zompist bboard

Just an idle inquiry (I don't know how much work you've done on Sarroc - it would probably depend on how much work you've done on the other languages of the region, if Sarroc was heavily influenced by them), but how did Sarroc manage to loose the genitive case? I assume it has lost final vowels, etc.

But among IE languages, at least, the genitive is a hard habit to shake, it seems, and it would have taken a degree of ingenuity to maintain the ablative and all the others while losing it.

Or - more idle speculation - has Sarroc even developed some new (perhaps postpositional) cases?

--Rhisto Filipei

So Haleza Grise wrote:Just an idle inquiry (I don't know how much work you've done on Sarroc - it would probably depend on how much work you've done on the other languages of the region, if Sarroc was heavily influenced by them), but how did Sarroc manage to loose the genitive case? I assume it has lost final vowels, etc.

But among IE languages, at least, the genitive is a hard habit to shake, it seems, and it would have taken a degree of ingenuity to maintain the ablative and all the others while losing it.

Well, Old French had nominative and accusative only, while Romanian retains three cases-- though I'm not sure which Latin cases correspond to the Romanian ones.

Anyway, both Sarroc and Isma?n use the Cadh. ablative as a possessive, which allowed them to do without the genitive.

I don't have much information on Sarroc, and I should really work on Dhekhnami first...

zompist wrote:Well, Old French had nominative and accusative only, while Romanian retains three cases-- though I'm not sure which Latin cases correspond to the Romanian ones.

Anyway, both Sarroc and Isma?n use the Cadh. ablative as a possessive, which allowed them to do without the genitive.

I don't have much information on Sarroc, and I should really work on Dhekhnami first...

On the language map in the atlas I see Tyellakhi and Demoshi, but no Dheknami.

Iscun wrote:On the language map in the atlas I see Tyellakhi and Demoshi, but no Dheknami.

They're sister languages. Since the Demoshi are the top humans in the empire, 'Dhekhnami' is simply Demoshi.

zompist wrote:They're sister languages. Since the Demoshi are the top humans in the empire, 'Dhekhnami' is simply Demoshi.

Why are the Demoshi the top humans if the Tyellakhi were the first to be absorbed by the ktuvoks?

Iscun wrote:Why are the Demoshi the top humans if the Tyellakhi were the first to be absorbed by the ktuvoks?

Life's like that sometimes.

The Demoshi are a more dynamic culture-- probably because they were ruled by the Cadhinorians for a few centuries and learned a lot, while Tyellakh was a backwater.

I've been looking for a place to put this:
is the kh in Dhekhnam and Munkhash a velar fricative, or an aspirated stop?

zompist wrote:Life's like that sometimes.

The Demoshi are a more dynamic culture-- probably because they were ruled by the Cadhinorians for a few centuries and learned a lot, while Tyellakh was a backwater.

Sorry this isn't a language-based question, but what is a Dhekhnami's perception of evil? It must be a lot different than a Verdurian's.

What would a Dhekhnami do if he orshe uncovered everything about his hor her empire?

Drydic_guy, the kh is listed in my notes as a velar fricative.

Iscun wrote:Sorry this isn't a language-based question, but what is a Dhekhnami's perception of evil? It must be a lot different than a Verdurian's.

What would a Dhekhnami do if he or she uncovered everything about his hor her empire?

Try to get attached to a really prestigious ktuvok. :)

The beauty of a ktuvok empire is that it mostly runs itself, based on the humans' own self-interest. If you're in one of the top ethnic groups (the Demoshi in general; the Carhinnians in the military), there are plenty of opportunities for command and/or prosperity. If you're in the middle, there are newer groups to help rule. If you're on the bottom, you have the hope of dominating others as the empire expands.

For the Dhekhnami, the biggest worry is Sarn?e, the Cadhinorized western half of their empire, especially the most recently conquered bits. Their methods are basically to apply massive intimidation, to impress the impossibility of rebellion upon the conquered; they also like to move groups to other parts of the empire, in part to serve as slaves, but mostly to disperse them and make them less able to link up and rebel.

The Dhekhnami certainly don't conceive of their nation, or the ktuvoks, as evil; they think it's a glorious empire, full of manly military discipline. The ktuvoks can be frightening, but hey, it's better to be on their side than against them, no?

Ah, I see. With what countries do they have good relations with? Do they have any close allies at all? It would be terribly difficult to make friends having such an evil reputation throughout all history. Both the Easterners and the Jippirasti fought against Munkh?sh, so I assume that they all still hate their guts, but what is the Xurnese stance on Dhekhnam? It doesn't look like they're ever had much trouble with them.

And what kind of nation is G?sh? It seems to be the only other free Eynleyni state. Linguistically a Qarau language is spoken in the north and a Lenani in the south, which must be confusing for the inhabitants.

So being Dhekhnam the "bad guys" of Erel?e, will they have a harsh, evil, sloppy, (clich? ) language? What's the phonology like?

Iscun wrote:Ah, I see. With what countries do they have good relations with? Do they have any close allies at all? It would be terribly difficult to make friends having such an evil reputation throughout all history. Both the Easterners and the Jippirasti fought against Munkh?sh, so I assume that they all still hate their guts, but what is the Xurnese stance on Dhekhnam? It doesn't look like they're ever had much trouble with them.

And what kind of nation is G?sh? It seems to be the only other free Eynleyni state. Linguistically a Qarau language is spoken in the north and a Lenani in the south, which must be confusing for the inhabitants.

So being Dhekhnam the "bad guys" of Erel?e, will they have a harsh, evil, sloppy, (clich? ) language? What's the phonology like?

See the commentary to the 3480 map for the origin of G?sh. It and the northernmost two Tzhuro states are really Dhekhnami client states.

Dhekhnam has two allies in Eretald, M?tk?n and Azgami. These are "rogue states" in terrestrial jargon; their leaders have been bought off by the Dhekhnami in hopes of threatening Verduria and ?renat.

Kebri trades with Dhekhnam, a fact which annoys the Verdurians to no end (rather as the French have always annoyed American diplomats), but they're certainly not allies.

In theory Xurno is ready to resist the Dhekhnami, thanks to Verdurian diplomacy and the traditional notion that you can't really trust the smooth-talking Dhekhnami. However, they have trouble believing that there's really a threat-- or if there is, it's obviously directed at Eretald. There's some trade, through Karazi intermediaries.

As for the language, it's going to be tricky to distinguish it from Barakhinei and Elkar?l, which have similar phonologies. Its only distinctive sound is the lateral fricative lh as in Gelalh (not the same as the palatalized lateral lh in Barakhinei!). When I get to it, I'll have to find some way to make it more interesting.

zompist wrote:Well, Old French had nominative and accusative only, while Romanian retains three cases-- though I'm not sure which Latin cases correspond to the Romanian ones.

AFAIK, the Romanian genitive - dative is based on the Latin dative.
Late Old Persian is another example for a language which replaced the genitive by the dative. (Modern Persian has lost all case distinctions).
Greetings,
Hans-Werner

Actually, the Romanian Dat-Gen is more based upon the merger fo the Latin Genitive and Dative.
I think I'll throw a Dative as Genitive construction in my next conlang.