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

A forum for all topics related to constructed languages
User avatar
Lambuzhao
earth
earth
Posts: 7700
Joined: 13 May 2012 01:57

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

Post by Lambuzhao » 25 Jul 2018 16:09

eldin raigmore wrote:
24 Jul 2018 02:11
It is beginning to seem to me, that the term “root”, when discussing the diachronic processes of language evolution, and the genetic relatedness of languages in the same family, means something different, from the term “root”, when discussing the synchronic processes of inflection and morphological derivation, and suchlike morphological processes.

So, or not so?
Well, insofar as :lat: and :grc: are concerned, the inflectional 'root' found in the genitive singular of a noun, or in one of the principal parts of a verb, is usually referred to in textbooks and other didactic materials as the stem.

But, certainly, at least as for as :lat: and :grc: verbs go, the principal parts can each have, as the main formant of their respective stems, different grades of a former Proto-Italic or PIE roots.

User avatar
Lambuzhao
earth
earth
Posts: 7700
Joined: 13 May 2012 01:57

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

Post by Lambuzhao » 25 Jul 2018 16:21

BTW,

Looks like Lithuanian has three principal parts
http://www.lituanus.org/1987/87_1_04.htm

I was looking for info on Sanskrit, but stumbled upon this article about Static and Dynamic Principal Parts in both Indo-European languages, but also considering non IE langs as well:

ftp://ftp.cs.engr.uky.edu/cs/techreports/459-06.pdf

[:)]

User avatar
eldin raigmore
fire
fire
Posts: 6256
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 18:38
Location: SouthEast Michigan

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

Post by eldin raigmore » 25 Jul 2018 19:52

Thanks, @Lambuzhao!

I wonder, also, whether the term “derivation” means something different, when speaking morphologically and synchronically, than when speaking diachronically.

—————

Do you think a new thread, on such topics as suppletion, roots, derivation, paradigms, and principal parts, or some of those, might be good to start?

User avatar
KaiTheHomoSapien
greek
greek
Posts: 596
Joined: 15 Feb 2016 06:10
Location: Northern California

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

Post by KaiTheHomoSapien » 25 Jul 2018 20:49

I would be interested in a separate thread on that, since figuring all this stuff out has been a major part of my PIE-inspired conlang. [:)]
Don't live to conlang; conlang to live.

My conlang: Image Lihmelinyan

felipesnark
sinic
sinic
Posts: 422
Joined: 27 Jan 2013 02:12
Contact:

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

Post by felipesnark » 25 Jul 2018 22:40

eldin raigmore wrote:
25 Jul 2018 19:52
Do you think a new thread, on such topics as suppletion, roots, derivation, paradigms, and principal parts, or some of those, might be good to start?
[+1]

For my latest project, "Denkurian", I am working on a few verbal periphrases to express some aspects. I want the progressive to be expressed by to be + [PREP] + [INF].

What are some prepositions that would make sense? I was thinking those that mean something like "at" or "in" or perhaps "to". Ideas?

I am also thinking of the following:
prospective aspect: to go + 'to' + [INF]
recent perfect (‘have just’): to come + 'from' + [INF]
Visit my website for my blogs and information on my conlangs including Shonkasika: http://felipesnark.weebly.com/ It's a work in progress!

User avatar
eldin raigmore
fire
fire
Posts: 6256
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 18:38
Location: SouthEast Michigan

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

Post by eldin raigmore » 26 Jul 2018 03:24

felipesnark wrote:
25 Jul 2018 22:40
eldin raigmore wrote:
25 Jul 2018 19:52
Do you think a new thread, on such topics as suppletion, roots, derivation, paradigms, and principal parts, or some of those, might be good to start?
[+1]

For my latest project, "Denkurian", I am working on a few verbal periphrases to express some aspects. I want the progressive to be expressed by to be + [PREP] + [INF].

What are some prepositions that would make sense? I was thinking those that mean something like "at" or "in" or perhaps "to". Ideas?

I am also thinking of the following:
prospective aspect: to go + 'to' + [INF]
recent perfect (‘have just’): to come + 'from' + [INF]
“For” and “after” might be good, for the progressive or prospective or intended future.

Go for INF
Be after INF
Go for GERUND (or ACTIVE PARTICIPLE)
Be after GERUND (or ACTIVE PARTICIPLE)

Or some such thing.

What do you think?

User avatar
eldin raigmore
fire
fire
Posts: 6256
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 18:38
Location: SouthEast Michigan

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

Post by eldin raigmore » 26 Jul 2018 03:24

KaiTheHomoSapien wrote:
25 Jul 2018 20:49
I would be interested in a separate thread on that, since figuring all this stuff out has been a major part of my PIE-inspired conlang. [:)]
If anyone starts it I will follow it.

felipesnark
sinic
sinic
Posts: 422
Joined: 27 Jan 2013 02:12
Contact:

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

Post by felipesnark » 26 Jul 2018 05:11

eldin raigmore wrote:
26 Jul 2018 03:24
felipesnark wrote:
25 Jul 2018 22:40
eldin raigmore wrote:
25 Jul 2018 19:52
Do you think a new thread, on such topics as suppletion, roots, derivation, paradigms, and principal parts, or some of those, might be good to start?
[+1]

For my latest project, "Denkurian", I am working on a few verbal periphrases to express some aspects. I want the progressive to be expressed by to be + [PREP] + [INF].

What are some prepositions that would make sense? I was thinking those that mean something like "at" or "in" or perhaps "to". Ideas?

I am also thinking of the following:
prospective aspect: to go + 'to' + [INF]
recent perfect (‘have just’): to come + 'from' + [INF]
“For” and “after” might be good, for the progressive or prospective or intended future.

Go for INF
Be after INF
Go for GERUND (or ACTIVE PARTICIPLE)
Be after GERUND (or ACTIVE PARTICIPLE)

Or some such thing.

What do you think?
I like "go for", zolon zag, for prospective. I might use "be in" balon sko, for progressive; I had been using "be at/to", balon dan. I think I will use the infinitive for the main verb in each of these periphrases.
Visit my website for my blogs and information on my conlangs including Shonkasika: http://felipesnark.weebly.com/ It's a work in progress!

Clio
sinic
sinic
Posts: 200
Joined: 27 Dec 2012 23:45

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

Post by Clio » 26 Jul 2018 17:16

For those interested: I created a separate thread on Indo-European morphology here.
Niûro nCora
Getic: longum Getico murmur in ore fuit

Salmoneus
MVP
MVP
Posts: 1557
Joined: 19 Sep 2011 18:37

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

Post by Salmoneus » 26 Jul 2018 18:16

felipesnark wrote:
25 Jul 2018 22:40
eldin raigmore wrote:
25 Jul 2018 19:52
Do you think a new thread, on such topics as suppletion, roots, derivation, paradigms, and principal parts, or some of those, might be good to start?
[+1]

For my latest project, "Denkurian", I am working on a few verbal periphrases to express some aspects. I want the progressive to be expressed by to be + [PREP] + [INF].

What are some prepositions that would make sense? I was thinking those that mean something like "at" or "in" or perhaps "to". Ideas?

I am also thinking of the following:
prospective aspect: to go + 'to' + [INF]
recent perfect (‘have just’): to come + 'from' + [INF]
You might want to look into Irish in this regard.

ErickTyndale
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 2
Joined: 26 Jul 2018 23:00

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

Post by ErickTyndale » 26 Jul 2018 23:08

Hello, I'm currently brainstorming on the grammar of a new conlang I'm working on. This conlang is Nom-Acc with a marker on the subject, but I was thinking the following:
What if the subject marker would also tell you the tense? F.e. "He[1SG, +PAST] walk". My question is: would this make sense, what would the pros and cons be (I imagine it would greatly reduce verb conjugations) and are there any languages that do this?

shimobaatar
darkness
darkness
Posts: 11149
Joined: 12 Jul 2013 22:09
Location: PA → IN

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

Post by shimobaatar » 26 Jul 2018 23:12

ErickTyndale wrote:
26 Jul 2018 23:08
Hello, I'm currently brainstorming on the grammar of a new conlang I'm working on. This conlang is Nom-Acc with a marker on the subject, but I was thinking the following:
What if the subject marker would also tell you the tense? F.e. "He[1SG, +PAST] walk". My question is: would this make sense, what would the pros and cons be (I imagine it would grestly reduce verb conjugations) and are there any languages that do this?
If the subject is "he", why would it be marked as first person singular?

User avatar
Pabappa
sinic
sinic
Posts: 210
Joined: 18 Nov 2017 02:41
Contact:

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

Post by Pabappa » 26 Jul 2018 23:40

ErickTyndale wrote:
26 Jul 2018 23:08
Hello, I'm currently brainstorming on the grammar of a new conlang I'm working on. This conlang is Nom-Acc with a marker on the subject, but I was thinking the following:
What if the subject marker would also tell you the tense? F.e. "He[1SG, +PAST] walk". My question is: would this make sense, what would the pros and cons be (I imagine it would greatly reduce verb conjugations) and are there any languages that do this?
English basically has that .... for future tense only though, and it's seen as a mood, not a tense.

I'll walk home by myself.
The tense is marked on the subject, not the verb, so definitely a system like this can work. But I don't know if any langs use that setup exclusively.
Image

felipesnark
sinic
sinic
Posts: 422
Joined: 27 Jan 2013 02:12
Contact:

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

Post by felipesnark » 26 Jul 2018 23:41

ErickTyndale wrote:
26 Jul 2018 23:08
Hello, I'm currently brainstorming on the grammar of a new conlang I'm working on. This conlang is Nom-Acc with a marker on the subject, but I was thinking the following:
What if the subject marker would also tell you the tense? F.e. "He[1SG, +PAST] walk". My question is: would this make sense, what would the pros and cons be (I imagine it would greatly reduce verb conjugations) and are there any languages that do this?
"He's walked, He'll walk, He'd walk" ?

Not exactly the same, but...
Visit my website for my blogs and information on my conlangs including Shonkasika: http://felipesnark.weebly.com/ It's a work in progress!

Khemehekis
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2156
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 08:36
Location: California über alles

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

Post by Khemehekis » 27 Jul 2018 02:47

I would think that the principal parts of a noun in Latin would be the two parts like agricola, agricolae, or princeps, principis, that are given in Latin books.
♂♥♂♀

Squirrels chase koi . . . chase squirrels

My Kankonian-English dictionary: 58,000 words and counting

31,416: The number of the conlanging beast!

clawgrip
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2399
Joined: 24 Jun 2012 06:33
Location: Tokyo

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

Post by clawgrip » 27 Jul 2018 05:37

ErickTyndale wrote:
26 Jul 2018 23:08
Hello, I'm currently brainstorming on the grammar of a new conlang I'm working on. This conlang is Nom-Acc with a marker on the subject, but I was thinking the following:
What if the subject marker would also tell you the tense? F.e. "He[1SG, +PAST] walk". My question is: would this make sense, what would the pros and cons be (I imagine it would greatly reduce verb conjugations) and are there any languages that do this?
I know some oceanic languages like Marshallese mark tense on the pronoun. The wikipedia page for Nominal TAM lists several languages that have it, as well as explaining why English is not an example of this (because they are clitics).

User avatar
Creyeditor
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4500
Joined: 14 Aug 2012 18:32

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

Post by Creyeditor » 27 Jul 2018 10:55

Hausa also does it. And there must be good resources on it somewhere on the internet.

ErickTyndale wrote:
26 Jul 2018 23:08
"He[1SG, +PAST] walk"
Did you mean "He[3SG, +PAST]"?
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]

ErickTyndale
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 2
Joined: 26 Jul 2018 23:00

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

Post by ErickTyndale » 27 Jul 2018 16:47

Creyeditor wrote:
27 Jul 2018 10:55
ErickTyndale wrote:
26 Jul 2018 23:08
"He[1SG, +PAST] walk"
Did you mean "He[3SG, +PAST]"?
Yes, my bad. Thanks [:P]

yangfiretiger121
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 126
Joined: 17 Jun 2018 02:04

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

Post by yangfiretiger121 » 29 Jul 2018 06:35

Do the following results for the diphthongs seem reasonable, noting that the palatal onglide palatalizes the preceding consonant and the labiodental onglide is only present in coda?

ai > ɑi > ɑː > ɑ
au > ɑʉ > ɑ(ː)ᶹ > ɑⱽ > ɑ
ei > ᴇi > ᴇː > ᴇ
eu > ᴇʉ > ᴇ.ʉ (alternatively, eu > ᴇʉ > ᴇ(ː)ᶹ > ᴇⱽ > ᴇ)
ia > iɑ > ʲɑ > ᶨɑ
ie > iᴇ > ʲᴇ > ᶨᴇ
io > iⱺ > ʲⱺ > ᶨⱺ
iu > iʉ > ʲʉ > ᶨʉ
oi > ⱺi > ⱺː > ⱺ
ou > ⱺʉ > ⱺ(ː)ᶹ > ⱺⱽ > ⱺ
ua > ʉɑ > ᶹɑ(ː) > ⱽɑ
ue > ʉᴇ > ᶹᴇ(ː) > ⱽᴇ
ui > ʉi > ᶹi(ː) > ⱽi
uo > ʉⱺ > ᶹⱺ(ː) > ⱽⱺ
Alien conlangs (Font may be needed for Vai symbols)

felipesnark
sinic
sinic
Posts: 422
Joined: 27 Jan 2013 02:12
Contact:

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

Post by felipesnark » 02 Aug 2018 04:23

For a naturalistic conlang, is it unrealistic to have separate personal endings on verbs for active, middle, and passive voice?

Here is what I have for Denkurian at the moment:
Spoiler:
Image
My idea is that the middle voice evolved from an old reflexive pronoun.
Visit my website for my blogs and information on my conlangs including Shonkasika: http://felipesnark.weebly.com/ It's a work in progress!

Post Reply