zompist bboard

_________________
そうだ。死んでいる人も勃起することが出来る。
俺はその証だ。

_________________
そうだ。死んでいる人も勃起することが出来る。
俺はその証だ。

_________________
そうだ。死んでいる人も勃起することが出来る。
俺はその証だ。

_________________
< Cev> My people we use cars. I come from a very proud car culture-- every part of the car is used, nothing goes to waste. When my people first saw the car, generations ago, we called it šuŋka wakaŋ-- meaning "automated mobile".

_________________
そうだ。死んでいる人も勃起することが出来る。
俺はその証だ。

Where do you live, Miekko?

I have those diphtongs you mention initially, too, so I also say stein, röjk and heim (and I would spell them stein, røyk and heim).

I conjugate "illa" as well, so my first (masculine, singular, indefinite) form would be iller.

For me, masculine -e hasn't switched to accusative -a; instead I retain both, so I say påse (spelled pose and pronounced pøse) in nominative, and påsa in accusative and dative.

I have no present tense marker for some words either (usually when it's correct etymologically, but not always; I say "eg heit" (jag heter) instead of "eg heite", which would be correct etymologically). I say "eg frys", which is correct etymologically, but sometimes also "han frys", which isn't, and should be "han fryser" to be correct according to etymology.

Lamb and kamb are etymological, but rinda isn't. I say renna. I say lamm, and kam, but I would still write them lamb and kamb for the sake of etymology.

If I were to write using your dialect, I would probably spell /tatSen/ as takjen, because that would still keep etymology intact, while still representing the pronunciation in a logical way.

_________________
< Cev> My people we use cars. I come from a very proud car culture-- every part of the car is used, nothing goes to waste. When my people first saw the car, generations ago, we called it šuŋka wakaŋ-- meaning "automated mobile".

I speak a language whose "standard" (if it can be called such) isn't spoken by anyone anymore. Nonetheless, here goes. (I won't try and construct a "phonetic" spelling, because that's a good way to get the bigger linguists to beat me up and take my lunch money.)

I don't drop Hs (I hate misconstructions like *<an hotel> [ən 'əʊtɛɫ] - it can only be <a hotel> [ə 'həʊtɛɫ]).
I don't front TH - it is <something> ['sʌmθɪŋ], never ['sʌɱfɪŋ].
I do diphthongise BEAT and BOOT - from what I can tell, they're [bɪit] and [bʊut]. I also distinguish <wholly> [hɒʊɫi] from <holy> [həʊɫi] (but <whole> and <hole> are indistinguishable as [hɒʊɫ]).
I do not diphthongise BORE - it is pronounced [bo:], such that BOARD and BORED have the same vowel. POOR, POUR and PORE all have the same vowel [o], while PURE is [pjʉ]. (Liaison applies - <poor elephant> [poɹ 'ɛlɪ̞fn̩t], <pour out> [poɹ æʊt], <pore opener> [poɹ 'əʊpənə], <pure element> [pjʉɹ 'ɛlɪ̞mn̩t].).

_________________
< Cev> My people we use cars. I come from a very proud car culture-- every part of the car is used, nothing goes to waste. When my people first saw the car, generations ago, we called it šuŋka wakaŋ-- meaning "automated mobile".

"to" [tʰ]
"tomorrow" [tʰmɑʁ˞əʊ̯]
"today" [tʰɾɛɪ̯]
etc.

"you have" [jæːv]
"do you have" [djæːv]
etc.

also subject dropping, retention of "have" instead of "got" in most cases, and everything I said in the other thread. I also use the past to refer to things that were referred to in the past, while everyone else up here in this damn nonsense state has this really annoying tendency to use the present and confuse the hell out of me

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.

_________________
そうだ。死んでいる人も勃起することが出来る。
俺はその証だ。

_________________
< Cev> My people we use cars. I come from a very proud car culture-- every part of the car is used, nothing goes to waste. When my people first saw the car, generations ago, we called it šuŋka wakaŋ-- meaning "automated mobile".

_________________
< Cev> My people we use cars. I come from a very proud car culture-- every part of the car is used, nothing goes to waste. When my people first saw the car, generations ago, we called it šuŋka wakaŋ-- meaning "automated mobile".

I tend to voice /s/ intervocally, while Standard Chilean actually lenites them all the way to [h]. I've even been known to pronounce both /n/ and /s/ when V_V as [z~] when I'm tired.

I also voice obstruents rather frequently. while some people have [b] and [d] for intial /b/ and /d/, I always, without exeption, even initially and before a nasal, say [B] and [D].

other than that... I dunno, I speak standard chilean.

english I speak with a very heavy accent. again, [D] for /d/ and [B] for /b/, don't make the / i-I / distinction, say [tS] for /dZ/ and other typical chicano habits, like hating that rhotic aproximant and trilling most <r>s, unless I'm carefull.