Search found 188 matches
- Thu Mar 31, 2011 5:02 pm
- Forum: Languages & Linguistics
- Topic: Is Sumerican a Uralic Language?
- Replies: 59
- Views: 16185
Re: Is Sumerican a Uralic Language?
I don't really understand all the flak that the long-range comparers are getting. Largely because of shoddy work by Ruhlen, Greenberg, and Starostin. It's tainted the field. Also there's the bizarre idea floating around that you can't demonstrate family relationships beyong 8000 years (sometimes th...
- Sun Mar 27, 2011 9:12 pm
- Forum: Languages & Linguistics
- Topic: Is Sumerican a Uralic Language?
- Replies: 59
- Views: 16185
Re: Is Sumerican a Uralic Language?
I don't really understand all the flak that the long-range comparers are getting. Other than the shortage of material to work with, I see nothing inherently flawed with the idea of long-range comparison. In theory, you should be able to apply the comparative method indefinitely and end up at the beg...
- Sat Mar 26, 2011 7:57 pm
- Forum: None of the above
- Topic: Linguistic Quackery Thread, take 2
- Replies: 812
- Views: 212278
Re: Linguistic Quackery Thread, take 2
Is it just me, or are these examples of linguistic fail getting more and more hilariously outrageous? 
- Fri Mar 25, 2011 7:20 pm
- Forum: None of the above
- Topic: The Official ZBB Quote Thread
- Replies: 2878
- Views: 663993
Re: The Official ZBB Quote Thread
hito wrote:Yes, is is is; if is is not is, something else is is. Or, if is is said by a different structure, we can say that that structure is is: if if is is then then is if.
- Thu Mar 24, 2011 3:49 pm
- Forum: None of the above
- Topic: Linguistic Quackery Thread, take 2
- Replies: 812
- Views: 212278
Re: Linguistic Quackery Thread, take 2
Sanskrit is an absolutely perfect language that has never ever changed and Proto-Indo-European is a Eurocentric conspiracy! Now the question is, when an original parent language, Sanskrit, is already in existence, why was the ‘Proto-Indo-European’ term designed, and, instead of deriving the ancestr...
- Tue Mar 01, 2011 9:55 am
- Forum: Languages & Linguistics
- Topic: Sounds That You Can/Can't Pronounce Easily
- Replies: 322
- Views: 58257
Re: Sounds That You Can/Can't Pronounce Easily
Ooh, what bad luck. I'm going to kill you if you don't. I have 14 bombs placed strategically around your house. Pronounce a series of breathy and creaky voiced vowels and consonants or the bombs will go off. You have 3 hours. Breathy vowels I'm actually pretty good at. It's breathy consonants that ...
- Tue Mar 01, 2011 8:35 am
- Forum: Conlangery & Conworlds
- Topic: Yet Another English Spelling Reform Thread
- Replies: 117
- Views: 25616
Re: Yet Another English Spelling Reform Thread
Yeah! Gratuitous diacritics rule!XinuX wrote:It even has the lower-case s for the third-person singular ending. It's genius!Nortaneous wrote:HȺ GÍZ LEȾ RÍT IṈLIŚ WIŦ EN ECSTENĆEN EV ŦE SENĆOŦEN URŦAGREFI
W̲ET E FECIṈ GRȺT ÍDIYE
U GOD W̲ET HEV Í DEN
- Mon Feb 28, 2011 4:24 pm
- Forum: Conlangery & Conworlds
- Topic: ASCA v0.1.6 - NEW
- Replies: 125
- Views: 32999
Re: ASCA v0.1.6 - NEW
A couple bug reports: Rule exceptions don't work right unless there's a positive condition. Just using a plain underscore for the condition will completely ignore the exception part, applying the rule unconditionally. (If I missed something here, let me know, but yeah.) Also, ASCA seems to ignore th...
- Mon Feb 28, 2011 4:11 pm
- Forum: Languages & Linguistics
- Topic: Sounds That You Can/Can't Pronounce Easily
- Replies: 322
- Views: 58257
Re: Sounds That You Can/Can't Pronounce Easily
I cannot do breathy or creaky voice to save my life.
- Sat Feb 26, 2011 10:54 pm
- Forum: C&C Archive
- Topic: A conlang interpretation challenge
- Replies: 45
- Views: 8103
Re: A conlang interpretation challenge
Wait... There's two symbols for /v/?
Apparently the [+voice] diacritic applies to fricatives too.
Apparently the [+voice] diacritic applies to fricatives too.
- Sat Feb 26, 2011 1:21 pm
- Forum: Conlangery & Conworlds
- Topic: Yet Another English Spelling Reform Thread
- Replies: 117
- Views: 25616
Re: Yet Another English Spelling Reform Thread
(why are <why> and <I> spelled with |ai| while <like> is spelled with |í|?) I suppose that Tropylium⁺s dialect, like mine, exhibits Canadian raising, so <why> would be [waɪ] whereas <like> is realised as [lʌɪk]. Which, of course, is only evidence of one of the other big problems in spelling reforms...
- Fri Feb 25, 2011 4:59 pm
- Forum: Languages & Linguistics
- Topic: The Innovative Usage Thread
- Replies: 2452
- Views: 438827
Re: The Innovative Usage Thread
For some reason I keep wanting to analyze the "help" in "God help us" as an imperative. I read somewhere that it's actually a present subjunctive, but I could be wrong. Well, nowadays English can hardly be said to have a subjunctive, so the only sensible thing would be to analyse it as imperative. ...
- Fri Feb 25, 2011 4:41 pm
- Forum: None of the above
- Topic: Linguistic Quackery Thread, take 2
- Replies: 812
- Views: 212278
Re: Linguistic Quackery Thread, take 2
Yeah, but the thing is that site's a comedy site. I mean, "French is essentially a Romance language with Algonquian verb grammar."? That's a parody, not ignorance. I know it's a humor site. That's the point; I was intentionally making a joke. I was commenting on a previous point, not bringing up a ...
- Fri Feb 25, 2011 9:18 am
- Forum: None of the above
- Topic: Linguistic Quackery Thread, take 2
- Replies: 812
- Views: 212278
Re: Linguistic Quackery Thread, take 2
What's more is that it's not even something that can be excused by (c wut i did thar?) Latinophilia, as Latin had a passive voice. Okay, I just have to say this: According to traditional grammar, all languages are essentially Latin. :D The next person who says "copula equals passive" is gonna hear ...
- Fri Feb 25, 2011 8:42 am
- Forum: C&C Archive
- Topic: A conlang interpretation challenge
- Replies: 45
- Views: 8103
Re: A conlang interpretation challenge
Here's another possible transcription: ik had en openbarun (I had a revelation) got stud efor ik (God stood before me) he sa (:) ik eksisti nix (he said?? : I exist not) so ik beglefi nix got (so i believe not God) ik vet he eksisti nix (I think he exists not) I can't really work out half of this. ...
- Thu Feb 24, 2011 4:48 pm
- Forum: Conlangery & Conworlds
- Topic: ASCA v0.1.6 - NEW
- Replies: 125
- Views: 32999
Re: ASCA v0.1.5 - Test Resease (broken)
What the heck is an omment?It remains possible to use the hash sign # for a full line omment and double-hash-sign ## for full-line comments
- Mon Feb 21, 2011 4:15 pm
- Forum: Languages & Linguistics
- Topic: Multi-Person Possession in English
- Replies: 45
- Views: 7437
Re: Multi-Person Possession in English
I would agree in saying that me and my sister's car is the most likely construction for me.
- Sun Feb 20, 2011 1:12 pm
- Forum: C&C Archive
- Topic: A conlang interpretation challenge
- Replies: 45
- Views: 8103
Re: A conlang interpretation challenge
That means it's a posteriori then. We need to figure out what language it's based on.Chuma wrote:I will tell you this much: It is a conlang, but it's not apriori.
If it helps, here's all the different glyphs I've identified:
- unknown script glyphs.png (599 Bytes) Viewed 4724 times
- Fri Feb 18, 2011 11:10 pm
- Forum: Conlangery & Conworlds
- Topic: Lexicon Building
- Replies: 4308
- Views: 826866
Re: Lexicon Building
Bengedian beágiem /beˈag.iˌem/ "to rust".
Next word: to allow
Next word: to allow
- Wed Feb 16, 2011 8:52 pm
- Forum: C&C Archive
- Topic: What do you lexicalise in your motion verbs?
- Replies: 52
- Views: 10348
- Wed Feb 16, 2011 5:39 pm
- Forum: C&C Archive
- Topic: What do you lexicalise in your motion verbs?
- Replies: 52
- Views: 10348
Re: What do you lexicalise in your motion verbs?
Bengedian lexicalizes manner; for example I have grubem "to fly", clodem "to walk", ferem "to go/travel", brithem "to ride". Some path lexemes also exist, like utem "to rise", derived from the word for "up" Derivational affixes can be used to express path, for example ofrem "to exit" ← of-ferem , li...
- Thu Feb 10, 2011 10:13 pm
- Forum: Languages & Linguistics
- Topic: Grammar Changes in Languages
- Replies: 45
- Views: 7876
Re: Grammar Changes in Languages
I don't know about the goose->geese example you posted I can't believe nobody brought this up yet. It's just Germanic umlaut at work. Germanic umlaut is actually a great example of how a sound change can work its way into grammar. Once i-mutation became phonemicized in pre-Old English, words like "...
- Sun Feb 06, 2011 5:19 pm
- Forum: Languages & Linguistics
- Topic: Yonagu by Nancy - vowel systems
- Replies: 76
- Views: 13469
Re: Yonagu by Nancy - vowel systems
I think I know what you're talking about.Eddy wrote:Interesting and helpful webpage, by the way, although I recall seeing it somewhere before.
It's not exactly the same, but there's obviously a relationship.
- Thu Feb 03, 2011 10:17 pm
- Forum: Conlangery & Conworlds
- Topic: ASCA v0.1.6 - NEW
- Replies: 125
- Views: 32999
Re: ASCA v0.1.3 - progress update
Okay, it's been a few days since my last big post that wasn't a TC, so I've got quite a few things to dump here. __________ Additionally, it should be relatively straightforward to implement exceptions that work like "UNLESS" statements in VSCA. I loved VSCA's UNLESS statements, but it's too darn sl...
- Tue Feb 01, 2011 8:39 pm
- Forum: Languages & Linguistics
- Topic: Anon's English topic - Grammatical Gender
- Replies: 24
- Views: 4988
Re: Anon's English topic - Grammatical Gender
To me, "She's an actor" and "she's an actress" are both perfectly acceptable. A group of them are called "actors" regardless of composition, unless their genders are relevant to the discussion.
But *"He's an actress" is wrong, under normal circumstances.
But *"He's an actress" is wrong, under normal circumstances.