Yay or Nay?

A forum for all topics related to constructed languages
shimobaatar
korean
korean
Posts: 11590
Joined: 12 Jul 2013 23:09
Location: PA → IN

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by shimobaatar » 22 Sep 2018 04:06

I realize I'm quite late responding to this, but in case this question is still relevant to you, I'd recommend having verbs like these become part of the a-conjugation, although I do understand the appeal of uniqueness.

(Post #10200.)

Ælfwine
roman
roman
Posts: 926
Joined: 21 Sep 2015 01:28
Location: New Jersey

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Ælfwine » 25 Sep 2018 15:18

A paragraph from the Wikipedia page on the Principality of Lower Pannonia:
In the summer of 867, Kocel provided short-term hospitality to brothers Cyril and Methodius on their way from Great Moravia to the pope in Rome to justify the use of the Slavic language as a liturgical language. They and their disciples turned Blatnograd into one of the centers that spread the knowledge of the new Slavonic script (Glagolitic alphabet) and literature, educating numerous future missionaries in their native language.
Yay or Nay: Pannonian Slavic will preserve the use of the Glagolitic alphabet in this alternative timeline.
My Blog
Current Projects:
Crimean Gothic — A Gothic language spoken in Crimea (duh)
Pelsodian — A Romance language spoken around Lake Balaton
Jezik Panoski — A Slavic language spoken in the same area
An unnamed Semitic language spoken in the Caucus.

User avatar
Zekoslav
sinic
sinic
Posts: 222
Joined: 07 Oct 2017 16:54

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Zekoslav » 25 Sep 2018 20:52

@ shimo: Thank's for your input, since Proto-Tewanian is undergoing an unexpected revision atm. I'm currently inclined to decide the outcome on a word-to-word basis (simulating messy analogical changes), but having irregularities be concentrated in the a-conjugation is appealing, since it is otherwise the most regular of all conjugations.

@ Ælfwine: I say yay, at least until the invention of printing.
Languages:
:hrv: [:D], :bih: :srb: [;)], :eng: [:D], :fra: [:|], :lat: [:(], :deu: [:'(]

A linguistics enthusiast who would like to make a conlang, but can't decide what to call what.

- Tewanian languages
- Guide to Slavic accentuation

shimobaatar
korean
korean
Posts: 11590
Joined: 12 Jul 2013 23:09
Location: PA → IN

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by shimobaatar » 25 Sep 2018 22:44

Zekoslav wrote:
25 Sep 2018 20:52
@ Ælfwine: I say yay, at least until the invention of printing.
[+1]

Ælfwine
roman
roman
Posts: 926
Joined: 21 Sep 2015 01:28
Location: New Jersey

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Ælfwine » 25 Sep 2018 23:22

I imagine it could still be used for liturgical purposes, hmm?
My Blog
Current Projects:
Crimean Gothic — A Gothic language spoken in Crimea (duh)
Pelsodian — A Romance language spoken around Lake Balaton
Jezik Panoski — A Slavic language spoken in the same area
An unnamed Semitic language spoken in the Caucus.

Birdlang
greek
greek
Posts: 749
Joined: 25 Dec 2014 20:17
Location: Virginia

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Birdlang » 30 Sep 2018 20:14

Ælfwine wrote:
25 Sep 2018 23:22
I imagine it could still be used for liturgical purposes, hmm?
Yes, that would work great!
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
All4Ɇn
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1819
Joined: 01 Mar 2014 07:19

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by All4Ɇn » 02 Oct 2018 00:26

I'm not sure if this the right place to mention it but I've been working on a sort of conlanging exercise. It's a Germanic language similar to Dutch and Low German which has technically removed cases from its grammar, but one that uses fossilized case usages so frequently that it's still practically a necessity to learn cases in order to properly speak the language. I was wondering if anyone would be curious in seeing a thread about this. [:)]

shimobaatar
korean
korean
Posts: 11590
Joined: 12 Jul 2013 23:09
Location: PA → IN

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by shimobaatar » 02 Oct 2018 00:59

All4Ɇn wrote:
02 Oct 2018 00:26
I'm not sure if this the right place to mention it but I've been working on a sort of conlanging exercise. It's a Germanic language similar to Dutch and Low German which has technically removed cases from its grammar, but one that uses fossilized case usages so frequently that it's still practically a necessity to learn cases in order to properly speak the language. I was wondering if anyone would be curious in seeing a thread about this. [:)]
Yes, absolutely!

Nachtuil
greek
greek
Posts: 489
Joined: 21 Jul 2016 00:16

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Nachtuil » 04 Oct 2018 19:32

All4Ɇn wrote:
02 Oct 2018 00:26
I'm not sure if this the right place to mention it but I've been working on a sort of conlanging exercise. It's a Germanic language similar to Dutch and Low German which has technically removed cases from its grammar, but one that uses fossilized case usages so frequently that it's still practically a necessity to learn cases in order to properly speak the language. I was wondering if anyone would be curious in seeing a thread about this. [:)]
Seems interesting potentially. I quite like low Germanic languages myself generally. I find it hard to conceptualise a situation where case remains fully understood but only exists in fossilised set phrases but knowledge of it is necessary to speak it properly though at the same time not necessary. Could it be that you have a prestige dialect that retains the use of case and it is more optional or diminished in common usage? I like the idea of a transitional state from case to non-case and again, I am enthusiastic about low Germanic languages generally. I would be interested in what you do with it for sure.

tseren
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 6
Joined: 12 Dec 2016 20:19

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by tseren » 08 Oct 2018 19:37

Since pː → pʰ is attested, how likely is the opposite pʰ → pː in an intervocalic environment? Both [pʰ] and [pː] could be viewed as fortis realizations of [p]. Yea or Nay on making them interchangeable intervocalically such that:

p pʰ → f p \ V_V

User avatar
WeepingElf
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 193
Joined: 23 Feb 2016 18:42
Location: Braunschweig, Germany
Contact:

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by WeepingElf » 08 Oct 2018 20:33

tseren wrote:
08 Oct 2018 19:37
Since pː → pʰ is attested, how likely is the opposite pʰ → pː in an intervocalic environment? Both [pʰ] and [pː] could be viewed as fortis realizations of [p]. Yea or Nay on making them interchangeable intervocalically such that:

p pʰ → f p \ V_V
I'd say nay: [pʰ] is more likely to become [f] than [p]. The change you are asking about seems like leap-frogging to me.
... brought to you by the Weeping Elf

User avatar
Lambuzhao
korean
korean
Posts: 7781
Joined: 13 May 2012 02:57

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Lambuzhao » 09 Oct 2018 03:35

I bet someone already mentioned this, but anyway:

What happens when an aspect is argued without sufficient sway?
If it's neither 'yay' nor 'nay', does that make it 'gray' ?
:wat:

shimobaatar
korean
korean
Posts: 11590
Joined: 12 Jul 2013 23:09
Location: PA → IN

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by shimobaatar » 09 Oct 2018 13:38

Lambuzhao wrote:
09 Oct 2018 03:35
What happens when an aspect is argued without sufficient sway?
If it's neither 'yay' nor 'nay', does that make it 'gray' ?
Sorry, but I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to ask. Could you perhaps clarify?

User avatar
gach
MVP
MVP
Posts: 702
Joined: 07 Aug 2013 01:26
Location: displaced from Helsinki

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by gach » 09 Oct 2018 14:12

tseren wrote:
08 Oct 2018 19:37
Since pː → pʰ is attested, how likely is the opposite pʰ → pː in an intervocalic environment? Both [pʰ] and [pː] could be viewed as fortis realizations of [p]. Yea or Nay on making them interchangeable intervocalically such that:

p pʰ → f p \ V_V
Maybe, though I'd like to see real world examples of Cʰ > C: to be truly happy with the justification. My preferred development path would still be along the lines of

p > b > β > f
pʰ > p
ImageKištaLkal sikSeic

User avatar
spanick
roman
roman
Posts: 1024
Joined: 11 May 2017 01:47
Location: California

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by spanick » 10 Oct 2018 20:02

Option 4 but maybe have one of the classes be quite rare compared to the others.

felipesnark
sinic
sinic
Posts: 392
Joined: 27 Jan 2013 02:12
Contact:

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by felipesnark » 16 Oct 2018 23:44

I'm working on Denkurian's nominal declension system, and I think I am mostly satisfied with where I've ended up, except I'm not too sure about what I have for the genitive plural. I am using the example noun razh man, since it is a consonant stem:

Code: Select all

	sg.	pl.
nom.	razh	razhen
acc.	razhes	razhis
gen.	razhek	razhenek
dat.	razhev	razhiv
inst.	razhed	razhidi
In this set, the genitive plural ending is -(e)nek, which is basically the nominative accusative plural plus the genitive ending, instead of the normal oblique plural marker -i.

I was considering the following genitive plural markers:
  1. -(e)nek, as above
  2. -(e)kel, using an old collective affix -el
  3. -(e)ken, reversing the order of the case and plural suffix
  4. -inek, using both the oblique and nominative plural, plus the genitive ending
  5. Some other combination/order of the genitive affix -(e)k, the oblique plural -i, the nominative plural -(e)n, and the old collective affix -el
Thoughts? Suggestions? Thanks in advance!
Visit my website for my blogs and information on my conlangs including Shonkasika: http://felipesnark.weebly.com/ It's a work in progress!

Ælfwine
roman
roman
Posts: 926
Joined: 21 Sep 2015 01:28
Location: New Jersey

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Ælfwine » 17 Oct 2018 00:10

Honestly, having -ik as the plural in analogy with the dative and accusative might suffice, unless you are going for something totally regular and agglutinative.
My Blog
Current Projects:
Crimean Gothic — A Gothic language spoken in Crimea (duh)
Pelsodian — A Romance language spoken around Lake Balaton
Jezik Panoski — A Slavic language spoken in the same area
An unnamed Semitic language spoken in the Caucus.

felipesnark
sinic
sinic
Posts: 392
Joined: 27 Jan 2013 02:12
Contact:

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by felipesnark » 17 Oct 2018 00:44

Ælfwine wrote:
17 Oct 2018 00:10
Honestly, having -ik as the plural in analogy with the dative and accusative might suffice, unless you are going for something totally regular and agglutinative.
I thought about that as well; I guess I saw the -ik option as appearing even more regular and agglutinative.
Visit my website for my blogs and information on my conlangs including Shonkasika: http://felipesnark.weebly.com/ It's a work in progress!

User avatar
spanick
roman
roman
Posts: 1024
Joined: 11 May 2017 01:47
Location: California

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by spanick » 17 Oct 2018 02:27

I like 1 and 4.

User avatar
Omzinesý
runic
runic
Posts: 2665
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 08:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Omzinesý » 17 Oct 2018 15:17

felipesnark wrote:
16 Oct 2018 23:44
I'm working on Denkurian's nominal declension system, and I think I am mostly satisfied with where I've ended up, except I'm not too sure about what I have for the genitive plural. I am using the example noun razh man, since it is a consonant stem:

Code: Select all

	sg.	pl.
nom.	razh	razhen
acc.	razhes	razhis
gen.	razhek	razhenek
dat.	razhev	razhiv
inst.	razhed	razhidi
In this set, the genitive plural ending is -(e)nek, which is basically the nominative accusative plural plus the genitive ending, instead of the normal oblique plural marker -i.

I was considering the following genitive plural markers:
  1. -(e)nek, as above
  2. -(e)kel, using an old collective affix -el
  3. -(e)ken, reversing the order of the case and plural suffix
  4. -inek, using both the oblique and nominative plural, plus the genitive ending
  5. Some other combination/order of the genitive affix -(e)k, the oblique plural -i, the nominative plural -(e)n, and the old collective affix -el
Thoughts? Suggestions? Thanks in advance!
It seems to be plural genitives that are most varied in languages. Finnish has enkeli-en, enkele-iden, enkele-itten, enkel-ten (and enkele-in) all meaning ' angels' ' Russian plural genitives are also famously difficult.

Post Reply