Yay or Nay?

A forum for all topics related to constructed languages
User avatar
Creyeditor
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4493
Joined: 14 Aug 2012 18:32

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Creyeditor » 05 Sep 2017 20:58

Interesting idea, definitely a yay. Is there a certain preposition that you would use?
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]

Ælfwine
greek
greek
Posts: 809
Joined: 21 Sep 2015 00:28
Location: New Jersey

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Ælfwine » 05 Sep 2017 23:32

Creyeditor wrote:Interesting idea, definitely a yay. Is there a certain preposition that you would use?
Not entirely sure. Some interesting prepositions would be
cantrar, from contrá
entrar, from intrá (also its similar to entrar[e], "to get in")
juftar, from juxtá

etc.

New yes/no question:

Pannonian pretonic vowels are deleted.

coāctus -> caftu
sapere -> speri
credentia -> cřdentsja

I don't know any romance languages that delete pretonic vowels wholesale, but I thought it would be an interesting way to get some new consonant clusters (including syllabic r/l).
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
loglorn
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2026
Joined: 17 Mar 2014 03:22

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by loglorn » 08 Sep 2017 02:36

Ælfwine wrote:
Creyeditor wrote:Interesting idea, definitely a yay. Is there a certain preposition that you would use?
Not entirely sure. Some interesting prepositions would be
cantrar, from contrá
entrar, from intrá (also its similar to entrar[e], "to get in")
juftar, from juxtá

etc.

New yes/no question:

Pannonian pretonic vowels are deleted.

coāctus -> caftu
sapere -> speri
credentia -> cřdentsja

I don't know any romance languages that delete pretonic vowels wholesale, but I thought it would be an interesting way to get some new consonant clusters (including syllabic r/l).
One could argue that pretonic vowels are deleted wholesale for some speakers of European Portuguese. So you're not that far off.
Diachronic Conlanging is the path to happiness, given time. [;)]

Gigxkpoyan Languages: CHÍFJAEŚÍ RETLA TLAPTHUV DÄLDLEN CJUŚËKNJU ṢATT

Other langs: Søsøzatli Kamëzet

User avatar
DesEsseintes
cleardarkness
cleardarkness
Posts: 4652
Joined: 31 Mar 2013 12:16

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by DesEsseintes » 08 Sep 2017 17:09

Huh.

Something weird came up.

Híí has a process whereby the diphthong becomes weı when following another vowel, like so:
e + oı → eweı
ı + oı → ıweı
o + oı → oweı

And here I was happily encoding this in SCA2 when the rule just refused to work whenever the preceding vowel is o.

The relevant rules go:
oi/wei/U_
óí/wéí/U_
öi/wëi/U_

And yet SCA2 gives me:
ón’ooımo → ón’ooımo

I even added a rule:
oi/wei/o_

Still no luck. (And yes I have a rewrite rule to make sure my unjotted i's don't mess with the code and besides the rules work fine when the preceding vowel is either of e i/ı.)

And then I realised ón’ooımo is pretty pretty.

tl;dr

Should I allow ooı as the only Híí diphthong with a long first component as the o-counterpart to eweı ıweı?

And if you're dying to, please tell me why my code isn't working.

User avatar
Creyeditor
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4493
Joined: 14 Aug 2012 18:32

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Creyeditor » 08 Sep 2017 17:19

It works for me, if I use undotted i's in the input of the rule, like so

U=o
oı/wei/U_
óı/wéí/U_
öı/wëi/U_
ón’ooımo → ón’oweimo


I still have to say that ón’ooımo looks more beautiful to me than ón’oweimo.
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: 3119
Joined: 14 May 2016 17:47
Location: The North

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Frislander » 08 Sep 2017 22:41

DesEsseintes wrote:The relevant rules go:
oi/wei/U_
óí/wéí/U_
öi/wëi/U_
How about you move the i's from the input/output to the environment, like so:

o/we/U_i
ó/wé/U_í
ö/wë/U_i

Will it work then?

User avatar
DesEsseintes
cleardarkness
cleardarkness
Posts: 4652
Joined: 31 Mar 2013 12:16

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by DesEsseintes » 09 Sep 2017 04:40

Frislander wrote:
DesEsseintes wrote:The relevant rules go:
oi/wei/U_
óí/wéí/U_
öi/wëi/U_
How about you move the i's from the input/output to the environment, like so:

o/we/U_i
ó/wé/U_í
ö/wë/U_i

Will it work then?
Nope.

Regardless of how I rearrange and rephrase the rules, I cannot get two unaccented o's to work. Every other combination works:

U=eioéíóèìòēīōêîôëïö
o/we/U_i (← just for good measure)
oi/wei/U_
óí/wéí/U_
öi/wëi/U_

Rewrite rule: ı|i

ón’oóímo → ón’owéímo
ón’ıoımo → ón’ıweımo
on’oȯimo → on’owėimo
on’óoımo → on’óweımo
onıoımo → onıweımo
oneoımo → oneweımo
ón’ooımo → ón’ooımo

I think the gods of conlanging are telling me to go with the new ooı diphthong, and I'd still be interested in yays and nays on that.
Edit: I'm an idiot. The reason why the rule doesn't work is because my code recognises the two o's as a long vowel and rewrites them as ō before it gets to this part of the code. Mystery solved.

User avatar
cedh
metal
metal
Posts: 370
Joined: 07 Sep 2011 21:25
Location: Tübingen, Germany
Contact:

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by cedh » 09 Sep 2017 07:23

DesEsseintes wrote:I think the gods of conlanging are telling me to go with the new ooı diphthong, and I'd still be interested in yays and nays on that.
Yay.

User avatar
Thrice Xandvii
darkness
darkness
Posts: 3829
Joined: 25 Nov 2012 10:13
Location: Carnassus

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Thrice Xandvii » 09 Sep 2017 09:07

DesEsseintes wrote:
Edit: I'm an idiot. The reason why the rule doesn't work is because my code recognises the two o's as a long vowel and rewrites them as ō before it gets to this part of the code. Mystery solved.
While I'm glad you solved your issue, I do so hate when a problem is entirely of your own making and somehow you just can't find it!
Image

Ælfwine
greek
greek
Posts: 809
Joined: 21 Sep 2015 00:28
Location: New Jersey

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Ælfwine » 11 Sep 2017 00:36

loglorn wrote:
Ælfwine wrote:
Creyeditor wrote:Interesting idea, definitely a yay. Is there a certain preposition that you would use?
Not entirely sure. Some interesting prepositions would be
cantrar, from contrá
entrar, from intrá (also its similar to entrar[e], "to get in")
juftar, from juxtá

etc.

New yes/no question:

Pannonian pretonic vowels are deleted.

coāctus -> caftu
sapere -> speri
credentia -> cřdentsja

I don't know any romance languages that delete pretonic vowels wholesale, but I thought it would be an interesting way to get some new consonant clusters (including syllabic r/l).
One could argue that pretonic vowels are deleted wholesale for some speakers of European Portuguese. So you're not that far off.
Hmm, can we find any sources on this? I'm definitely interested.

Another cool thing is that there would be some interesting alternations in the grammar depending on the stress, mostly it seems in verbal conjugations. So some words would syncope the pretonic vowel if stress is penultimate, except initially where the post-tonic vowel is syncoped. So to use my "sapere" example, I could have "spere" in one conjugation but "sabre" in another.
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

shimobaatar
darkness
darkness
Posts: 10931
Joined: 12 Jul 2013 22:09
Location: PA → IN

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by shimobaatar » 11 Sep 2017 02:31

Ælfwine wrote: Hmm, can we find any sources on this? I'm definitely interested.
I think loglorn is a native speaker of (Brazilian) Portuguese. I don't know if that's enough of a source.

Iyionaku
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1624
Joined: 25 May 2014 13:17

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Iyionaku » 11 Sep 2017 10:23

I am thinking of adding a system of evidentiality to Yélian, which would fit neatly by means of verbal participles as prefixes (I've always considered Yélian classifiers as an open class, so structurally it will fit and even be plausible to raise naturally).

Ta tem yiolket. - She killed him.
Ta tem yirîyatsolket. - I heard that she killed him / From hearsay it is known that she killed him. [From rîya - to hear]
Ta tem yivalatsolket. - I saw that she killed him / Obviously, she killed him. [From vala - to see]

And maybe a few more.

What speaks against it is that this will add an additional category to Yélian verbs (that can already be very long) and hence will make speaking even more complicated without fixing something that couldn't be said before. Plus, it will make it hard to distinguish from formally identical constructions that would mean "She killed him audibly"; "She killed him visibly" etc.

Jay or nay?
Wipe the glass. This is the usual way to start, even in the days, day and night, only a happy one.

User avatar
loglorn
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2026
Joined: 17 Mar 2014 03:22

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by loglorn » 12 Sep 2017 02:39

shimobaatar wrote:
Ælfwine wrote: Hmm, can we find any sources on this? I'm definitely interested.
I think loglorn is a native speaker of (Brazilian) Portuguese. I don't know if that's enough of a source.
I am indeed native Brazilian Portuguese but i do have contact with European Portuguese speakers. According to the wikipedia article on Portuguese phonology, which is pretty much in line with what i notice, EP only has the three unstressed vowels /ɐ, ɨ, u/, and they are, in wikipedia's words, "often voiceless or elided in fast speech". It approaches your processes and, in extreme cases it can be said to produce the paradigm alternations you seek: [s̩ˈbeɾ] saber vs. [sɐbˈɾa] saberá.

Sadly wikipedia doesn't point to further sources as for that particular process.
Diachronic Conlanging is the path to happiness, given time. [;)]

Gigxkpoyan Languages: CHÍFJAEŚÍ RETLA TLAPTHUV DÄLDLEN CJUŚËKNJU ṢATT

Other langs: Søsøzatli Kamëzet

Ashtăr Balynestjăr
sinic
sinic
Posts: 202
Joined: 18 Jan 2017 07:17

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Ashtăr Balynestjăr » 12 Sep 2017 08:14

There’s a description of European Portuguese phonetics here, but I‘m not sure how reliable the site is.
[ˈaʃt̪əɹ ˈbalɨˌnɛsʲtʲəɹ]

User avatar
loglorn
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2026
Joined: 17 Mar 2014 03:22

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by loglorn » 12 Sep 2017 10:43

Ashtăr Balynestjăr wrote:There’s a description of European Portuguese phonetics here, but I‘m not sure how reliable the site is.
Don't think I'd ever opened a site so old on mobile. Of the ancient layout and xsampa usage do not elude me, it mentions voiceless vowels, but argues they're never actually deleted, but very often unvoiced. IMO there is deletion, especially of pretonic vowels.
Diachronic Conlanging is the path to happiness, given time. [;)]

Gigxkpoyan Languages: CHÍFJAEŚÍ RETLA TLAPTHUV DÄLDLEN CJUŚËKNJU ṢATT

Other langs: Søsøzatli Kamëzet

User avatar
esoanem
hieroglyphic
hieroglyphic
Posts: 64
Joined: 05 Sep 2017 13:03
Location: Cambridge, UK
Contact:

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by esoanem » 12 Sep 2017 14:46

One idea I've had for a while for one of my conlangs is to give each verb two tenses, one fixing the start of the action (the initial tense) and one fixing the end of the action (the terminal tense). Together with more than one degree of past and future, this would give plenty of opportunity for varying degrees of perfectivity to be expressed.

More concretely, the idea was to have the initial tense as a prefix and the terminal tense as a suffix, with the tenses being distant past, past, near past, (present), near future, future, distant future (I'm tempted to merge the present into either the near past or near future as a near non-future or near non-past respectively to make it a bit less unwieldy) which would give the following tense combinations (with an approximate tense-aspect combination in brackets):

DPAST-be-DPAST (distant past perfective)
DPAST-be-PAST (non-near past imperfective)
DPAST-be-NPAST (past imperfective)
DPAST-be-PRES (non-future imperfective)
DPAST-be-NFUT (present imperfective)
DPAST-be-FUT (present imperfective)
DPAST-be-DFUT (gnomic)

PAST-be-PAST (past perfective)
PAST-be-NPAST (non-distant past imperfective)
PAST-be-PRES (past imperfective)
PAST-be-NFUT (present imperfective)
PAST-be-FUT (present imperfective)
PAST-be-DFUT (present imperfective)

NPAST-be-NPAST (near past perfective)
NPAST-be-PRES (near past imperfective)
NPAST-be-NFUT (present imperfective)
NPAST-be-FUT (present imperfective)
NPAST-be-DFUT (present imperfective)

PRES-be-PRES (present perfective)
PRES-be-NFUT (present imperfective)
PRES-be-FUT (present imperfective)
PRES-be-DFUT (present imperfective)

NFUT-be-NFUT (near future perfective)
NFUT-be-FUT (non-distant future imperfective)
NFUT-be-DFUT (future imperfective)

FUT-be-FUT (future perfective)
FUT-be-DFUT (non-near future imperfective)

DFUT-be-DFUT (distant future perfective)

Obviously, unless we allow for time travel, the other combinations wouldn't make much sense (unless they were to be interpreted as negative forms?).

Does this seem reasonable or interesting?
My pronouns are they/them/their

:gbr: native | :esp: advanced | :deu: intermediate | :fra: intermediate | :rus: basic | :ell: lapsed | :navi: lapsed | :con: making a bunch

shimobaatar
darkness
darkness
Posts: 10931
Joined: 12 Jul 2013 22:09
Location: PA → IN

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by shimobaatar » 12 Sep 2017 15:22

loglorn wrote:
shimobaatar wrote:
Ælfwine wrote: Hmm, can we find any sources on this? I'm definitely interested.
I think loglorn is a native speaker of (Brazilian) Portuguese. I don't know if that's enough of a source.
I am indeed native Brazilian Portuguese but i do have contact with European Portuguese speakers.
Yeah, that's what I meant. I didn't mean to imply that just because you were Brazilian that you didn't know about European Portuguese.

User avatar
Frislander
runic
runic
Posts: 3119
Joined: 14 May 2016 17:47
Location: The North

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Frislander » 12 Sep 2017 16:11

esoanem wrote:One idea I've had for a while for one of my conlangs is to give each verb two tenses, one fixing the start of the action (the initial tense) and one fixing the end of the action (the terminal tense). Together with more than one degree of past and future, this would give plenty of opportunity for varying degrees of perfectivity to be expressed.
Spoiler:
More concretely, the idea was to have the initial tense as a prefix and the terminal tense as a suffix, with the tenses being distant past, past, near past, (present), near future, future, distant future (I'm tempted to merge the present into either the near past or near future as a near non-future or near non-past respectively to make it a bit less unwieldy) which would give the following tense combinations (with an approximate tense-aspect combination in brackets):

DPAST-be-DPAST (distant past perfective)
DPAST-be-PAST (non-near past imperfective)
DPAST-be-NPAST (past imperfective)
DPAST-be-PRES (non-future imperfective)
DPAST-be-NFUT (present imperfective)
DPAST-be-FUT (present imperfective)
DPAST-be-DFUT (gnomic)

PAST-be-PAST (past perfective)
PAST-be-NPAST (non-distant past imperfective)
PAST-be-PRES (past imperfective)
PAST-be-NFUT (present imperfective)
PAST-be-FUT (present imperfective)
PAST-be-DFUT (present imperfective)

NPAST-be-NPAST (near past perfective)
NPAST-be-PRES (near past imperfective)
NPAST-be-NFUT (present imperfective)
NPAST-be-FUT (present imperfective)
NPAST-be-DFUT (present imperfective)

PRES-be-PRES (present perfective)
PRES-be-NFUT (present imperfective)
PRES-be-FUT (present imperfective)
PRES-be-DFUT (present imperfective)

NFUT-be-NFUT (near future perfective)
NFUT-be-FUT (non-distant future imperfective)
NFUT-be-DFUT (future imperfective)

FUT-be-FUT (future perfective)
FUT-be-DFUT (non-near future imperfective)

DFUT-be-DFUT (distant future perfective)

Obviously, unless we allow for time travel, the other combinations wouldn't make much sense (unless they were to be interpreted as negative forms?).
Does this seem reasonable or interesting?
Yay. In fact why not go for the time-travelling angle and make it the language of a race of inter-dimensional beings/time-lords?

I wouldn't use the other forms as negatives though because then you can't properly negate a perfective.

User avatar
LinguoFranco
sinic
sinic
Posts: 396
Joined: 20 Jul 2016 16:49

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by LinguoFranco » 12 Sep 2017 19:21

I have an idea for a language that uses suffixes for inflections and prefixes for derivational morphology. One issue that I am having so far is that it can get hysterically redundant. For example, "vuti" means to eat. and "vivuti" means "food" because the prefix "vi-" makes a verb into a noun. So "I eat food is "Uka vuti vivuti." Of course, you'd normally just say "I eat."

User avatar
eldin raigmore
fire
fire
Posts: 6235
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 18:38
Location: SouthEast Michigan

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by eldin raigmore » 12 Sep 2017 21:30

LinguoFranco wrote:I have an idea for a language that uses suffixes for inflections and prefixes for derivational morphology. One issue that I am having so far is that it can get hysterically redundant. For example, "vuti" means to eat. and "vivuti" means "food" because the prefix "vi-" makes a verb into a noun. So "I eat food is "Uka vuti vivuti." Of course, you'd normally just say "I eat."
Well, that would make it like trying to alliterate in Swahili, or trying to rhyme in Latin. In other words; not difficult.
I'm not sure the redundancy is a bug instead of a feature. An L1-speaker's tolerance-setting for "hysterically" might be a good deal less strict than yours.
My advice (to the degree that I can even actually give advice) would be to go for it if you want to.
Trying to avoid saying the same thing the same way too many times in a shortish utterance is something speakers of languages with lots of synonyms -- i.e. English -- can (and some do) have as a goal.
It might be a worthwhile experience for you to develop this conlang along the lines it's already taking.
--------
But of course, the only real advice is "do what you want as long as it fits your design goals; and your design goals are whatever you say they are".

Post Reply