Yay or Nay?

A forum for all topics related to constructed languages
User avatar
thaen
roman
roman
Posts: 1080
Joined: 04 Jun 2011 22:01
Location: Plano

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by thaen » 23 Sep 2014 18:07

Is it more naturalistic for tone to change in a direction? I have it changing instantaneously.

HLHLHL > HHLHLL

Because: H is on an edge, so it doesn't change because it isn't bound on both sides. H because the original L is bound by H on both sides. L because the original H was bounded by L in the original pattern. H because the original L was bounded by H on both sides in the original pattern. L because the original H was bounded by L in the original pattern. L because it is on an edge.

And yes, it stops after a step, and doesn't further simplify into HHHLLL.

LHLHLL > LLHLLL
LLHLHL > LLLHLL
HLHLH > HHLHH
LHLHLH > LLHLHH

HLHLHLH > HHLHLHH


I think you are trying to apply the tone changes in a left-to-right or a right-to-left manner; that is to say, in a direction. But as it stands, tone is changed instantly, so there is no need for a direction, I think. And also, the shift only occurs once. That is, it doesn't keep going until it can't any more; it changes once and then it's done.
:con: Nillahimma
:con: Øð!
:con: Coneylang

I am the Great Rabbit. Fear me, O Crabs!
Spoiler:
ı θ ð ʃ ɲ ŋ ʔ ɛ ə ø ʑ ɕ ʷ ʲ ⁿ

User avatar
DesEsseintes
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4601
Joined: 31 Mar 2013 13:16

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by DesEsseintes » 24 Sep 2014 07:10

Should I change the Dánıdoo /l/ phoneme to /r/ which is realised [l] l syllable-finally? Y/N?

User avatar
Thrice Xandvii
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 3722
Joined: 25 Nov 2012 10:13
Location: Carnassus

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Thrice Xandvii » 24 Sep 2014 09:22

I have that same thing occur in Khengallese, so... I vote Yes.
Image

User avatar
eldin raigmore
korean
korean
Posts: 6387
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 19:38
Location: SouthEast Michigan

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by eldin raigmore » 24 Sep 2014 20:43

thaen wrote:Is it more naturalistic for tone to change in a direction?
IMO very much "yes", but my opinion isn't the most important thing.

thaen wrote:(other worthwhile points) ...
If a syllable can only be H or L or HL or LH, and tone-sandhi operates only intra-word, you'll never have to worry about HLHLHLH or LHLHLHL or HLHLHLHL or LHLHLHLH or anything that complicated or more complicated.
HLH > HHH comes up only when:
1. one word ends with a heavy falling-tone syllable and the next word begins with a (light or heavy) high-tone syllable, ( …HL H… > …HH H…)
or
2. one word ends with a (light or heavy) high-tone syllable and the next word begins with a heavy rising-tone syllable ( …H LH… > …H HH…).

LHL > LLL comes up only when:
3. one word ends with a heavy rising-tone syllable and the next word begins with a (light or heavy) low-tone syllable ( …LH L… > …LL L…),
or
4. one word ends with a (light or heavy) low-tone syllable and the next word begins with a heavy falling-tone syllable ( …L HL… > …L LL…).

HLHL > HHLL comes up in only two circumstances:
5. one word ends with, and the next word begins with, a heavy falling-tone syllable (…HL HL… > …HH LL…)
6. there are three words involved; the middle word is a heavy monosyllable with a rising tone, the previous word ends in a high tone (light or heavy) syllable, and the following word begins with a low tone (light or heavy) syllable (…H LH L… > …H HL L…) (to me, this is the most believable, but again, my impression matters only because this is the "yay or nay?" thread).

LHLH > LLHH comes up in only two circumstances:
7. one word ends with, and the next word begins with, a heavy rising-tone syllable (…LH LH… > …LL HH…)
8. there are three words involved; the middle word is a heavy monosyllable with a falling tone, the previous word ends in a low tone (light or heavy) syllable, and the following word begins with a high tone (light or heavy) syllable (…L HL H… > …L LH H…) (to me, this is the most believable, but again, my impression matters only because this is the "yay or nay?" thread).

Five-tone strings, which you hadn't already covered before your last post, could be involved in tone-sandhi if there were three words, the middle one of which is a monosyllable.
HLHLH could arise as:
…H LH LH…
…HL H LH…
…HL HL H…

LHLHL could arise as:
…L HL HL…
…LH L HL…
…LH LH L…


Six-tone strings, which you hadn't already covered before your last post, could be involved in tone-sandhi if there were three words, the middle one of which is a heavy monosyllable with a rising or falling tone.
HLHLHL can only arise as …HL HL HL…
LHLHLH can only arise as …LH LH LH…

You have at most one tone per mora, and no trimoraic syllables, so there are no peak-tone (LHL) or dip-tone (HLH) syllables.
And tones-sandhi is only interword, so the only syllables involved are the word-final and word-initial syllables.
So the only way a syllable could be involved in tone-sandhi with two other syllables, is for it to be the only syllable of its word.

thaen wrote:I think you are trying to apply the tone changes in a left-to-right or a right-to-left manner; that is to say, in a direction. But as it stands, tone is changed instantly,

As I said, I don't find that naturalistic nor realistic. But your own decision is what matters; I would have not continued to defend my opinion except this is the "yay or nay" thread, where conlangers ask other conlangers whether they think some candidate feature of a conlang is a "good" one (where "good" is defined various ways).

thaen wrote:But as it stands, tone is changed instantly, so there is no need for a direction, I think.
I don't think that alone is enough to prevent the need for a direction.

thaen wrote:And also, the shift only occurs once. That is, it doesn't keep going until it can't any more; it changes once and then it's done.
That probably does obviate the need for a direction.



Do you really think
…HL HL H… > …HH LH H…
…H LH LH… > …H HL HH…
…HL H LH… > …HH L HH…
…LH LH L… > …LL HL L…
…L HL HL… > …L LH LL…
…LH L HL… > …LL H LL…
are all realistic and naturalistic? Examine each one individually, not just all of them as a group.
If you decide they are, and/or decide "realism and naturalism" aren't among your top-priority design goals, then do whatever you want. I'll certainly not object.



Do you think maybe monosyllabic words should be protected from changing tone by inter-word tone-sandhi?
One of the example natlangs we referred to earlier has tone-sandhi changing pretty much every syllable except the last; the last syllable's tone is never changed by sandhi. A similar idea applied to a language where tone-sandhi is only inter-word, never intra-word, would mean only word-initial syllables of two-or-more-syllable words ever got their tones changed by sandhi; word-final syllables and monosyllables would never change tone. (Or, only word-final syllables of polysyllabic words get their tones changed by sandhi, and sandhi leaves monosyllables and word-initial syllables unchanged.)

Or, maybe, stressed syllables should be protected from changing tone by inter-word tone-sandhi?
So tone-sandhi depends not only on syllable-weight but on stress?
Even if you make it "primarily-stressed syllables keep their tones", and let secondarily-stressed syllables' tone be "vulnerable" to sandhi, that would still protect monosyllables
Such a rule would cut down a lot on the prevalence of situations I've found ambiguous; because heavy syllables are likely to be (at least secondarily) stressed.
Your inter-word tone-sandhi rules don't take effect unless at least one of the syllables at the word-boundary is heavy.

Then you'd have, for instance,
in situation 1: …HL H… > …HH H… whenever, and only when, the word-final heavy falling-tone syllable is unstressed (and its word isn't a monosyllable).
in situation 2: …H LH… > …H HH… whenever, and only when, the word-iintial heavy rising-tone syllable is unstressed (and its word isn't a monosyllable).
in situation 3: …LH L… > …LL L… whenever, and only when, the word-final heavy rising-tone syllable is unstressed (and its word isn't a monosyllable).
in situation 4: …L HL… > …L LL… whenever, and only when, the word-iintial heavy falling-tone syllable is unstressed (and its word isn't a monosyllable).

in situation 5: …HL HL… > …HH LL… whenever, and only when, both the word-final and the word-initial heavy falling-tone syllables are unstressed, and neither word is a monosyllable.
Otherwise,
5a: …HL HL > …HL LL… whenever the word-final heavy falling-tone syllable is either stressed or is a monosyllabic word, but the word-initial heavy falling-tone syllable is an unstressed syllable and its word isn't a monosyllable.
5b: …HL HL > …HH HL… whenever the word-initial heavy falling-tone syllable is either stressed or is a monosyllabic word, but the word-final heavy falling-tone syllable is an unstressed syllable and its word isn't a monosyllable.
5c: …HL HL > …HL HL… whenever both the word-final and the word-inital heavy falling-tone syllable is either stressed or is a monosyllabic word.

In situation 6: …H LH L… > …H LH L… because a monosyllable's tone is "protected from sandhi".

in situation 7: …HL HL… > …HH LL… whenever, and only when, both the word-final and the word-initial heavy rising-tone syllables are unstressed, and neither word is a monosyllable.
Otherwise,
7a: …LH LH > …LH HH… whenever the word-final heavy rising-tone syllable is either stressed or is a monosyllabic word, but the word-initial heavy rising-tone syllable is an unstressed syllable and its word isn't a monosyllable.
7b: …LH LH > …LL LH… whenever the word-initial heavy rising-tone syllable is either stressed or is a monosyllabic word, but the word-final heavy rising-tone syllable is an unstressed syllable and its word isn't a monosyllable.
7c: …LH LH > …LH LH… whenever both the word-final and the word-inital heavy rising-tone syllable is either stressed or is a monosyllabic word.

In situation 8: …L HL H… > …L HL H… because a monosyllable's tone is "protected from sandhi".

- - - - - - - -

Or, instead or as well, only a stressed syllable could cause the tone of the syllable on the other side of the word-boundary to change tone because of sandhi.
Or you might say "primarily-stressed syllable" instead of just "stressed syllable".

Whether or not you use such a rule as well or instead, you might want to decide differently whether to treat a monosyllabic word as consisting of just a primarily-stressed syllable, or just a secondarily-stressed syllable, or just an unstressed syllable. You might also (or instead) want to decide to treat the only stressed syllable of a two-syllable word as secondarily-stressed instead of primarily-stressed; and/or treat stressed first syllables of two-syllable words one way, while treating stressed last syllables of two-syllable words differently.

In fact, in situations for which stress matters (whether or not you want tone-sandhi to be one of them), you might decide to treat decisions about mono- and bi-syllabic words lexically; some words one way, some another.

One suggestion that strikes me as "realistic and/or naturalistic": Monosyllables are "protected from sandhi" induced by adjacent monosyllables or adjacent unstressed or secondarily-stressed syllables, but not from tone-sandhi induced by adjacent primarily-stressed syllables (of two-or-more-syllable words). One thing that will do is make some clitics "vulnerable to sandhi" while other monosyllables mayn't be.

- - - - - - -

I hope this at least gives you food for thought, even if you don't want to change your system.
As I said, I wouldn't have kept "defending" my taste (I was always taught that "taste" is neither defensible nor does it require defense) except this is the "yay or nay" thread.
Your decision is yours, and you don't even have to give a reason (though it looks like you'd rather do so), and if you do give a reason it doesn't have to be a good one (though it looks like you think it has to at least be "good to you", if not to anybody else.)

Solarius
roman
roman
Posts: 1202
Joined: 30 Aug 2010 01:23

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Solarius » 25 Sep 2014 19:43

Should I add nasalized vowels to my conlang, or tone?
Check out Ussaria!

User avatar
Ahzoh
korean
korean
Posts: 5773
Joined: 20 Oct 2013 02:57
Location: Toma-ʾEzra lit Vṛḵaža

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Ahzoh » 25 Sep 2014 19:47

Solarius wrote:Should I add nasalized vowels to my conlang, or tone?
This gentle reader says tone.
Image Ӯсцьӣ (Onschen) [ CWS ]
Image Šat Wərxažu (Vrkhazhian) [ WIKI | CWS ]

User avatar
loglorn
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1871
Joined: 17 Mar 2014 03:22

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by loglorn » 25 Sep 2014 23:26

Solarius wrote:Should I add nasalized vowels to my conlang, or tone?
I say nasal vowels
Diachronic Conlanging is the path to happiness, given time. [;)]

Gigxkpoyan Languages: CHÍFJAEŚÍ RETLA TLAPTHUV DÄLDLEN CJUŚËKNJU ṢATT

Other langs: Søsøzatli Kamëzet

User avatar
Egerius
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2388
Joined: 12 Sep 2013 21:29
Location: Not Rodentèrra
Contact:

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Egerius » 25 Sep 2014 23:45

loglorn wrote:I say nasal vowels
Me too. [+1]
Languages of Rodentèrra: Buonavallese, Saselvan Argemontese; Wīlandisċ Taulkeisch; More on the road.
Conlang embryo of TELES: Proto-Avesto-Umbric ~> Proto-Umbric
New blog: http://argentiusbonavalensis.tumblr.com

User avatar
DesEsseintes
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4601
Joined: 31 Mar 2013 13:16

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by DesEsseintes » 26 Sep 2014 02:48

Solarius wrote:Should I add nasalized vowels to my conlang, or tone?
Tone.

User avatar
loglorn
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1871
Joined: 17 Mar 2014 03:22

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by loglorn » 26 Sep 2014 03:01

Gosh! You are making it a tie!
Diachronic Conlanging is the path to happiness, given time. [;)]

Gigxkpoyan Languages: CHÍFJAEŚÍ RETLA TLAPTHUV DÄLDLEN CJUŚËKNJU ṢATT

Other langs: Søsøzatli Kamëzet

User avatar
thaen
roman
roman
Posts: 1080
Joined: 04 Jun 2011 22:01
Location: Plano

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by thaen » 26 Sep 2014 03:39

loglorn wrote:Gosh! You are making it a tie!
Why not both? :mrgreen:
Spoiler:
On a more serious note, tone is my vote.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Eldin wrote:...many valuable things that I will take into account in any future conlang that has tone....
Actually, I think that I'm going to implement a more simple pitch-accent system. I chose to do this because I have trouble pronouncing a fully tonal language with any fluidity. But I do thank you for everything that you have told me and asked me; you definitely made me think! I now know how tone sandhi works, which is more than I could say before all of this.
Spoiler:
The primary stressed mora in a word receives a high tone, and tone descends left and right of the high tone. If there are more than three morae on either side of the stressed syllable, the second or penultimate mora (the former if there are 3+ morae to the left, and the latter if there are 3+ morae to the right) and the pattern acts accordingly: rising from right to left, then dropping after, and then rising again to the other high tone.

Examples:

1. ka-pu-so-lej-so-lo-tej with <lej> being the stressed syllable. Starting with <ka>, tone/pitch will rise until it climaxes at <lej>, then it drops from <lej> to <so>, then flatlines for the rest of the word.

Now, there is an extra mora on the left, <le>

2. le-ka-pu-so-lej-so-lo-tej

<lej> still has primary stress, and a high tone, but now <ka> is stressed, too, and also has a high tone. Thus, tone/pitch rises from <le> to <ka>, after which it drops to <pu> and then rises to <lej>, where it falls and flatlines.

Now, there is an extra mora on the left, <su>

3. le-ka-pu-so-lej-so-lo-tej-su

<ka>, <lej>, and <tej> now have stress and high tones. The only difference from Ex. 2 is that the pitch/tone rises (no longer flatlining) after <so> and drops after <tej> to <su>.

Is this plausible/naturalistic?
Last edited by thaen on 26 Sep 2014 03:54, edited 1 time in total.
:con: Nillahimma
:con: Øð!
:con: Coneylang

I am the Great Rabbit. Fear me, O Crabs!
Spoiler:
ı θ ð ʃ ɲ ŋ ʔ ɛ ə ø ʑ ɕ ʷ ʲ ⁿ

User avatar
DesEsseintes
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4601
Joined: 31 Mar 2013 13:16

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by DesEsseintes » 26 Sep 2014 03:40

loglorn wrote:Gosh! You are making it a tie!
I guess Solarius has no choice but to adopt both.

Navajo has both, and I shall never ever stop harping on about Navajo... [}:D]

User avatar
Lao Kou
korean
korean
Posts: 5665
Joined: 25 Nov 2012 10:39
Location: 蘇州/苏州

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Lao Kou » 26 Sep 2014 04:32

DesEsseintes wrote:I guess Solarius has no choice but to adopt both.

Navajo has both, and I shall never ever stop harping on about Navajo... [}:D]
And Taiwanese (Minnan), let's not forget Taiwanese. But I won't harp -- it's not a fave.
道可道,非常道
名可名,非常名

User avatar
eldin raigmore
korean
korean
Posts: 6387
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 19:38
Location: SouthEast Michigan

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by eldin raigmore » 26 Sep 2014 06:53

thaen wrote:
Spoiler:
The primary stressed mora in a word receives a high tone, and tone descends left and right of the high tone. If there are more than three morae on either side of the stressed syllable, the second or penultimate mora (the former if there are 3+ morae to the left, and the latter if there are 3+ morae to the right) and the pattern acts accordingly: rising from right to left, then dropping after, and then rising again to the other high tone.

Examples:

1. ka-pu-so-lej-so-lo-tej with <lej> being the stressed syllable. Starting with <ka>, tone/pitch will rise until it climaxes at <lej>, then it drops from <lej> to <so>, then flatlines for the rest of the word.

Now, there is an extra mora on the left, <le>
2. le-ka-pu-so-lej-so-lo-tej
<lej> still has primary stress, and a high tone, but now <ka> is stressed, too, and also has a high tone. Thus, tone/pitch rises from <le> to <ka>, after which it drops to <pu> and then rises to <lej>, where it falls and flatlines.

Now, there is an extra mora on the left, <su>
3. le-ka-pu-so-lej-so-lo-tej-su
<ka>, <lej>, and <tej> now have stress and high tones. The only difference from Ex. 2 is that the pitch/tone rises (no longer flatlining) after <so> and drops after <tej> to <su>.
Is this plausible/naturalistic?
I think so. Quite so, in fact.


[hr][/hr]

Solarius wrote:Should I add nasalized vowels to my conlang, or tone?
Do you have a reason to have one or the other, instead of neither or both?
Tell us the reason if you have one; odds are no one will have a convincing criticism of it.
OTOH it's pretty easy to criticise "you don't have a reason". Although "I just feel like it, see?" is, to me, a convincing-enough response to such criticism. If there is any.
Last edited by eldin raigmore on 26 Sep 2014 06:59, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
eldin raigmore
korean
korean
Posts: 6387
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 19:38
Location: SouthEast Michigan

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by eldin raigmore » 26 Sep 2014 06:56

Solarius wrote:Should I add nasalized vowels to my conlang, or tone?
Do you have a reason to have one or the other, instead of neither or both?
Tell us the reason if you have one; odds are no one will have a convincing criticism of it.
OTOH it's pretty easy to criticise "you don't have a reason". Although "I just feel like it, see?" is, to me, a convincing-enough response to such criticism. If there is any.

User avatar
DesEsseintes
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4601
Joined: 31 Mar 2013 13:16

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by DesEsseintes » 26 Sep 2014 08:57

Lao Kou wrote:
DesEsseintes wrote:I guess Solarius has no choice but to adopt both.

Navajo has both, and I shall never ever stop harping on about Navajo... [}:D]
And Taiwanese (Minnan), let's not forget Taiwanese. But I won't harp -- it's not a fave.
天不怕,地不怕,只怕台湾人说普通话
Although there are few things I fear more than Taiwanese people speaking Mandarin, I do love the sound of Minnan.
Spoiler:
Navajo Navajo Navajo Navajo Navajo Navajo...

User avatar
Lao Kou
korean
korean
Posts: 5665
Joined: 25 Nov 2012 10:39
Location: 蘇州/苏州

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Lao Kou » 26 Sep 2014 10:14

DesEsseintes wrote:I do love the sound of Minnan.
咩。 Meh.
Spoiler:
Navajo Navajo Navajo Navajo Navajo Navajo...
You got it bad!
道可道,非常道
名可名,非常名

User avatar
Ear of the Sphinx
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1969
Joined: 23 Aug 2010 01:41
Location: Nose of the Sun

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Ear of the Sphinx » 26 Sep 2014 16:56

Is it possible for a stressed vowel to assimilate its position to vowels it is preceded by (in the fashion of an inverse umlaut)?

For example,
/ti ˈbaku/ → [ti ˈbɛku]
/lu ˈbaku/ → [lu ˈbɔku]

(It differs from vowel harmony in that here it's the unstressed vowel influencing the stressed one.)

Are there natlangs where that is the case?
Thrice the brinded cat hath mew'd.

User avatar
DesEsseintes
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4601
Joined: 31 Mar 2013 13:16

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by DesEsseintes » 27 Sep 2014 03:30

I had the idea that Dánıdoo /x/ could have an allophone [ɕ~ʃ] after /i/. I might even have the orthography reflect this as sh. Y/N?

shimobaatar
korean
korean
Posts: 11690
Joined: 12 Jul 2013 23:09
Location: PA → IN

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by shimobaatar » 27 Sep 2014 03:33

DesEsseintes wrote:I had the idea that Dánıdoo /x/ could have an allophone [ɕ~ʃ] after /i/. I might even have the orthography reflect this as sh. Y/N?
Yay, but no change in orthography.

Post Reply