zompist bboard

Qòye ák'ə Zôq'ərbòrgə šére č'oyẽše!
all-SF power.F Zuckerberg lord.M=DAT exist.PFV-3SF-SJV
[ˈqʰɔje ˈʔakʼə zɔqʼəɾˈbɔɾgə ˈʂeɾe tʂʼoˈjɛ̃ʂe]
All power to Lord Zuckerberg!

Zòhe šáyetlare sáwo go.
lizard.M lord.M-PM-1S=DAT worship.IPFV-1S EGO
[ˈzɔhe ˈʂajetʰlaɾe ˈsawo ˈgo]
I worship my lizard overlords.

«Yòrdə» šu zeləyówə go.
thing-DEF.SM NEG see-PFV-A:1S-P:3SM EGO
[ˈjɔɾdə ˈʂu zeləˈjowə ˈgo]
I have not seen "The Thing".

Early Middle Laqar: yôq' "money" (f., sg..), from Proto-Laqar *jɒːkʼ yòq'la "money" (f., sg.., 1S-possessed), from Proto-Laqar *jɒːkʼ , and Proto-Laqar *-læː yòq'ni "money" (f., sg.., 1P-possessed), from Proto-Laqar *jɒːkʼ , and Proto-Laqar *-niː yòč'i "money" (f., sg.., 2SM-possessed), from Proto-L...

I'm with alynnidalar - there is no such thing as "should" when it comes to languages.

One thing to remember is that people do not know how past speakers spoke their language; people don't do things or not do things sound-change-wise because of how things are "supposed" to be or because people in the past did things a certain way. To invoke this requires that other varieties are spoke...

Early Middle Laqar: wič' "fire" (m., sg..), from Proto-Laqar *wiːkʼ wíč'la "fire" (m., sg.., 1S-possessed), from Proto-Laqar *wiːkʼ and Proto-Laqar *-læː wíč'ni "fire" (m., sg.., 1P-possessed), from Proto-Laqar *wiːkʼ and Proto-Laqar *-niː wíč'i "fire" (m., sg.., 2SM-possessed), from Proto-Laqar *wi...

The above paradigm breaks many of the general guidelines for locating the position of stress (if it is not explicitly marked), since all of the forms, except the plural definite forms, have second syllable stress despite the second syllable having /o/ in most of the forms.

Early Middle Laqar: yoló "money" (f., sg..), from Proto-Laqar *julæːw yolóla "money" (f., sg.., 1S-possessed), from Proto-Laqar *julæːw , and Proto-Laqar *-læː yolóni "money" (f., sg.., 1P-possessed), from Proto-Laqar *julæːw , and Proto-Laqar *-niː yoláwi "money" (f., sg.., 2SM-possessed), from Pro...

As you can see, the stress paradigms for Early Middle Laqar nouns and verbs are pretty predictable. Essentially, the left-most /a/, /i/, /u/, /ɛ/, or /ɔ/ in the last three syllables of a word is probably stressed. Of course, /e/ and /o/ can be stressed or unstressed anyplace in the last three syllab...

Imralu wrote:

KathTheDragon wrote:

jal wrote:

linguoboy wrote:before I crack it over your head.

It should be "on" your head. "Over my head" there's just thin air.

That'd be "above my head". "Over" here means "spread across", more or less.

Considering the context that came up in, that was obviously a joke.

I think KathTheDragon realized that.

yangfiretiger121 wrote:Was Raphe his name or short for Raphael?

What do you think, considering we are talking about Ralphs and not Raphaels?

Speaking of quitting jobs, I am torn between staying at my current programming job and potentially switching over to a different programming job. Normally I would not be looking for a new job, but the engineering director of this company was my engineering lead at a past job and specifically wants t...

Vijay wrote:Of course not, the Brits are obviously going around saying "RRÉLF! RRÉLF!"

Just because something is written as /r/ phonemically does not mean it is trilled...

Is /reIf/ still standard in the U.K.? I knew someone with that name, but he spelled it Rafe and I didn't think of it as a variant of Ralph at the time. You people using capital I for IPA ɪ when transcribing diphthongs are going to make me have a conniption. For a moment I was wondering if there wer...

I just obsoleted all of the paradigms above by introducing phonemic stress into Early Middle Laqar. Well... not exactly - most words follow the same sorts of general patterns with regard to their mobile stress, and from just looking at most words you can figure out where the stress is. Some words, t...

Šọ̈́gala wrote:There's also X as /ɨgz/ in "Xavier", at least in my midwestern U.S. accent.

Yeah, I hear that here as well.

Nortaneous wrote:bark bork woof bark barf, bark boof bonk woof bark bork honk hork illuminati wooga barf
animals aren't even real, they're holograms projected by the space lizards to keep us down

Kəlacə waźori wə!
explain.PFV-GER want.IPFV-A:1S-P:3SF EGO
[ˈkʰəlatsʰə ˈwaʑoɾi ˈwə]
I want a gloss!

StrangerCoug wrote:Is it plausible to split a uvular series off from a velar series? If so, how?

Sure - back velar consonants adjacent to back or more specifically low back vowels, then do something that removes the conditioning environment, e.g. merging low back and low front vowels.

I need to figure out some way to regularize Laqar verbal and nominal paradigms, because they are just too complex, with too many possible variations. Even though each basic stem shape like CVC, CV:C, CVCV, CV:CV, CVCV:, CV:CV:, CVCCV, CV:CCV, CVCCV:, CV:CCV:, CVCVC, etc. has a basic paradigm, "weak"...

That does look boring, with how superficially regular it looks. Contrast that with Early Middle Laqar, which has so many different potential paradigms, with there being no real clear "regular" one that most verbs or nouns follow.

ndiba napesa liikwe maŋ? napesaŋowin fe liikweuku but pronounce-3p liquid Q / pronounce-3p-ABT-SBJV ASM liquid-PL But what about a liquid? They might be able to at least pronounce liquids, I'm guessing. C'ir [ʁ̞] sòxot kuri hi sa. DIST.PM [ʁ̞] only say.PFV-A:3PM-P:3SF able_to DED [ˈtsʼiɾ ʁ̞ ˈsɔχotʰ...

Early Middle Laqar: źórə "trees" (m., col.), from Proto-Laqar *ʁuɾæ źorlá "trees" (m., col., 1S-possessed), from Proto-Laqar *ʁuɾæ and Proto-Laqar *-læː źorní "trees" (m., col., 1P-possessed), from Proto-Laqar *ʁuɾæ and Proto-Laqar *-niː źorrí "trees" (m., col., 2SM-possessed), from Proto-Laqar *ʁuɾ...

yangfiretiger121 wrote:

Vijay wrote:Could it lenite into [fʲ] or something like that?

It might be able to under average circumstances, however, Outsider speakers would devoice it back to [pʲ] because the language's only voiced consonants are supposed to be /m n ɲ ŋ ʐ ʝ ɰ r/.

Umm... [fʲ] is voiceless.

yangfiretiger121 wrote:Okay. Somehow, I forgot about /pʲ/. What are likely outcomes for it?

Either it would stay as is, or it would turn into something like [pç], [pɕ], or [pʃ], even though in some languages (e.g. Tibetan varieties) /pj/ has turned into one of [cç], [tɕ], or [tʃ] (I don't remember which exactly offhand),