Vuase

[Corphishy]

Edit: skip to here

Vuase is a conlang that I have been tinkering with, abandoning, picking back up, and abandoning again for about 6 years (or about since I was 10). I think that making a thread will help to make more constructive progress on the language.

As is obligatory of a conlang thread, the first post will be about the phonology! Vuase has a very simple one:

PHONEME INVENTORY

/m n/ <m n>
/p b t d k g/ <p b t d k g>
/v s h/ <v s h>
/w r l/ <w r l>
Consonants can also be labialized, which is written as <Cu> (e.g. vuase)

/i y u o e a/ <i y u o e a>
/ai au/ <ai au>

ALLOPHONY
/s/ > [ʃ] before /i y e/

PHONOTACTICS

(C)(R)V(N)(K)
C=a consonant
R=/r l/
V=a vowel or diphthong
N=/r l n m/
K=/p t s k/

there are, however, some restrictions:

• If V is a diphthong, there can be no N
• (m w n r l)R cannot occur
• When N=/m n/, the K cannot be /k/ (ironically). In fact, clusters of /m n/K can only be /mp nt ns/

[Corphishy]

Ignoring the previous (now deleted) post I made ever so slightly, let's try this again. I've been stewing over the nitty-gritty, and admittedly boring details of this language for the past couple of weeks, and I think I have something that isn't half bad.
[hr][/hr]
NOUNS (again)
The information on nouns is basically the same as the last post. So allow me to repost it:

Nouns in Vuase decline for 5 cases and for singular and plural number. The cases are called nominative, accusative, oblique, locative and genitive:

• The nominative and accusative cases are pretty self explanatory. They are just the direct subject and direct object respectively.
• The oblique case is used for both the indirect object of the noun (i.e. the dative case), and in some cases as an instrumental or a benefactive, or for possession of non-subject nouns. When a noun has an adposition attached, it usually takes this case.
• The locative case is used for, well, the locative case, but sometimes used when taking other locational adpositions, such as the ablative on.
• The genitive case is used to mark possession on the subject (i.e., only on nominative nouns).

This is the general declension paradigm which nouns in Vuase use. There are other irregularities out there, but that's what I like to classify as "interesting," so it isn't going to be discussed today.

There are some general notes on this chart and the chart after this one. Namely, that when nouns end in /i/ or /y/, they replace the /e/ in the endings which begin with /e/, and all vowels replace the /a/ in -as.

VERBS
Verbs were something that fucked me in the ass a little bit harder took a little bit more time to work out than nouns did. Which is kind of weird if you consider that the end result was the initial design. I guess I just tried so hard to reinvent the wheel in such stupid, complex and, at the end of the day, unsatisfying ways.



Another note for the verbs table is that RDP stands for reduplication (namely, reduplication of the final syllable). I did this to save space. You understand.

As shown, Vuase verbs generally decline for 3 aspects: simple, progressive and perfect; and 2 tenses: past and nonpast. And, as my 8th grade English teacher taught me once, I must again define my terms. Here goes:

• The simple aspect is pretty much the most complicated one. It covers a lot of ground in Vuase. Specifically, it acts as a habitual and a gnomic, and is used for what have been previously coined in another thread of mine, "copular clauses" (e.g. a sentence like "I am a man" or "I am hungry": statements wherein the subject is being described in some way using a copula to link the subject with the descriptor). It is also, in conjunction with the temporal adverb nau used to form the future tense.
• The progressive aspect is basically the present tense.
• The perfect aspect is basically the past tense.
• The past implies a more distant past, and is also used as a "narrative" tense.

I would love to hear some feedback from the folks at home. Hopefully I explained everything well enough.

[Iyionaku]

If the progressive aspect "is basically the present tense", where would then be the difference between the progressive past and the non-past perfect?
I assume that the simple past is used for habitual actions in the past, but I cannot guess between the lower two aspects.

There is nothing much to say to the phonetics: Pretty usual, but pretty pretty.

To nouns: How could one differentiate between indirect and direct objects when both are in plural? Are there special particles, or maybe restrictions in word order?

[Corphishy]

If the progressive aspect "is basically the present tense", where would then be the difference between the progressive past and the non-past perfect?
I assume that the simple past is used for habitual actions in the past, but I cannot guess between the lower two aspects.

The simple answer is that there's not a lot of difference between the past progressive and nonpast perfect, other than they aren't interchangeable. Like I said, the past tense conveys a more distant past or "narrative" tense, and so is used to refer to events which occured in the past. The perfect is more for evens which have just ended, so saying "I died"/"I have died" or "I exploded"/"I have exploded" would use the perfect. Sorry if that was confusing, I'm not the best at this kind of stuff.

To nouns: How could one differentiate between indirect and direct objects when both are in plural? Are there special particles, or maybe restrictions in word order?

Well, my good friend I am glad you asked, as word order is a great next topic to discuss.

In Vuase, there are two word orders. For sentences with a verb that is in the simple aspect, the order is generally VISO (verb-indirect object-subject-object, to clarify what "I" stands for). Otherwise, the order is SVIO or ISVO (the only difference being that ISVO makes you sound a little on the "simple peasant" side of things). So one can easily tell the case of a noun by its position in the sentence.

[shimobaatar]

I think that making a thread will help to make more constructive progress on the language.

Hopefully!

Consonants can also be labialized, which is written as <Cu> (e.g. vuase)

Can all consonants be labialized? Can consonants be labialized before any of the vowels?

• The nominative and accusative cases are pretty self explanatory. They are just the direct subject and direct object respectively.
• The oblique case is used for both the indirect object of the noun (i.e. the dative case), and in some cases as an instrumental or a benefactive, or for possession of non-subject nouns. When a noun has an adposition attached, it usually takes this case.
• The locative case is used for, well, the locative case, but sometimes used when taking other locational adpositions, such as the ablative on.
• The genitive case is used to mark possession on the subject (i.e., only on nominative nouns).

So the language is nominative-accusative in terms of alignment, it seems. I really like how possession is marked differently depending on whether or not the noun is nominative. What do you mean by "the ablative on"?

This is the general declension paradigm which nouns in Vuase use. There are other irregularities out there, but that's what I like to classify as "interesting," so it isn't going to be discussed today.

I look forward to hearing more about them in the future.

• The simple aspect is pretty much the most complicated one. It covers a lot of ground in Vuase. Specifically, it acts as a habitual and a gnomic, and is used for what have been previously coined in another thread of mine, "copular clauses" (e.g. a sentence like "I am a man" or "I am hungry": statements wherein the subject is being described in some way using a copula to link the subject with the descriptor). It is also, in conjunction with the temporal adverb nau used to form the future tense.
• The progressive aspect is basically the present tense.
• The perfect aspect is basically the past tense.
• The past implies a more distant past, and is also used as a "narrative" tense.

Could you perhaps show us some example sentences to demonstrate the distinctions between the different tense-aspect combinations? Also, I audibly laughed at the first sentence here. I don't know if that was intentional or not, but I found it pretty funny.

I would love to hear some feedback from the folks at home. Hopefully I explained everything well enough.

You explain things very well!

In Vuase, there are two word orders. For sentences with a verb that is in the simple aspect, the order is generally VISO (verb-indirect object-subject-object, to clarify what "I" stands for). Otherwise, the order is SVIO or ISVO (the only difference being that ISVO makes you sound a little on the "simple peasant" side of things). So one can easily tell the case of a noun by its position in the sentence.

Interesting!

Also, I believe I've seen "X" used to represent an indirect object, or at least an oblique argument. I could be wrong, though.

[Corphishy]

Wow jesus I kind of abandoned this thread and also this language for the millionth time because of a lack of focus. It's really hard to try to sustain a conlang you've been tinkering with for over 6 years. Either way, I'll try to answer your questions.

Can all consonants be labialized? Can consonants be labialized before any of the vowels?

only /p b v t d s k g/ can be labialized, and all vowels can come after a labialized consonant besides /u/

So the language is nominative-accusative in terms of alignment, it seems. I really like how possession is marked differently depending on whether or not the noun is nominative. What do you mean by "the ablative on"?

Thank you for the complement. on (bolded to represent a lexical item, which I forgot to do) is the ablative adposition (i.e. its the one I use to mean "from").

Could you perhaps show us some example sentences to demonstrate the distinctions between the different tense-aspect combinations? Also, I audibly laughed at the first sentence here. I don't know if that was intentional or not, but I found it pretty funny.

Okay. So the thing about Vuase is i kind of hate it. And one of the main reasons why is because I seem to have this nagging desire to make something "complex," especially with verbs. But the thing is that I don't know anything about verbs, aspects or tenses outside of English (Ive taken one year of french in high school and i can only speak in the present and future tense). And this translates well I think into how fucking confusing I have made the verb system in Vuase. I don't have any idea what I am doing and it makes me angry so I just avoid it which sums up how I treat the entire language. So no, I don't think I have the mental strength to give example sentences yet.

[shimobaatar]

Either way, I'll try to answer your questions.

Thank you very much.

Sorry for bringing back something you're no longer working on. Are you no longer working on your other threads, either? I was going to comment on a few other posts of yours from when I was "gone" from the board, but I won't if you don't want me to.

on (bolded to represent a lexical item, which I forgot to do) is the ablative adposition (i.e. its the one I use to mean "from").

Oh, sorry, I couldn't tell it was bolded.

Okay. So the thing about Vuase is i kind of hate it. And one of the main reasons why is because I seem to have this nagging desire to make something "complex," especially with verbs. But the thing is that I don't know anything about verbs, aspects or tenses outside of English (Ive taken one year of french in high school and i can only speak in the present and future tense). And this translates well I think into how fucking confusing I have made the verb system in Vuase. I don't have any idea what I am doing and it makes me angry so I just avoid it which sums up how I treat the entire language. So no, I don't think I have the mental strength to give example sentences yet.

That's fine; don't feel like you have to do anything you personally don't want to do.

I can definitely relate to how you feel about Vuase. Hopefully you can get over these feelings that are keeping you from enjoying creating the language soon.

[Corphishy]

Sorry for bringing back something you're no longer working on. Are you no longer working on your other threads, either? I was going to comment on a few other posts of yours from when I was "gone" from the board, but I won't if you don't want me to.

That's quite alright, actually. Having people discuss my conlangs/ask me questions kind of forces me (in a good way) to actually do something, so I would appreciate posting on any of my threads.

I can definitely relate to how you feel about Vuase. Hopefully you can get over these feelings that are keeping you from enjoying creating the language soon.

I cannot agree more. Maybe over the next few days I'll try to revive both Vuase and some of the other languages I've posted on here.

[shimobaatar]

That's quite alright, actually. Having people discuss my conlangs/ask me questions kind of forces me (in a good way) to actually do something, so I would appreciate posting on any of my threads.

OK, good!

I cannot agree more. Maybe over the next few days I'll try to revive both Vuase and some of the other languages I've posted on here.

Good luck!

[Corphishy]

When I first created Vuase, I was maybe 13 years old (late 2012). I really have grown attached to this little conlang that could. 5-6 years have gone by, with constant reforms and revisions. The same, I think can also be said of its creator. But now I’m a 19 year old college freshman, and I think its time I finally do this conlang justice. So, with that being said...

Vuase is a personal language that I have been tinkering with, abandoning, picking back up, and abandoning again for about 6 years (disregard the first post’s computation: I have had an abysmal sense of the progression of time since forever). I think that continuing this thread will help to put the many ideas I have in my head into a more tangible form. Think of it like one of them “scratchpads” (if I’m using that term correctly). Nothing said in this thread is set in stone; as I’ve stated, this is a personal language. If I decide to change or get rid of something, I’ll do so at my leisure in an attempt to make an end product that I find enjoyable to use and work on.

As is obligatory of a conlang thread, the first 11th post will be about the phonology!

PHONEMIC INVENTORY

/m n/ m n
/p b t d k g/ p b t d c g
/β s z h/ v s z h
/r l/ r l

/i ɨ u ɛ ɔ a/ i y u o e a

PHONOTACTICS
CCVC

SANDHI
[i ɨ]/j/_V
ɨi/i/_³
iɨ/u/_³
u/w/C_V
u/β/V_V
ɔ[u ɨ]/ow/_²
ɔ/o/_[i ɛ a]
E[i ɨ]/ej/_¹ ²
ɛ/e/_[u ɔ a] ¹
ai/aj/_
au/aw/_
V//V[same]_

¹These combinations only occur in roots. Otherwise, ɛ is deleted between morpheme boundaries, except for /iɛ ɨɛ uɛ/, which becomes [jɛ jɛ wɛ]

²/ɛɨ ɔɨ/ never occurs inside roots. When they do occur between morpheme boundaries, they become ⟨y ou⟩ respectively

³these are written as ⟨i u⟩ respectively

STRESS
Stress is penultimate

/i ɨ u ɛ ɔ a/ > [ɪ ʊ ʊ ɜ ɑ ɜ] in unstressed syllables
- /i ɨ u ɔ/ do not change word finally
- This de-stressing does not occur in the syllable before the stressed syllable

OTHER ALLOPHONY
s z/[ɕ ʑ]/_[i ɨ ɛ]
[k g]/[c ɟ]/_jV
[h]/[x] syllable finally
[r l]/[r̥ ɬ]/C[-voice]_
ɛ//VC_#¹

¹This is to say that word-final ⟨e⟩ is silent except for when it would create a coda cluster. This shifts stress to the final syllable, so it is important that it be written.

Throughout this labor day weekend, I plan to add more and more to this thread. I hope this was coherent enough. I have a lot of ideas; some I'm sure of, others I'm very much not. Everything's always much clearer in your head than it is on paper, eh?

[Corphishy]

Much like I did two years ago, I will now discuss nominal morphology in Vuase. However, since I have a little bit more to say than I did last time, I will split nouns and verbs into different sections (verbs will probably get a few subsections as well).

Due to my kind of janky set up at the moment, I wont be able to show an entire declension chart. That may be a blessing in disguise, as it means I'm forced to individually describe every case etc. So let's get into it:

Nouns in Vuase have four cases: nominative, accusative, locative, and genitive. Here is what they all do.

NOM: −∅ The nominative case is the unmarked case. It marks the subject of a clause, and is the dictionary form of nouns. Pretty basic stuff.

ACC: −i / −a The accusative case marks the object of a clause, both direct and indirect, and can thus be used as a dative. It also functions as a vocative.

The accusative ending is −i in every circumstance except after ⟨i y⟩. When this happens it becomes −a

LOC: −e The locative case is used to indicate, well, location, or position relative to another object. Since Vuase only has one locative case, it still does use postpositions to indicate specific direction. If the locative noun is unmarked, it usually has the sense of "in, on, at."

GEN: −a The genitive case has a few purposes. Primarily, it indicates possession. It is also used as an instrumental, and a benefactive. Unlike the other cases, the genitive does not distinguish number.

Nouns can either be count or mass nouns, like pretty much every other language. In Vuase, mass nouns are treated as if they were plurals, but conjugate as if they were singular. Count nouns have separate endings for the plural forms.

NOM: −an¹
ACC: −in / −an
LOC: −er
GEN: −a

¹The ⟨a⟩ only appears if the noun ends in a consonant so as to not violate phonosyntactic rules

On top of singular and plural, Vuase also has ways of distinguishing collective and singulative.

The collective is just the function of an old augmentative. You simply reduplicate the first syllable. So from lid "tree" you get lidlid "forest, grove." If the noun's first syllable is a bare vowel, you add ⟨h⟩ between them as a repair strateɡy.

The singulative, however, is generally only used for mass nouns. It is a prefix, which is rare for Vuase: you add the prefix en- which is related to the numeral enta "one."

That's about all I have for nouns right now. As I implied earlier, I have more to say about Vuase verbs than nouns. I just don't know what other stuff nouns do. If anyone has any suggestions of topics to cover about nouns and the fun things you can do with them, I'd be more than happy to hear it.

[Corphishy]

So, in the old days, Vuase had this system where modifiers agreed with the heads by just repeating the same suffixes, and then the heads would just stop being marked altogether. Besides being completely unnatural and not very pleasant to look at (which is in keeping with the rest of the language circa 2013). I've since overcorrected to have no agreement whatsoever, and I don't like that either. So, as the God of the Vuase Language, I will now bring to you the gold tablets of how adjectives in Vuase work.

So a fun little etymological history lesson about the Vuase accusative:

The accusative is the oldest case in Vuase. It used to be a postposition *iə. It was only used as a direct object, so it wasn't an oblique case (indirect objects were still unmarked). Anyway, this postposition then begun to be redundantly placed at the end of noun phrases, which basically meant that when it began to cliticize, it would be placed both on the accusative nouns and on their dependents. As the function of the accusative expanded, so too did the accusative marking on adjectives. However, eventually the accusative was restricted as new cases emerged, while the agreement markings stayed the same.

All this rambling is all to say that adjectives agree to two cases: called Nominative and Oblique. They also agree for number. This is also trying to say that the oblique marking is purposefully the same as the accusative case.

---

I usually talk about comparatives with regards to adjectives because, speaking English, I think of comparatives as a thing that happens to adjectives. However, in doing some research, I have come to a very interesting conclusion (at least I think so) of how Vuase comparatives work.

Vuase has a locational comparative. Basically what that means is that to form comparatives, the comparee takes the locative case. Here is an example:

Sed sie utra trys.
be-2S.IMPV 1S.LOC horse-NOM.SG happy-NOM.SG
"The horse is happier than me."

Of course, because of Vuase's loosey goosey syntax, that sentence can be reordered in a number of ways. This is just the most standard way of forming comparatives. I like this system for a number of reasons. For one, it gives the locative more things to do. It also makes Vuase less SAE, because the way PIElangs form comparatives is actually pretty rare cross-linguistically.

Superlatives are formed using the genitive on the "comparee" (or whatever it is called in superlatives), similar to in French (the only other language I know). Here is that example:

Sed tigosia utra trys
be-2S.IMPV 1S.GEN horse-NOM.SG happy-NOM.SG
"The horse is the happiest in the world."

[Corphishy]

The most basic/least marked form of a verb is the imperfective aspect. It is essentially the present tense, or I guess more accurately the "nonpast" as it is used for the future tense in conjunction with the future particle nau. Verbs in Vuase agree for the person and number of the subject. There are only two persons in Vuase, however: the first and second person. The second person is used for both second and the third person subjects. Here are the conjugations:

1 -e|es
2 -da|dan
SG|PL

The second person singular specifically has some odd features. Namely, before vowels, it is -d; before consonants, it is -a. The same is somewhat true for second person plurals, except instead its -an before consonants (but -dan otherwise).

The rest of the aspects build on this framework. The perfect is marked with the -mi- suffix. This goes after the stem and before the person marking. This aspect works a bit like a past tense, but it's more complicated than that. I'll explain when I get to the perfect aspect. The conjugations look like this:

1 -mie|mies
2 -mid|midan

Now, the perfective I put after the perfect and not after the imperfective because Vuase considers both of these aspects to be somewhat past tenses. The perfect, as perfects do, refers to verbs in the past tense with present relevance ("I have done"). The perfective, however, does not. It acts more like a simple past. These conjugations can usually both appear on verbs (not at the same time, of course), but not all verbs. Telic verbs can only take the perfect aspect as their past tense form.
The perfective marker is -(a)r. The perfective is younger than the perfect, and so unlike it, it goes after the person marking. Here is the conjugation table:

1 -er|esar
2 -dar|danar

What defines a telic verb in Vuase is my own judgement, as that's a question of semantics. Verbs will be marked vt. and va. for telic and atelic from this point on.

---

Now, those are verbs in the indicative. There is one other mood in Vuase: the subjunctive. The subjunctive, for one, does not distinguish between perfective and perfect, so that's one less thing to worry about. The subjunctive is used for counterfactuals, conditionals, hypotheticals etc. Standard "might" functions. Combined with the future particle, it also forms the imperative.

The subjunctive marker is -ai-, and goes after the perfect ending, and before the person marking. The imperfective form looks like this:

1 -aie|aies
2 -aid|aidan

And the perfect form looks like this:

1 -miaie|miaies
2 -miaid|miaidan

I should also note that the es in -aie, -aies, -miaie, -miaies are optionally pronounceable, but not optionally written.

After class (which is in a few minutes) I will post about nonfinite verbs.

[Corphishy]

Vuase has three kinds of nonfinite verb forms: participles, gerunds and infinitives. Let's first discuss participles, as they are the most complicated.

Just a head's up, this is basically the end of Vuase's inflectional morphology.

A participle's function is very simply as a verbal adjective. They distinguish the imperfective and perfect aspects, and number and person. In this way they can function as entire adjectivized verb phrases. The participle marker is -yn-. This reacts quite a bit more violently than the other affixes. When the final vowel of a stem is /ɔ ɛ a/, then the resultant *oy *ey *ay clusters become ou ei ai [ou̯ ei̯ ai̯] respectively. After /i/, the stem's vowel is deleted.
This problem is avoided in the perfect aspect, where the ending is -myn-. I'm sure I don't need to share the paradigm with you because you already know from the previous how to add the person/number endings to things.

Participles have a few functions beyond adjectives. They can also be used in converbial constructions in conjunction with adpositions (they do other things but I will get into tnat in a different post). Unlike the rest of the language, which utilizes exclusively postpositions, the adpositions used for this construction goes before the verb. This is because the participle is viewed as modifying the adposition, rather than the other way around.

Converbs (or just converbial periphrases) are formed using cyn "after" before the participle. This has the meaning of "because, after, while, when" etc. Typical converb things. Here is an example sentence:

Sed cyn amonmyna aisai utra trys
be-2S.IMPV after eat-PRF.PTCP-2S grain-ACC.SG horse-NOM.SG happy-NOM.SG
"The horse is happy because he ate some hay."

---

Besides verbal adjectives, there are also verbal nouns. There are two kinds of verbal nouns: gerunds and infinitives. I'll talk about infinitives last because they're the simplist.

Gerunds, like participles, mark for aspect, person and number. Note also that neither mark for mood. Anyway the gerund suffix is -ec- and -miec- for the imperfective and perfect respectively. Gerunds do not decline for anything.

The reason why there are two different types of verbal nouns because they do different things. Gerunds primarily form subordinate clauses. Specifically content clauses and supines. In this way, gerunds sometimes compete for semantic space with relative clauses.

Infinitives are basically just plane jane verbal nouns. They primarily act as a kind of derivational morphology, having its purpose long eroded and consumed by the gerund. The primary grammatical function is to discuss a verbs action as a whole, which I think is true for most infinitives.
They do not conjugate at all, but they do decline for things, and actually I want to discuss something. First, let me show you the declension paradigm for the infinitive, and you can tell me what problems you see

NOM -a|an
ACC -ai|ain
LOC -a|ar
GEN -a

If you couldn't tell, the main problem is that the nominative, locative and genitive marking all have the same ending. This is actually a small problem with Vuase in general, at least with regards to nouns. So, I have decided that I will be writing postpositions manditorily alongside the locative and genitive case (an and tyla respectively: of course, there are other postpositions, but these are the ones which convey the same meaning as the original unaccompanied cases). I imagine this to be a thing which is mandatory to write, but not mandatory to say, much like French "ne."