(Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

A forum for all topics related to constructed languages
User avatar
Isfendil
greek
greek
Posts: 709
Joined: 19 Feb 2016 03:47

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by Isfendil » 27 Sep 2016 16:39

loglorn wrote:An interesting situation to test the terminology, if you diachronically derive a conlang from Brithenig, is it a priori or a posteriori?
What is diachronic conlanging and why is it the path to happiness?

User avatar
Egerius
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2388
Joined: 12 Sep 2013 21:29
Location: Not Rodentèrra
Contact:

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by Egerius » 27 Sep 2016 17:43

Isfendil wrote:
loglorn wrote:An interesting situation to test the terminology, if you diachronically derive a conlang from Brithenig, is it a priori or a posteriori?
What is diachronic conlanging and why is it the path to happiness?
@ loglorn: I'd say it's a posteriori — Vulgar Latin existed, Brithenig exists, case closed.
@ Isfendil: Diachronic conlanging is making a conlang age through supposed sound changes or deriving a conlang from an existing language through you own set of sound changes. And it's the path of happiness because one can make a conlang that seems familiar at first sight and produces a WTF moment right after some random person begins reading a text in a diachronically derive conlang.
Edit: Corrected. Thanks, DesEsseintes!
Last edited by Egerius on 27 Sep 2016 19:00, edited 1 time in total.
Languages of Rodentèrra: Buonavallese, Saselvan Argemontese; Wīlandisċ Taulkeisch; More on the road.
Conlang embryo of TELES: Proto-Avesto-Umbric ~> Proto-Umbric
New blog: http://argentiusbonavalensis.tumblr.com

User avatar
DesEsseintes
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4598
Joined: 31 Mar 2013 13:16

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by DesEsseintes » 27 Sep 2016 18:01

Egerius wrote:
Isfendil wrote:
loglorn wrote:An interesting situation to test the terminology, if you diachronically derive a conlang from Brithenig, is it a priori or a posteriori?
What is diachronic conlanging and why is it the path to happiness?
@ Isfendil: I'd say it's a posteriori — Vulgar Latin existed, Brithenig exists, case closed.
@ loglorn: Diachronic conlanging is making a conlang age through supposed sound changes or deriving a conlang from an existing language through you own set of sound changes. And it's the path of happiness because one can make a conlang that seems familiar at first sight and produces a WTF moment right after some random person begins reading a text in a diachronically derive conlang.
I think you got your @s the wrong way round.

Ebon
sinic
sinic
Posts: 431
Joined: 02 Jul 2016 20:55

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by Ebon » 27 Sep 2016 19:03

Aretach adjectives are commonly formed by attaching an adjective ending to a noun; for example, eshe (wisdom) + ky = eshegy (wise.SG.ANIM). These endings change to reflect noun gender and number. Would it be implausible for the writing system not to reflect the changes?

I've made an adjective ending glyph, but on its own you wouldn't know how you're meant to pronounce it, you'd have to look at the corresponding noun following the adjective. Stretching pronunciation across glyphs happens, but I don't know if it's too much to stretch it beyond a single word.

User avatar
Chagen
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 3970
Joined: 03 Sep 2011 05:14
Location: Texas

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by Chagen » 27 Sep 2016 19:15

Creyeditor wrote:William Annis' "A conlanger's Thesaurus" gives get, obtain as a verb that is likely to have a semantic connection to the past tense and sit and stand have a connection to the continious aspect in some languages according to him. So, I guess in principle locational verbs are a naturalistic solution, I guess.
I actually decided on a verb less than ten minutes after making that post. I used PIE *kwel- "turn", giving Maryusic vatikarīma "I was speaking". Also compare the reduced form in vatikrasāma "I will have spoken", which is an Future Imperfect, an unholy construction that would be absolutely horrifying to PIE proper.
Nūdenku waga honji ma naku honyasi ne ika-ika ichamase!
female-appearance=despite boy-voice=PAT hold boy-youth=TOP very be.cute-3PL
Honyasi zō honyasi ma naidasu.
boy-youth=AGT boy-youth=PAT love.romantically-3S

Sumelic
greek
greek
Posts: 619
Joined: 18 Jun 2013 23:01

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by Sumelic » 28 Sep 2016 01:14

Ebon wrote:Aretach adjectives are commonly formed by attaching an adjective ending to a noun; for example, eshe (wisdom) + ky = eshegy (wise.SG.ANIM). These endings change to reflect noun gender and number. Would it be implausible for the writing system not to reflect the changes?

I've made an adjective ending glyph, but on its own you wouldn't know how you're meant to pronounce it, you'd have to look at the corresponding noun following the adjective. Stretching pronunciation across glyphs happens, but I don't know if it's too much to stretch it beyond a single word.
-Do the adjectives decline in the same way as nouns (or some subset of nouns), or does adjective declension use different suffixes?
-Are noun inflections for gender and number marked in the writing system? How so?

Ebon
sinic
sinic
Posts: 431
Joined: 02 Jul 2016 20:55

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by Ebon » 28 Sep 2016 01:24

Sumelic wrote:
Ebon wrote:Aretach adjectives are commonly formed by attaching an adjective ending to a noun; for example, eshe (wisdom) + ky = eshegy (wise.SG.ANIM). These endings change to reflect noun gender and number. Would it be implausible for the writing system not to reflect the changes?

I've made an adjective ending glyph, but on its own you wouldn't know how you're meant to pronounce it, you'd have to look at the corresponding noun following the adjective. Stretching pronunciation across glyphs happens, but I don't know if it's too much to stretch it beyond a single word.
-Do the adjectives decline in the same way as nouns (or some subset of nouns), or does adjective declension use different suffixes?
-Are noun inflections for gender and number marked in the writing system? How so?
-They use different suffixes.
-Number markings are written, gender markings are not. Numbers are written with half-width glyphs for dual and plural after the noun.

clawgrip
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2386
Joined: 24 Jun 2012 07:33
Location: Tokyo

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by clawgrip » 28 Sep 2016 02:01

It seems fine to me, as long as the rest of the script is equally ambiguous. You shouldn't differentiate gender anywhere, I think.

User avatar
Isfendil
greek
greek
Posts: 709
Joined: 19 Feb 2016 03:47

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by Isfendil » 28 Sep 2016 03:14

Egerius wrote:
Isfendil wrote:
loglorn wrote:An interesting situation to test the terminology, if you diachronically derive a conlang from Brithenig, is it a priori or a posteriori?
What is diachronic conlanging and why is it the path to happiness?
@ loglorn: I'd say it's a posteriori — Vulgar Latin existed, Brithenig exists, case closed.
@ Isfendil: Diachronic conlanging is making a conlang age through supposed sound changes or deriving a conlang from an existing language through you own set of sound changes. And it's the path of happiness because one can make a conlang that seems familiar at first sight and produces a WTF moment right after some random person begins reading a text in a diachronically derive conlang.
Edit: Corrected. Thanks, DesEsseintes!
Okay so I have a question. Could you clarify what you said here? Now that I know what it's called, I can say that I've done this. Edyssian needed a brother for worldbuilding reasons, so I sideways derived a fairly intelligable language from it, and was pleased when I read a semantically identical sentence in both. Is that what you mean?

Iyionaku
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1667
Joined: 25 May 2014 14:17

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by Iyionaku » 28 Sep 2016 03:45

Partially, but normally when you do diachronic conlanging, you start from a parent rather than from a sister. (Because it is exceptionally hard to create sister languages that are really realistic, albeit not impossible).
Wipe the glass. This is the usual way to start, even in the days, day and night, only a happy one.

User avatar
Isfendil
greek
greek
Posts: 709
Joined: 19 Feb 2016 03:47

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by Isfendil » 28 Sep 2016 06:49

Iyionaku wrote:Partially, but normally when you do diachronic conlanging, you start from a parent rather than from a sister. (Because it is exceptionally hard to create sister languages that are really realistic, albeit not impossible).
What if they weren't particularly diverged morphologically and you had a concrete idea in mind for their phonological changes?

Keenir
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2383
Joined: 22 May 2012 03:05

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by Keenir » 28 Sep 2016 09:01

Ebon wrote:Aretach adjectives are commonly formed by attaching an adjective ending to a noun; for example, eshe (wisdom) + ky = eshegy (wise.SG.ANIM). These endings change to reflect noun gender and number. Would it be implausible for the writing system not to reflect the changes?
not implausible.
I've made an adjective ending glyph, but on its own you wouldn't know how you're meant to pronounce it, you'd have to look at the corresponding noun following the adjective. Stretching pronunciation across glyphs happens, but I don't know if it's too much to stretch it beyond a single word.
so, the two glyphs might be PANAM and AJ, but the pronounciation would be pana then a space, then maj...or did i misunderstand your question?
At work on Apaan: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=4799

Ebon
sinic
sinic
Posts: 431
Joined: 02 Jul 2016 20:55

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by Ebon » 28 Sep 2016 10:59

Keenir wrote:
Ebon wrote:Aretach adjectives are commonly formed by attaching an adjective ending to a noun; for example, eshe (wisdom) + ky = eshegy (wise.SG.ANIM). These endings change to reflect noun gender and number. Would it be implausible for the writing system not to reflect the changes?
not implausible.
I've made an adjective ending glyph, but on its own you wouldn't know how you're meant to pronounce it, you'd have to look at the corresponding noun following the adjective. Stretching pronunciation across glyphs happens, but I don't know if it's too much to stretch it beyond a single word.
so, the two glyphs might be PANAM and AJ, but the pronounciation would be pana then a space, then maj...or did i misunderstand your question?
I think you may have. Here's an example:
Spoiler:
Image
The first two glyphs in each are wise+adjective marker. The top row nouns are singular animate and inanimate, and the bottom two are plural.

Top left is pronounced eshe-gy one.
Bottom left: eshe-gyde one-dhy.
Top right: eshe-gyn tarore.
Bottom right: eshe-gyne taror-dhy.

The adjective marker in these four samples is pronounced gy/gyde/gyn/gyne but the adjective itself never reflects that. Unless I change it.

clawgrip
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2386
Joined: 24 Jun 2012 07:33
Location: Tokyo

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by clawgrip » 28 Sep 2016 12:56

This seems perfectly fine to me, especially with the noun right there. Contrary to what I said previously, the fact that you have the marking on the noun right there makes the particular reading obvious. However, because adjectives come before the nouns they modify, It will get confusing if the adjective appears far in front of the noun, because even the most competent reader would be unable to pronounce it, because it's based on context that has not appeared yet.

If these adjective endings do appear physically distant from the nouns they modify, then I think you can only get away with this if the script is not normally used for everyday communication and is limited to specific contexts where the specific pronunciation is already generally known (like a prayer or something), if it's unimportant (record keeping using a limited subset of the language, where perhaps differentiating adjectives from other parts of speech is important, but differentiating genders is not) or if it's an epigraphic script, where appearance is more important than legibility.

In brief, if legibility is important, but the distance between adjectives and their nouns frequently hinders it, then frustrated readers and writers will develop workarounds. But if not, then no problem.
Last edited by clawgrip on 29 Sep 2016 00:54, edited 1 time in total.

Ebon
sinic
sinic
Posts: 431
Joined: 02 Jul 2016 20:55

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by Ebon » 28 Sep 2016 18:30

clawgrip wrote:This seems perfectly fine to me, especially with the noun right there. Contrary to what I said previously, the fact that you have the marking on the noun right there makes the particular reading obvious. However, because adjectives China before the nouns they modify, It will get confusing if the adjective appears far in front of the noun, because even the most competent reader would be unable to pronounce it, because it's based on context that has not appeared yet.

If these adjective endings do appear physically distant from the nouns they modify, then I think you can only get away with this if the script is not normally used for everyday communication and is limited to specific contexts where the specific pronunciation is already generally known (like a prayer or something), if it's unimportant (record keeping using a limited subset of the language, where perhaps differentiating adjectives from other parts of speech is important, but differentiating genders is not) or if it's an epigraphic script, where appearance is more important than legibility.

In brief, if legibility is important, but the distance between adjectives and their nouns frequently hinders it, then frustrated readers and writers will develop workarounds. But if not, then no problem.
Did you mean to write change instead of China?

Thanks either way, that helps a lot. I'll make sure not to stick much between adjectives and nouns then.

clawgrip
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2386
Joined: 24 Jun 2012 07:33
Location: Tokyo

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by clawgrip » 29 Sep 2016 01:39

I meant "come".

The thing is, when you say you will make sure not to stick too much stuff between adjectives and nouns, you have to prohibit it in the language itself, otherwise the script simply will not be able to keep up with the language. Realistically, writers would start to add disambiguators if they could not properly read what was written.

Ebon
sinic
sinic
Posts: 431
Joined: 02 Jul 2016 20:55

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by Ebon » 29 Sep 2016 10:07

I was planning to do it in the language itself, of course.

User avatar
Frislander
runic
runic
Posts: 3496
Joined: 14 May 2016 18:47
Location: The North

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by Frislander » 29 Sep 2016 13:44

Isfendil wrote:
Iyionaku wrote:Partially, but normally when you do diachronic conlanging, you start from a parent rather than from a sister. (Because it is exceptionally hard to create sister languages that are really realistic, albeit not impossible).
What if they weren't particularly diverged morphologically and you had a concrete idea in mind for their phonological changes?
I'd say that's fine. I generally don't go down the whole proto-lang to daughter-lang route; my style is more "historically aware" rather than historically based (despite historical linguistics possibly being my favourite linguistic field). So if I want dialectal differentiation or a sister-lang, I almost always throw in a few phonemes lost in the main daughter, but present or with different reflexes in the sister(s).

User avatar
Isfendil
greek
greek
Posts: 709
Joined: 19 Feb 2016 03:47

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by Isfendil » 29 Sep 2016 16:47

Frislander wrote:
Isfendil wrote:
Iyionaku wrote:Partially, but normally when you do diachronic conlanging, you start from a parent rather than from a sister. (Because it is exceptionally hard to create sister languages that are really realistic, albeit not impossible).
What if they weren't particularly diverged morphologically and you had a concrete idea in mind for their phonological changes?
I'd say that's fine. I generally don't go down the whole proto-lang to daughter-lang route; my style is more "historically aware" rather than historically based (despite historical linguistics possibly being my favourite linguistic field). So if I want dialectal differentiation or a sister-lang, I almost always throw in a few phonemes lost in the main daughter, but present or with different reflexes in the sister(s).
That sounds right. Oh thank goodness.

Ebon
sinic
sinic
Posts: 431
Joined: 02 Jul 2016 20:55

Re: (Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by Ebon » 01 Oct 2016 13:15

How does one even maintain a logographic conlang dictionary? I'm toying with the idea of getting a binder and sorting them by semantic radical, and then noting in my transcription dictionary under which radical I'd find any given word, but it still sounds annoying to find when my word count grows higher. :| Or I suppose I could take photos and insert them into the digital dictionary...

Does anyone have any tips on this? It isn't a problem yet, but it won't be long until it is.

Post Reply