PRS: àmat > àmana
IPF: amàvat > amàvana
PST: amèrot > amèrona
FUT: amaront (no change)
CND: amarèrot > amarèrona
PRS_SBJV: ámit > ámina
IPF_SBJV: amàssiat > amàssiana
Some nouns that experience these changes (in a different way) are:
gzonr /ˈdʑõː(ɾ)/ - day
fonr /ˈfõː(ɾ)/ - oven
ivenri /ɪˈvãːɾɪ/ - winter
czanra /ˈtɕõːɾa/ - flesh
Just one thing: The language used to have geminate nasals, laterals and rhotics. But it didn't have geminate stops or fricatives. All of the languages that I can think of that have gemination allow it on voiceless stops at least.
In any case, I didn't know voiceless stops were most likely to have a length contrast.
EDIT: Removing smiley that had an unexpected growth spurt
Cool! It's especially interesting to me how what was formerly <t> (unpronounced word-finally, if I remember correctly) now becomes <n> in the cases you've described above.Dormouse559 wrote:I've been adjusting sound changes a little. It involves epenthesis and shifting nasalization. The biggest change so far is that third-person plural endings go from -at/-ot/-it to -ana/-ona/-ina. 3PL forms ending in -ont remain the same. Below is amâ (to love) followed by its old and new 3PL forms:
Some nouns that experience these changes (in a different way) are:Spoiler:
I didn't know that either. Especially given your explanation, though, I think you should be fine.Dormouse559 wrote:It still does have a geminate lateral. (Yay! Even weirder) But I was thinking that this part of Silvish phonology has been slowly balancing itself over centuries. Silvish used to have geminate stops and fricatives, but at that time it was called Latin. When most of the Latin geminate consonants shortened, the variety that gave rise to Silvish didn't shorten sonorants. The length contrast on nasals and the rhotic disappeared eventually, leaving just the long lateral. In the (in-world) future, that will also be lost.
In any case, I didn't know voiceless stops were most likely to have a length contrast.Spoiler:
Mostly correct, but technically, <t> doesn't become <n>. They both come from the Latin 3PL ending <nt>. But I've added a sound change that causes the <n> to be preserved instead of the <t>.shimobaatar wrote:Cool! It's especially interesting to me how what was formerly <t> (unpronounced word-finally, if I remember correctly) now becomes <n> in the cases you've described above.
I hope so. It's not unheard of, at least, for one part of a phonology to change faster or slower than another (see: English vowels, English consonants).shimobaatar wrote:I didn't know that either. Especially given your explanation, though, I think you should be fine.
That's just what I was going for, too.Prinsessa wrote:Feels similar to both French and Italian in different ways. Quite interesting, unlike many romlangs.
That's interesting! And yeah, I just meant that orthographically, <t> in the previous forms seemed to generally correspond to <n> in the current ones, but thank you for the explanation!Dormouse559 wrote:Mostly correct, but technically, <t> doesn't become <n>. They both come from the Latin 3PL ending <nt>. But I've added a sound change that causes the <n> to be preserved instead of the <t>.
1) Latin /k/ becomes /ɕ/ before front vowels and is spelled <c(z)>. Later, /k/ becomes /tɕ/ before /a/ and is spelled <tc(z)>.
2) The length distinction in /l/ has been lost by the in-world present. /l/ vocalizes to /o̯/ word-finally and before consonants, including /l/.
3) Historically, in a stressed falling diphthong whose nucleus is neither /i/ nor /u/, the nucleus becomes /a/. As nuclei, /i/ and /u/ become semivowels and the old offglide becomes the nucleus. Changes 2) and 3) mean that Latin bellum becomes modern baul /baːo̯/. Ciul, once pronounced /ɕiwl/, becomes /ɕjul/ (modern /ɕoː/).
In unstressed syllables, monophthongization occurs. If the nucleus isn't /a/, it is deleted and the offglide becomes the nucleus (/vejˈtuɾa/ -> /viˈtuɾa/). The diphthongs /aj aw/ become /e o/ (modern /ə ɔ/).
A word affected by all three of these changes is the reflex of Latin castellum - tcetaul /tɕəˈtaːo̯/. 1) The original Latin /k/ becomes /tɕ/ before /a/. 2) /l/ vocalization causes the final diphthong to become /ɛw/. 3) /ɛw/ changes to /aw/ (later /aːo̯/). The first syllable's nucleus, which had become /aj/, simplifies to /e/ (later /ə/).
La Diclarassiun universela dis dritis de l'uonm
Tods us étres umáns náczona libres ed ebáus en dintedi ed en dritis. Éssis sont doráds de regzuni e de conciénci e sor tregs c'agìtciana us uns enverz lis áutris ava ni spriti de fralecia.
[la dɪ.kla.ɾaˈse̯õː.ŋ‿ʊ.nɪ.vəˈsɛː.la dɪ ˈdɾe.tɪ də lõː]
[ˈtɔ.z‿ʊˈz‿e.tɾə.z‿ʊˈmõː ˈnɛ.ɕɔ.na ˈleːbɾə.z‿ɛ.ɾ‿əˈbɛːo̯ ã dẽˈtɛː.ɾɪ̯‿ɛ.ɾ‿ã ˈdɾe.tɪ | ˈe.sɪ ˈsõ dɔˈɾɛː də rəˈʑoː.nɪ̯‿ɛ də kõˈɕɪ̯ẽ.ɕɪ ɛ sɔ ˈtɾɛː kaˈʑe.tɕa.na ʊˈz‿õ ãˈvɛɾ.s‿lɪˈz‿ɛo̯.tɾɪ ˈaː.va nɪ ˈspɾe.tɪ də fɾaˈlɛ.ɕa]
1) declarassión -> diclarassiun. I've decided that the Latin prefixes de- and re- become di- and ri- in Silvish, based on analogy with di-, the reflex of dis-. Also by analogy, before vowels, they take an epenthetic /z/ <s>. So "to dress" is abiglâ and "to dress again" is risabiglâ.
2) declarassión -> diclarassiun. When I changed the third-person plural conjugations, it no longer made sense to have final <n> indicate penultimate stress (instead of final stress like most consonant letters), partially obviating <ó>. And in any case, <un> always represents the same phonemes as <ón>. These two facts, and a desire to replace acute-accented letters with unaccented equivalents where possible, led to the new spelling.
3) uom -> uonm. Silvish gets a spelling as shockingly unnecessary as French <hauts> /o/! <uonm> is pronounced /õː/. Like in French, though, the spelling is only unnecessary on the surface; it provides clues to the noun's irregular oblique form - <uónmi> /o̯õːme/, which is actually the shortest spelling possible according to Silvish orthography rules.
4) universel, sprit -> universela, spriti. I've decided that second- and third-declension nouns have merged. I'm still working out the details, but it means that all old second-declension nouns, like sprit, get a distinct singular oblique form. This has potentially far-reaching implications for gender assignment, because the gender of a noun in this new second declension can't be guessed from its form or meaning. This merger is mirrored in adjectives, which gain the distinct singular oblique in the masculine. Adjectives like universau, which previously weren't marked for gender, get feminine forms.
Code: Select all
"finau" final M NOM OBL SG finau fineli PL fináus finélis F NOM OBL SG finela finél PL finelas finélis
- /tɕ/ is now represented by <ch>. While there is a general pattern to whether <ch> means /k/ or /tɕ/, exceptions aren't hard to find. Non-standard orthographies might play around with <chz> to specify /tɕ/ where there is ambiguity.
- /ʎ/ is a phoneme (again) and is regularly represented by <gl> (again). I settled on sound changes that could get me some interesting irregularity while maintaining some familiar word shapes, and that partly involved bringing back /ʎ/.
- The RE verbs are more Catalan/Occitan, with several of them dropping the /d/ in their infinitives and adding a velar infix. For example, préndre has the forms prenons and préngona.
- I added sections on irregular nouns and adjectives, and added the conjugation of poê "to be able to".
I think my next project will be to finalize the subjunctive.
7.2 Subjunctive Mood
The subjunctive is one of the most distinctive aspects of Silvish grammar. Basic aspects of its distribution may be familiar to French speakers, but with the change in meaning of its "tenses", the Silvish subjunctive has expanded and shifted into new territory. Broadly, it communicates how likely an event is considered and/or whether the event happened.
7.2.1 Subjunctive Subjects
Subjunctive clauses are among the few places where Silvish is pro-drop. If the triggering phrase is verbal, the subjunctive verb takes no subject pronoun. Rather, the subject is expressed as an indirect object of the triggering verb.
Gzo vúghi a Marî ca fessa queli.
1SG.NOM want.1SG to Marïa[OBL] SBRD_CNJ do-SBJV DEM
I want Marïa to do that.
Gzo su vúghi ca fessa queli.
1SG.NOM 3SG-DAT want.1SG SBRD_CNJ do-SBJV DEM
I want him/her to do that.
If the triggering phrase is non-verbal, the subject of the subjunctive verb is expressed as a normal nominative.
Modinc' essa fessa queli …
until=3SG.NOM do-SBJV DEM
Until she does that …
7.2.2 Uses of the Subjunctive
The subjunctive tends to appear in constructions expressing uncertainty, extremes, desire, emotion and necessity. It also appears after certain relative clauses and conjunctions, ones that concern goals, conditions, time and contradiction.
pensâ ca - think that
criúre ca - believe that
étre seür ca - be sure that
The subjunctive is not allowed when these verbs are used affirmatively. When they are in the negative and/or in questions, the subjunctive is required. In the negative, the present implies conviction that the statement is true, while the imperfect implies uncertainty. In a negative question, they are used the same way. In an affirmative question, the present is the only possibility.
Gzo ne su pensi pas ca vienga. (PRS)
I (really) don't think he's coming.
Gzo ne su pensi pas ca venessia. (IPF)
I don't think he's coming (but he might).
Su pensès-vos ca viénga? (PRS)
Do you think he's coming?
tanta-mint … ca - so (much/many) … that
sì … ca - so … that
These cases are some of the simplest for the Silvish subjunctive. The present subjunctive is required after these phrases.
És iera sì uròs ca chánti. (present subjunctive)
He was so happy that he sang.
volê ca - want (sb) to
The subjunctive is required after "volê ca". The present implies certainty that the subordinated event did/does/will happen; the imperfect implies either that the event is uncertain or does not happen.
Gzo su vúghi ca fessa queli. (present subjunctive)
I want her to do this (and she does/will).
Gzo su vúghi ca fezessia queli. (imperfect subjunctive)
I want her to do this (but she won't/might not).
díre ca - tell to / say that
"Díre ca" requires the subjunctive when it expresses a command, the choice of tense having the same implications as after "volê ca". When it expresses an indirect quote, it normally takes the indicative.
Gzo su dizé ca vienga. (command, present subjunctive)
I told him to come (and he did).
Gzo su dizé c'és vién. (quote, indicative)
I told him that he is coming.
Informal usage allows the subjunctive to follow "díre ca" in indirect quotes, as a way of emphasizing that a statement is correct or incorrect. Indirect quotes with subjunctive can be distinguished from commands because the subject pronoun is not dropped in indirect quotes (és in the following examples).
Tu me dizaus c'és vienga! (quote, present subjunctive)
You told me he was coming (and you were right)!
Tu me dizaus c'és venessia! (quote, imperfect subjunctive)
You told me he was coming (and you were wrong)!
ordennâ ca - order to
"Ordennâ ca" and similar command or request phrases are fairly simple. They require the subjunctive, and the choice of tense has the same implication as after "volê ca".
Gzo t'ordennè ca partessias. (imperfect subjunctive)
I ordered you to leave (and you didn't).
annâ a [ccn] par sica - ask [sb] if
The subjunctive is required after this construction. The present implies that the answerer is expected to agree. The imperfect implies that the speaker isn't expected to agree.
Gzo su annè par sica comprenga. (present subjunctive)
I asked him if he understood (thinking that he did).
Gzo su annè par sica comprenessia. (imperfect subjunctive)
I asked him if he understood (thinking he might not).
amâ ca - like that
étre uròs ca - be happy that
Expressions of emotion are unusual. They require the present subjunctive when they are not in the conditional. But in the conditional, they require the imperfect subjunctive; this construction is often translated as an "if" statement.
Gzo su sue urosa ca fessa queli. (sue = indicative, fessa = present subjunctive)
I am happy that he does that.
Gzo su seré urosa ca fezessia queli. (seré = conditional, fezessia = imperfect subjunctive)
I would be happy if he did that.
pruén ca - it is necessary that
ét necessarië ca - it is necessary that
When phrases expressing necessity are in the present, simple past or compound past, they are followed by the present subjunctive. A phrase in the imperfect is followed by the imperfect subjunctive. In the future, both the present and imperfect are possible. The tense of the independent clause already communicates whether a needed action was carried out, so the subjunctive tenses simply patterned with them after taking their current meanings.
Me pruegnau ca vienga. (pruegnau = simple past, vienga = past subjunctive)
I needed to come (and I did).
Me pruegneva ca venessi. (pruegneva = imperfect indicative, venessi = imperfect subjunctive)
I needed to come (and I didn't).
184.108.40.206 Relative Clauses
u plupa … ca, u mimpa … ca - the most … that, the least … that
u saul ca, l'uniche ca, u primier ca, u derran ca - the only, the only, the first, the last
After superlatives like these, the subjunctive tenses and the indicative are both possible. The indicative represents something recognized as fact, the present subjunctive indicates certainty in an opinion or light doubt, and the imperfect subjunctive indicates uncertainty.
U Neil Armstrong iera u primier uön·ne chi marchò súr'le lun. ([past] indicative)
Neil Armstrong was the first man to walk on the moon (and that is a fact).
Quel'ét u meglur film ca gzo augza vesud. (present subjunctive)
That is the best film I've seen (without a doubt).
Quel'ét u meglur film ca gzo avessi vesud. (imperfect subjunctive)
That is the best film I've seen (maybe).
Because of its meaning of great doubt, the imperfect subjunctive is considered rude when describing positive qualities in people. Conversely, it is often preferred when describing a negative quality in a person.
Tu es la parsonna la plupa disordennada ca gzo conniecessi. (imperfect subjunctive)
You are possibly the messiest person I know.
un [num] ca - a [noun] that
cauc'un/cauchosa ca - someone/something that
Like with superlatives, indefinites can be followed by either the indicative or subjunctive. The indicative means that the antecedent is specific and that the relative clause is true. The present subjunctive means that the antecedent is specific but implies doubt about the truth of the relative clause. The imperfect subjunctive implies a non-specific antecedent.
Gzo conniéghi cauc'uni chi puór m'agzovâ. (indicative)
I know someone who can help me.
Gzo çerchi cauc'uni chi pussa m'agzovâ. (present subjunctive)
I am looking for someone (a specific person) who might be able to help me.
Gzo çerchi cauc'uni chi poressia m'agzovâ. (imperfect subjunctive)
I am looking for someone (anyone) who can help me.
modinca - until
avanca - before
canca - when
All of these terms require the subjunctive. The present subjunctive implies certainty that the event will happen; it can point to a specific instance of the event. The imperfect subjunctive implies doubt and/or any instance of the event. For example, "canca + [imperfect]" can be translated as "if and when" or "whenever".
Canca vos anniès au plági, metès de créme solér. (PRS)
When you go to the beach (i.e. today), put on sunscreen.
Canca vos annessiès au plági, metès de créme solér. (IPF)
When(ever) you go to the beach, put on sunscreen.
The first sentence with the present is something you might say to someone who just told you they were going to the beach later. The second sentence with the imperfect is a general admonition; you might see it on an informational sign at the beach, targeting everyone at any time.
parca - so that
The subjunctive is required after "parca" and has the same connotations as after "volê ca".
Essa encevau a parlâ li sivauchi parca gzo sa comprenga. (present subjunctive)
She started speaking Silvish so I would understand her (and I did).
biénca - even though
This phrase requires the present subjunctive.
sica - if
"Sica" requires the subjunctive. The imperfect subjunctive expresses counterfactuals, what the speaker knows to be contrary to fact. The main clause accompanying "sica + [imperfect]" is normally in the conditional. The present subjunctive expresses things that may or may not be true and is accompanied in the main clause by the indicative.
Sic'és fussia là, gzo so veré. (fussia = imperfect subjunctive, veré = conditional)
If he were here, I would see him.
Sic'és séia là, gzo so verò. (seia = present subjunctive, verò = future)
If he is here, I will see him.
Click here to return to the rest of section 7.
Determiners are among the most common words in Silvish. Except in certain cases, usually fixed phrases, a noun will always be accompanied by a determiner of some kind, sometimes more than one.
The Silvish article declines for the same categories as an adjective: gender, number and case. It additionally distinguishes definiteness and specificity. Articles are unstressed on the phrase level and always precede the noun phrase they modify.
8.1.1 Definite Article
Generally, the definite article is used if the noun being referred to is specific and is either known by the listener or can be inferred from context. It is also used when referring to the entirety of a category.
known to the listener
u paget ca tu as vesud
DEF boy REL have seen
the boy you saw
inferable from context
Gzo sue annada a li merchadi.
1SG am gone to DEF store
I went to the store.
Us ozáus ont dis plúmis.
DEF birds have INDEF feathers
Birds have feathers.
The definite article declines as follows. Where two forms are shown, the second is used before a vowel.
Code: Select all
M NOM OBL SG u, l' li PL us lis F NOM OBL SG la, l' le, l' PL las lis
The indefinite article is used when a noun is unknown to the listener or can't be inferred from context. The noun may be specific or non-specific.
unknown to the listener
un paget ca gzo connighi mes tè non
INDEF boy REL 1SG know but you no
a boy whom I know but you don't
not inferable from context
I á ún arégn súr'le tiév opále.
there has INDEF spider on DEF your shoulder
There is a spider on your shoulder.
The indefinite article has no plural form. The partitive article or cauca can be used with plural indefinites.
The indefinite article declines as follows.
Code: Select all
M NOM OBL M un únni F unna ún
The partitive article refers to an unspecified amount of something and often precedes uncountable and/or non-specific nouns. It formed from a contraction of the preposition de (of, from) with the definite article.
unspecified amount, non-specific
Gzo vuodré di leti.
1SG would_like PART milk
I would like some milk.
Ó pússi-gzo achatâ dis bonmélis ?
where can=1SG buy PART-PL apples
Where can I buy apples?
The partitive article declines as follows. If it is preceded by de, the article is deleted. If it is followed by an adjective, the article is reduced to de.
Code: Select all
M NOM OBL SG du, dl' di PL dus dis F NOM OBL SG da, dl' de, dl' PL das dis
Demonstratives are exclusively used with definite, specific nouns. In addition to that, they distinguish two levels of deixis: proximal and distal. Demonstratives have irregular stress at the phrase level, as explained in 220.127.116.11. Unlike other determiners, they can act as either modifiers or standalone pronouns.
The proximal demonstrative, quet, marks something as close to the speaker. It can also indicate something that closely follows it or is in the immediate future.
Gzo preferiúchi quauti libri, pres de mè.
1SG prefer PROX book near of 1SG
I prefer this book, near me.
The proximal demonstrative declines as follows:
Code: Select all
M NOM OBL SG quaut quauti PL quáuts quáutis F NOM OBL SG quauta quáut PL quautas quáutis
The distal demonstrative marks something as not near to the speaker. It can also refer to something that precedes it or is in the past.
Gzo preférg queli libri, pres de tè.
1SG prefer DIST book near of 2SG
I prefer that book, near you.
The distal demonstrative declines as follows:
Code: Select all
M NOM OBL SG quau, quel' queli PL quáus quélis F NOM OBL SG quela quél PL quelas quélis
Possessives mark when a noun is possessed by something else and are used only when the possessed noun is definite and specific. They mark the person and number of the possessor as well as the gender, number and case of the possessed noun. A possessive may be preceded by a definite article and appears at the beginning of the noun phrase it modifies.
8.3.1 Meaning of the Definite Article
To greatly simplify things, the choice of whether to include an article indicates whether the possessum is unique or not. When there is an article, the implication is that the possessum is a subset of things owned by the possessor. Take the following sentence:
Quel'ét u miev gzat.
That is DEF my cat
That is my cat.
With the article, the sentence means that I have other cats besides this particular cat. The cat is a "subset" of my supply of cats. However, remove the article:
Quel'ét miev gzat.
That is my cat
That is my cat.
And the sentence means that this is my only cat.
The distinction holds in the plural:
Quáus sont (us) miévs gzáts.
Those are (DEF.PL) my.PL cat.PL
Those are my cats.
With the article, the sentence means I have other cats besides the ones mentioned. Without it, the sentence means these are all of my cats. A lack of article can also communicate that the noun is complete or a full set. If I were to talk about "my playing cards" with no article, the implication is either that these are all of my playing cards or that they form a complete deck; in the latter case, it's possible I have other playing cards.
8.3.2 Natural Pairs
Natural pairs (e.g. hands, eyes, shoes) behave differently than other nouns after possessives. In the plural, a naturally paired noun cannot take the definite article, and in the singular, it has to. So you can only say "mievas máns" (my hands), without the article, and "la mieva man" (my hand), with the article.
The possessive determiners decline as follows. The horizontal axis shows the traits of the possessor. The vertical axis shows those of the possessum. Note that "lor" does not decline for gender.
Code: Select all
SG PL 1 2 3 1 2 3 M NOM SG miev tiev siev nutre vutre lor PL miévs tiévs siévs nútres vútres lórs OBL SG mievi tievi sievi nutri vutri lori PL miévis tiévis siévis nútris vútris lóris F NOM SG mieva tieva sieva nutra vutra lor PL mievas tievas sievas nutras vutras lórs OBL SG miév tiév siév nútre vútre lori PL miévis tiévis siévis nútris vútris lóris
Click here to read about indefinite determiners.
I think my favorite one is plafon (ground floor), which is a very confusing false friend with French plafond (ceiling). Privat (toilet) is interesting, too, because it is always plural, even when referring to a single fixture.
Housekeeping: So I won't forget, if a noun has an emergent consonant, I put the oblique singular next to it in italics. All the following nouns are common gender, so I didn't mark it explicitly, but masculine and feminine gender are shown with an m or an f after the IPA.
Mêzo mêzon-i [mɛˈzo mɛˈzõ.i] f. - House
couver couverti [kuˈvɛʁ kuˈvɛʁ.ti] m. - roof
fen-ettre [fŋ̩ˈɛt.tʁə] f. - window
mu mûwi [ˈmy ˈmy.wi] m. - wall
pese [ˈpe.sə] f. - room
plafon plafonti [pləˈfɔ̃ŋ pləˈfɔ̃n.ti] m. - ground floor
porte [ˈpɔʁ.tə] f. - door
parqué parquêti [paˈke paˈkɛː.ti] m. - floor
travâ [tʁəˈvɑː] f. - ceiling
Salo salon-i [səˈlo səˈlõ.i] m. - Living room
canapé canapêyi [ka.nəˈpe ka.nəˈpɛː.ji] m. - sofa
chemineye [ɕe.miˈne.jə] f. - fireplace
heye [ˈhe.jə] f. - chair
televizo televizon-i [te.le.viˈzo te.le.viˈzõ.i] f. - television
Quêjen-e [kɛˈʑẽ.ə] f. - Kitchen
boutico bouticoeuti [bu.tiˈko bu.tiˈkœː.ti] m. - pantry
four fourni [ˈfuʁ ˈfuʁ.ni] m. - oven
microonne [mi.kʁəˈɔ̃n.nə] m. - microwave
refrijerateu refrijerateûwi [ʁe.fri.ʑe.ʁəˈtø ʁe.fri.ʑe.ʁəˈtœː.wi] m. - refrigerator
table [ˈta.blə] f. - table
Hambre [ˈhɑ̃m.bʁə] f. - Bedroom
armeyou [aˈme.ju] m. - closet
cuisé cuisen-i [kɥiˈse kɥiˈsẽ.i] m. - pillow
lí lîti [ˈli liː.ti] m. - bed
lensoú lenseûli [lɛ̃ˈsu lɛ̃ˈsœː.li] m. - bedsheet
matten-o matten-on-i [mat.tŋ̩ˈo mat.tŋ̩ˈõ.i] m. - alarm clock
Pese de bã [ˈpe.sə dəˈbɑ] f. - Bathroom
aví avîyi [əˈvi əˈviː.ji] m. - sink
bengnware [bɛ̃ˈɲwa.ʁə] f. - bathtub
douche [ˈdu.ɕə] f. - shower
miyeu miyeûwi [miˈjø miˈjœː.wi] m. - mirror
touaille [ˈtwaʎ.ʎə] f. - towel
privat [pʁiˈvat] mpl. - toilet (room or fixture)
I've been thinking about noun/adjective declension on a phonological level, and increasingly I'm seeing an alternation between a euphonic root and a non-euphonic root. The non-euphonic root is essentially the masculine singular nominative form, like buon /bõː/. The euphonic root appears 1) in liaison, 2) when a suffix beginning with a vowel is added, and 3) in the oblique singular of first-declension nouns and feminine adjectives. An example is the feminine form buona /buː.ŋa/, the root being /buː(ŋ)/.
As you might notice, the <n> in buona is now pronounced /ŋ/ (instead of /n/), and that's a direct result of the euphonic vs. non-euphonic dichotomy. /ŋ/ now contrasts with /n/ within words. Because of sound changes, it first appeared word-finally and has since been generalized to a large amount of inherited vocabulary (una /o.ŋa/, pessona /pəˈsɔː.ŋa/, liazuni /le̯aˈzoː.ŋe/, etc). To distinguish /n/ from /ŋ/, the former is written <·n> in between vowel letters (telefo·ne /tə.ləˈfɔː.nə/).
The difference between the euphonic and non-euphonic roots is pretty drastic for buon, but for most nouns and adjectives the change isn't that great. Usually, it just means pronouncing a formerly silent consonant. For example, here are the roots of chetaul: non-euphonic - /tɕəˈtaːo̯/, euphonic - /tɕəˈtaːo̯(l)/.
That's a general explanation. Roots ending with nasal vowels, like /bõː/, mess things up royally. For instance, the feminine oblique singular is buón /ˈbo̯õː/, which is supposed to be an ablauted, nasalized version of the euphonic root /ˈbuː(ŋ)/. In liaison, things clear up a little with /ˈbo̯ɑ.ŋ/.
I know you weren't soliciting suggestions, but I have to wonder about your choice of using the dot before the letter instead of some type of diacritic or another. How do you feel about "ṅ"? I feel like telefoṅe would look pretty nice.Dormouse559 wrote:telefo·ne /tə.ləˈfɔː.nə/
Consider anything I write in this thread as open to suggestions. I don't promise I'll implement them, but it's nice to discuss the thought process, and I've been known to circle back on a idea after initially having doubts.Thrice Xandvii wrote:I know you weren't soliciting suggestions
It does look nice. But with this change, I was thinking about how Catalan differentiates <ll> /ʎ/ from <l·l> /ll/. And it looks like Occitan also used the interpunct at one point. So the idea was to bring Silvish a bit closer to the orthographic traditions of the region.Thrice Xandvii wrote:but I have to wonder about your choice of using the dot before the letter instead of some type of diacritic or another. How do you feel about "ṅ"? I feel like telefoṅe would look pretty nice.
I didn't know the interpunct was used like that, regionally that is. However, in the present case, I think there is something æsthetically superior in using the interpunct for separating a digraph, versus using it to mark a singular letter. Obviously, this is just one random dude's opinion however. Maybe consider an·na /ana/ vs. anna /aŋa/?
I think the only aesthetic issue I have with that is that /Ṽn/ isn't a common sequence, so the interpunct might not pop up enough to justify itself. Another option might be to let /Ṽn/ and one of the other two be represented the same way. There probably wouldn't be much of an issue with ambiguity.
Note that the numbered posts don't all reflect these changes yet. I'm going to update them as I have time.