, which in my opinion would look much worse.
Xonen wrote:
Mon 11 Dec 2017, 18:43
No disagreement on this assessment, except maybe that "disgusting" is putting it a bit mildly.
Yeah, it's literally the worst orthography ever... taking cacography to a whole new level. I had no idea something so hideous could even be possible, especially for a language that already has one of the coolest-looking orthographies of all time (and definitely the best when it comes to the Cyrillic alphabet).
Pabappa wrote:
Mon 11 Dec 2017, 22:12
http://www.eurasianet.org/node/86051
The internet agrees with you ..... everybody hates it. The ' just doesn't blend in with the rest of the letters. Apparently ''s shape requires it to have full spacing underneath. If enough people complain they might decide to make the use of the "'" optional.
Well, there's one guy on Unilang who thinks it looks cool...
All4Ɇn wrote:
Tue 12 Dec 2017, 02:01
Oh man I really hope Kazakhstan doesn't actually go through with that orthography. Any word on a website where the people on this site could send them better ones [xD]
Apparently Nazarbayev personally decided that no matter what, it's pushed through. Maybe he has a fetish for apostrophes or something, but I used to think he was the kind of leader more countries could do with, but then he pulls this shit...
Iyionaku wrote:
Tue 12 Dec 2017, 07:57
Vlürch wrote:
Sun 10 Dec 2017, 16:58

Would you like to have some 蕊 ?
HNNNNNGGGG [<3]

I looked it up on Wiktionary, which said "See also: 蘂", which then led me to 橤. All this cool flower shit is cool, and flowers in general are interesting, which is why it makes me feel kinda sad and annoyed that any reference to flowers in English or Finnish is seen as a reference to weed or psychedelic drugs...
Post Reply