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

A forum for all topics related to constructed languages
User avatar
Lambuzhao
korean
korean
Posts: 7784
Joined: 13 May 2012 02:57

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

Post by Lambuzhao » 12 Apr 2017 21:18

alynnidalar wrote: I'm a fast typist so if all I had to do was sit around with a dictionary and type random sequences of phonemes that were valid in Tirina, I could probably create words in mere seconds, but what would that get me? They wouldn't mean anything.
Indeed.

I have done random-generating and gotten literally pages of words that obey Rozwi's sound laws and look great. I think I have assigned meanings to exactly half of those words.

But if I sat down and tried to work out meanings for and etymologies (b/c sisterlangs Kwijin, Yauchuan, Hwa An, etc will be mighty jealous) straight on through... that... that would seem too much like homework. [:S]

It is a great resource to cherry-pick from, though, from time to time.

User avatar
Lambuzhao
korean
korean
Posts: 7784
Joined: 13 May 2012 02:57

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

Post by Lambuzhao » 12 Apr 2017 21:21

OTʜᴇB wrote:the average conlanger.
Heavens to betsy! An average conlanger, you say‽‽ :wat:

Pretty much each and every conlanger I have known is above average, wot?

[;)]

User avatar
KaiTheHomoSapien
greek
greek
Posts: 686
Joined: 15 Feb 2016 06:10
Location: Northern California

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

Post by KaiTheHomoSapien » 13 Apr 2017 07:19

alynnidalar wrote:I don't often create more than three or four words at once, and then usually just because they're related or I'm translating something. Because I generally create an etymology for each word, it can take several minutes to create one, starting from figuring out what the etymology will be, if it's a borrowing, what sound changes need to be applied, etc. etc. Of late I've also tried to write down more about connotation and special uses of words, so that adds time as well.

Speed seems like an odd thing to focus on in a conlang--I suppose if that's what you like, more power to you, but that's not at all what I'm personally interested in. I'm a fast typist so if all I had to do was sit around with a dictionary and type random sequences of phonemes that were valid in Tirina, I could probably create words in mere seconds, but what would that get me? They wouldn't mean anything.
Same. I create words very slowly, and my system is not even as perfectly root-derived as I'd like (I have many more roots than are probably necessary or realistic). Sometimes I think about a single word for a while; I've even gone back and changed a word (such as the word for "gold") because I liked a different sequence of sounds better -_-

Needless to say this method isn't very conducive to having an expansive conlang vocabulary [:$] But I'm getting there!

Ælfwine
roman
roman
Posts: 959
Joined: 21 Sep 2015 01:28
Location: New Jersey

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

Post by Ælfwine » 14 Apr 2017 02:43

Can /c͡ç/ and /ɟ͡ʝ/ be the result of palatalization (and as a result, become phonetic?) I've noticed that these affricates aren't as common as say, /t͡ʃ/ is, for example in natlangs, and I am not sure if they are actual phonemes in any language I can think of.
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.

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

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

Post by Sumelic » 14 Apr 2017 03:04

Ælfwine wrote:Can /c͡ç/ and /ɟ͡ʝ/ be the result of palatalization (and as a result, become phonetic?) I've noticed that these affricates aren't as common as say, /t͡ʃ/ is, for example in natlangs, and I am not sure if they are actual phonemes in any language I can think of.
It's at least approximately possible, depending on what you mean. I don't know of any language that has /c͡ç/ and /ɟ͡ʝ/ as phonemes that contrast with non-affricated palatal plosives /c/ and /ɟ/. And of course, with no contrast, it's common to use the simpler transcription for either practical reasons (it's easier to type) or theoretical reasons (e.g. the affrication is analyzed as non-phonemic because it is completely predictable). But there are languages that people have reported as having the phones [c͡ç] and [ɟ͡ʝ]. Some people say the Hungarian palatal stops, which can result in some contexts from palatalization of coronal stops before original /j/, are sometimes or even usually realized as affricates. They are phonologically coronal and phonetically alveolopalatal, but I don't think they are sibilant enough to warrant a transcription like [cɕ] or [ɟʑ]. That's just my guess though; I am no expert on phonetics. If you want a rigorous/detailed description you can check to see if Canepari has a CanIPA analysis of Hungarian.

User avatar
LinguoFranco
greek
greek
Posts: 466
Joined: 20 Jul 2016 17:49
Location: U.S.

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

Post by LinguoFranco » 14 Apr 2017 04:21

holbuzvala wrote:So I have two inanimate noun classes: 'line' and 'group' things (each takes seperate verb/adj agreements). Group things are either things you find almost always in groups with their kin (leaves, fingers, grapes), or things composed of many of the same things (hair, a mop).

I want a way to overtly mark when group things are singular, so I open it to the floor - what might be a fun way to do that? A affix from the same root as the word 'one'? Something non-concatenative-y?
You could use ablauts, like English uses sing, sang, sung. The vowel is different to mark the different tenses. You could apply to the same process to 'group' things to make them singular.

User avatar
LinguoFranco
greek
greek
Posts: 466
Joined: 20 Jul 2016 17:49
Location: U.S.

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

Post by LinguoFranco » 14 Apr 2017 04:25

OTʜᴇB wrote:When you're down making words, how quickly do you find yourself making them and adding them to a dictionary/lexicon book? I'm managing just under 1wpm (word per minute) at the moment as it takes be some 40 seconds to type out my little entry into my dictionary.
I tend to just create words out of nowhere while still being consistent with the language's morphophonology. I don't usually derive them from anything. I usually add a word to the list that I really like the sound of or works really well, but it doesn't have a meaning because I try to turn it over and spin it around in my mind several times before I find a concept I can match it with. Basically it goes along the lines of something like this: "No, that word does not really sound like something I'd associate a tree with." Idk if I'm making any sense.

Squall
greek
greek
Posts: 578
Joined: 28 Nov 2013 14:47

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

Post by Squall » 15 Apr 2017 04:24

I have some weird rules in my conlang.
I want to know if the rules are acceptable. In other words, can a human speaker use theses rules spontaneously and non-prescriptively? Are the rules is stable for a long time?

There is a word that means "this/that". It is usually followed by a noun, but the noun can be omitted. However, when the next word is a noun that is not part of the same nominal group, a particle that means "thing" is used. If the next word is a conjugated verb, a relative pronoun, an adverbial or the end of the sentence, that particle is not used.
So, if the speaker uses the SOV order, "She/he/this/that likes dogs" is translated as "this thing dog likes" while "this dog likes" means "This dog likes it/them/him/her". "I want this" is translated as "I this want". The rule is also used with numbers. When the number occurs without a noun, 'two' is translated as 'two ones'.

The other rule concerns relative clause and subordinate clause. A relative clause may end with the particle 'en', which has no meaning. If the clause ends before a conjugated noun or at the end of the sentence, the particle is not used.
I ate the apple that you bought yesterday. (you bought it yesterday)
I ate the apple that you bought EN yesterday. (I ate it yesterday)
I ate the apple that you bought last week EN yesterday.
English is not my native language. Sorry for any mistakes or lack of knowledge when I discuss this language.
:bra: :mrgreen: | :uk: [:D] | :esp: [:)] | :epo: [:|] | :lat: [:S] | :jpn: [:'(]

User avatar
loglorn
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1886
Joined: 17 Mar 2014 03:22

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

Post by loglorn » 15 Apr 2017 05:07

Squall wrote:I have some weird rules in my conlang.
I want to know if the rules are acceptable. In other words, can a human speaker use theses rules spontaneously and non-prescriptively? Are the rules is stable for a long time?

There is a word that means "this/that". It is usually followed by a noun, but the noun can be omitted. However, when the next word is a noun that is not part of the same nominal group, a particle that means "thing" is used. If the next word is a conjugated verb, a relative pronoun, an adverbial or the end of the sentence, that particle is not used.
So, if the speaker uses the SOV order, "She/he/this/that likes dogs" is translated as "this thing dog likes" while "this dog likes" means "This dog likes it/them/him/her". "I want this" is translated as "I this want". The rule is also used with numbers. When the number occurs without a noun, 'two' is translated as 'two ones'.

The other rule concerns relative clause and subordinate clause. A relative clause may end with the particle 'en', which has no meaning. If the clause ends before a conjugated noun or at the end of the sentence, the particle is not used.
I ate the apple that you bought yesterday. (you bought it yesterday)
I ate the apple that you bought EN yesterday. (I ate it yesterday)
I ate the apple that you bought last week EN yesterday.
First looks perfectly reasonable. I don't get the second exactly so I can't comment. Can you make some full glossed sentences showing it? If you also make glossed sentences with the first rule while you're at it ill certainly not complain.
Diachronic Conlanging is the path to happiness, given time. [;)]

Gigxkpoyan Languages: CHÍFJAEŚÍ RETLA TLAPTHUV DÄLDLEN CJUŚËKNJU ṢATT

Other langs: Søsøzatli Kamëzet

User avatar
Lao Kou
korean
korean
Posts: 5665
Joined: 25 Nov 2012 10:39
Location: 蘇州/苏州

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

Post by Lao Kou » 15 Apr 2017 05:10

Squall wrote:I have some weird rules in my conlang.
I want to know if the rules are acceptable. In other words, can a human speaker use theses rules spontaneously and non-prescriptively?
None of this strikes me as particularly weird, especially as Géarthnuns does similar things. [;)]
There is a word that means "this/that". It is usually followed by a noun, but the noun can be omitted. However, when the next word is a noun that is not part of the same nominal group, a particle that means "thing" is used. If the next word is a conjugated verb, a relative pronoun, an adverbial or the end of the sentence, that particle is not used.
While not exactly the same, and not used in this particular context, there is some similar particle usage in Géarthnuns.
The rule is also used with numbers. When the number occurs without a noun, 'two' is translated as 'two ones'.
Géarthnuns would do this, too, but with substantivized adjectives.
The other rule concerns relative clause and subordinate clause. A relative clause may end with the particle 'en', which has no meaning. If the clause ends before a conjugated noun or at the end of the sentence, the particle is not used.
I ate the apple that you bought yesterday. (you bought it yesterday)
I ate the apple that you bought EN yesterday. (I ate it yesterday)
I ate the apple that you bought last week EN yesterday.
"Sho" works similarly to your "en":

I the apple that you yesterday bought SHO ate. (you bought it yesterday)
I the apple that you bought SHO yesterday ate. (I ate it yesterday)
I the apple that you last week bought SHO yesterday ate. (well, nothing really new here)
Are the rules stable for a long time?
Stability, schmability. Whether the rules last one generation or ten, any language description, con- or nat-, is simply a snapshot taken at a particular moment/period of time. If you want to think of your lang as enduring throughout the ages, you'll need to take a series of snapshots and run them through a linguistic zoetrope.
道可道,非常道
名可名,非常名

User avatar
Parlox
greek
greek
Posts: 457
Joined: 10 Feb 2017 20:28
Location: Ehh

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

Post by Parlox » 15 Apr 2017 17:53

Does anyone know of websites with a proto-berber list of words?
Or a website with in depth grammar of berber languages?
  • :con: Cajun, a descendant of French spoken in Louisiana.
  • :con: Bàsupan, loosely inspired by Amharic.
  • :con: Oddúhath Claire, a fusion of Welsh and Arabic.

Squall
greek
greek
Posts: 578
Joined: 28 Nov 2013 14:47

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

Post by Squall » 15 Apr 2017 17:54

Lao Kou wrote:
Are the rules stable for a long time?
Stability, schmability. Whether the rules last one generation or ten, any language description, con- or nat-, is simply a snapshot taken at a particular moment/period of time. If you want to think of your lang as enduring throughout the ages, you'll need to take a series of snapshots and run them through a linguistic zoetrope.
Most people prefer naturalistic conlangs, but I want my conlangs to be like natural languages in another manner. Historical changes, irregular forms, homophones, synonyms and unexpected rules are absent. I want the conlang to be as usable by the human brain as a natural language. So the human speaker should be spontaneous without having to think of rules.
As for stability for a long time, some features are more stable than others. For instance, /ɸ/ and /f/ are unlikely to co-exist for a long time.

loglorn wrote:First looks perfectly reasonable. I don't get the second exactly so I can't comment. Can you make some full glossed sentences showing it? If you also make glossed sentences with the first rule while you're at it ill certainly not complain.
The following sentences have relative clauses. The end of relative clauses is marked with the particle EN when it is not at the end of the sentence and when it is not followed by a conjugated verb. EN is only a resumptive particle, it doesn't have any meaning.

The apple that you bought disappeared. (correct)
The apple that you bought EN disappeared. (wrong, 'disappeared' is a conjugated verb)

I ate the apple that you bought yesterday EN. (wrong, EN cannot be at the end of the sentence)
I ate the apple that you bought yesterday. (you bought it yesterday)(correct)
I ate the apple that you bought EN yesterday. (I ate it yesterday)(correct)
English is not my native language. Sorry for any mistakes or lack of knowledge when I discuss this language.
:bra: :mrgreen: | :uk: [:D] | :esp: [:)] | :epo: [:|] | :lat: [:S] | :jpn: [:'(]

Iyionaku
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1687
Joined: 25 May 2014 14:17

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

Post by Iyionaku » 17 Apr 2017 11:14

I need help with the phonetic descriptive analysis of Yélian's vowel system in IPA. So far, I have analyzed unstressed vowels in Yélian like this:
Iyionaku wrote:In unstressed syllables, the monophtongs /a e i o u œ/ are realized as [ɐ ɛ ɪ ɔ ʊ ə], additionally /e/ is [ə] in the ultimate syllable.
However, after a bit of speaking practice this is not exactly correct. In fact, all unstressed vowels are very centralized and closer to [ə] than to what I've described them. I've shown the realizations in the vowel trapezoid below. The stressed allophones [a e i o u œ] are on the outside, additionally [ə] is displayed. The red arrow points to their actual realization (/e/ points into two directions, depending on position).

Image

In the graphics you can see that all vowels become centralized and differ more or less strongly from what I used to describe them.

1) Is this process actually naturalistic?

2) The differences between the vowels are very narrow now (although still big enough to be distinguished, except for unstressed /e/ and /œ/. Would it be accurate to say in that case, that all unstressed vowels are more or less [ə]? (I haven't checked my whole dictionary, but there are, if maybe not none, but at least very few minimal pairs only distinguished by unstressed vowels).

3) How could I describe the vowels accurately with IPA? I feel like the "centralized" marker would do its purpose quite well, but I'm not certain.

Thanks all in anticipation! [:)]
Wipe the glass. This is the usual way to start, even in the days, day and night, only a happy one.

User avatar
Lao Kou
korean
korean
Posts: 5665
Joined: 25 Nov 2012 10:39
Location: 蘇州/苏州

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

Post by Lao Kou » 17 Apr 2017 12:33

Squall wrote:
Lao Kou wrote:Stability, schmability. Whether the rules last one generation or ten, any language description, con- or nat-, is simply a snapshot taken at a particular moment/period of time.
As for stability for a long time, some features are more stable than others. For instance, /ɸ/ and /f/ are unlikely to co-exist for a long time.
That well may be. But my point is a conlang ought to be able to have /ɸ/ and /f/ concurrently without fretting about being monikered "wildly unnaturalistic". So what if the two sounds are just ships passing in the night? (and whether that night is one or three generations or twenty minutes shouldn't matter) -- that's the moment/period a conlanger has chosen to document. If you expect your lang to be set in marble and read with an unchanging effortlessness 500 years down the pike, well, that's a different question.
道可道,非常道
名可名,非常名

User avatar
Creyeditor
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4522
Joined: 14 Aug 2012 19:32

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

Post by Creyeditor » 17 Apr 2017 13:41

Iyionaku wrote:
Spoiler:
I need help with the phonetic descriptive analysis of Yélian's vowel system in IPA. So far, I have analyzed unstressed vowels in Yélian like this:
Iyionaku wrote:In unstressed syllables, the monophtongs /a e i o u œ/ are realized as [ɐ ɛ ɪ ɔ ʊ ə], additionally /e/ is [ə] in the ultimate syllable.
However, after a bit of speaking practice this is not exactly correct. In fact, all unstressed vowels are very centralized and closer to [ə] than to what I've described them. I've shown the realizations in the vowel trapezoid below. The stressed allophones [a e i o u œ] are on the outside, additionally [ə] is displayed. The red arrow points to their actual realization (/e/ points into two directions, depending on position).

Image

In the graphics you can see that all vowels become centralized and differ more or less strongly from what I used to describe them.

1) Is this process actually naturalistic?

2) The differences between the vowels are very narrow now (although still big enough to be distinguished, except for unstressed /e/ and /œ/. Would it be accurate to say in that case, that all unstressed vowels are more or less [ə]? (I haven't checked my whole dictionary, but there are, if maybe not none, but at least very few minimal pairs only distinguished by unstressed vowels).

3) How could I describe the vowels accurately with IPA? I feel like the "centralized" marker would do its purpose quite well, but I'm not certain.

Thanks all in anticipation! [:)]
1) Yes, it is [:)]
2) You can say both, either that they are all essentially Schwa, but there is an incomplete neutralizaion, or that they are centralized and can still be distinguished.
3) There is a range of possibilities. You can try to approximate them with central/lax IPA symbols, e.g. /a e i o u œ/ [ɐ ɛ ɪ ɞ ʊ ɵ]
You can use the host symbols with a mid centralization mark /a e i o u œ/ [a̽ e̽ i̽ o̽ u̽ œ̽]
You could also just use the lax version of each IPA symbol, i.e. /a e i o u œ/ [ɐ ɛ ɪ ɔ ʊ ɞ(?)]
Another possibilty would be to try to get as close as you can with special IPA symbols and diacritics, e.g. /a e i o u œ/ [ɐ̝ ɛ ɘ̟ ɞ̝ ɵ̠ ɵ̞]
Creyeditor
"Thoughts are free."
Produce, Analyze, Manipulate
1 :deu: 2 :eng: 3 :idn: 4 :fra: 4 :esp:
:con: Ook & Omlűt & Nautli languages & Sperenjas
[<3] Papuan languages, Morphophonology, Lexical Semantics [<3]

User avatar
All4Ɇn
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1831
Joined: 01 Mar 2014 07:19

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

Post by All4Ɇn » 22 Apr 2017 06:08

Not exactly sure if this in the right place but I started working on a Chữ Nôm based conlang and wanted to make a topic about it but much to my surprise it turns out the forum doesn't accept Chữ Nôm characters in posts [:(] . Any recommendations on what I could do to circumvent it?

holbuzvala
sinic
sinic
Posts: 218
Joined: 01 Jan 2017 14:03

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

Post by holbuzvala » 22 Apr 2017 16:52

What sorts of numbers/plurals are attested in natlangs? I know of singular, dual, (trial), plural, but are there things like 'collective' plurals, 'dispersive' ones, 'paucal', 'manifold' etc.?

User avatar
cedh
MVP
MVP
Posts: 377
Joined: 07 Sep 2011 22:25
Location: Tübingen, Germany
Contact:

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

Post by cedh » 22 Apr 2017 17:36

holbuzvala wrote:What sorts of numbers/plurals are attested in natlangs? I know of singular, dual, (trial), plural, but are there things like 'collective' plurals, 'dispersive' ones, 'paucal', 'manifold' etc.?
Collective: Yes
Distributive: Yes
Paucal: Yes
Manifold: Not that I know of (would usually be covered by plural as contrasted against paucal)

See here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammatic ... _of_number

User avatar
DesEsseintes
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4610
Joined: 31 Mar 2013 13:16

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

Post by DesEsseintes » 23 Apr 2017 17:22

In sound change/morfofo notation, is there a dedicated symbol for a morpheme boundary, just like there's $ for a syllable boundary and # for word boundary? I don't remember if I've seen such a thing.

To illustrate I've got the following rule in Limestone:

o → oo / _%w

Where I've improvised % as a marker for a morpheme boundary.

User avatar
Creyeditor
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4522
Joined: 14 Aug 2012 19:32

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

Post by Creyeditor » 23 Apr 2017 17:26

People sometimes use labeled brackets, which gives you more possibilities. Yet, I have seen many people using [µ for moras and morpheme boundaries. I actually have seen % as a syllable boundary. Something that I have seen often for morpheme boundaries is actually a plus sign ' + ' or a circled plus sign.
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]

Post Reply