zompist bboard

a congress of convoluted conworldery
It is currently Sun Jan 21, 2018 7:35 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Dec 13, 2017 3:20 pm 
Sanci
Sanci

Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2016 6:32 am
Posts: 20
Location: In a shingle near Odin City
After a while of working on my Anglo-Romance bogolang, I had the idea of taking the bogo up a notch, and I conceived a concept AU in which Northeast Semitic languages (Arabic, Hebrew, Aramaic etc.) were descendants of Proto-Indo-European.
I'd like ideas on how to kickstart the thing and some soundchange lists for Northeast Semitic langs (not correspondences, actual "A turns to B under condition C" soundchanges).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 13, 2017 7:31 pm 
Lebom
Lebom
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 25, 2013 2:45 am
Posts: 203
Location: Australia
ÜberBen wrote:
After a while of working on my Anglo-Romance bogolang, I had the idea of taking the bogo up a notch, and I conceived a concept AU in which Northeast Semitic languages (Arabic, Hebrew, Aramaic etc.) were descendants of Proto-Indo-European.
I'd like ideas on how to kickstart the thing and some soundchange lists for Northeast Semitic langs (not correspondences, actual "A turns to B under condition C" soundchanges).

Index Diachronica basically has these, though I don't remember how much detail it has on the Semitic langs.

_________________
Native: English || Pretty decent: Ancient Greek || Alright: Ancient Hebrew || Eh: Welsh || Basic: Mandarin Chinese || Very basic: French, Latin, Gamilaraay, Syriac, Nisuese, Old Apsiska
Conlangs: Pofp'ash, Nisuese, Apsiska


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2017 6:42 am 
Sanci
Sanci

Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2016 6:32 am
Posts: 20
Location: In a shingle near Odin City
Thanks Mate!
There's tons of info there, I'm indebted to you.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2017 4:28 pm 
Sanci
Sanci

Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2016 6:32 am
Posts: 20
Location: In a shingle near Odin City
Well... Sh*t.
Yeah, there really isn't much info about the Semitic langs, and my first SCA testrun with the soundchanges (plus a few more that I've brewed myself/borrowed for historical accuracy, like the laryngeals becoming full vowels) failed horribly.
Although deriving all of the modern Semitlangs from Proto-Semitic is feasible, Applying soundchanges to a phonology that is very incompatible with them is not gonna work.
My previous Anglo-Romance project worked pretty well with slapping a slightly modified version of the Proto-Germanic -> Old English SCs onto Latin, since the phonologies of the two parent languages are pretty similar:
More: show
Latin:
/m n/
/p b t d k g kʷ gʷ/
/f s h/
/w l r j/

/i e a o u/ + length
-----
Proto-Germanic:
/m n/
/p b t d k g kʷ gʷ/
/ɸ θ s z x xʷ/
/w l r j/

/i e ɑ u/ + length
/ɛ: ɛ:: ɔ: ɔ::/
/ĩ ɑ̃ ũ/+ length
/ɔ̃: ɔ̃::/

Nasals and Overlong vowels could be ignored, and many other features could be dealt with- Romance!OE without /θ/ is fine by me.
However, have a gander at PIE vs. PS:
More: show
Proto-Indo-European:
/m n/
/p t c k kʷ/
/b d ɟ g gʷ/
/bʰ dʰ ɟʰ gʰ gʷʰ/
/s h1 h2 h3/
/w l r y/

/e o/ + length
/m̩ n̩ u l̩ r̩ i/
-----
Proto-Semitic:
/m n/
/p b t t' d k k' g ʔ/
/θ θ' ð s s' z ʃ ɬ ɬ' x ɣ ħ ʕ h/
/w l r y/

/i a u/ + length

Tell me- How on earth would soundchanges geared towards a language with emphatics and 14 fricatives work on a language with voiced aspirated plosives and syllabic sonorants?
Dangit, seems like I'll have to create most of the soundchange list out of the blue.
As a nooblanger, I require your assistance! :(


Last edited by ÜberBen on Thu Dec 14, 2017 5:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2017 4:42 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 5:00 pm
Posts: 4237
Location: Braunschweig, Germany
It seems that you have hit on the fundamental problem of bogolanging: The sound changes you are trying to apply to your starting language just don't fit because they presuppose a different phonology. And PIE and Proto-Semitic are not even close, they are almost as utterly different as they could be.

_________________
...brought to you by the Weeping Elf
Tha cvastam émi cvastam santham amal phelsa. -- Friedrich Schiller
ESTAR-3SG:P human-OBJ only human-OBJ true-OBJ REL-LOC play-3SG:A


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2017 6:30 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2015 6:44 am
Posts: 2569
Location: suburbs of Mrin
This thread might be useful.

_________________
ìtsanso, God In The Mountain, may our names inspire the deepest feelings of fear in urkos and all his ilk, for we have saved another man from his lies! I welcome back to the feast hall kal, who will never gamble again! May the eleven gods bless him!
kårroť


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 14, 2017 8:50 pm 
Smeric
Smeric
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2010 5:00 pm
Posts: 1384
If you want to use the West Semitic sound changes as written, you're going to have to make PIE look like PS first by hand. However, there's another snag: a great deal of the flavor of the Semitic languages comes from massive morphological analogy and leveling. An Indo-European language could easily develop a Semitic-like phonological inventory (just as Maltese, Neo-Punic, and [to some extent] Modern Hebrew developed Indo-European-esque phonological inventories), but it's still not going to look Semitic without the significant grammatical reanalysis that characterizes the Semitic languages.

_________________
"But if of ships I now should sing, what ship would come to me,
What ship would bear me ever back across so wide a Sea?”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2017 9:49 am 
Sanci
Sanci

Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2016 6:32 am
Posts: 20
Location: In a shingle near Odin City
I never even considered giving the Indo-Semitic bogolangs nonconcatenative morphology!
They're supposed to be descendants of PIE, and thus should have IE-like morphology, not the 3C root system of actual Semitic langs.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2017 11:20 am 
Smeric
Smeric
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 29, 2016 6:34 am
Posts: 1078
Location: The North
ÜberBen wrote:
I never even considered giving the Indo-Semitic bogolangs nonconcatenative morphology!
They're supposed to be descendants of PIE, and thus should have IE-like morphology, not the 3C root system of actual Semitic langs.


But then PIE morphology does have quite a non-concatenative component anyway, I think you could have great fun working to enlarge its role.

_________________
https://frislander.tumblr.com/

First known on here as Karero


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2017 12:18 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:48 am
Posts: 2954
Location: Brittania
The role of ablaut in PIE morphology is pretty overstated, imo. It's certainly nowhere near as prominent as in Semitic.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2017 1:02 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 4:41 am
Posts: 2829
Location: Davis, CA
Leaving aside the morphological issues, I can think of some sound changes that might help:
  • Make laryngeals 1-3 into [h x ħ] respectively, with allophonic voicing (and possibly also [h] versus [ʔ]) that becomes phonemic later. Then merge /e o/ into /a/. Insert /i/ or /u/ before formerly syllabic consonants. This gives you the PS back consonants and a more PS-like vowel set.
  • Make voiced stops emphatic, then make the voiced aspirates simply voiced.
  • Pseudo-satemize: shift [s] into [ʃ] in some or all environments, then shift the palatals to front sibilants or interdentals based on some conditioning factor. Lastly, shift the labialized velars to plain velars.

The one real stumbling block is I’m not sure how to generate the lateral fricatives.

_________________
[ʈʂʰɤŋtɕjɑŋ], or whatever you can comfortably pronounce that's close to that

Formerly known as Primordial Soup

Supporter of use of [ȶ ȡ ȵ ȴ] in transcription

It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a 青.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2017 2:12 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 5:00 pm
Posts: 4237
Location: Braunschweig, Germany
KathTheDragon wrote:
The role of ablaut in PIE morphology is pretty overstated, imo. It's certainly nowhere near as prominent as in Semitic.


Indeed not. But I once had the idea of an IE lostlang in contact with Semitic in which PIE ablaut developed into something like Semitic triconsonantal morphology, but as for now, I have no idea how to do that.

_________________
...brought to you by the Weeping Elf
Tha cvastam émi cvastam santham amal phelsa. -- Friedrich Schiller
ESTAR-3SG:P human-OBJ only human-OBJ true-OBJ REL-LOC play-3SG:A


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2017 4:06 pm 
Osän
Osän
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 2:57 pm
Posts: 11308
Location: Lake Tašpa
Another idea may be would be to keep the lRnygeals as is, nd shift /a o/ to grammatical identity with them, so that , essentially, all vowels come to behave az lagnrgeals and to this merges ablaut. E.g. Greek/ apator/ "fatherless " becomes a regular pattern, with the 2nd vowel of a noun u n noun always /o/ when that affix/prewfix i cix is added to the beginning.

_________________
Sunàqʷa the Sea Lamprey says:
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 16, 2017 9:09 am 
Sanci
Sanci

Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2016 2:43 am
Posts: 60
Location: Russia, Saint-Petersburg
Speaking of Semitic and Indo-European languages interacting, what would you say would be the effect of heavy, prolonged influence of a mix of Modern Arabic dialects on Modern English?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 16, 2017 2:13 pm 
Smeric
Smeric
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2010 5:00 pm
Posts: 1384
Chengjiang wrote:
[*]Make voiced stops emphatic, then make the voiced aspirates simply voiced.

That seems possible but unlikely IMO. I think a more Armenian-esque shift would make more sense:
P > Pʼ
B > P
Bʱ > B

Chengjiang wrote:
The one real stumbling block is I’m not sure how to generate the lateral fricatives.

That's easy: sl Hl > ɬ.

_________________
"But if of ships I now should sing, what ship would come to me,
What ship would bear me ever back across so wide a Sea?”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 16, 2017 2:51 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 4:41 am
Posts: 2829
Location: Davis, CA
Zaarin wrote:
Chengjiang wrote:
[*]Make voiced stops emphatic, then make the voiced aspirates simply voiced.

That seems possible but unlikely IMO. I think a more Armenian-esque shift would make more sense:
P > Pʼ
B > P
Bʱ > B


The reason why I suggested converting the plain voiced stops to emphatics is it preserves the relative markedness of the stop series better. The tenues are the least marked series in both PIE and PS, while the most marked series are PIE’s modally voiced stops and PS’s emphatics. Your suggestion does work, but you end up with certain sounds being strangely rare or common, e.g. /p/ being near nonexistent.

Also, leaving aside the potential truth of falsity of the glottalic model of PIE, if you use it you’ve basically already got the aftermath of my stop shift.

Quote:
Chengjiang wrote:
The one real stumbling block is I’m not sure how to generate the lateral fricatives.

That's easy: sl Hl > ɬ.


That works. Laryngeal + /l/ initial clusters are pretty common, so there’d be plenty of /ɬ/. I guess for the emphatic counterpart you could use post-satemization clusters of former voiced palatals and /l/? (With clusters of former voiced aspirated palatals and /l/ just yielding /l/?)

_________________
[ʈʂʰɤŋtɕjɑŋ], or whatever you can comfortably pronounce that's close to that

Formerly known as Primordial Soup

Supporter of use of [ȶ ȡ ȵ ȴ] in transcription

It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a 青.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:12 pm 
Smeric
Smeric
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2010 5:00 pm
Posts: 1384
Chengjiang wrote:
Zaarin wrote:
Chengjiang wrote:
[*]Make voiced stops emphatic, then make the voiced aspirates simply voiced.

That seems possible but unlikely IMO. I think a more Armenian-esque shift would make more sense:
P > Pʼ
B > P
Bʱ > B


The reason why I suggested converting the plain voiced stops to emphatics is it preserves the relative markedness of the stop series better. The tenues are the least marked series in both PIE and PS, while the most marked series are PIE’s modally voiced stops and PS’s emphatics. Your suggestion does work, but you end up with certain sounds being strangely rare or common, e.g. /p/ being near nonexistent.

Also, leaving aside the potential truth of falsity of the glottalic model of PIE, if you use it you’ve basically already got the aftermath of my stop shift.

Less of an issue because PS didn't have /pʼ/. So you'd actually have /t k/ > /tʼ kʼ/; /p b d g/ > /p p t k/; /bʱ dʱ gʱ/ > /b d g/. Still, I see your point.

Quote:
Quote:
Chengjiang wrote:
The one real stumbling block is I’m not sure how to generate the lateral fricatives.

That's easy: sl Hl > ɬ.


That works. Laryngeal + /l/ initial clusters are pretty common, so there’d be plenty of /ɬ/. I guess for the emphatic counterpart you could use post-satemization clusters of former voiced palatals and /l/? (With clusters of former voiced aspirated palatals and /l/ just yielding /l/?)

Yeah, I was wondering how to get an emphatic lateral as well; that works.

_________________
"But if of ships I now should sing, what ship would come to me,
What ship would bear me ever back across so wide a Sea?”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:14 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2015 6:44 am
Posts: 2569
Location: suburbs of Mrin
I think the original values of the laryngeals were something like this (phonologically, no clue as to phonetically): /x χ xʷ/ (I believe that the palatovelars were actually plain and the "plain velars" were actually uvular)
According to Wikipedia, it has been suggested that /χ/ later became /ħ/ in most non-Anatolian branches. So it seems more likely that that would be the source of /ħ/.

Syllabic /x χ xʷ/ become reinterpreted as /a a o/. I think all of /e o a/ combining would make the resulting sound too common, and the classic Semitic solution to troublesome consonants is to add a schwa. So maybe /o/ merges with /u/ or /e o/ are merged either with /i u/ or with /a/ depending on the condition. And also vowel lengthening should happen with the remaining laryngeals in order to have the long-short contrast.

Chengjiang wrote:
e.g. /p/ being near nonexistent.
/p'/ can shift to /p/ afterwards. It's debatable whether /p'/ even existed in Proto-Semitic.

I don't think the OP really needs to create lateral fricatives if the goal is to get to Arabic, Hebrew and Aramaic.

_________________
ìtsanso, God In The Mountain, may our names inspire the deepest feelings of fear in urkos and all his ilk, for we have saved another man from his lies! I welcome back to the feast hall kal, who will never gamble again! May the eleven gods bless him!
kårroť


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:21 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:48 am
Posts: 2954
Location: Brittania
Small aside on *h₃ - xʷ isn't very likely, since Anatolian doesn't display any rounding when the laryngeal is preserved, in constrast to the labiovelar stops which do. The actual labiovelar fricative in Anatolian is the reflex of *h₂w.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 2:40 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 5:00 pm
Posts: 4237
Location: Braunschweig, Germany
KathTheDragon wrote:
Small aside on *h₃ - xʷ isn't very likely, since Anatolian doesn't display any rounding when the laryngeal is preserved, in constrast to the labiovelar stops which do. The actual labiovelar fricative in Anatolian is the reflex of *h₂w.


That's your opinion. It may be the case, but it may also be the case otherwise. I know that you don't believe in PIE *o having been rounded, but I haven't understood yet why you don't.

_________________
...brought to you by the Weeping Elf
Tha cvastam émi cvastam santham amal phelsa. -- Friedrich Schiller
ESTAR-3SG:P human-OBJ only human-OBJ true-OBJ REL-LOC play-3SG:A


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 6:21 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:48 am
Posts: 2954
Location: Brittania
I mean the only evidence for a labialised *h₃ is a rounded *o, so... And my main reasons for not thinking *o to have been originally rounded (though I do concede it may well have been rounded at least after Tocharian split off) are precisely that I don't believe *h₃ to have been labialised.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 6:30 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2015 6:44 am
Posts: 2569
Location: suburbs of Mrin
I doubt that it's relevant because this conlang is not so far away from the rest as Tocharian and would therefore have labialisation.

_________________
ìtsanso, God In The Mountain, may our names inspire the deepest feelings of fear in urkos and all his ilk, for we have saved another man from his lies! I welcome back to the feast hall kal, who will never gamble again! May the eleven gods bless him!
kårroť


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 18, 2017 3:17 am 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:48 am
Posts: 2954
Location: Brittania
It's only really relevant if they want to keep the laryngeals, which they probably do. My belief is that there is no solid case for a rounded *h₃, but a reasonable case against it, but it is ultimately up to OP. Besides, a discussion on *h₃ is better suited for elsewhere, don't you think?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 18, 2017 11:12 am 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 5:00 pm
Posts: 4237
Location: Braunschweig, Germany
KathTheDragon wrote:
Besides, a discussion on *h₃ is better suited for elsewhere, don't you think?


Yep. It belongs to the Great Proto-Indo-European Thread, where we have already discussed it.

_________________
...brought to you by the Weeping Elf
Tha cvastam émi cvastam santham amal phelsa. -- Friedrich Schiller
ESTAR-3SG:P human-OBJ only human-OBJ true-OBJ REL-LOC play-3SG:A


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group