Goþesch Razde

A forum for all topics related to constructed languages
Ælfwine
roman
roman
Posts: 955
Joined: 21 Sep 2015 01:28
Location: New Jersey

Goþesch Razde

Post by Ælfwine » 19 Mar 2019 07:11

(Crossposted from the ZBB)

Goþesch Razde (Cyrillic: готэшэ раздэ /ˈɣotəʃə ˈrazdə/ alternatively Gothesch or, Gotesch), hereon referred to primarily as "Gothish," is the last surviving Ostrogothic (East Germanic) language. It is spoken by approximately 4,000 people in the southern part of the Crimean peninsula, largely in the city of Doros (Mangup).

History made short, the Ostrogoths reportedly first settled the Crimean peninsula in the 3rd century AD. Likely they became subjects of the Roman Empire, and later the Byzantine Empire in the Principality of Theodoro. In the 8th century, John of Gothia led an unsuccessful revolt against the Khazars. Little is heard of them until Busbecq sought them out and recorded many words in their language. In our timeline, the language probably died out at the tail end of the 18th century, although it is possible it survived as a "Haussprache" until the mid-20th century. In this alternate history, I've altered history only so much to keep a handful of Goths alive until the present day, with numbers on par with the number of Tatars in Crimea. Likely during the 20th century they suffered from persecution and deportation by the USSR.

The Gothic phonemic inventory is quite modest, contrasting only 19 consonants and 11 vowels. It uses a Cyrillic alphabet inspired by Ukrainian and Russian.

Consonants:

/m n ŋ/ <м н нъ>
/p b t d k g/ <п б т д к ґ>
/f v θ s z ʃ x ɣ/ <ф в ѳ с з ш х г>
/r l/ <р л>

/ŋ/ and /ŋɣ/ marginally contrast: The former is typically written нъ while the latter is written нг. Otherwise, all phonemic values are written with as they are shown above. The reason for the orthography mimicking Ukrainian is until the last century Gothic lacked a proper /g/ phoneme, much like Ukrainian. Therefore, it was natural to write /ɣ/ as <г>. However, an increasing amount of loanwords had entered the language that facilitated the reintroduction of /g/, and therefore <ґ> was introduced for that purpose. Another interesting tidbit to take from the orthography is that Gothic is the only language to preserve the Cyrillic letter fita.

Vowels:

/i iː u uː/ <и ӣ у ӯ>
/e eː ə o oː/ <е е̄ э о о̄>
/a aː/ <а а̄>

Unfortunately the language isn't mature enough to create drawn out sentences (although I've briefly practiced with Ik büde þa wulf farwel some aspects of the conlang have changed since then.) Nonetheless I have been calquing many words and can give you a list of them, just as a small taste. Some of the words listed are directly from the corpus, others I've coined.

азэнс - autumn (PGmc *azaniz)
бро̄д - bread (PGmc *braudą)
брӯдэр - brother (PGmc *brōþēr)
ва̄зэр - marketplace (c.f. Middle Persian wʾčʾl, Hungarian vásár)
верс - man (PGmc *weraz, Old Norse verr)
фидэр - four (PGmc *fedwōr)
голѳ - gold (PGmc *gulþą)
кӣнс - woman (PGmc *kwēniz)
марс - horse (PGmc *marhaz)
мӣнэ - moon (PGmc *mēnô)
швартс - black (PGmc *swartaz)
швӣн - pig (PGmc *swīną)
хазэр - thousand (c.f. Middle Persian hcʾl)

NB: The fact that the macrons won't properly place themselves above the Cyrillic letters annoys me, but ah what can I do.

And that's all the work I can show for now. Hopefully my next post will be a detailed list of sound changes from Proto-Germanic, although the sleuths amongst you can probably figure out from the word list alone some of the changes. :-)
Last edited by Ælfwine on 21 Apr 2019 04:24, edited 1 time in total.
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
Heinrich von Preußen
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 22
Joined: 06 Jan 2013 22:26

Re: Gotesche Razde

Post by Heinrich von Preußen » 19 Mar 2019 09:19

Way you use Cyrillic Script is not intuitive for me. It s shame you don 't use нг or even гг (like in Gothic) for /ŋ/ :P Is /ə/ an allophone of /e/? Does /e/ appear in unstressed syllables? Alphabet looks like Stalin has ordered to make it (but I think they wouldn't use prerevolutionary characters, but just create new own)

Your Crimean has retained declension, right? Do you use as a background original Crimean Gothic or Ulfilas'?

I'd like to see verbal and nominal inflection.
Pieśń Arjów!

User avatar
spanick
roman
roman
Posts: 1091
Joined: 11 May 2017 01:47
Location: California

Re: Gotesche Razde

Post by spanick » 19 Mar 2019 13:59

As a fellow Gothic conlang maker (and coincidentally one whose Gothic also uses Cyrillic), I'm pretty excited to see how this develops! I like the words you've glossed so far.

Hopefully we can see some declension and conjugations soon.

User avatar
Omzinesý
runic
runic
Posts: 2705
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 08:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: Gotesche Razde

Post by Omzinesý » 19 Mar 2019 14:48

Nice start!

Is /ð/ an allophone of /θ/ like it is in all old Germanic langs?
Does palatalization - it doesn't have to be phonemic - appear by contact influence?

I personally hate that the only part of language people are able to comment is orthography, but I'm doing the same.
Cyrillic orthography has plenty of vowel graphemes. Some of them could be utilized for marking vowel length too.
<и> for /i:/ and <i> for /i/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dotted_I_(Cyrillic) ?
<oy> for /u:/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uk_(Cyrillic) ?
<ѣ> for /e:/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yat ?
<ѡ> for /o:/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omega_(Cyrillic)

I usually prefer <ъ> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yer for cscwa. It could also mark short /u/.

User avatar
Zekoslav
sinic
sinic
Posts: 312
Joined: 07 Oct 2017 16:54

Re: Gotesche Razde

Post by Zekoslav » 19 Mar 2019 15:18

I know it's unusual for conlangs, but what about an underrepresenting orthography where you don't mark vowel length at all? There's plenty of natural languages which do that.
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

Ælfwine
roman
roman
Posts: 955
Joined: 21 Sep 2015 01:28
Location: New Jersey

Re: Gotesche Razde

Post by Ælfwine » 19 Mar 2019 19:20

This is somewhat my fault. I wrote this up at 4 in the morning, and therefore is somewhat low quality. I hope I can answer everyone's questions (and hopefully get answers for myself.)
Heinrich von Preußen wrote:
19 Mar 2019 09:19
Way you use Cyrillic Script is not intuitive for me. It s shame you don 't use нг or even гг (like in Gothic) for /ŋ/ :P Is /ə/ an allophone of /e/? Does /e/ appear in unstressed syllables? Alphabet looks like Stalin has ordered to make it (but I think they wouldn't use prerevolutionary characters, but just create new own)

Your Crimean has retained declension, right? Do you use as a background original Crimean Gothic or Ulfilas'?

I'd like to see verbal and nominal inflection.
I didn't think the orthography would adopt anything from Wulfilas's script, particularly intricacies like <гг>. Nonetheless, if <ъ> makes more sense as a vowel sound for schwa, I'll consider replacing <нъ> with <нг> and likewise <нг> with <гг>.

Only schwa appears in unstressed syllables. The use of <э> for schwa mimics Mansi and Cyrillic Romanian, which uses/used the same character. In many European languages, <e> is used for schwa...French (formerly), German, Danish etc. However, if <ъ> makes more sense for schwa as I said, I can change it.

Your comment about Stalin creating the orthography probably isn't too far from the truth, as the orthography would have been created around the same time as Crimean Tatar's (so either the 1920s or 1930s.)

Crimean Gothic has retained declensions and conjugations, although its much more syncretic and a bit reduced compared to BG. Notably, with the current changes I am applying the subjunctive has become quite similar to the indicative.
spanick wrote:
19 Mar 2019 13:59
As a fellow Gothic conlang maker (and coincidentally one whose Gothic also uses Cyrillic), I'm pretty excited to see how this develops! I like the words you've glossed so far.

Hopefully we can see some declension and conjugations soon.
Have some more. These are the numbers I gave to Janko just now:
Spoiler:
итэ [ˈitʰə]
one

твэ [ˈtʰwə]
two

дрӣэ [ˈtriːə]
three

фидэр [ˈfidər]
four

финф [ˈfinf]
five

се̄с [ˈseːs]
six

севэнэ [ˈsevənə]
seven

атэ [ˈatʰə]

нӣнэ [ˈniːnə]

тӣнэ [ˈtʰiːnə]
Omzinesý wrote:
19 Mar 2019 14:48
Nice start!

Is /ð/ an allophone of /θ/ like it is in all old Germanic langs?
Does palatalization - it doesn't have to be phonemic - appear by contact influence?
I realized I've neglected a lot of information on the language's allophony. Perhaps I should make that its own post. [ð] is indeed an allophone of /θ/, mostly in internal or unstressed position. (Actual PGmc /đ/ merged with /d/.)

I didn't think palatalization would develop in the language, as Mariupol Greek (the language's biggest influence) lacks it entirely. For the most part, the goal of this language is to stick as close to the corpus as possible, which makes for a less interesting but more realistic Germlang. Furthermore, the Slavic languages are somewhat new to the Crimean region compared to Greek, Gothic and Tatar, and I didn't particularly think they'd have as strong as an influence on Gothic.

Nonetheless, I did secure a grammar of Crimean Tatar, and as a matter of fact Crimean Tatar does have allophonic palatalization of consonants. If I adopt this same contrast, it would not affect the grammar in any way as it would probably postdate the vowel reduction to schwa.
Omzinesý wrote:
19 Mar 2019 14:48
I personally hate that the only part of language people are able to comment is orthography, but I'm doing the same.

Cyrillic orthography has plenty of vowel graphemes. Some of them could be utilized for marking vowel length too.
<и> for /i:/ and <i> for /i/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dotted_I_(Cyrillic) ?
<oy> for /u:/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uk_(Cyrillic) ?
<ѣ> for /e:/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yat ?
<ѡ> for /o:/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omega_(Cyrillic)

I usually prefer <ъ> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yer for cscwa. It could also mark short /u/.
Zekoslav wrote:
19 Mar 2019 15:18
I know it's unusual for conlangs, but what about an underrepresenting orthography where you don't mark vowel length at all? There's plenty of natural languages which do that.
Macrons are used in Evenki, Bering Aleut, Mansi, Selkup and a few others to distinguish vowel length. This is the most aesthetically pleasing solution to me, although it may not be the most realistic. I've briefly toyed with double vowels, but I rejected it as too ugly.

I could use different characters for different lengthened vowels instead. But would it be realistic or intuitive to do so?

I would also be fine with foregoing distinctions on vowel length entirely: it doesn't seem to have a particularly high functional load in Germanic languages anyway, and many Germanic languages lost phonemic vowel length, preferring allophonic lengthening in open syllables. Of course whether this happened in Crimean Gothic we don't know, although it is a common cross linguistic occurrence that I could easily justify it. Or I could keep vowel length as a marginal feature.
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: 784
Joined: 25 Dec 2014 20:17
Location: Virginia

Re: Gotesche Razde

Post by Birdlang » 19 Mar 2019 19:40

The macron is fine for me.
The orthography is nice, has elements of Evenki, Ukrainian, and OCS.
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
Omzinesý
runic
runic
Posts: 2705
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 08:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: Gotesche Razde

Post by Omzinesý » 19 Mar 2019 21:54

I wasn't to say that there is some problem with macron. It's also possible that macron is used in some styles and sometimes just dropped, like dots above <ë> in Russian.
My suggestion with separate letters is relevant only if you want to have a strange oddity. Logical Stalin-made orthographies aren't often what conlangers want.

User avatar
Shemtov
runic
runic
Posts: 3108
Joined: 29 Apr 2013 04:06

Re: Gotesche Razde

Post by Shemtov » 19 Mar 2019 22:04

I find it odd that a language surrounded by Slavic hasn't evolved palatalized consonants AND keeps the interdental.
Many children make up, or begin to make up, imaginary languages. I have been at it since I could write.
-JRR Tolkien

Ælfwine
roman
roman
Posts: 955
Joined: 21 Sep 2015 01:28
Location: New Jersey

Re: Gotesche Razde

Post by Ælfwine » 21 Mar 2019 03:26

So what about this compromise, in regards to vowel length: vowels are typically not marked for length, except when distinguishing minimal pairs. What these pairs are exactly I'll figure out when the language becomes more complex.
Shemtov wrote:
19 Mar 2019 22:04
I find it odd that a language surrounded by Slavic hasn't evolved palatalized consonants AND keeps the interdental.
Except that Slavic languages aren't native to Crimea, and are newcomers to the region. Furthermore, based on the corpus it is highly likely that Crimean Gothic preserved the dental (c.f. words like statz and goltz, which Busbecq tried to transcribe using <tz>). Mariupol Greek also has this phoneme.

Anyway, lets see some actual declensions. A very typical strong noun looks like this:

вулфс "wolf"

Code: Select all

	Sing.	Plural
Nom: 	вулфс 	вулфэс
Acc: 	вулф 	вулфэнс
Gen: 	вулфэс 	вулфэ
As you can see, the dative case is missing: it had been subsumed by the genitive case. This is quite similar to Modern Greek, which similarly lacks a dative case (although to be honest, I am not quite sure if Mariupol Greek shares the same state of affairs as Modern Greek, I can only assume it does.)

Weak nouns are typically more syncretic than strong nouns, although the amount of syncretism varies depending on the exact declension. For example, a neuter an-stem like огэ has the same plural form in -энэ, and shares a similar singular form in the nominative and accusative. Here is the weak an-stem огэ declined:

огэ "eye"

Code: Select all

	Sing.	Plural
Nom:	огэ	огэнэ
Acc:	огэ	огэнэ
Gen:	огэнс	огэнэ
Root nouns and other stems form a special class in Gothic. Most of them inflect quite similarly to other strong nouns, however there are a few irregular nouns to take note of. One of these such words, танѳс, is declined below:

танѳс "tooth"

Code: Select all

	Sing.	Plural
Nom.	танѳс	танѳэс
Acc.	танѳ	танѳэнс
Gen.	тунѳэс	тунѳэ
Much like how the interdental was preserved after an /l/ in words such as голѳ "gold," the dental was preserved after an /n/ in танѳс. In other Germanic languages, either the dental was lost (e.g. Old Norse tǫnn), or the nasal was lost (English tooth). Not only was the interdental preserved here, it was analogically extended from the nominative and accusative to the genitive, which initially had -д instead.

This is all I am going to share for today, as it takes me 30 minutes of my time alone to prepare such a small post, much more for a larger one.
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
Omzinesý
runic
runic
Posts: 2705
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 08:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: Gotesche Razde

Post by Omzinesý » 21 Mar 2019 12:15

Ælfwine wrote:
21 Mar 2019 03:26
As you can see, the dative case is missing: it had been subsumed by the genitive case. This is quite similar to Modern Greek, which similarly lacks a dative case (although to be honest, I am not quite sure if Mariupol Greek shares the same state of affairs as Modern Greek, I can only assume it does.)
Was the dative function really subsumed by the genitive, not the other way around?
Dative (Hungarian) or the ablative (English, Slavic, Romance) subsuming the getive function is very normal.
Ælfwine wrote:
21 Mar 2019 03:26
Much like how the interdental was preserved after an /l/ in words such as голѳ "gold," the dental was preserved after an /n/ in танѳс. In other Germanic languages, either the dental was lost (e.g. Old Norse tǫnn), or the nasal was lost (English tooth). Not only was the interdental preserved here, it was analogically extended from the nominative and accusative to the genitive, which initially had -д instead.
Swedish has "tand".

Salmoneus
MVP
MVP
Posts: 1738
Joined: 19 Sep 2011 19:37

Re: Gotesche Razde

Post by Salmoneus » 21 Mar 2019 13:24

More people might be able to enjoy your work if you didn't demand that we learn Cyrillic for you first!

It may make sense the language having a native orthography that's Cyrillic, but I don't see that it makes much sense having an orthography of presentation that's Cyrillic. Even when dealing with Russian, linguists frequently transliterate, because not all linguists read Cyrillic. Similarly, when we're talking about features in Quenya, people don't insist on only using tengwar.

It's just another barrier to understanding.

User avatar
Heinrich von Preußen
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 22
Joined: 06 Jan 2013 22:26

Re: Gotesche Razde

Post by Heinrich von Preußen » 21 Mar 2019 16:31

Ælfwine wrote:
19 Mar 2019 19:20
I didn't think the orthography would adopt anything from Wulfilas's script, particularly intricacies like <гг>. Nonetheless, if <ъ> makes more sense as a vowel sound for schwa, I'll consider replacing <нъ> with <нг> and likewise <нг> with <гг>.
I know, I just like this combination in Gothic ;)
Ælfwine wrote:
19 Mar 2019 19:20
Only schwa appears in unstressed syllables. The use of <э> for schwa mimics Mansi and Cyrillic Romanian, which uses/used the same character. In many European languages, <e> is used for schwa...French (formerly), German, Danish etc. However, if <ъ> makes more sense for schwa as I said, I can change it.
But in Romanian schwa is not an allophone, but a separate phoneme and it was retained from a Old Church Slavonic convention. Your schwa is just an allophone.
Ælfwine wrote:
19 Mar 2019 19:20
Your comment about Stalin creating the orthography probably isn't too far from the truth, as the orthography would have been created around the same time as Crimean Tatar's (so either the 1920s or 1930s.)
Hmmm, it s such a shame that there will be no simulation of gothic Cyrillic evolution :/
Salmoneus wrote:
21 Mar 2019 13:24
More people might be able to enjoy your work if you didn't demand that we learn Cyrillic for you first!

It may make sense the language having a native orthography that's Cyrillic, but I don't see that it makes much sense having an orthography of presentation that's Cyrillic. Even when dealing with Russian, linguists frequently transliterate, because not all linguists read Cyrillic. Similarly, when we're talking about features in Quenya, people don't insist on only using tengwar.

It's just another barrier to understanding.
Юу ар нот райт. Бай де йей, соу урайтн Инглиш ис мор фонимик дэн эны модэрн дэй конвэйншн.
Pieśń Arjów!

User avatar
spanick
roman
roman
Posts: 1091
Joined: 11 May 2017 01:47
Location: California

Re: Gotesche Razde

Post by spanick » 21 Mar 2019 16:56

Ælfwine wrote:
21 Mar 2019 03:26
So what about this compromise, in regards to vowel length: vowels are typically not marked for length, except when distinguishing minimal pairs. What these pairs are exactly I'll figure out when the language becomes more complex.
That seems odd to me. I prefer to side with the "leave vowel length undermarked" crowd, but that's just me.
Anyway, lets see some actual declensions. A very typical strong noun looks like this:

вулфс "wolf"

Code: Select all

	Sing.	Plural
Nom: 	вулфс 	вулфэс
Acc: 	вулф 	вулфэнс
Gen: 	вулфэс 	вулфэ
As you can see, the dative case is missing: it had been subsumed by the genitive case. This is quite similar to Modern Greek, which similarly lacks a dative case (although to be honest, I am not quite sure if Mariupol Greek shares the same state of affairs as Modern Greek, I can only assume it does.)
Has Gothic lost its gender and reduced all nouns to Strong, Week, or Root?

I like the way this looks although I'm not sure you can take for granted that Mariupol Greek has merged the Dative into the Genitive. That is a feature of the Balkan Sprachbund that Greek shares with Albanian, Macedonian, etc. and not necessarily shared by other dialects. That being said, I know nothing of Mariupol Greek.
Much like how the interdental was preserved after an /l/ in words such as голѳ "gold," the dental was preserved after an /n/ in танѳс. In other Germanic languages, either the dental was lost (e.g. Old Norse tǫnn), or the nasal was lost (English tooth). Not only was the interdental preserved here, it was analogically extended from the nominative and accusative to the genitive, which initially had -д instead.
I like this a lot. Keeping not only the interdental but retaining it in these positions seems very Gothic to me.

User avatar
Creyeditor
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4517
Joined: 14 Aug 2012 19:32

Re: Gotesche Razde

Post by Creyeditor » 21 Mar 2019 20:46

Ælfwine wrote:
21 Mar 2019 03:26
As you can see, the dative case is missing: it had been subsumed by the genitive case. This is quite similar to Modern Greek, which similarly lacks a dative case (although to be honest, I am not quite sure if Mariupol Greek shares the same state of affairs as Modern Greek, I can only assume it does.)
Judging from this paper, Mariupol Greek has lost both genitive and dative case. Judging from the traces of the genitive case and the absence of dative case traces, dative case might have been lost earlier. So, what you do is okay, I guess.
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
roman
roman
Posts: 955
Joined: 21 Sep 2015 01:28
Location: New Jersey

Re: Gotesche Razde

Post by Ælfwine » 22 Mar 2019 01:32

Salmoneus wrote:
21 Mar 2019 13:24
More people might be able to enjoy your work if you didn't demand that we learn Cyrillic for you first!

It may make sense the language having a native orthography that's Cyrillic, but I don't see that it makes much sense having an orthography of presentation that's Cyrillic. Even when dealing with Russian, linguists frequently transliterate, because not all linguists read Cyrillic. Similarly, when we're talking about features in Quenya, people don't insist on only using tengwar.

It's just another barrier to understanding.
I agree. To be honest, I'm not necessarily the best at deciphering Cyrillic myself!

With a few adjustments, this can be the Gothic orthography:

/m n ŋ/ <m n ng>
/p b t d k g/ <p b t d k g>
/f v θ s z ʃ x ɣ/ <f v þ s z sch ch gh>
/r l/ <r l>

/i iː u uː/ <i i u u>
/e eː ə o oː/ <e e e o o>
/a aː/ <a a>

Arguably it's a little more difficult to parse than the Cyrillic one (especially as <e> can be /e/, /eː/ or /ə/), but it works for a Latin transcription. Anyway, I figure a Latin orthography might exist for this language for the same reason it exists for Crimean Tatar: to disassociate itself from Russia and associate itself with the west.
Heinrich von Preußen wrote:
21 Mar 2019 16:31
But in Romanian schwa is not an allophone, but a separate phoneme and it was retained from a Old Church Slavonic convention. Your schwa is just an allophone.
And <э> is just a variant of <е>. So it works, since it is an allophone of /e/.
Hmmm, it s such a shame that there will be no simulation of gothic Cyrillic evolution :/
Unfortunately not! Though I've seen someone with a similar idea to mine use Cyrillic psi <ѱ> for /θ/, based on the similar character in Gothic, I don't know how realistic that is. (I admit it is a pretty cool idea, though.)
spanick wrote:
21 Mar 2019 16:56
That seems odd to me. I prefer to side with the "leave vowel length undermarked" crowd, but that's just me.
I figure the macrons could still be used in say, children's reader books and similar material, while most people may leave it out (like newspapers and the media.)
Has Gothic lost its gender and reduced all nouns to Strong, Week, or Root?
I reckon gender still exists, that is at least the opinion of Stearns (1978) and other scholars who've studied Crimean Gothic.

How exactly gender is marked may be a greater problem, as the quality of vowels in unstressed syllables has become obscured. The article "the/tho" as recorded seems to be one solution, however Stearns seems to think this article is unstressed and therefore the two vowels signify one schwalike sound, and not a difference in gender.

What I've just given was a small sampling. However, as in English, "strong" vs. "weak" nouns may be the two largest groups, with a handful of irregular nouns.
I like this a lot. Keeping not only the interdental but retaining it in these positions seems very Gothic to me.
Indeed!
I like the way this looks although I'm not sure you can take for granted that Mariupol Greek has merged the Dative into the Genitive. That is a feature of the Balkan Sprachbund that Greek shares with Albanian, Macedonian, etc. and not necessarily shared by other dialects. That being said, I know nothing of Mariupol Greek.
Me neither beyond the stuff my book tells me.
Creyeditor wrote:
21 Mar 2019 20:46

Judging from this paper, Mariupol Greek has lost both genitive and dative case. Judging from the traces of the genitive case and the absence of dative case traces, dative case might have been lost earlier. So, what you do is okay, I guess.
Thank you for that paper, Crey. It definitely gives me a few ideas.

So now I am thinking: what if the genitive was lost entirely, much like Mariupol Greek? Apply a bit of analogy and a very clean looking paradigm emerges, where the nominative is marked using -s and the plural is marked using -e.

The paradigm for strong nouns would become thus:

-s, -es
-∅, -e

In weak nouns the difference between nominative and accusative might be eliminated entirely (and so would the case system). The genitive of course, may still survive in pronouns and similar words. Gothic may give us its own host of unique particles and prepositions that could be used in place of the former case system (most likely with the accusative.)
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
spanick
roman
roman
Posts: 1091
Joined: 11 May 2017 01:47
Location: California

Re: Gotesche Razde

Post by spanick » 22 Mar 2019 18:36

Ælfwine wrote:
22 Mar 2019 01:32
Arguably it's a little more difficult to parse than the Cyrillic one (especially as <e> can be /e/, /eː/ or /ə/), but it works for a Latin transcription. Anyway, I figure a Latin orthography might exist for this language for the same reason it exists for Crimean Tatar: to disassociate itself from Russia and associate itself with the west.

Maybe a little but if Gothic has predictable stress then we can reasonably infer when <e> represents a phoneme and when it represents schwa. This is basically the same system as German, after all.
I figure the macrons could still be used in say, children's reader books and similar material, while most people may leave it out (like newspapers and the media.)
Gotcha. This is pretty common. Serbian does this with vowel length (only indicated in dictionaries) and of course most Hebrew and Arabic isn't written with vowel points.
I reckon gender still exists, that is at least the opinion of Stearns (1978) and other scholars who've studied Crimean Gothic.

How exactly gender is marked may be a greater problem, as the quality of vowels in unstressed syllables has become obscured. The article "the/tho" as recorded seems to be one solution, however Stearns seems to think this article is unstressed and therefore the two vowels signify one schwalike sound, and not a difference in gender.

What I've just given was a small sampling. However, as in English, "strong" vs. "weak" nouns may be the two largest groups, with a handful of irregular nouns.
It's been a while since I've looked at Gothic declension that wasn't my own conlang's but I don't think the <-s> ending in the nominative singular is particularly common in the feminine or neuter, so unless you're having <-s> generalize to ALL genders, you should still be able to mark gender at least there.
The paradigm for strong nouns would become thus:

-s, -es
-∅, -e

In weak nouns the difference between nominative and accusative might be eliminated entirely (and so would the case system). The genitive of course, may still survive in pronouns and similar words. Gothic may give us its own host of unique particles and prepositions that could be used in place of the former case system (most likely with the accusative.)
Very interesting!

Ælfwine
roman
roman
Posts: 955
Joined: 21 Sep 2015 01:28
Location: New Jersey

Re: Gotesche Razde

Post by Ælfwine » 24 Mar 2019 22:19

Allophony! For now, I'll start with consonantal allophony, as the vowels don't vary much:

/b/ is pronounced:
[p] initially
{b] in between two sonorants
[p] finally

/d/ is pronounced:
[t] initially
[d] in between two sonorants
[t] finally

/f/ is pronounced:
[f] everywhere

/g/ is pronounced:
[k] initially
[g] in between two sonorants
[k] finally

/ɣ/ is pronounced:
[g] after [ŋ]
[x] finally
[ɣ] in all other positions

/k/ is pronounced
[k] after a sibilant
[kʰ] in all other positions

/l/ is pronounced
[ɫ] before a velar consonant
[l] in all other positions

/m/ is pronounced:
[ɱ] before a labiodental
[m] in all other positions

/n/ is pronounced:
[ŋ] before a velar consonant
[n] in all other positions

/p/ is pronounced
[p] after a sibilant
[pʰ] in all other positions

/r/ is pronounced
[r] in all positions

/s/ is pronounced:
{s] initially
[z] in between two sonorants
{s] finally

/t/ is pronounced:
[t] after a sibilant
[tʰ] in all other positions

/θ/ is pronounced
[θ] initially
[ð] in between two vowels
[θ] finally

/v/ is pronounced:
[v] initially and in between two vowels
[ʋ] or [w] in between a consonant and a vowel
[f] finally

/x/ is pronounced:
[x] in all positions


spanick wrote:
22 Mar 2019 18:36

It's been a while since I've looked at Gothic declension that wasn't my own conlang's but I don't think the <-s> ending in the nominative singular is particularly common in the feminine or neuter, so unless you're having <-s> generalize to ALL genders, you should still be able to mark gender at least there.
Indeed it does seem that by eliminating the genitive, case only survives in masculine nouns, as in many neuters and feminines seem to collapse the two. While there are a few stems that had preserved a difference, I may just level it so that only masculine nouns distinguish case. Furthermore, at least in nouns (adjectives are a different story), the neuter gender and feminine gender merge. For comparison sake, I'll show the difference between the two below:

Strong masculine stem:
The strong masculine stem forms from the strong masculine a-stem, the strong masculine i-stem, the strong masculine u-stem, feminine i-stem and the consonant stem.
dags "day"

Code: Select all

	Sing.	Plural
Nom: 	dags 	dages
Obl: 	dag	dage
Weak masculines:
mīne "moon"

Code: Select all

	Sing.	Plural
Nom:	mīne	mīnens
Obl:	mīne	mīnens
Strong neuters:
brōd "bread"

Code: Select all

	Sing.	Plural
Nom:	brōd	brōde
Obl:	brōd	brōde
Weak neuters:
ōge "eye"

Code: Select all

	Sing.	Plural
Nom:	ōge	ōgene
Obl:	ōge	ōgene
Strong feminine stem:
The strong feminine stem forms from the strong feminine ō-stem and the strong feminine ī/jō-stems
razde "language"

Code: Select all

	Sing.	Plural
Nom: 	razde 	razdes
Obl: 	razde	razdes
Weak feminine stem
This class of nouns derives from the feminine ōn and in stems.
tunge "tongue"

Code: Select all

	Sing.	Plural
Nom: 	tunge 	tungens
Obl: 	tungen	tungens
r-stems
The r-stems are a special class of nouns that primarily form kinship words.
schvester "sister"

Code: Select all

	Sing.		Plural
Nom: 	schvester 	schvestres
Obl: 	schvester	schvestrens

z-stems
lambs "sheep"

Code: Select all

	Sing.		Plural
Nom: 	lambs 		lambeze
Obl: 	lambs		lambeze
Last edited by Ælfwine on 17 May 2019 23:56, edited 4 times in total.
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
Omzinesý
runic
runic
Posts: 2705
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 08:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: Gotesche Razde

Post by Omzinesý » 01 Apr 2019 15:16

How is the possession construction formed if the genitive case disappears? Turkic languages (I guess Tatar as well) need a posssed marker in the end of the possessed word.
How is Accusative used, that's though a marked-nominative language, so Accusative could have some extrafunctions, like vocative, predicative, topicalization etc. Also accusative-dative (preposition) verbs could appear. Icelandic also has them.

Does Accusative somehow mark Definiteness. In Turkic languages the accusative seems to derive form the possessed marker and only appear as a definite object.

Ælfwine
roman
roman
Posts: 955
Joined: 21 Sep 2015 01:28
Location: New Jersey

Re: Gotesche Razde

Post by Ælfwine » 03 Apr 2019 00:11

I'm going to be frank, syntax is my weakest area, so any ideas you guys can through at me are welcome.
How is the possession construction formed if the genitive case disappears?
Most likely by the accusative case in addition to a preposition or pronoun that denotes possession. "for" might work well for this case.

The accusative case anyway is a misnomer, as it should be called the "oblique." First, the dative merged into the genitive, and then the genitive merged into the accusative. I thought briefly of keeping the genitive as per the "Balkan Sprachbund," but the Crimean peninsula might be out of reach of the sprachbund, and Mariupol Greek lost it anyway. All the ways the accusative may be used might require its own post for later, but to simplify a bit, it covers the object and every way it can be modified (as opposed to the initial subject, which always takes the nominative case.) Do note that the accusative is distinct mostly in strong masculine nouns.

Edit: There may still be a chance that Gothish joins the Balkan Sprachbund based on the fact that the Sprachbund best corresponds to the borders of the Byzantine Empire (and later the Ottoman Empire). See this paper.
Does Accusative somehow mark Definiteness. In Turkic languages the accusative seems to derive form the possessed marker and only appear as a definite object.
Any examples you can show me?
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.

Post Reply