Odd natlang features thread
- Nortaneous
- Sumerul
- Posts: 4544
- Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
- Location: the Imperial Corridor
Re: Odd natlang features thread
the past tense of bullshit is bullshat. e n g l i s h s t r o n g
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.
- KathTheDragon
- Smeric
- Posts: 2139
- Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:48 am
- Location: Brittania
Re: Odd natlang features thread
Bullshit's a verb?
- LinguistCat
- Avisaru
- Posts: 250
- Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 7:24 pm
- Location: Off on the side
Re: Odd natlang features thread
Well, the Catholic Church said beavers are fish, so why not rabbit-birds?
The stars are an ocean. Your breasts, are also an ocean.
-
- Lebom
- Posts: 144
- Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2013 3:21 pm
Re: Odd natlang features thread
To be fair, cladistically speaking, beavers are fish, as are all other terrestrial vertebrates.
Re: Odd natlang features thread
Ehh... that analysis doesn't really hold up. If all vertebrates are fish, you could just as easily claim that all living things are just weird varieties of prokaryote.
Last edited by CatDoom on Fri Jun 06, 2014 12:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Odd natlang features thread
Which, well, we are. Now, such a definition is probably not very useful in everyday matters, but it is correct.
- KathTheDragon
- Smeric
- Posts: 2139
- Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:48 am
- Location: Brittania
Re: Odd natlang features thread
Nor is 'all vertebrates are fish' useful.
- 2+3 clusivity
- Avisaru
- Posts: 454
- Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 5:34 pm
Re: Odd natlang features thread
So . . . twerk --> twrought?Nortaneous wrote:the past tense of bullshit is bullshat. e n g l i s h s t r o n g
linguoboy wrote:So that's what it looks like when the master satirist is moistened by his own moutarde.
Re: Odd natlang features thread
jerk → jrought?2+3 clusivity wrote:So . . . twerk --> twrought?Nortaneous wrote:the past tense of bullshit is bullshat. e n g l i s h s t r o n g
smirk → smrought?
The conlanger formerly known as “the conlanger formerly known as Pole, the”.
If we don't study the mistakes of the future we're doomed to repeat them for the first time.
If we don't study the mistakes of the future we're doomed to repeat them for the first time.
Re: Odd natlang features thread
The Trøndersk dialect of Norwegian has, for long /i/ in most other dialects, [ð̩˕ʲː]
Yes, that's a long palatalized frictionless syllabic voiced dental fricative.
Yes, that's a long palatalized frictionless syllabic voiced dental fricative.
Nūdhrēmnāva naraśva, dṛk śraṣrāsit nūdhrēmanīṣṣ iźdatīyyīm woḥīm madhēyyaṣṣi.
satisfaction-DEF.SG-LOC live.PERFECTIVE-1P.INCL but work-DEF.SG-PRIV satisfaction-DEF.PL.NOM weakeness-DEF.PL-DAT only lead-FUT-3P
satisfaction-DEF.SG-LOC live.PERFECTIVE-1P.INCL but work-DEF.SG-PRIV satisfaction-DEF.PL.NOM weakeness-DEF.PL-DAT only lead-FUT-3P
Re: Odd natlang features thread
That sounds like it's just a long /i/ with the tongue tip pushed forward between the teeth... an odd gesture, perhaps, but how different does it sound?Chagen wrote:The Trøndersk dialect of Norwegian has, for long /i/ in most other dialects, [ð̩˕ʲː]
Yes, that's a long palatalized frictionless syllabic voiced dental fricative.
Re: Odd natlang features thread
I remember skogvur saying something of a region specific speech in Swedish, that it had the same type of /i/
If I stop posting out of the blue it probably is because my computer and the board won't cooperate and let me log in.!
Re: Odd natlang features thread
It's not that uncommon to have a 'raised' /i/, to the point that it almost becomes a fricative. It's a funny sound, but I've heard it a lot in Swedish (which I don't speak) and even sometimes in French (which I do speak).
— o noth sidiritt Tormiott
Re: Odd natlang features thread
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRISmm3dpVwKathAveara wrote:Bullshit's a verb?
- Nortaneous
- Sumerul
- Posts: 4544
- Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
- Location: the Imperial Corridor
Re: Odd natlang features thread
I posted about this in the Random Thread, but Tehit marks (with single-consonant prefixes) almost everything that isn't a noun (and even inalienable nouns!) for its referent nominal.
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.
Re: Odd natlang features thread
While many languages make use of bare verb stems or otherwise relatively unmarked forms of a verb to form the imperative, in the Utian languages of central California imperatives are genrally the *most* marked category of verb. The only verbal inflections reconstructable to proto-Utian are the imperative, the reflexive, the reflexive imperative, the andative (to go and...), the andative imperative, and some kind of volitional suffix. In the Costanoan (Ohlone) and Western Miwok languages the reflexive suffix and various flavors of imperative suffixes are arguably the only remaining verb inflections, although verbs may also take pronominal proclitics agreeing with the subject of the clause. Catherine Callaghan reconstructs proto-Costanoan verbal suffixes like so:
Reflexive: *-pi ~ *-pe
2nd person singular imperative: *-j, *-ij after word-final consonants
2nd person plural imperative: *-ʈ
2nd person singular imperative with first person object (like the English "tell me!"): *-t̪
2nd person plural imperative with first person object: *-m
Andative imperative (like the English "go and fight!): -jis
Reciprocal imperative (like the English "help each other!"): *-mu ~ *-mo
Reflexive imperative (like the English "wash yourself!"): *-po ~ *-pu
In Western Miwok and Mutsun within the Costanoan family, reflexes of *-mu ~ *-mo may be used as general reciprocal markers when combined with the appropriate pronouns, but the imperative meaning seems to be primary.
Reflexive: *-pi ~ *-pe
2nd person singular imperative: *-j, *-ij after word-final consonants
2nd person plural imperative: *-ʈ
2nd person singular imperative with first person object (like the English "tell me!"): *-t̪
2nd person plural imperative with first person object: *-m
Andative imperative (like the English "go and fight!): -jis
Reciprocal imperative (like the English "help each other!"): *-mu ~ *-mo
Reflexive imperative (like the English "wash yourself!"): *-po ~ *-pu
In Western Miwok and Mutsun within the Costanoan family, reflexes of *-mu ~ *-mo may be used as general reciprocal markers when combined with the appropriate pronouns, but the imperative meaning seems to be primary.
- Nortaneous
- Sumerul
- Posts: 4544
- Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
- Location: the Imperial Corridor
Re: Odd natlang features thread
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemnitz_German_phonology
A dialect of German with r > q, contrastive vowel pharyngealization, one aspirated consonant, and apparently no low vowels.
A dialect of German with r > q, contrastive vowel pharyngealization, one aspirated consonant, and apparently no low vowels.
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.
- Herr Dunkel
- Smeric
- Posts: 1088
- Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 3:21 pm
- Location: In this multiverse or another
Re: Odd natlang features thread
That is magicalNortaneous wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemnitz_German_phonology
A dialect of German with r > q, contrastive vowel pharyngealization, one aspirated consonant, and apparently no low vowels.
sano wrote:To my dearest Darkgamma,
http://www.dazzlejunction.com/greetings/thanks/thank-you-bear.gif
Sincerely,
sano
Re: Odd natlang features thread
This seems an appropriate place to ask a question.
On a TV show that portrays Yorkshire 100 years ago, there was a man of low SES who said "It was 5 year ago". Now I know this is all performance and I'm sure the accent is being played up, but it was curious to me to see the English dropping the plural 100 years ago. Perhaps this is commonplace, I am not English, I do not know. What explains this? Is it still common today in Yorkshire?
On a TV show that portrays Yorkshire 100 years ago, there was a man of low SES who said "It was 5 year ago". Now I know this is all performance and I'm sure the accent is being played up, but it was curious to me to see the English dropping the plural 100 years ago. Perhaps this is commonplace, I am not English, I do not know. What explains this? Is it still common today in Yorkshire?
Re: Odd natlang features thread
It is, or at least it's common in accents on tv that are meant to be from Yorkshire. In general if you're watching British tv what you're seeing is modern accents standing in for however they would have spoken, which technically we don't know because there were no recordings back then.
Re: Odd natlang features thread
What explains this? A common tendency in the Indo-European languages not to mark plurals on nouns used as counters. Cf. "ten head of cattle", "four score years". English examples with year go back to the Anglo-Saxon period (e.g. "An wif...þolode blodryne twelf gear" [Matt. 9:20]). The OED labels this usage "Now chiefly regional" and gives a citation from 2010 (albeit from a work of historical fiction): "Two year we were courting—near enough to two year."Viktor77 wrote:On a TV show that portrays Yorkshire 100 years ago, there was a man of low SES who said "It was 5 year ago". Now I know this is all performance and I'm sure the accent is being played up, but it was curious to me to see the English dropping the plural 100 years ago. Perhaps this is commonplace, I am not English, I do not know. What explains this? Is it still common today in Yorkshire?
Re: Odd natlang features thread
In Dutch, 'jaar' isn't pluralized after numerals. The same goes for 'uur' (hour).
— o noth sidiritt Tormiott
Re: Odd natlang features thread
Oh. My. God. Coda R became pharyngealized vowels???Nortaneous wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemnitz_German_phonology
A dialect of German with r > q, contrastive vowel pharyngealization, one aspirated consonant, and apparently no low vowels.
Re: Odd natlang features thread
For Áine's sake, how could it come into being!? It's an abomination under Tehlu!TaylorS wrote:Oh. My. God. Coda R became pharyngealized vowels???Nortaneous wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemnitz_German_phonology
A dialect of German with r > q, contrastive vowel pharyngealization, one aspirated consonant, and apparently no low vowels.
The conlanger formerly known as “the conlanger formerly known as Pole, the”.
If we don't study the mistakes of the future we're doomed to repeat them for the first time.
If we don't study the mistakes of the future we're doomed to repeat them for the first time.
- Nortaneous
- Sumerul
- Posts: 4544
- Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
- Location: the Imperial Corridor
Re: Odd natlang features thread
ir > ʌˤː
ur > ʊˤː
er > aˤː
or > oˤː
ar > ɔˤː
can't tell what happened to är
ur > ʊˤː
er > aˤː
or > oˤː
ar > ɔˤː
can't tell what happened to är
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.