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

A forum for all topics related to constructed languages
yangfiretiger121
sinic
sinic
Posts: 293
Joined: 17 Jun 2018 03:04

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

Post by yangfiretiger121 » 05 Dec 2019 18:20

Is a language more likely to have a parent root meaning something like "related to the heavens" and a derivative root, specifically, for stars or unrelated roots for the heavens and stars?
Alien conlangs (Font may be needed for Vai symbols)

User avatar
loglorn
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1902
Joined: 17 Mar 2014 03:22

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

Post by loglorn » 05 Dec 2019 18:28

yangfiretiger121 wrote:
05 Dec 2019 18:20
Is a language more likely to have a parent root meaning something like "related to the heavens" and a derivative root, specifically, for stars or unrelated roots for the heavens and stars?
Sounds cultural/cosmological but also I'd say separate heaven and star roots are more likely
Diachronic Conlanging is the path to happiness, given time. [;)]

Gigxkpoyan Languages: CHÍFJAEŚÍ RETLA TLAPTHUV DÄLDLEN CJUŚËKNJU ṢATT

Other langs: Søsøzatli Kamëzet

User avatar
Dormouse559
moderator
moderator
Posts: 2880
Joined: 10 Nov 2012 20:52
Location: California

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

Post by Dormouse559 » 05 Dec 2019 18:38

yangfiretiger121 wrote:
05 Dec 2019 18:20
Is a language more likely to have a parent root meaning something like "related to the heavens" and a derivative root, specifically, for stars or unrelated roots for the heavens and stars?
I have no idea, but this feels like the kind of thing you can safely decide for yourself. No one will bat an eyelash.

yangfiretiger121
sinic
sinic
Posts: 293
Joined: 17 Jun 2018 03:04

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

Post by yangfiretiger121 » 05 Dec 2019 20:19

Thanks guys.
Alien conlangs (Font may be needed for Vai symbols)

User avatar
DesEsseintes
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4630
Joined: 31 Mar 2013 13:16

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

Post by DesEsseintes » 06 Dec 2019 02:51

Dormouse559 wrote:
05 Dec 2019 18:38
I have no idea, but this feels like the kind of thing you can safely decide for yourself. No one will bat an eyelash.
Huh. I’ve never heard that variant of the expression “bat an eyelid”. A quick Google suggests it’s common.

User avatar
LinguistCat
sinic
sinic
Posts: 211
Joined: 06 May 2017 07:48

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

Post by LinguistCat » 06 Dec 2019 04:56

DesEsseintes wrote:
06 Dec 2019 02:51
Dormouse559 wrote:
05 Dec 2019 18:38
I have no idea, but this feels like the kind of thing you can safely decide for yourself. No one will bat an eyelash.
Huh. I’ve never heard that variant of the expression “bat an eyelid”. A quick Google suggests it’s common.
And I've mostly heard "bat an eye".

User avatar
Pabappa
sinic
sinic
Posts: 298
Joined: 18 Nov 2017 02:41
Contact:

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

Post by Pabappa » 06 Dec 2019 04:59

I think batting your eyelashes is a bit different .... thats a sign of flirting, ... at work I once heard a woman say to another woman "you know the customer cant see you batting your eyelashes over the phone, right?"
Sorry guys, this one has the worst sting.

User avatar
spanick
roman
roman
Posts: 1169
Joined: 11 May 2017 01:47
Location: California

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

Post by spanick » 06 Dec 2019 05:02

Yeah, I’ve only ever heard “bat and eyelash” as a reference to flirting. The expression I’m familiar with is “bay an eye.”

User avatar
Dormouse559
moderator
moderator
Posts: 2880
Joined: 10 Nov 2012 20:52
Location: California

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

Post by Dormouse559 » 06 Dec 2019 05:20

Apparently, everyone is batting an eyelid at my eyelash. [:P] For me, there's a clear difference between "bat one's eyelashes" and "not bat an eyelash". The former is a pretty straightforward phrase and can be affirmative or negative; the latter is a full-on idiom and only negative (the affirmative doesn't make much anatomical sense). "Not bat an eye(lid)" is perfectly acceptable for me, too.

yangfiretiger121
sinic
sinic
Posts: 293
Joined: 17 Jun 2018 03:04

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

Post by yangfiretiger121 » 06 Dec 2019 10:24

The language one root for soldier, which I'm planning to have become the word with a single transfix. While I'm confident that the classifications (enlisted, etc.) are derived from the root, is it plausible or speakers to derive the ranks, such as Yeoman, from the root as well?

Additionally, I'm reconstructing Proto-Common with the help of several Wikipedia articles. Are the changes below plausible?

1. [*h → l]
2. {*pʰ, *tʰ, *kʰ → ħ}
3. [*J → ʝ], but {*pJ, *tJ, *kJ, *ɾJ → pʰ, tʰ, kʰ, r}, which become interchangeable with [p, t, k, ɾ] due to rarity (no complete agreement on [*J], with it as [j] or [ʝ]; [ʝ] being more likely)
4. [*C → t͡ʃ~d͡ʒ] ([*C] was [ç] or [j̊], no complete agreement)
Alien conlangs (Font may be needed for Vai symbols)

Khemehekis
runic
runic
Posts: 2501
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 09:36
Location: California über alles

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

Post by Khemehekis » 08 Dec 2019 02:52

A number system question: Can someone please go to my Kankonian grammar at http://khemehekis.angelfire.com/basic.htm and read over my number system list (search for "quintillion" on the page to find it) to make sure I didn't goof?
♂♥♂♀

Squirrels chase koi . . . chase squirrels

My Kankonian-English dictionary: 61,367 words and counting

31,416: The number of the conlanging beast!

User avatar
Omzinesý
runic
runic
Posts: 2746
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 08:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

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

Post by Omzinesý » 08 Dec 2019 17:05

yangfiretiger121 wrote:
06 Dec 2019 10:24
The language one root for soldier, which I'm planning to have become the word with a single transfix. While I'm confident that the classifications (enlisted, etc.) are derived from the root, is it plausible or speakers to derive the ranks, such as Yeoman, from the root as well?

Additionally, I'm reconstructing Proto-Common with the help of several Wikipedia articles. Are the changes below plausible?

1. [*h → l]
2. {*pʰ, *tʰ, *kʰ → ħ}
3. [*J → ʝ], but {*pJ, *tJ, *kJ, *ɾJ → pʰ, tʰ, kʰ, r}, which become interchangeable with [p, t, k, ɾ] due to rarity (no complete agreement on [*J], with it as [j] or [ʝ]; [ʝ] being more likely)
4. [*C → t͡ʃ~d͡ʒ] ([*C] was [ç] or [j̊], no complete agreement)
Phonemes are written /phoneme/, pronunciations [pronunciation].
It's impossible to say if an unanalysable phoneme *C can change to something. You probably see why.
[h] rarely fortifies to anything. It's kind of the last stage of the phoneme before disappearing. In some voiceless environment that could happen but I don't see it probable in all environments.
pj -> pç -> pʰ actually does feel theoretically ok, though I don't know where it would have happened.

yangfiretiger121
sinic
sinic
Posts: 293
Joined: 17 Jun 2018 03:04

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

Post by yangfiretiger121 » 08 Dec 2019 19:29

Omzinesý wrote:
08 Dec 2019 17:05
yangfiretiger121 wrote:
06 Dec 2019 10:24
The language one root for soldier, which I'm planning to have become the word with a single transfix. While I'm confident that the classifications (enlisted, etc.) are derived from the root, is it plausible or speakers to derive the ranks, such as Yeoman, from the root as well?

Additionally, I'm reconstructing Proto-Common with the help of several Wikipedia articles. Are the changes below plausible?

1. [*h → l]
2. {*pʰ, *tʰ, *kʰ → ħ}
3. [*J → ʝ], but {*pJ, *tJ, *kJ, *ɾJ → pʰ, tʰ, kʰ, r}, which become interchangeable with [p, t, k, ɾ] due to rarity (no complete agreement on [*J], with it as [j] or [ʝ]; [ʝ] being more likely)
4. [*C → t͡ʃ~d͡ʒ] ([*C] was [ç] or [j̊], no complete agreement)
Phonemes are written /phoneme/, pronunciations [pronunciation].
It's impossible to say if an unanalysable phoneme *C can change to something. You probably see why.
[h] rarely fortifies to anything. It's kind of the last stage of the phoneme before disappearing. In some voiceless environment that could happen but I don't see it probable in all environments.
pj -> pç -> pʰ actually does feel theoretically ok, though I don't know where it would have happened.
I, actually, asked this on the new ZBB as well (final questioned changes below).

1. [*j̊ → l]
>[*j → l] happens from Proto-Oto-Manguean to Tlapanec as well as Proto-Malayo-Polynesian to Proto-Malayo-Javanic; a variant, [*j → lʲ], happens from Proto-Slavonic to Polish; and sporadic [*j → ɭ] is from Proto-Malayo-Polynesian to Proto-Chamic. I just kept [h] voicelessness.
2. {*pʰ, *tʰ, *kʰ → ħ}
3. [*J → ʝ], but {*pJ, *tJ, *kJ, *ɾJ → pʰ, tʰ, kʰ, r}, which become interchangeable with [p, t, k, ɾ] due to rarity (no complete agreement on [*J], with it as [j] or [ʝ]; [ʝ] being more likely)
4. [*ʍ → t͡ʃ~d͡ʒ]
>Truly, IPA [*xʷ → t͡ʃ(ʷ)~d͡ʒ(ʷ)], with the results having extremely weak or no labialization because the labialization's only occurrence fronted the velar but transcribed [*ʍ] as [*x] is never reconstructed.
>>Simplifying to IPA [*xʷ → t͡ʃ(ʷ)] or local [*ʍ → t͡ʃ(ʷ)], ultimately ending at [ɹ̠̊˔] through [t̠ɹ̠̊˔]
>>Somewhat related was [*py, *pJo, *pJɔ, *pJu, *pJʊ → fy~f͆y, fo~f͆o, fɔ~f͆ɔ, fu~f͆u, fʊ~f͆ʊ]
Last edited by yangfiretiger121 on 08 Dec 2019 22:05, edited 2 times in total.
Alien conlangs (Font may be needed for Vai symbols)

User avatar
Shemtov
runic
runic
Posts: 3139
Joined: 29 Apr 2013 04:06

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

Post by Shemtov » 08 Dec 2019 19:49

Would it be unautralistic to have a set of numbers for mass nouns? Let's say we had them in English, and the suffix was (i)l. So Fouril waters could mean "four cups of water" "four pits of water" etc. and what the number was referring to is based on context/discourse clues.
Also, what mood corresponds to "should"?
Many children make up, or begin to make up, imaginary languages. I have been at it since I could write.
-JRR Tolkien

User avatar
sangi39
moderator
moderator
Posts: 3357
Joined: 12 Aug 2010 01:53
Location: North Yorkshire, UK

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

Post by sangi39 » 08 Dec 2019 21:49

Shemtov wrote:
08 Dec 2019 19:49
Would it be unautralistic to have a set of numbers for mass nouns? Let's say we had them in English, and the suffix was (i)l. So Fouril waters could mean "four cups of water" "four pits of water" etc. and what the number was referring to is based on context/discourse clues.
Also, what mood corresponds to "should"?
I think Japanese does this, but its grouping of nouns as mass nouns is pretty pervasive. Apparently, however, there's two ways to describe how many of some nouns there are. On the one hand, there's the use of Sino-Japanese numbers and counter words, and on the other hand these can be switched out for a bare native Japanese word (although seemingly only up to ten).

I wouldn't find it odd to see a system where something like this appeared in a language where mass nouns were a lot less common than in Japanese.

The counter words could, presumably, gradually fall out in some situations, and you'd end up with a system where (some?) mass nouns ended up using a distinct set of numbers with an implied measure. So you might have "three.MASS water" meaning "three cups of water" vs. "three.MASS pail water" for "three pails of water".
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.

Salmoneus
MVP
MVP
Posts: 1780
Joined: 19 Sep 2011 19:37

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

Post by Salmoneus » 10 Dec 2019 00:10

Shemtov wrote:
08 Dec 2019 19:49
Would it be unautralistic to have a set of numbers for mass nouns? Let's say we had them in English, and the suffix was (i)l. So Fouril waters could mean "four cups of water" "four pits of water" etc. and what the number was referring to is based on context/discourse clues.
So you mean like English, if the space were taken out between the number and "lots of"? Sixlotsa water, fourlotsawater. [or 'loads']

Yes, it is common for counters to semantically bleach over time. It's also common, from the other direction, for modifiers to inflect to agree with the countability of the noun.
[quote
Also, what mood corresponds to "should"?
[/quote]

Moods don't work like that - they're not just translations of English. Rather, different English constructions are used to convey different moods at different times.

"Should" is a word with a huge range of meanings, so there is no single mood "corresponding" to "should" (not to mention, the naming of moods/cases/aspects etc is largely arbitrary and frequently ad hoc).

User avatar
KaiTheHomoSapien
greek
greek
Posts: 703
Joined: 15 Feb 2016 06:10
Location: Northern California

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

Post by KaiTheHomoSapien » 10 Dec 2019 07:46

Has anyone ever re-done a conlang of theirs significantly? Revamped it into the "2.0" version? What kind of changes did you make? Were they significant enough that you had essentially created a new conlang or just an improved version of the same one?

User avatar
Micamo
MVP
MVP
Posts: 7002
Joined: 05 Sep 2010 19:48
Contact:

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

Post by Micamo » 10 Dec 2019 10:18

KaiTheHomoSapien wrote:
10 Dec 2019 07:46
Has anyone ever re-done a conlang of theirs significantly? Revamped it into the "2.0" version? What kind of changes did you make? Were they significant enough that you had essentially created a new conlang or just an improved version of the same one?
Many times: Often, I throw out literally everything except the general aethetic and some basic lexicon words I like. Sometimes, if I haven't touched a lang in a while, I'll start over just because it's easier than trying to decipher my shit-ass notes.
My pronouns are <xe> [ziː] / <xym> [zɪm] / <xys> [zɪz]

My shitty twitter

User avatar
Zekoslav
sinic
sinic
Posts: 336
Joined: 07 Oct 2017 16:54

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

Post by Zekoslav » 10 Dec 2019 10:20

KaiTheHomoSapien wrote:
10 Dec 2019 07:46
Has anyone ever re-done a conlang of theirs significantly? Revamped it into the "2.0" version? What kind of changes did you make? Were they significant enough that you had essentially created a new conlang or just an improved version of the same one?
This happened to my Indo-European conlang. While it had and Old, Middle and Modern stage from the very beginning, they still had more-or-less the same feel, the archaic Indo-European feel like Greek or Lithuanian with final /s/ being preserved. And it had voiced aspirates become voiceless aspirates like Greek. Then at some point I decided to merge voiced aspirates into voiced unaspirates instead, and made the Middle and Modern stages much more innovative and rather ressembling the Iranian languages I had just read about than Greek or Lithuanian (complete with abstract/collective nouns formed with suffixes containing /t/ replacing the original plural declension). But then I became nostalgic about the original language and decided to make it a more conservative sister of the new one. However, I kept revising it to become an intentional pastiche of Classical Latin and Greek, complete with there being ae instead of ai (and ao instead of au for a good measure). Then the conlang with the original aesthetics became a third sister language (actually a fourth, since a third sister language had arisen by that time through an idea to have a "fleeting o". It was originally supposed to be also quite IE-like but it became to Hebrew what the second language was to Latin and Greek...).
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

User avatar
Pabappa
sinic
sinic
Posts: 298
Joined: 18 Nov 2017 02:41
Contact:

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

Post by Pabappa » 10 Dec 2019 17:36

KaiTheHomoSapien wrote:
10 Dec 2019 07:46
Has anyone ever re-done a conlang of theirs significantly? Revamped it into the "2.0" version? What kind of changes did you make? Were they significant enough that you had essentially created a new conlang or just an improved version of the same one?
For me, the name of a conlang indicates a place in the story, and sometimes a certain aesthetic. So yes, Ive done this many times, .... I've been trying to create a language I call "Moonshine" since 1994, and have scrapped and revived it several times, such that I could say it is really four different languages. It's likely that Moonshine will never approach completion or even the stage where I can write short texts, partly because of my indecisiveness and partly because my current plan for Moonshine is to make it so different from all of the other languages on the planet that it is very time-consuming to work on.

I created Pabappa in 2004, and have since then changed everything about it except the phonology, but I did this slowly, and never had a time in which I considered myself to be starting over. I could say the same about Late Andanese, which was originally called Xap and had a very different grammar. But the phonology has not changed at all, and the changes I've made have been slow and gradual.
Sorry guys, this one has the worst sting.

Post Reply