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

A forum for all topics related to constructed languages
User avatar
Evynova
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 186
Joined: 01 Jan 2017 18:28
Location: Belgium

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

Post by Evynova » 15 Jan 2018 16:43

Thank you for your replies. I understand better what the problem is. I will experiment with the solutions you have suggested, and I will see which one feels better.
Salmoneus wrote:
15 Jan 2018 15:22
Of course, the problem you're having has nothing to do with verbs being a closed class, but with oligosynthesis. Realistically, a language with a closed class of verbs would have something like "to give a kiss" instead of "to kiss", "to take in food" instead of "to eat", and "to use one's voice" or "to make a speech" or the like instead of "to speak". It wouldn't break it down into this sort of make-mouth-move-sound-comes-out pantomime-language.
How would I translate "to lie"? Or "to insult"? "To chew"?
"To give a lie". "To give an insult". "To use teeth (durative)" or "to make pulp".
Well I didn't actually want to go for an oligosynthetic language; the issue is that I wanted to be too minimalist. I will keep what you said in mind and I'll most likely use such constructions, whatever I end up deciding for my verbs.

User avatar
Lambuzhao
korean
korean
Posts: 7776
Joined: 13 May 2012 02:57

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

Post by Lambuzhao » 15 Jan 2018 19:23

It wouldn't break it down into this sort of make-mouth-move-sound-comes-out pantomime-language.
Well, let's just see.
In Native American Sign Language, for example

To Eat/Food
https://i.pinimg.com/236x/91/aa/be/91aa ... ge-eat.jpg

To Speak
http://pislresearch.com/illustrations/l ... x8_043.jpg

Speaking
http://pislresearch.com/illustrations/l ... x8_041.jpg

If anything, the eating/food pantmimes inward motion of the food into the mouth.

Of course, this is just one style of gestural communication e pluribus.

User avatar
Lambuzhao
korean
korean
Posts: 7776
Joined: 13 May 2012 02:57

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

Post by Lambuzhao » 15 Jan 2018 19:31

For comparison & contrastion, here are the same concepts in ASL:

Eat/Food
http://asluniversity.com/asl101/images-signs/eat-01.jpg


Speak/Talk
http://www.lifeprint.com/asl101/signjpegs/t/talk4.jpg

User avatar
Lambuzhao
korean
korean
Posts: 7776
Joined: 13 May 2012 02:57

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

Post by Lambuzhao » 15 Jan 2018 19:57

Salmoneus wrote:
15 Jan 2018 15:22
Evynova wrote:
15 Jan 2018 10:05
Hey all. I come to you with a conundrum regarding a new project I want to start working on.

I want to begin working on a personal conlang, for my own personal use and not as a part of my conworld. This relieves me of the constraints of naturalism to an extent, but I still want to do things right. I have decided to go for a Polynesian feel with a small phonemic inventory and a mostly isolating grammar with tons of particles. So far so good.

Another feature I've been thinking of, and the one that's causing me some problems, is to have verbs be a closed class. My idea is to only have a few verbs that only vaguely describe a concept; incorporating nouns is the solution for more precise meaning. Using a verb describing states, I would also get rid of adjectives. But here's the issue: how do I create verbs, using incorporation, that would not be awfully ambiguous? Using a single verb describing actions and incorporating mouth into it, as mouth-do could describe speaking. But who's to say it cannot translate as "to eat"? Or even "to kiss"? Admittedly, since this is a personal lang, it shouldn't really be a problem to me but I don't like so much ambiguity.
Who's to say that "speak" doesn't mean "to eat"? It's just a fact about the language. If your language has mouth-do mean 'speak', then it does, and speakers will know it doesn't mean 'eat' because... that's not the word for 'eat'.
In one of my :con:, Yauchuan, there is a verbalizer that is prefixed to nouns to make verbs like what you describe.

In fact,

zakuabai
za.kuabai
<VBLZ>mouth
"to bite"; "to eat"

besides unrelated roots

darupa "to eat"

wato "to speak"



You could get a little more specific:

teeth<VBLZ> = "to chew", "to bite", "to eat"
tongue<VBLZ> = "to speak"


And sometimes natlangs are helpful, sometimes not.

Proto-Semitic *lišān-
PIE *dn̥ǵʰwéh₂s
both "tongue" & "language"

:lat: osculum "kiss" from os "mouth" (Dim. os+culum)


But like Sal suggests, it's kind of up to you.

User avatar
Lambuzhao
korean
korean
Posts: 7776
Joined: 13 May 2012 02:57

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

Post by Lambuzhao » 15 Jan 2018 20:57

And in all the three gestural systems, the concept of 'talking' or 'speaking' has the interlocutor make some kind of hand-motion away from the mouth. In Native American Hand Talk, the gesture for 'speaking' carries this motion.

Sort of like the sound-waves/exhalations emanating from the mouth in the Chinese radical

Salmoneus
MVP
MVP
Posts: 1624
Joined: 19 Sep 2011 19:37

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

Post by Salmoneus » 16 Jan 2018 02:23

Lambuzhao wrote:
15 Jan 2018 19:23
It wouldn't break it down into this sort of make-mouth-move-sound-comes-out pantomime-language.
Well, let's just see.
In Native American Sign Language, for example
Emphasis added.

User avatar
Lambuzhao
korean
korean
Posts: 7776
Joined: 13 May 2012 02:57

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

Post by Lambuzhao » 16 Jan 2018 03:47

Salmoneus wrote:
16 Jan 2018 02:23
Lambuzhao wrote:
15 Jan 2018 19:23
It wouldn't break it down into this sort of make-mouth-move-sound-comes-out pantomime-language.
Well, let's just see.
In Native American Sign Language, for example
Emphasis added.

http://www.modaruniversity.org/silent/S ... ankYou.jpg

User avatar
Tuyono
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 126
Joined: 06 Aug 2017 15:09

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

Post by Tuyono » 17 Jan 2018 22:02

I'm looking for a way to represent /ʎ]/.
At first I used <lj> but I want <j> to be /ɟ/. <ly> would be confusing for me at the end of words or in clusters, because it looks like it has a vowel. I could go with <ll>, but are there other ideas?

User avatar
sangi39
moderator
moderator
Posts: 3230
Joined: 12 Aug 2010 01:53
Location: North Yorkshire, UK

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

Post by sangi39 » 17 Jan 2018 22:09

Tuyono wrote:
17 Jan 2018 22:02
I'm looking for a way to represent /ʎ]/.
At first I used <lj> but I want <j> to be /ɟ/. <ly> would be confusing for me at the end of words or in clusters, because it looks like it has a vowel. I could go with <ll>, but are there other ideas?
What's the rest of the phoneme inventory and orthography look like?
You can tell the same lie a thousand times,
But it never gets any more true,
So close your eyes once more and once more believe
That they all still believe in you.
Just one time.

User avatar
Tuyono
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 126
Joined: 06 Aug 2017 15:09

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

Post by Tuyono » 17 Jan 2018 23:09

sangi39 wrote:
17 Jan 2018 22:09
What's the rest of the phoneme inventory and orthography look like?
I have some more places where I'm not sure about the orthography, but these are the options:
/m n ɲ/ <m n ń>
/p t c k/ <p t c k>
/b d ɟ g/ <b d j g>
/mb nd ɲɟ ŋg/ <mb nd ńj ng>
/s ʃ x h/ <s ś x h> OR <s sh kh h>
/v~β z ʒ/ <v z ź> OR <v z zh>
/l ʎ/ <l ?>
/r/ <r>

[j] occurs but is not really phonemic so right now I'm not using <y> for anything

shimobaatar
korean
korean
Posts: 11468
Joined: 12 Jul 2013 23:09
Location: PA → IN

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

Post by shimobaatar » 17 Jan 2018 23:38

Maybe <lh> or <ľ>?

User avatar
sangi39
moderator
moderator
Posts: 3230
Joined: 12 Aug 2010 01:53
Location: North Yorkshire, UK

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

Post by sangi39 » 18 Jan 2018 00:09

shimobaatar wrote:
17 Jan 2018 23:38
Maybe <lh> or <ľ>?
I'd agree with that, although I'd suggest <ĺ> rather than <ľ> unless you're against diacritics over ascenders.

<lh> would fit in with <sh> and <zh>, although that option does then leave <ń> feeling a little out of place (<nh> would be more consistent there, and <nj> for /ɲɟ/ might only be an problem if it contrasted /nɟ/).

<ĺ> would fit with <ń>, and since /ʃ/ and /ʒ/ aren't "truly" palatal, then having them as <sh> and <zh> instead of <ś> and <ź> wouldn't necessarily be all that unreasonable.

You could go with several options if you're dealing with a pre-standardised orthography [:)]
You can tell the same lie a thousand times,
But it never gets any more true,
So close your eyes once more and once more believe
That they all still believe in you.
Just one time.

clawgrip
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2384
Joined: 24 Jun 2012 07:33
Location: Tokyo

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

Post by clawgrip » 18 Jan 2018 00:44

I use ļ for that sound in one of my languages. The Romanization I use has only four letters with diacritics: ç ļ ĝ š, so it kind of matches up.
<lh> would fit in with <sh> and <zh>, although that option does then leave <ń> feeling a little out of place (<nh> would be more consistent there, and <nj> for /ɲɟ/ might only be an problem if it contrasted /nɟ/).
I think I agree with this statement most.
Tuyono wrote:
17 Jan 2018 22:02
<ly> would be confusing for me at the end of words or in clusters, because it looks like it has a vowel.
Sometimes this can be fun. I use ny in one language for /ɲ/, e.g. Zemany /zemaɲ/.

User avatar
Pabappa
sinic
sinic
Posts: 248
Joined: 18 Nov 2017 02:41
Contact:

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

Post by Pabappa » 18 Jan 2018 01:09

You could reverse it to yn at the end of the wortd, or even just y if it doesn't conflict.
Sorry guys, this one has the worst sting.

User avatar
sangi39
moderator
moderator
Posts: 3230
Joined: 12 Aug 2010 01:53
Location: North Yorkshire, UK

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

Post by sangi39 » 18 Jan 2018 02:07

Pabappa wrote:
18 Jan 2018 01:09
You could reverse it to yn at the end of the wortd, or even just y if it doesn't conflict.
I think Old French use to do something similar, with <il> for /ʎ/ (I think some dialects of Basque do something similar), and of course Irish and Scottish Gaelic use <il> and <in> for /ʎ/ and /ɲ/ because of their orthographic rules regarding "broad" and "slender" consonants
You can tell the same lie a thousand times,
But it never gets any more true,
So close your eyes once more and once more believe
That they all still believe in you.
Just one time.

User avatar
Ahzoh
korean
korean
Posts: 5760
Joined: 20 Oct 2013 02:57
Location: Toma-ʾEzra lit Vṛḵaža

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

Post by Ahzoh » 18 Jan 2018 20:59

I want to know if this is plausible/naturalistic:

There are two copular verbs -іуп- and -буту- and their negative counterparts -агні- and -цал-.

The verbs -іуп-/-агні- are used when the predicate is a noun and functions like a transitive verb.
The verbs -буту-/-цал- are used when the complement is an adjective and functions like an intransitive verb. Additionally, adjective affixes are affixed to the verb.

лу-іуп-ач лу-н-ѕер-е-нш-е
3.ERG-be-3.ABS 3.ERG-NFUT-save-2.ABS-NMLZ-AN.ABS
"She will be your saviour."

н-инк-буту-ч чос-о
NFUT-white-be-3.ABS snow-INAN.ABS
"The snow is white."

л-агніа-ч ліок-е
3.ERG-not_be-3.ABS fish-AN.ABS
"They will not be a fish."

на-мин-цал-ч іӣп-еі
NFUT-hot-not_be-3.ABS man-HUM.ABS
"Man's not hot."
Image Ӯсцьӣ (Onschen) [ CWS ]
Image Šat Wərxažu (Vrkhazhian) [ WIKI | CWS ]

User avatar
Tuyono
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 126
Joined: 06 Aug 2017 15:09

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

Post by Tuyono » 19 Jan 2018 11:10

sangi39 wrote:
18 Jan 2018 00:09
<lh> would fit in with <sh> and <zh>, although that option does then leave <ń> feeling a little out of place (<nh> would be more consistent there, and <nj> for /ɲɟ/ might only be an problem if it contrasted /nɟ/).

<ĺ> would fit with <ń>, and since /ʃ/ and /ʒ/ aren't "truly" palatal, then having them as <sh> and <zh> instead of <ś> and <ź> wouldn't necessarily be all that unreasonable.

You could go with several options if you're dealing with a pre-standardised orthography
It's far from standardised. I did use <nj> for /ɲ/ and <dj> for /ɟ/ but that left me without a good way to write /ɲɟ/ - <ndj> is too long and ugly for what the language considers one sound. <nh> and <lh> will probably have the same issues. I also have some clusters that would make the whole thing messy.
<ĺ> is a good idea.
Pabappa wrote:
18 Jan 2018 01:09
You could reverse it to yn at the end of the wortd, or even just y if it doesn't conflict.
I like this one. Digraphs with <y> will be less confusing.

Thanks everyone :)

User avatar
Ahzoh
korean
korean
Posts: 5760
Joined: 20 Oct 2013 02:57
Location: Toma-ʾEzra lit Vṛḵaža

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

Post by Ahzoh » 21 Jan 2018 08:48

Ahzoh wrote:
18 Jan 2018 20:59
I want to know if this is plausible/naturalistic:

There are two copular verbs -іуп- and -буту- and their negative counterparts -агні- and -цал-.

The verbs -іуп-/-агні- are used when the predicate is a noun and functions like a transitive verb.
The verbs -буту-/-цал- are used when the complement is an adjective and functions like an intransitive verb. Additionally, adjective affixes are affixed to the verb.

лу-іуп-ач лу-н-ѕер-е-нш-е
3.ERG-be-3.ABS 3.ERG-NFUT-save-2.ABS-NMLZ-AN.ABS
"She will be your saviour."

н-инк-буту-ч чос-о
NFUT-white-be-3.ABS snow-INAN.ABS
"The snow is white."

л-агніа-ч ліок-е
3.ERG-not_be-3.ABS fish-AN.ABS
"They will not be a fish."

на-мин-цал-ч іӣп-еі
NFUT-hot-not_be-3.ABS man-HUM.ABS
"Man's not hot."
So, is this naturalistic/plausible?
Image Ӯсцьӣ (Onschen) [ CWS ]
Image Šat Wərxažu (Vrkhazhian) [ WIKI | CWS ]

User avatar
Reyzadren
sinic
sinic
Posts: 448
Joined: 14 May 2017 10:39
Contact:

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

Post by Reyzadren » 21 Jan 2018 09:14

Ahzoh wrote:
21 Jan 2018 08:48
Ahzoh wrote:
18 Jan 2018 20:59
I want to know if this is plausible/naturalistic:

There are two copular verbs -іуп- and -буту- and their negative counterparts -агні- and -цал-.

The verbs -іуп-/-агні- are used when the predicate is a noun and functions like a transitive verb.
The verbs -буту-/-цал- are used when the complement is an adjective and functions like an intransitive verb. Additionally, adjective affixes are affixed to the verb.
So, is this naturalistic/plausible?
Well, in another natlang that I speak, there is a set of 2 equalizers and 2 negators, of which 1 pair of them is used for nouns, and the other pair is for adjectives, as you describe it here.

However, they don't work the same way as shown in your provided sample sentences. Also, their function with regard to transitivity is probably not the same, as they have properties from a trigger language.
Image Soundcloud Profile | Image griuskant conlang

User avatar
Ahzoh
korean
korean
Posts: 5760
Joined: 20 Oct 2013 02:57
Location: Toma-ʾEzra lit Vṛḵaža

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

Post by Ahzoh » 21 Jan 2018 09:32

Reyzadren wrote:
21 Jan 2018 09:14
However, they don't work the same way as shown in your provided sample sentences. Also, their function with regard to transitivity is probably not the same, as they have properties from a trigger language.
The language you speak is a trigger language or are you guessing my conlang is? If the latter, then my conlang is not a trigger language. It is just that adjectives are more life affixes and attach to what they modify.
Image Ӯсцьӣ (Onschen) [ CWS ]
Image Šat Wərxažu (Vrkhazhian) [ WIKI | CWS ]

Post Reply