[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 112: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 112: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 112: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 112: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/functions.php on line 4752: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at [ROOT]/includes/functions.php:3887)
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/functions.php on line 4754: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at [ROOT]/includes/functions.php:3887)
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/functions.php on line 4755: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at [ROOT]/includes/functions.php:3887)
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/functions.php on line 4756: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at [ROOT]/includes/functions.php:3887)
zompist bboard • View topic - Kirroŋa

zompist bboard

It is currently Fri Feb 28, 2020 4:02 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Kirroŋa
PostPosted: Thu Jul 21, 2016 8:57 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 11:54 pm
Posts: 707

A language whose native name simply means "(The) Language", Kirroŋa is the native language of the Binnan people and the official one of their homeland, Binnanni Lateŋ (often just called "Binnanni", even though that's technically a genitive), a country on Thōselqat. Binnanni exists on the coasts east of Pazzel, and the Paz encountered them first as they traveled east to trade and commune with the Adari, Heocg, and Sun. Binnanni was little more than rest stop--there was effectively nothing there besides some "primitive savages", and the Binnan were almost completely ignored as the world turned: acknowledged on a map, but viewed as a quaint coastline nation far too insignificant for the major players of the world to care about. The Paz merchant prince Vēdnaranā said in his journal: ādhrāva ūṣrā yētha. ūṣrā, dṛk pezī klicī qa jriqā. kidda braqtirūmi rabodhawallītirū, kūvāya drēgvūya, dnaṣēyyū "On these coasts there is nothing. Nothing but primitive people and water. Even the most bloodthirsty king would regret counquering this place."

All this changed, however, when modern advances in technology revealed huge amounts of natural oil, metals, and other highly important material underneath Binnanni's coastal land. As such, the country now enjoys a wealth far exceeding it's population or history--a wealth explosion that occurred in less than a century. The country still reels from being thrust into the spotlight--what were tiny villages without much running water or electricity 80 years ago are now booming metropoli filled with cars, designer stores, and rich tourists. The government isn't satisfied, however--it truly wants to make Binnanni a massive world player, and is dedicating millions upon millions of dollars attracting massive corporations, exporting Binnan culture worldwide, and building even more modern works such as observatories, universities, museums, and much more. In this tumultuous time, the Binnan are thrust in the middle of a chaotic time. Might they lose their own culture as their country globalizes itself? How ironic, that after hundreds of years of defending their culture from being eradicated by outsiders, that their own government might be the true killer of their culture...

Kirroŋa has always been of great interest to Thōselqat linguists, in part due to its extremely bizarre morphology, being effectively the only language on the entire planet to mark case on verbs as well as nouns, outside of its moribund sister languages. Together with its five sisters, Kirroŋa is a part of the Kirrongic family, though it comprises literally 99% of said family's speakers. It it spoken by around 55 million people. Most other countries have Binnan immigrants and enclaves, and it's not hard to find a school that has classes on it. Due to the cosmopolitan nature of modern Binnanni, many speakers also know other languages such as Pazmat, Azenti, Heocg, Sunbyaku, etc.

This first post will serve as an overview of Kirroŋa's phonology, as well as a basic overview of its morphology, grammar, and unique features therein, which shall be expanded in other posts.

1.01 Phonology:

Kirroŋa has a rather large amount of consonants and vowels. It distinguishes vowel and consonantal length. It is completely devoid of any fricatives except for /h/, which itself can only appear word-initially and word-medially, and cannot appear in consonant clusters. It does have affricates, however. Vowel wise, it has massively elaborated on its historical three-vowel system, and has front rounded vowels (but no back unrounded ones). However, it has a highly complex morphophonology.

1.02: Sound Inventory and Phonotactics

Kirroŋa's has the following phonemes:

/m n ɳ ŋ/
<m n ṇ ŋ>

/p b t d ʈ ɖ k g/
<p b t d ṭ ḍ k g>


/ts dz tʃ dʒ ʈʂ ɖʐ/
<q z c j ṭc ḍj>

/w l j ɾ~ɺ r ɽ~ɻ/
<w l y ŀ r ṛ>

/a aː i iː u uː e eː o oː y yː ø øː ɛ ɛː ɔ ɔː/
<a aa i ii u uu e ee o oo ý ýý ø øø é éé ó óó>

Geminated consonants double their respective letter, except for /ʈʂː ɖʐː/ which are written <ṭcc ḍjj>.

Phonotactics: Each Kirroŋa syllable roughly can be described with (C)(R)V(C). However the situation is much more complex than that:

-The only consonants which can end a word are the resonants /r l/, the nasals, and the voiceless stops. Voiced stops may end a syllable if its word-medial, hence why words like udgi "thief" are acceptable.

-"R" refers to any of the following: /w r l j/. /tj dj ʈj ɖj kj gj/ do not occur: they are the origin of the affricates (i.e *ty > q). Words ending in one of these stops will palatalize into affricates when suffixed with morphemes beginning in /j/: for instance, drýt "death", -yo "his" > drýqo "his death". Because of this, no word actually ends in an affricate, outside of loanwords such as the verb koyoj "comprehend" from Pazmat koyojarā "comprehension".

-Homo-organic stop+affricate clusters are banned and become geminated affricates.

-Retroflexes force a dental obstruent to become retroflex, and geminate when next to any other obstruent; e.g hi<a>ṇ-ki > heṇṇi

-If a word ends in an unacceptable consonant or a CC cluster (very common through derivation/inflection), then a trailing -u is added. For instance, infixing the instrumental <id> to the verb wul "feel (emotionally)" gives us wu<id>l > *wuidl > wýllu "soul" (the gemination and vowel change will be explained later).

-If a word ends in a three consonant cluster through derivation, then the cluster is broken up: CCC > CCuC. If this still results in an unacceptable syllable at the end, a trailing -u is added; e.g infixing <id> to hund "cut" gives us hýnnudu "battlefield": huidnd > hýnnud > hýnnudu

-These rules do not apply to all words. Many verbs, for instance, end in normally banned consonants such as ned "sleep", as do many suffixes and infixes. This is because it's expected that these are suffixed into acceptable forms.

-Vowel hiatus is banned. Anytime vowels come together, they merge into one vowel; detailed explanations are in the section below.

1.03: Morphophonology

Kirroŋa has rather extensive morphophonology. The actual underlying rules are simple, but they are extremely pervasive. Even the most simple of declension, conjugation, or inflection will require their usage. Before talking about the morphophonology, it's important to talk about Kirroŋa's assimilation hierarchy. Morphemes in Kirroŋa can be split into three categories: words, suffixes, and infixes, in that order. Put simply, a morpheme will always assimilate to a morpheme above it in the hierarchy. Go back to wýllu above: the infix <id> fully assimilates into the word wul. This assimilation through gemination is a constant in Kirroŋa; it occurs even when the cluster would acceptable in a word.

For instance, ṛitno means "dirt", and has a medial /tn/ cluster. However, if we take a word ending in /t/, such as idat "boy", and add the accusative suffix -nu, the result is idattu. The reason we consider the suffix to be nu and not, say, -u+gemination is because when suffixed to vowel-final words its true form surfaces: hoŋŋenu "house (ACC)".

The hierarchy explains why both progressive and regressive assimilation occur in Kirroŋa. One thing to remember is that in strings of suffixes, assimilation is always regressive. The presumptive mood suffix -adan combined with the potential suffix -hý gives us -adahhý. Another important fact is that if the second suffix begins with a voiced stop, it forces a previous voiceless stop to voice. Suffixes containing voiced stops are actually quite rare, but one example would be suffixing the proximative don to the adessive -ýt, creating -ýddon. The assimilation appears progressive, but it is actually regressive: -ýt's /t/ is voiced and geminates.

The hierarchy also explains why infixes are always added to a suffix before it is suffixed onto a word. This is important for morphophonological reasons.

Vowels, however, are much trickier. As said above Kirroŋa bans vowel hiatus and merges any vowels that touch together (there are some exceptions however). Understanding this requires looking back at its ancestral vowel inventory. Old Kirroŋa (henceforth referred to as "O.Kir") had an extremely simply three-vowel inventory of /a i u/, with no distinction of length, and allowed vowels in hiatus. However, in a process called the First Great Vowel Merger, or FVM, all such hiatuses were merged into new vowels. These added long variants of /a i u/, as well as /e o y/ to the language. Soon, afterwards, a Second Great Vowel Merger ("SVM") occurred--for /a i u/, the results were the same, but now /e o y/ were allowed to participate in the mergers, creating their long variants, and the new vowels /ø ɛ ɔ/, finally filling out the inventory. Analogy then ran through the system, and what was once sound change now became an extremely important part of Kirroŋa's grammar. Here is a chart detailing the results of merging vowels. This happens anytime two vowels are brought together, often through suffixing or infixing. Memorize it well. It will be on the test:

So, from the chart, we can see why infixing <id> to wul gives us wýllu: /ui/ > /y/.

Some things of note:

-This chart does not include /y ø ɛ ɔ/. They do not merge with any vowels, except for themselves (which results in lengthening, as seen for the vowels in the chart). Anytime they are forced next to other vowels, an epenthetic /w/ is inserted (compare how epenthetic /u/'s are used to break up unacceptable clusters).

-The order of the vowels doesn't matter: /ai/ and /ia/ alike merge to /e/

-Some minor trends can be noticed here. /a/ "drags" the high vowels /i u/ down to /e o/, and drags those mid vowels to the open-mid /ɛ ɔ/, for instance.

These mergers explain the distribution of vowels in Kirroŋa. At the top we have /a i u/, the three vowels it has inherited from its ancient form. Then, there are the long variants of those vowels, and /e o/. These derive from the mixture of those three vowels, and are less common but still plentiful. Finally, there are /ø ɛ ɔ/, which are only formed through combinations of the FVM vowels (excluding /y/ obviously). As such they are far rarer--they are effectively non-existent in verbs, affixes, and infixes, only truly appearing in combinations of suffixes such as in the word nedetċému "Perhaps (he) thought about going to sleep". In addition, their long forms are basically non-existent and merely hypothetical constructs. Infixes and suffixes contain only /a i u o e y/.

1.04 Underlying Forms

Because of the above vowel mergers, it is important to remember the underlying forms of Kirroŋa words: the "raw" form of a word, which is then warped by morphophonological processes into the form produced by the speaker. A huge amount of morphology will not make any sense without understanding underlying forms. In this grammar, underlying forms are marked with italics and a preceding *, much like how reconstructed words are marked in real-life grammars of proto-languages. Underlying forms are important for any word, suffix, or infix which contains /e o y/.

Let's begin with an example: take the verb ned "sleep". Infixing the locative <ta> suffix creates the word "bed" (< "where one sleeps"). One would assume that the word would be netadu. However, it is...natedu? What exactly is going on?

Well, this is because ned is *naid. When viewed like this, suddenly it makes sense: *na<ta>id > *nated > natedu. Likewise, infixing onqý "pig" with the diminutive <ala> gives us aalonqý "piglet": *a<ala>unqý.

However, this mainly applies to infixing. When suffixing, vowels don't "split" like this. As such, the intentive mood suffix -ukku combined with the possibilitative mood -emu creates ukkømu, as in kirranukkømu "perhaps (he) was going to speak". Likewise, suffixing the -um stative oblique case to hoŋŋe "house" gives us hoŋŋøm. However, infixing the <ala> diminutive gives us haaloŋŋe "small house, cottage, hut": *ha<ala>uŋŋe.

Unfortunately, there's one tricky thing about this: "broken verbs". Kirroŋa possesses a small amount of verbs which have two completely distinct meanings. However, derivational infixing showcases that they are actually two entirely separate verbs. Examples would help: ceŋ can mean either "dream" or "pluck, play an instrument, (by analogy) be a musician". In O.Kir, "dream" was *kyiaŋ and "pluck" was *kyaiŋ. Both verbs then became ceŋ. When used as verbs, they're homophonous: ceŋorowo is either "(she) will keep plucking" or "(she) will keep dreaming". However, derive words from them, and their differences will be made clear: "instrument" is cóŋiŋ and "daze, reverie" is cuŋaŋ. Both are derived with the <oŋ> instrumental infix like so:

*ca<oŋ>iŋ > cóŋiŋ
*ci<oŋ>aŋ > cuŋaŋ

All broken verbs have a root vowel of /e o y/. Thankfully, there are very few of them--five with <e>, five with <o>, and five with <ý>, with 30 total meanings. In all honesty, broken verbs really only show their true nature when deriving words from them, otherwise they simply appear to be verbs with two distinct meanings (and in many cases one of the meanings is rarely used, having been replaced with other verbs) All other verbs with root /e o y/ are always underlyingly /ai/, /au/, and /ui/, respectively. The broken verbs will be listed later, but some examples are mel "drizzle", "slap", tloŋ "grow", be cautious", and ṇýp "crawl", "lie down".

These rules generally wrap up the morphophonology of Kirroŋa. With them, one can understand the processes acting on this admittedly extreme example: druttalluukkýṭcaadannayemmu, meaning "Even if (he) had suddenly thought about planning to die by her hands...". Below is the verb again along with its underlying form, showcasing how much the two differ:


However, even the simplest sentences showcase heavy morphophonlogy:

no hoŋŋøm amaayobu
*no hoŋŋe-um am-a-o<ya>b
1S house-S.OBL do-PFV-SUBESS<3S>
"I am underneath the house"

(am "do" is necessary in these copular sentences with oblique arguments, as the verbal case markers must have a verb to appear on)

ye handoŋŋu kurawat eṇḍeyadu
*ya-i handa-uŋ-nu kura-wat eṇḍ-i-a<ya>du
3S.F sword-2S.POSS-ACC lake-M.OBL carry-IMPFV-ALL<3S>
"She is carrying your sword to the lake"

When glossing sentences, I will always provide the underlying form below the surface version.

1.05: An Overview of Kirroŋa

This section is a brief overview of Kirroŋa's various features. None of them will be elaborated in detail--that's for later posts.

Kirroŋa is underlyingly an agglutinative language where each morpeheme has exactly one meaning. However due to the large amount of morphophonological fusion of consonants and vowels it straddles the line between fusional and agglutinative. It is overwhelmingly head-final, possessing SOV word order and being Noun-Adjective.

Kirroŋa nouns possess a variety of cases. It is Nominative-Accusative, though a bizarre quirk concerning subjects of intransitive verbs which are not inherently intransitive led to a minority opinion that it was actually Tripartite, but no linguist on Thōselqat adheres to that now. Kirroŋa's far more interesting feature is the fact that it features the extremely strange phenomenon of verbal case--that is, markers on verbs that correspond to case in most other languages. Nouns are still marked for case, however: Nominative, Accusative, Dative, Genitive, Benefactive, and finally two oblique causes: the Stative Oblique (glossed S.OBL) and Motive Oblique (M.OBL). These cases form the core syntactic cases.

The Oblique cases are where things get unusual: They mark a noun as ready to be modified by a verbal case. The verb itself takes a massive amount of cases: 10+. Certain cases have different meanings depending which Oblique they take; others demand a particular one. As an example:

nadu hoŋŋøm leŋataya "The woman walks in(side) the house" (Stative)
nadu hoŋŋewat leŋataya "The woman walks into the house" (Motive)

There are also a small amount of cases which do not govern obliques, such as the Optative (yes, that is a case in this language): yo tloŋoraginon "I hope that he will be cautious".

All verbal case suffixes are infixed with person markers corresponding to their oblique, even though Kirroŋa doesn't mark the subject or object. A lack of person marker is translated "something/someone" depending on context.

There are no articles. Number is distinguished only in pronominal elements, but there are three numbers: singular, dual, and plural. Nouns can be suffixed with possessive person marks: handano "my sword", handoŋ "your sword", handaye "her sword", etc. Unusually negative and interrogative markers exist: handenu "no one's sword", handommi "whose sword?" These can take case markers too: nuuṇṭýcuŋe "for his wife" (*nuuṇṭýt-ya<u>-iŋe). It should be noted that these markers--case and possessive--are technically clitics, as they suffix to the last word of a noun phrase.

Adjectives are nominal and require nouns to be in the genitive, the adjective itself taking any relevant case and possessive markers.

Verbs are richly marked with distinct Tense, Aspect, and Mood markers in that order; the mood marker is infixed to the final aspect marker, with any following mood markers suffixed. Case markers are then suffixed. While the verb only distinguishes three tenses (Past, Present, and Future), it possesses a patently absurd amount of aspect and mood markers.


That wraps that up. My next post will be on nouns and adjectives; the post afterwards will cover verbs.

I mostly have basic grammar and syntax down. I'm unsure about some of the markers, however: I might make a zero person marker on a verbal case suffix mean "it/they" instead of "s.thing/s.one".

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

 Post subject: Re: Kirroŋa
PostPosted: Sat Jul 23, 2016 12:00 am 

Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 4:15 pm
Posts: 52
Location: the workers' state of the upper country
The choice of <q> for /ts/ and <c> for /tʃ/ seems a tad odd to me, when it's precisely the opposite in pinyin. May I suggest:
/ts dz tʃ dʒ ʈʂ ɖʐ/
<c z q j c̣ ẓ> or
<s z x j ṣ ẓ>

Other than that tiny nitpick, everything looks great. I love all the morphophonological bits, I feel like they really add a lot of depth!

 Post subject: Re: Kirroŋa
PostPosted: Mon Jul 25, 2016 8:39 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 11:54 pm
Posts: 707

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

 Post subject: Re: Kirroŋa
PostPosted: Fri Aug 05, 2016 9:22 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 11:54 pm
Posts: 707
Come on, people! Make some noise.

Before I begin, I have some minor errata of previous posts:

-The Dative ending for regular nouns is now -an for words which end in a consonant such as idat "boy" or kraṭ "dog". The chart in the first post will be updated as soon as possible to reflect this. This also may or may not foreshadow a minor reworking of the case suffixes where I split the -C and -V words into two actual classes with distinct endings (though the endings will still be very, very similar).

-Possessive suffixes are not longer separated by an apostrophe: idatto "my boy", not *idat'to

-I have made some slight changes to glossing underlying forms. When two or more morphemes are (combined with parentheses like this), it means that they are part of one unit. For example:


This means that *doh-ma in the underlying transcription form one unit, meaning "funny". I do this because sometimes words must be broken down into more parts then they actually gloss as.

-In addition to the above, clauses in [brackets like this] are deranked, usually attached to a noun.

-Words connected with equals signs <=> indicate that they are part of one unit, such as a demonstrative and its noun, or a deranked verbal clause and its subject noun. It does not always mean that one of them is a clitic (though it could).

-In affixes, <C²> indicates that when the affix is attached to a Consonant-final word, it geminates that final consonant.

-From now on, posts will make references to sections which do not exist; they appear in later posts. Until the post with that section is made, these future references will be listed as [[XX.XX]] and will be updated with the correct section as soon as it is a part of this thread.

Adjectives and Demonstratives

Adjectives are words which describe the qualities of other nouns (or verbs, when used adverbially). Demonstratives are deictic words which usually describe a noun's position in space. Kirroŋa has both classes of words, distinct from nouns and verbs. However, the two are conflated, mainly in that they possess the same declension desinences. Since the demonstratives are the "original" class, the term for their overall morphology is "Demonstrative Morphology". Speaking of...

3.01 Demonstrative Morphology

Both adjectives and demonstratives share some common characteristics. First of all, they have distinct stems: the (Implicit) Nominative is built to one stem, while all others are built to another stem. Interestingly enough, the Explicit Nominative is NOT built to this stem, lending credence to the theory that it is not actually a Nominative morphologically. In addition, several demonstratives demonstrate (ha!) irregular forms in a few cases. The demonstrative case endings are almost identical to the pronominal ones, except in the Accusative and Genitive:

NOM: -ø, -wa
ACC: -u
DAT: -na
GEN: -i
BEN: -iŋe
S.OBL: -um
M.OBL: -t

All demonstratives and adjectives are post-noun. Their syntax and uses will be described later on--for now, let's introduce some examples.

3.02 Demonstrative Pronouns

dam: The most basic demonstrative pronoun, dam has the non-NOM stem da; here's a full declension of it:

NOM: dam
EXNOM: dawa
ACC: do
DAT: dan (irreg.)
GEN: de
BEN: deŋe
S.OBL: dom
M.OBL: dat

dam generally means "that", as in an object which is distant from both the speaker and the listener. It is also used when nominalizing verbs and adjectives (more on that later).

jun: This demonstrative means "this"; an object close to the speaker, but not the listener. It is completely regular, with the NON-NOM stem of ju- (e.g DAT juna or BEN jýŋe

mýdu: This demonstrative means "that", when the object in question is next to the listener. As such, often a translation such as "that X near/by you" is ideal, though often the distinction is meaningless translation-wise. It's non-NOM stem is mýn-, and it is regular.

durom: This is an intensive of dam, and refers to objects that are quite a ways off. Its non-NOM stem is dura-, and it has an irregular Dative of duron, similar to dam's own dan.

nebu: This demonstrative specifically marks out a member of a group. I know that all demonstratives do that, technically, but nebu puts heavy emphasis on it: "I want that car", and as such often should be translated as "this X" or "that X" with italics. At times, it may even be used as an ad-hoc article! Often drawn out too:"I want thaaaaaaaaat one!" Its non-NOM stem is nab-

awa: Means "here", non-NOM stem of ot-.

kuk: "There" near listener. non-NOM stem: kug-

rawi: "There", away from both speaker and listener. non-NOM stem is ret-

3.02.02 Demonstrative-esque Pronouns

These are a small class of pronouns which take pronominal desinences, but which exhibit the dual-stem behaviour of demonstratives. There are only two of them, and they are Kirroŋa's two interrogatives:

bita: "what". Non-NOM stem is bi-:

NOM: bita
EXNOM: biwa
ACC: bin
DAT: bina
GEN: bimi
BEN: biŋe (irreg.)
S.OBL: bým
M.OBL: bit

bum: "who". Non-NOM stem of bý-:

NOM: bum
EXNOM: býwa
ACC: býn
DAT: býna
GEN: bými
BEN: býŋe (irreg.)
S.OBL: býwum
M.OBL: být

3.03 Demonstrative Syntax

Demonstratives always appear after their noun, which is always in the Nominative: kaŋ dam "that man", diri mýdu "that tree (next to you)", kraṭ nebu "that (particular) dog", and so on. It is the demonstrative which takes case, not the noun:

na kraṭ juu kaṛṛana
*na kraṭ=ju-u kaṛ-pan-a
1S dog=DEM-ACC train-PST-PFV
"I trained this dog (here)".

oṇṇuḍu juu aṇare, pa kaŋ dan neŋe eṇḍare
*oṇṇuḍu=ju-u aṇ-a-re pa kaŋ=dan neŋe eṇḍ-a-re
package=DEM-ACC grab-PFV-IMPER then man=DEM.DAT 1S.BEN carry-PFV-
"Take this package, then deliver (it) to that man for me"

Of course, they can be used on their own as well:

durom apare!
*dura-um ap-a-re
"Look at that (thing) way over there!"

Demonstratives do not normally take possessive pronouns (except in special cases). They can be used with possessed nouns, however:

kraṭ dam "that dog"
kraṭto dam "that dog of mine"
kraṭca dam "that dog of theirs"
kraṭcer dam "that dog of those two"

nebu is used more often than usual--perhaps to specify the particularness of that possessed noun:

Aa, ma...ittroŋ nabu kiddanému? Nakum...
*aa ma ittra-uŋ=nab-u kid-pan-a-emu nakum
"Ah, welll...I might have hit that car of yours? Oops..."

Kirroŋa's most common word for "car" or "automobile" is ittra, a loanword from Pazmat iśt(a)ra. Kirroŋa does possess a native word, worrur, from wor "steer, lead" and rur "roll (around), spin", but this is not very common.

3.03.02 Demonstratives Used with Adjectives

Demonstratives appear after adjectives, so Kirroŋa is Noun-Adjective-Demonstrative; if the noun is possessed, the possession occurs on the noun itself, not the adjective or demonstrative:

ittrayomi zuro dam
ittra-yo-mi=zu-ro dam
car-3S.M.POSS-GEN fast-NOM
"that fast car of his"

However, this is not the only, or even most common way to express this, as you will see later.

3.04 Adjectives

Adjectives describe qualities of nouns. They come in a variety of classes; four, to be specific, with the first being much rarer than the other three. In addition, those three can be split into two subclasses each, depending on the root they are attached to.

3.04.02 Adjective Classes

Athematic Adjectives are the smallest class. These have no special endings marking them as adjectives, and represent a very old category of words. Only a few words, such as the numbers, are here; however, some very important suffixes form athematic adjectives so they are disproportionately common. I'll use the numbers from one to ten as examples here, even!

1: yan
3: krup
4: ahi
5: noŋ
6: hak
7: qet
8: jah (NOM. jahha)
9: kor
10: mýŋ

-du Adjectives have citations forms ending in -t, such as ahut "strong, clever, fit", jallut "bizzare, unusual", and amot "active, energetic, (of machines) running normally". The actual desinence of this class is -ut; of course, if the root ends in a vowel, then the beginning -u will merge, as seen in amodu which is underlyingly *ama-udu.

-du adjectives have a NOM-stem of -ut, as seen above. Their non-NOM stem is -udd-. They have an irregular Dative: the ending is -uddan, not the expected *-udduna.

Those who take the time to decline one of these adjectives (or who check the chart at the end of this section...that works too, I guess) will notice that a -du desinence never actually occurs in these words. Why are they called "-du" Adjectives, then? Well, they used to end in -du but now they don't, and I'm too lazy to change the name. Yup. That's it. Disappointing, I know.

mýhut "distant, far away"
grot "wide, fat" (cf. gran "fatten up", grennu "junk food")
irýt "intelligent, smart" (cf. iri "smarts, intelligence, cleverness")
gurut "wise, keen"
gonot "strong, impressive, imposing"

-mý Adjectives form the second large class. Their citation forms end in -mý when attached to vowels: namý "hungry", dumý "sad", dakimý "chilly". When attached to consonants, the /m/ assimilates as usual: idattý "boyish, puerile", luppý "hot", dohhý "funny"; finally, the rare few which have -CC roots are -CCumý. Their non-NOM stems are in -ma. They have completely regular declension.

uddý "good"
hundumý "violently slashing, out-of-control"
dagamý "embarrassing"

-ro Adjectives are the trickiest class, but still not too complicated. Their citation forms and Nominatives are in -ro, but their non-NOM stems are in -ur. This means that:

-Vowel-roots undergo assimilation in every stem but the nominative: daro "happy" (doru ACC), zuro "fast" (zuuru ACC),

-Consonant-final roots geminate in the Nominative: pitto "big" (pituru ACC), taŋŋo "scary, terrifying" (taŋuru ACC)

-Those with -CC stems have Nominative forms in -CCuro, and normal non-NOM stems in -CCur: jakkuro "stubborn (jakkuru ACC)

Other than that, these adjectives are the same as the others

aqiro "beautiful"
aparo "visible"
drutaro "mortal"

Following is a chart where I have declined a variety of adjectives: one Athematic, and then two of each of the three remaining classes, in order to demonstrate the differences between vowel- and consonant-final roots. The adjectives in question are:

yan "one"
gurut "wise"
amot "active"
namý "hungry"
dohhý "funny"
daro "happy"
nakko "bad"

3.04.03 Adjective Syntax, Nominalized Adjectives

Adjectives appear after their noun, which is placed in the genitive. Like the demonstratives, the adjective is what takes case:

uwa na kaŋŋi dohho daŋorémuginon!
*uwa na kaŋ-mi=(doh-ma)-u daŋ-or-a-emu-gi<no>n
again 1S man-GEN funny-ACC meet-FUT-PFV-POSSIB-OPT<1S>
"I hope I'll be able to meet that funny man again!"

Also like demonstratives, the noun is possessed. It's still genitive when used with adjectives:

idaqemi namý puru dumom wulapa...
*idat-ye-mi (na-mý) puru (du-ma)-um (wul-ap)-a
boy-3S.F.POSS-DAT hungry-NOM INTENS sad-S.OBL look.like-PFV
"Those hungry boys of hers look so sad..."

As said in 3.03.02, adjectives appear before demonstratives. However, one other way to use the two together is with a nominalized adjective, which leads us to the next section:

3.04.04 Adjectives Without Nouns/Nominalized Adjectives

It's all well and good that we can use adjectives to describe nouns, but what about when our adjectives have no nouns? We can say "He hates sour fruit", but what about "He hates the sour ones"?

This requires nominalization of our adjectives. The process is simple: take the non-nominative stem of an adjective, and suffix the dam demonstrative directly to it, assimilating as necessary. This creates a demonstrative meaning "the X one"; it inflects exactly like the free-standing adjective dam itself:

amot "energetic" > amoddam "the energetic one"
gurut "wise" > guruddam "the wise one"

uddý "good" > uddadam "the good one"
namý "hungry" > namadam "the hungry one"

daro "happy" > dorram "the happy one"
taŋŋo "terrifying" > taŋurram "the terrifying one"

Now we can use adjectives without nouns:

t-taŋurram nerru appanému!?
*(taŋ-ur)-dam ner-u ap-pan-a-emu
terrifying-NMLZ 1DU-ACC see-PST-PFV-POSSIB
"M-maybe that scary thing saw us two!?"

piturro aṇare ø otumma
(pit-ur)-da-u aṇ-a-re ø otumma
big-NMLZ-ACC grab-PFV-IMPER and come.here
"Grab the big one and come over here"

otumma "come (over) here" is a clipping of otum arre "(same meaning)", unusual in its lack of an aspect or verbal case suffix

This also provides an alternative method for using an adjective and demonstrative together: just nominalize the adjective! The following two sentences both mean "that beautiful woman", but the first has a separate adjective and demonstrative, while the second uses a nominalized adjective:

nadumi aqiro dam
nadu aqýrram

The second is generally preferred by speakers, both for its succinctness and the less confusing syntax. The first is still seen occasionally, however. Note that in both methods, the noun is what takes any possessive suffixes, while the demonstrative takes case: following is "for his beautiful wife/woman" in both methods:

In Kirroŋa, attaching a possessive suffix to "man", "woman", "boy", or "girl" carries the idiomatic meanings of "X's husband/wife/son/girl"

naduyomi aqiro deŋe
naduyo aqýrreŋe

The second is strongly preferred in all contexts, as the first has a rather confusing syntax.

3.04.05 Adjectives Used Adverbially

Like many languages, Kirroŋa has Adjectives pull double duty as adverbs. To use an adjective as an adverb, simply place it in one of the oblique cases and place it next to a verb (this is about the only time where the nominal oblique cases are used for something other than connecting nouns to a verbal case). Which one should you use? Well, the Stative is the usual choice, when one simply wishes to modify a verb:

puru zuurum leŋi!
*puru (zu-ur)-um leŋ-i
"You're walking too/very quickly!"

Doraka pudda kommo, pratoddu hattanoyyadayiiŋe kat, dreggu burrom kluppana ø'we katollu hata. Burro daŋŋa...
*Doraka pudda kom-ro pratod-nu hat-pan-a-uyya-da-ye-iŋe=kat dreggu (bur-ma)-um klup-pan-a ø'we katol-nu hat-a burro=daŋŋa
NAME INTENS drunk strip.club-ACC be.in.place-PST-PFV-ASSUMPTION-LOC-NMLZ-3S.POSS-BEN=because dick stupid-S.OBL take.out-PST-PFV and.now jail-ACC be.in.place-PFV idiot EXPL
"Since Doraka was drunk as hell and thought he was in the strip club, he stupidly pulled his cock out and now he's in jail. Fucking idiot..."

I made that sentence like three days ago and already the grammar makes no sense to me. Such is the perils of the early stages of making a language...

The Motive Oblique, however, is used to express becoming a state (a form of metaphorical motion, if you will), so it appears with verbs such as tloŋ "grow" or car "become":

piturru tloŋi!
*(pit-ur)-t tloŋ-i
big-M.OBL grow-IMPERF
"It's growing/getting big(ger)!"

tuŋ ahuddut carire!
*tuŋ (ah-udd)-t car-i-re
2S strong-M.OBL become-IMPERF-IMPER
"You must get/become strong(er)!"

Of course Kirroŋa possesses many distinct adverbs of its own such as we "now". Many of these however are clearly old words or even verbal roots (!) in one of the Oblique cases, such as hamat "all over the place/haphazardly".

3.05 Reduplicated Adverbs
Interestingly enough, while reduplication is almost nonexistent in Kirroŋa's morphology, it has quite a few adverbs featuring it. Most of these do not possess any distinct adverbial morphology (indeed, some appear to have a more adjectival meaning!), and they have a wide range of meanings; one can compare the huge amount of CVCV-CVCV adverbs Japanese has; Kirroŋa examples are miha-miha "cutely, childishly", rulu-rulu "rolling", hama-hama "clumsily". These have restricted phonology compared to normal words: they only have the vowels /a i u e o y/ with no long vowels seen, and never have affricates; geminates however do appear though less frequently short consonants. In terms of vowels, they have two variants: in the first, the vowels of the first part are directly repeated in the second, as seen in all of the examples so far. In the second, the first part has the same two vowels, while the second part has different vowels; in these, the vowels are always the same height (/a/ appears to be neutral in regards to height); in addition, /y/ does not ever appear with /i/: midi-mudu is possible, but *midi-mýdý is not.

One unusually common variant on this is to have have alternating voicing: the first part of the adverb has at least one unvoiced stop, while the second has its complementing voiced stop: meta-meda "flowing, calmly undulating", koto-godo "(of a personality) sharp, abrasive". Another has the form SVCV-(N/R)VCV, with the second nasal or resonant sharing the POA of the first stop (/w/ patterns as a velar here and the taps for some odd reason count as stops), and : tara-nara "really high up", ḷitu-ṇitu "bouncing".

The fact that the retroflex tap counts as a stop is tricky for Thōselqat linguists. If not for the retroflex stops already in Kirroŋa, one could postulate that the tap derives from a stop, but since it clearly does not, where did it come from and why does it pattern as a stop in this one specific case?

The lateral tap also patterning as a stop here is unusual, though a common theory is that it derives from an alveolar plosive with lateral release (usually assumed to be a coronal given Kirroŋa's preponderance of them); the lack of evidence for a corresponding fricative is easily explained with Kirroŋa's utter lack of any fricatives, a quirk which appears to extend back hundreds or even thousands of years from looking at its dying relatives and old papers on it from other languages: Paz linguist Yaśaśamarā said, over a thousand years ago "The language of this Binnayez people has a great paucity of consonants...they have nothing corresponding to the richness of Pazmat's f, v, s, z, th, dh, ṣ, ẓ, ś, ź, x, gh, or ḥ, outside of a consonant corresponding to our ḥ but with none of the forceful or artful trilling..."

These reduplicated adverbs usually have meanings relating to either physical/emotional characteristics (guda-guda "fat, chubby", durra-durra "droning, overly verbose, boring"), the manner an action was done, usually translated as a gerund (waṭa-waṭa "waving one's arms wildly in delirium/confusion", hakku-hakku "coughing, wheezing, gasping, out of breath"), or the speaker's opinion/experiences on the actions of another (rodo-rodo "ignoring (me) completely", guru-giri "annoyingly, aggravatingly"_. They appear in sentences normally, usually at the beginning of a sentence or before the verb; the following sentence features of two of them:

rodo-rodo ye hoŋŋewat zuurum lide-lide leŋŋinayoda
*(rodo-rodo) ye honŋŋe-wat (zu-ur)-um lide-lide leŋ-pan-i-no<ya>da
ignoring.EGO 3S.F house-M.OBL quick-M.OBL worriedly walk-PST-IMPFV-INTERESS<3S>
"She worriedly walked quickly throughout the house, completely ignoring me"

In the sentence, the first adverb, rodo-rodo, appears at the beginning because it is an adverb relating to the speaker's experience/opinion on the action, whereas the second, lide-lide, appears before the verb to emphasize that it is describing the actual action itself.

The above sentence showcases a verbal case I have not mentioned yet (mainly because I made it up on the spot right now): the Interessive, glossed <INTERESS>. It can take both oblique cases; in the Motive, it means "throughout" as seen above, denoting that the subject is moving amongst/throughout the object(s) in question without leaving them; in the Stative, it means "amongst" in the locative sense, though this is uncommon; more commonly, the Stative gives it a distributive sense: "You will find water fountains distributed throughout the various floors", or "There are collectible items in each of the game's ten levels" or "The debris is scattered around the area" It has the marker noda; interestingly, this almost appears a combination of the Circumessive nuŋ and the Allative -adu, which are two cases whose meanings together somewhat form the Interessive's meaning. A few of Kirroŋa's more complex verbal cases appear to be compounds of two simpler cases with some slight alterations.

These adverbs are rather casual and don't appear often in formal speech/writing. The adverbs relating to opinions or experiences are the most common in more formal contexts; one relating to traits are usually ignored in favor of actual adjectives, such as gýddo/gýdur for "fat, chubby" instead of guda-guda.

3.06 Intensity, Comparison, and Manner of Adjectives and Adverbs

These are placed together from their similarity. Kirroŋa does not have dedicated morphology for comparison, instead using periphrastic constructions. Before delving into that, however, I will go over some basics relating to intensity. Most of this involves particles. Kirroŋa's particle clitics have been neglected up until now. Like usual, particle clitics are post-positional. Since they are clitics and not suffixes, they appear at the end of word phrases, and are separate words which do not merge with their arguments. In glossing, they use the standard equals sing <=> to show their connection. The phrases or clauses they are connected with are always placed in [brackets like these].

3.06.02 Intensity

[Reduplication]: This is a simple ad-hoc way of intensifying an adjective or adverb: simply reduplicate it! Mostly restricted to informal speech.

puru: This not actually a clitic; it's an adverb. It has no set meaning, and simply intensifies whatever it placed in front of--just about any word outside of a noun. You have already seen it in many example sentences. Depending on context, it may be translated as anything from "very", "a lot", "really", "a ton", etc.

However, it has a special form, a suffix which is attached to a particle, adverb, or adjective in its non-NOM form: -ppu for words ending in a vowel and -appu for words ending in a consonant. This has special meaning of "too": amoddappu "too energetic", gýdurappu "too fat".

This is actually a word which may take possessive suffixes, meaning "too X for [possessive suffix]". Unusually, the infixation point for -appu is -appu<> (one would expect -a<>ppu); this is because the actual suffix is -ppu(ru), the /a/ is just a linking morpheme like -o- in "speedometer". An example:

dohhom amému? "Dakimappu"? Dakimappuummi, eladat? Tarare ø witonidde!
*(doh-ma)-um am-a-emu? (daki-ma)-ppu? (daki-ma)-pu<ummi> eledat? tar-a-re ø wit-a-unid-re
funny-S.OBL do-PFV-POSSIB cold-too.much cold-too.much<INTEROG> boy<DIMIN> shut.up-PFV-IMPER and work-PFV-REGRESS-IMPER
"You jokin'? "Too cold"? Too cold for whom, a little boy? Shut up and get back to work!"

When used adverbially, one suffixes this to an adjective and then puts it in one of the obliques: zuurappuum "too quickly".

Likewise, this may be used an actual substantiative; the suffix in this form is -ppurram/-appudam and acts as a demonstrative (underlyingly, the suffixes are -ppur-dam and -appu-dam): na hommappudo un imepa "I don't want the one that's too/very spicy". "For X" must use a Benefactive here: idatan piturappudo yuuŋe un waktare "Don't give that (one) to the boy, it's too big for him."

To be used adjectively, the suffixes turn into -mý adjectives (-ppumý/-appumý): kaŋŋi neŋe ahuddappumý "The/That man who's too strong for me".

The literal translation of idatan piturappudo un waktare is "Do not give the one that's too big to the boy", but I chose a more liberal translation to better convey the underlying meaning.

Also note that Kirroŋa's verb for "want" is imep, literally "mind-look", from imi- "head, mind" and ap "look (towards)"

pudda: An even more intensive variant of puru, pudda is bordering on being vulgar: pudda kommo "drunk as hell", pudda burro "crazy stupid, dumb as hell", etc.

Like puru, this has a special suffixed variant: -ppuda and -appud: taŋurappunodu "way too scary for me", hommappuyadda "scary as hell for them".

And of course, there are noun versions: -ppuddam/-appuddam. Likewise for adjectives, where they are still -mý adjectives: -ppudamý/-appuddý.

daŋŋa: An incredibly vulgar word, this adverb often translates as "fucking" and is unusually post-positional except when used with verbs, such as in burro daŋŋa "fucking idiot". Likewise, ittreŋe daŋŋa uwa witi "he's working on that fucking car again"

As before, this has a special suffixed version, which means "way too fucking X", basically; it has the form -ddaŋ/addaŋ: hommaddanoŋ! "(That's) way too fucking spicy for me!

The noun variant of this (-ddaŋŋam/-addaŋŋam) often means "[adjective] (little) fuck/shit/bastard/asshole/motherfucker/etc.": dohhaddaŋŋam! "cheeky little fuck!", jakkuraddaŋŋam! "stubborn little bastard!", caŋguddaddaŋŋam! "broke-ass motherfucker!"

The adjectival variant (-ddaŋŋý/-addaŋŋý) is like usual.

These suffixes seen on adjectives are actually part of a special class and by no means are the only ones. For instance, the suffix -uṭṭa means "so X that": neŋe hommoṭṭaya... "it's so spicy for me...". These are collectively called...actually, I'm not sure what the hell these would be called, but they exist and will be elaborated in [[XX.XX]]. Note that while the above three followed the same basic patterns for deriving their nominal and adjectival forms, these patterns do not hold for all of these suffixes: -uṭṭi's nominal and adjectival forms, for instance, are respectively uṭṭun (declines like jun above) and -uṭṭomý. This suffix in particular is important to form "so X that..." clauses: gurudduṭṭayemi kat na lamým tarranowo "She was so wise that I respectfully remained quiet"

3.06.03 Comparison/Manner

Kirroŋa's method for comparison involves the use of demonstratives and demonstrative-like words. Several of these are actually suffixes added to regular demonstratives. This construction is also used to denote some shades of meaning and manner not related to comparison per se. Moving on:

-uwam: When added a nominalized adjective, this means "like that" or "that X", denoting that the thing in question exemplifies that trait. -du, -mý, and -ro adjectives thus respectively end in -uddowam, -madowam, and urrowam. It's a standard dam-style demonstrative (yup, I am getting good usage out of that demonstrative):

idat irýddowa tuŋŋun lumom zimmanora
*idat(iri-udd)-da-uwa tuŋŋu-n (lu-ma)-um zimman-or-a
boy intelligent-NMLZ-such 2P easy-S.OBL outsmart-FUT-PFV
"A boy that clever will easily outsmart you all."

A Genitive or possessive marker shows who or what the noun is being compared with.

nana irýŋŋi handa kyarurrowo waktare.
*na-na iri-uŋ-mi handa (kyar-ur)-da-uwa-u wakt-a-re
1S-DAT wit-2S.POSS-GEN sword sharp-NMLZ-such-ACC bring-PFV-IMPER
"Bring to me a sword (that's) as sharp as your wit."

gonoddowommi? "Who is as strong as that?"
gonoddowenu "No one is as strong as that!"/"No one is that strong!"

3.06.04 The Comparative

-otti is Kirroŋa's dedicated comparative marker. It is attached directly to the non-NOM stem of an adjective and has the non-NOM form of otta:

irýt "clever"
irýddotti "more clever"

namý "hungry"
namótti "hungrier"

daro "happy"
dorotti "happier"

Note that these are demonstratives: dorotti is not an adjective meaning "happier", it is a demonstrative meaning "that which is happier (than)". When used with nouns, the noun is thus Nominative and not Genitive, and these comparative adjectives may be used on their own: piturotto imepi! "I want the bigger one!"/"I want the one which is bigger!"

The comparison is complete with, of all things, a Stative Oblique, usually in between the adjective and its noun/pronoun:

na tuŋum zuurotti
*na tuŋ-um(zu-ur)-otti
"I'm faster than you"

Of course this may be used adverbially as well:

loganu nom zuurottom druttana
*loga-nu na-um (zu-ur)-otta-um drut-pan-a
quarry-ACC 1S-S.OBL fast-COMP.DEM-S.OBL kill-PST-PFV
"He killed the quarry more quickly than I did"

Kirroŋa's oldest method of comparison actually involved a verb along with the Locative verbal case marker. The verb as later dropped--but the Stative Oblique its Locative took remained.

Kirroŋa does not possess any dedicated morphology or constructions for forming a superlative. The most common method is to simply take the comparative demonstrative and put puru after it: puru dorotti "the happiest" (adverbially, puru dorottom). An informal and relatively new method is to suffix -ppu to it: dorottappu (adverbially, dorrottappum), but this is restricted to casual speech.

Likewise, Kirroŋa does not have dedicated morphology for the Inferiorative, Sublative, or Equative, unlike Pazmat. Similar to English, these are handled through ad-hoc methods; the Inferiorative, for instance, can be expressed with the adjectival suffix -unam: na idatum ahuddunam "I'm not as strong as that boy", with an addition of puru to mean the Sublative: na puru ahuddunam "I'm the least strong". As seen above, the Equative uses -uwa.

Basic Adjectival Derivation

The following is only a small glimpse of derivational morphology in Kirroŋa; a more detailed overview will appear in a later post. For now, though, it's useful to know a few methods of derivation.

3.07 Deriving Adjectives From Nouns

<u>-u, -mý class: A common way to derive adjectives, this infixes <u> and also suffixes that same vowel to nouns. The resulting adjective is -mý classThe meaning is generally "possessing the characteristics of [noun]":

kaŋ "man" >koŋumý "manly, impressive, tough, handsome"

ittra "car" > ýttromý "automotive, pertaining to cars"

kraṭ "dog" > kroṭumý "canine"

tir "water" > týrumý "wet, drenched"

-mi, -ro class: This suffix derives an adjective that means "possessing [noun]"

bobu "beard" > bobumiro "bearded"

ket "hair" > kettiro "hairy"

<e>, -du class: These adjectives refer to being immersed in the noun; metaphorically extended to emotions and other feelings:

tir "water" > tiirut "underwater"

ḍum "pain" > ḍømut "in pain"

waṭa "confusion, delerium" > wétot "confused, delerious"

3.07.02 Deriving Adjectives From Verbs

-a, -ro class: Basic derivational marker:

ap "see" > aparo "visible"

nub "work properly, be functional/sane" > nubaro "functional"

drut "die" > drutaro "mortal"

3.07.03 Deriving Adjectives from Other Adectives
Very important: When deriving an adjective which is itself derived, one suffixes and affixes to the derivational marker, not the stem. For non-derived adjectives, the derivational marker is applied to the stem itself.

<in>-u, -mý: Forms negative adjectives:

daro "happy" > denumý "unhappy, miserable"

aparo "visible" > apenumý "invisible"

amot "active, energetic" > emmomý "inactive, lethargic"

namý "hungry" > nenumý "satiated, full, stuffed"

3.07.04 Deriving Nouns From Adjectives

-aŋ: A basic nominal derivation, akin to -ness, -ship, -hood, etc. in English; applied to the adjective's non-NOM stem:

daro "happy" > doraŋ "happiness"

nakko "bad, wrong" > nakuraŋ "evil, injustice, wrongdoing, crime"

dumý "sad" > dumaaŋ "sadness, grief"

3.07.05 Deriving Verbs from Adjectives

Kirroŋa generally does not derive verbs directly from adjectives (or much of anything, really), instead preferring to place the non-NOM form of the adjective (-du classi adjectives have the ending -ut since -udd cannot end a word) with am "do" (cf. Japanese's suru verbs): nama am "starve" ("make hungry"), ahut am "strengthen", apor am "produce, manifest", duma am "sadden", nakur am "commit a crime, do evil" These are technically two words, but effectively nothing can come between them, so they're one word for all practical matters.

A few have been fossilized and are written as one word: doram "cheer up, make happy", gurom "wisen, teach, educate".


With that this extremely long post is now finished. Next up will be in-depth descriptions of more Kirroŋa aspects, mood, and verbal cases.

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

 Post subject: Re: Kirroŋa
PostPosted: Mon Sep 12, 2016 5:20 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 11:54 pm
Posts: 707

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

 Post subject: Re: Kirroŋa
PostPosted: Mon Sep 12, 2016 9:21 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 11:54 pm
Posts: 707
Nominal Rework Incoming

I'm making this minor update to inform you all that I am currently in the process of reworking and substantially altering Kirroŋa's nominal system. This will entail several new cases entering the language--at least two are locked down as of now: the Causal and Semblative/Essive, but probably a one or two more will appear. I'm thinking a Translative would be nice. Kirroŋa's nominal cases generally do not correspond to locational or instrumental phrases or cases, as the verbal case system handles that already. Therefore, I want to use different kinds of cases than the usual Finnic-esque bloat of a million locational cases. For instance, the Essive could be very interesting, as it could be for using adjectives adverbially, creating words like "Finnic-esque" above, and perhaps for temporal clauses (i.e "when I had finished working").

This rework would also clarify the declensions of Kirroŋa. Unlike the declensions of Latin or Greek, Kirroŋa's declensions are more split along word classes. Right now, Kirroŋa has:
-C nouns
-V nouns
Broken Nouns (you'll learn about these in the next post)
Pronouns/Possessive Affixes (you might want to consider the Pronouns a separate declension thanks to their irregular forms in many cases)

What I aim to do is to keep the idea of separate declensions, but have less "main" declensions with subclasses in each one. Each Declension will have its own unique set of case markers. Each subclass will share a majority of its case endings with its other subclasses, but will differ very slightly in 1-3 cases. The total schema is like so:

-Consonant-stem Nouns
-Vowel-stem Nouns
-Broken Nouns
-Pronouns (highly irregular forms)
-Possessive Affixes
Descriptives (the combined term for demonstratives and adjectives)
-Consonant-stem Adjectives (Athematics, -du adjectives,-ro adjectives)
-Vowel-stem Adjectives (-mý adjectives)*

*: Identical to the Demonstratives (at least as of now--things are always subject to change!)

I might also delete a case, probably the Benefactive, as it doesn't see much use and kind of sits there awkwardly. The Casual could easily take its place, given that the semantics of "because of her" and "for her" aren't really all that different, but I may keep the Benefactive regardless because why not.

Why am I doing this? Well, right now, Kirroŋa's case endings don't sit well with me. I do like that they are clearly related, such as the Dative -ą-/-ana/-na, as opposed to having completely dissimilar endings for the various declensions, but right now they aren't varied enough. What little variation they contain isn't enough to justify having that variation at all, in my eyes. Thus, I will first start by creating a archaic form for each case ending: what it might have been in Old Kirroŋa, for instance. From that I will derive the case endings for each declension, and subclass, if necessary.

I have actually already done this with one ending: the Motive Oblique. Its archaic form was *-watu, which in Kirroŋa appears as:
-tu in the Pronouns and Broken Nouns(natu "me", tetu "night sky")
-t in the demonstratives and -V Adjectives (dat "that", namat "hungry")
-at in the -C, -V nouns, and -C Adjectives (ýbot "clear sky", idatat "boy", yanut "one", amoddat "excited", dorat "happy")

Note that the concept of subclasses would make more sense in Middle Kirroŋa; Modern Kirroŋa has shaken the up the system a bit by often borrowing endings from other declensions. This phenomena is well attested in real-life language after all--even across word classes such as Latin and Greek cribbing -o stem NOM.PL endings from the demonstratives.

As for the diachronic explanation of these various ending-forms? Who knows. A mere cursory knowledge of language's like PIE and the family it spawned show that often times languages are a chaotic mess. There are many inexplicable factors in PIE and in the various IE languages, so Kirroŋa really isn't all that worse, especially when all of the case endings are still related to each other.

I should mention that for all of my dramatic language and excessive verbiage in this post, the actual endings will probably not stray too far from where they are right now. They could, and that possibility is open, but it's rather likely that, e.g the genitive will retain its /m/ and possibly the high-front vowel.

Regardless, any upcoming charts will include some new cases and endings. All will be explained. Eventually. I'm well aware I've said that so many times in this thread I sound like a broken record, but Kirroŋa is a pretty messy and chaotic language right now as I endlessly adjust every minor thing and rebuild. I hope it is worth it.

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

 Post subject: Re: Kirroŋa
PostPosted: Fri Sep 16, 2016 6:10 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 11:54 pm
Posts: 707
Kirroŋa Phonology Remodel; Old Kirroŋa Diphthongs, Triphthongs, and Other Phonology Quirks

I am sorry as hell this is a complete mess of a post. It has been expanded to thrice the original size and filled with a bunch of extraneous detail for no real reason other than I have nowhere else to put this stuff.

In my process of creating Kirroŋa I have found myself often dissatisfied with current state of things. So, I have been tweaking constantly. Right now, I have just created yet another tweak, but this one is significant enough to deserve its own post. Since it is not exactly a post on Kirroŋa itself, it will not be normally numbered; instead, it is labeled "X1"

This change is a remodel of Kirroŋa phonology. First adds a new set of consonants: aspirated stops, in both voiced and unvoiced varieties, like the famous ones of Proto-Indo-European and Sanskrit vintage. They are spelled the same way: <ph bh th dh ṭh ḍh kh gh>, but have some very skewed distribution, which is odd on its face but completely understandable in context of their historical origin.

That leads me to my second part: this change is not one of Kirroŋa, but Old Kirroŋa. Referred to from now on as OK or O.Kir (here, the word "Kirroŋa" or "Kir." by itself refers to modern Kirroŋa, the language actually discussed in this thread). This is the first time I have actually done anything resembling historical diachronics with Kirroŋa. Because of this change's venerable age, it is actually more of a subtle, "behind the scenes" change. Kirroŋa still looks almost identical: this change, however, serves to explain several quirks and oddities of it, explain the origin skewed distrubution of certain consonants, and add some nice and naturalistic irregularity to the language. Without further ado:

X1.01 Old Kirroŋa Phonology

In the following post, a hash sign <#> indicates a word boundary, either the beginning or end. For instance, #Ca refers to a Ca syllable at the beginning of a word, while Ca on its own means a word medial one (Ca# refers to a specifically word-final syllable, but the distinction between those and medial syllables is irrelevant for this post)

OK had a phonology very similar to Kirroŋa (at least consonant-wise). The main difference was that there was a set of voiceless resonants, but only /w j/ (presumably voiceless /m n r.../ once existed, but by OK they are completely gone without a trace), spelled with a dot <.>. The sole reflex of these consonants in Kirroŋa are the ghost /w j/ mentioned in previous posts. In addition, OK appeared to have two guttural sounds, an *h and a *ḥ. The exact pronunciation of these two consonants is difficult to discern, and they are reconstructed pretty much solely to explain why Kirroŋa has two specific Broken Gutturals (those are detailed in the following post); in this post they are brought together into one vague phoneme <H>, as Kirroŋa's own /h/ is a chaotic mixture of the two. In any case, these consonantal distinctions are completely irrelevant for this post.

Nonetheless, I might as well explain further in this side note. The distinction between /h ḥ/ is only relevant in suffixes and few a few special subclasses of nouns, verbs, and adjectives. In short:

-/h/ reflexes in Kirroŋa as <h>, and acts unusually for a consonant when suffixing: before consonants, it drops and lengthens the vowel before it, while before vowels it appears; that is: ahC > ąC, aha > aha. Note that a lengthened diphthong breaks into -aya, -awa, -uya, or -uwa sequence (and this prevents that diphthong from later causing gemination). Thus, ką "take a piss, urinate" > kąpana "took a piss", but kahora "will take a piss". At the same time: keh (*kaih) "stir, swirl" > kayapana "stirred", kehora "will stir"

I kind of want to give verbs like keh an irregular past tense in -ąn (e.g kayąna) but I have no suitable justification for why these verbs and these verbs alone have anomalous past tense forms.

Unless...I do a really weird form of analogy that's honestly stretching a bit. The gist is that almost all verb end in a consonant (well, all of them do, but the above specials appear to not). This means they have past tenses with geminates (druttan "died", karran "trained", etc. Geminates are long like long vowels. Thus, the past tense morpheme is viewed not as -pan, but as -[LONG]an. So, kayapana is viewed as an odd form and analogically turned into the historically inaccurate kayąna (the long form of keh plus -an. I guess the long-vowel verbs like ką will just be viewed as irregular.

-/ḥ/ drops completely in Kirroŋa and its existence is solely derived from its effects on neighboring consonants: it geminates them as per usual, whereas before vowels it disappears. Thus, ŋraḥ "take a bath" > ŋrappana "took a bath", ŋróra "will take a bath". It appears to have been less common in OK than /h/, and notably most root verbs don't have it, whereas it's quite common in derived verbs.

Unusually, Kirroŋa decided that <uhV ihV> become <uwV iyV>. Later, it also decided that <uwu iyi aha> in particular become <ų į ą>. This did not happen if the second vowel was part of a diphthong; hence why "will take a piss" is kahora and not *ką(w)ura or something.

The above is taken as evidence--about the only conclusive evidence--that /a/ was a vocalic counterpart to /h/, much like how /u i/ were to /w j/. It is quite a nice pattern--three vowels, three resonants which have special status in OK.

Vowel-wise, however, things were different, and this is what I am focusing on. As stated in the first post, OK had a tiny vowel inventory of /a i u/ with no distinction of length whatsoever. OK also had a free stress or pitch accent (I am undecided on Modern Kirroŋa's own suprasegmentals). Which of the two is unknown and unreconstructable by now; in any case, the distinction is academic, as either would lead to the situation in Kirroŋa. I will not indicate stress except for a few special cases.

There's nothing preventing me from having vowel length in OK--I could just say that [u: i:] were underlyingly /uw ij/. Indeed, that's already a rule in OK--it's just that /uw ij/ are very rare and only appear through derivation/inflection.

Stress in OK displays some interestingly skewed distribution. While it was completely free, stressed suffixes, particles, and demonstratives are utterly non-existent. If these could ever take stress, it was clearly some kind of secondary stress, but the more likely answer was that they were actually more like clitics (especially the demonstratives and particles). For the purposes of Modern Kirroŋa, this explains the complete lack of aspirated consonants outside of roots.

OK's phonotactics were quite simple: Every syllable falls into the pattern (C)(R)V(Y)(C), where C is any consonant (note that /n/, /l/, and /r/ were more like Archiphonemes, assimilating to whatever consonant was next to them), R is any resonant /l r w j/, and Y was one of the two semivowels /w~u j~i/.

OK did not allow the syllable /ji/. When it did occur through morphology, the /j/ dropped and an epenthetic /w/ was placed instead. However, Modern Kirroŋa, in morphologically transparent forms (such as certain nouns), has restored this syllable (albeit pronounced [çi]), but in others, such as verbal person affixes, such as the Comitative 3S.F -wawį, the original form remains. The same goes for verbal aspect-mood combinations, where the original forms with epenthetic /w/ prevail. Of course, in opaque root forms, such analogy never happened.

Unusually, OK had some suffixes that were just a bare resonant: -w -j -h, -ḥ. These were directly suffixed to words and had even in the time OK underwent some sound change that Kirr. faithfully preserved (these had to have happened before the gemination and vowel mergers detailed below). Notably: -Cw -Cy -Ch -Cḥ > -Cuw -Ciy -Cah -CCa (soon after, the first three became -Cų -Cį -Cą before consonants).

OK appeared to have distinguished some form of syllable weight, but it was irrelevant for its stress. Instead, it appears that it did not like words to have too many overly heavy syllables. Even though they should have been normally acceptable, words like klautraŋ (Kir. klotraŋ "large fish, sea creature") were abnormally rare. Usually, the heavier one syllable was, the lighter any adjacent to it would be. Figuring out the specifics is trying: the best guess is that any phoneme in a syllable added to its weight (leading some to believe that it was less a system of weight and more one of complexity), with vowels counting as less heavy than consonants (which mostly were the same weight, though final resonants were probably lighter than final stops)

This would explain why the various affixes, both verbal and nominal, are overall much simpler than what the full phonotactics allow, rarely going more complex than VCVC. Since Kirroŋa is almost exclusively suffixing this gives it a "top-heavy" feel.

Normally, resonant-resonant clusters such as /*rl/ were banned, but /w j/ had special status, which finally leads us to the reason I made this post:

Curiously enough OK considered its guttural fricatives to be resonants, at least somewhat. The main evidence of this is the curious fact that /H/ did not ever enter consonant clusters except /w j/--much like the other resonants.

X1.02 Old Kirroŋa diphthongs and triphthongs

OK had nowhere near the same hatred for adjacent vowels as its daughter. It had a set of diphthongs, all formed from the three vowels it possessed: /ai ia au ua ui iu/. It also had triphthongs, formed by taking either of /i u/ and placing them in front (e.g /iau/, etc.); note that two alike vowels never appeared in these, such as /*iia/), and these were always of the form VaV (that is, rising diphthongs preceded by a semivowel). However, it is often better to think of the falling diphthongs /ia ua ui iu/ as instead being consonant clusters; i.e *nian was a CVYC syllable, but more like a CRVC syllable.

This explains some quirks of OK's diphthongs. For one, syllables featuring a consonant cluster and a falling diphthong (such as **nriaŋ) are non-existent, but those featuring a rising one (nraiŋ "grab" > Kirroŋa nreŋ "wrest, forcibly take from, confiscate") are commonplace, something which makes far more sense if /ia/ is itself a cluster, in which case *nria would be banned much like any CCC cluster.

Nevertheless, they clearly had some special significance, as falling diphthongs could appear after resonants, even though normally clusters like /*rw *ry/ weren't accepted; yet, syllables like /riu ria liu/ could appear. However, the only diphthongs that could appear after /w j/ were rising ones; falling diphthongs and all triphthongs (which were inherently falling; the distinction is academic here) could not appear.

If a true distinction between, say, Cwa (CRV) and Cua (CVY) in OK, that distinction was long-gone before the modern language's time. Should it have existed, both kinds of syllables reflexed the same in the later language--though, thanks to Kirroŋa's heavy analogy, the distinction actually exists there, somewhat.

Triphthongs in OK were clearly secondary--they are far rarer than one would expect in roots and almost always appeared from affixing a vowel-initial suffix to a word ending in a diphthong. There should have been nothing preventing one from appearing a root form--they are nothing more than the combination of a Cw or Cy cluster with a diphthong in the nucleus, but they are extraordinarily rare nonetheless. Of the few that exist such as kiaiŋ they are almost exclusively /iVV/.

This has been assumed to been some kind of ban against overly heavy syllables, but this hypothesis is flawed considering that CRAYV syllables (which should have had the same weight as a hypothetical CYVYC syllable) like tlauŋ "grow" were commonplace.

Triphthongs with medial /i u/ (e.g /aua uiu/, etc.) early in OK's history broke into VyV and VwV sequences. The ones with /a/ as their medial acted as normal (i.e Cia and Ciau took the same general path). In the extremely rare cases where a rising diphthong combined with a rising one and both possessed the same glide elements (i.e Cai-ia), they had unique reflexes:

Cai-i(a/u) > Cayy(a/u) > Cey(au)
Cau-ua > Cawwa > Cowa

The rest, however, had a rather involved history. To explain the Kirroŋa reflexes of these diphthongs and triphthongs, I have to make two kinds of distinctions: the first is of rising and falling diphthongs. The second is initial and medial/final syllables. The reflexes are as follows:

Rising Diphthongs

These are much easier. These almost invariably reflex as the familiar vowel mergers already familiar to Kirroŋa, in medial, initial, and final syllables, when they are before consonants. Before vowels, they break into awV and ayV sequences (though analogy has much disturbed initial patterns)

Falling Diphthongs

These are trickier. In initial syllables with no onset, and after vowels, they immediately become consonant clusters e.g uaŋ > Kir. waŋ "buy"

When they are after consonants in all syllables, however, things are slightly more complex. The diphthong is treated as a consonant cluster, and as per Kirroŋa assimilation rules geminates the consonant (unless the diphthong begins with /i/ and the consonant is a coronal or velar plosive, in which case the diphthong palatalizes it). The glide portion of the diphthong disappears: mutua > Kir. mutta "apple". Note that this happens even initially, meaning that OK had initial geminates for a while. What happens next depends on whether the geminate is initial or not:

There is one notable exception to this however: /ui/. For whatever reason, this one diphthong did not geminate but instead just collapsed to /y/ later.

In addition, according to these rules, there should be no geminate palatal consonants; yet such consonants exist in Kirroŋa. They hail mainly from one situation in OK; stop-stop C.CiV clusters where the second stop was a dental: ket-tiat-i "hair-lose" > Kirr. keqqati "hair loss, balding", nik-tiaiŋ "fire-sing" > Kirr. nicceŋ "loudly sing, lose onesself in drunken revelry". Sonorant-Stop clusters remained: laun-ṭiud "oil-fry" > Kirr. loṇṭcud "deep fry".

Initial geminate stops become aspirated stops: buaud "sit down" > bwaud > bbod > Kir. bhod "meditate". All other initial geminates revert to regular stops, but transfer their gemination to the next consonant: nuaH > nwaH > nnaH > Kir. nahh "climb".

This is why verbs containing a final geminate are invariably CVCC: something like *nrahh would require OK *nruaH, an unacceptable syllable, and a vowel-initial verb would have no onset to transfer gemination to the final consonant. At the same time, there was nothing preventing a triphthong, so jepp "bounce" comes from OK giaip

Medial or final geminate remained as normal,except for geminate stops after a stressed syllable. In that case, the geminate became an aspirated stop. Note that geminates in clusters also turned to normal and never assimilated with the previous consonant.

The above sound laws explain the quirks of the aspirated stop series in Modern Kirroŋa, which have a skewed distribution:

-Initial aspirates never occur in consonant clusters (they themselves are formed from clusters)
-No words end in an aspirate, not even verbs (non-initial aspirates require a cluster, and thus must be medial; they were not a part of the consonant system when the verbal roots first came into being)
-Aspirates before any complex vowels (/e o y ø ɛ ɔ/) are extremely rare, and of those that exist, they are almost always phV or bhV (they would require a triphthong, and a i-initial triphthong would palatalize the coronals and velars before they aspirated
-In all consonant clusters featuring aspirates, they are always the second element, as in anghat "broken limb"
-Aspirates are exclusively found in root forms such as nouns, verbs, and adjectives; they are non-existent in particles, demonstratives, pronouns, and all suffixes/infixes (these were not stressed and the concept of "initial" doesn't apply to them)
-Most nouns with medial aspirates are of the forms (C)VC[super]h[/super]V(C) (OK did not generally like disyllabic nouns to have two overly heavy syllables. Usually, one of the syllables was less heavy, so a word like e.g *krátuat (Kir. *krathat) would have been discouraged

To provide an example of how knowing these historical changes explains unusual morphology: Kirroŋa itself has a curious derivational prefix a- (combined with a <i> infix)-of murky meaning (the closest approximation would be a sense of aoristic completion) which unexpectedly geminates words attached to it: hoṭ "be here, be present" > ahhut "arrival" (< "having been present"), jak "trip" > ajjek "pratfall, falling on one's face/butt". On its face, this is not terribly unusual--the prefix clearly ended in a consonant (any one would do) which assimilated as usual. However, this supposed consonant does NOT appear when this suffix is added to vowel-initial roots: eṇḍ "carry" > ąyiṇḍ "delivery" (*a-a<i>iṇḍ). And, at the same time, when added to verbs with a final geminate or which begins with an aspirate, it doesn't geminate the root: bhod "meditate (orig. "sit down")" > abhayud "enlightenment",

This unusual behavior is perfectly explained when one constructs the OK model ḥua-<i>-Ø. /ḥ/ in OK dropped in the modern language, but clearly it had geminated from the diphthong and transferred its gemination before this. Indeed, there are other prefixes which do this (not many, but prefixation is notably uncommon in both languages anyway) and almost all of them can be reconstructed as being ḥuV or ḥiV.

X1.04 The Implications of These Changes on Modern Kirroŋa

For all the verbiage I have wasted here the significance this has to the modern language is less than one would expect. Analogy has run rampant, generally preferring to merge vowels instead of deal with this unusual . Thus the Dative of u-stem nouns, for instance, suffixes -ana to the noun. This would result in -CCana (Cuana > Cwana > CCana), but instead we find a Dative in -ona, as in nadona lakona ýbona "to the woman, flower, clear sky". Likewise, the Possibilitive -emu and the Desiderative -abba should be -emmabba (emuabba > emwabba > emmabba), but instead it is -emobba, as in ye patįmobba? "maybe he wants to play?"

This applies the other way as well. For instance, take patįmobba "wants to play" up there. This breaks down to the morphemes pat-i-emu-abba, whose underlying forms are *pat-i-aimu-abua (note how -abba was not analogically remodelled, as it is a base morpheme). Running the changes said above should give us the form *paqemmabba. This obviously does not occur. Kirroŋa has used copious amounts of analogy to bowl over these changes, instead using vowel merging.

However, this mainly applies to morphologically transparent forms, such as inflections nouns, verbs, and adjectives. In bare roots, of course, no analogy was made, and these changes have given Kirroŋa a new set of nouns and verbs called "Broken Nouns/Verbs". They will be expanded on in a new post, but I can spare some time to give basics. Broken nouns are more common, and are any noun which ends in -e, -o, or -ý--or, in other words, any noun which ended in -ai, -au, or -ui in OK. Such words are hoŋŋe "house, residence", hano "hand fan", jedý "rogue warrior, ronin", tamý "cat", etc. They have two distinct stems: a "sound form" in -e/-o/-ý before consonants (and before nothing at all), and a "broken form" in -ay/-aw/-uw, which occurs before vowels. Thus, we have NOM hano and TRANS hanobǫ, but DAT hanawana.

There is another kind of broken noun, with two subclasses; examples højų "encampment" and niką "fire" (these are called "consonantal broken nouns", as opposed to the vocalic types above), but those will be covered later. They are formed from various consonantal suffixes in OK, and exhibit the same sound and broken stem differences, but are sufficiently different to warrant being a class of their own. Regardless, all broken nouns are morphologically -C nouns.

I can't help but notice that due to this, -V nouns can only end in exactly three phonemes: /a i u/. Any noun ending in /e o y/ is a broken one.

Broken verbs also exist, and notably can be disyllabic; one example is ore "sing": na oraya "I sing", tuŋ orepana "you sung", ye orayora "she is singing". Broken adjectives are rare, as they would only show distinct sound and broken stems if they were -ro class. Still, a few exist, such as uktįro, uktiyur- "proud, prideful, courageous" or umero, umayur- "intoxicated, unable to be reasoned with".

I have spend far too many words on something that's supposed to be left for a different post.

In general, these changes apply mostly serve to work behind the scenes, explaining unusual traits in Kirroŋa's morphology and phonology. Sometimes they have disposed of with analogy, other times they remain.

One such example of both things appearing is infixing on words which have a complex vowel (remember that /e o y/ are always underlying /ai au ui/). When infixing these words with an infix beginning with a consonant, such as the locative <ta>, the infix is placed between the underlying vowels: ned "sleep" > nated "bedroom" (*na<ta>id). When infixing a vowel-initial infix, however, Kirroŋa always places the vowel after the underlying ones. For instance, take the a-<i>-Ø model above. Infixing it to ned should get us *annayid but instead we find annįdaro "well-rested".

This is actually more of a hacky change so that words with complex vowels still undergo vowel mergers. I do like the breaking effect though. I might postulate that both kinds occur, depending on some condition. I like the idea that the infix is placed post-diphthong when it is <V> or <VC>, and intra-diphthong when <CV> or <VCV>. I think. It's still a mess.

Unfortunately, this means I probably have to rewrite my verbal case infix chart, unless I just handwave it and say that person infixes are always intra-diphthong. But man, I'll probably go back and rewrite it anyway. Ugh.

Funnily enough, the position of the <i> infix above shouldn't affect anything: OK a-na<i>id and a-nai<i>d should both lead to Kirr. anayid.

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

 Post subject: Re: Kirroŋa
PostPosted: Sat Sep 17, 2016 12:52 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 2:57 pm
Posts: 1228
Location: Scattered disc

Sunàqʷa the Sea Lamprey says:

 Post subject: Re: Kirroŋa
PostPosted: Sun Sep 18, 2016 3:13 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 11:54 pm
Posts: 707

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

 Post subject: Re: Kirroŋa
PostPosted: Sun Sep 18, 2016 7:44 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 11:54 pm
Posts: 707
Phonology Post Part 2 (Errata and Additions)

I've realized that I didn't mention a few things or didn't clarify things well in the above Phonology post, and I also have made a few minor adjustments. I could simply edit the post, but then the changes were be opaque due to the lack of a bump (or anything indicating the changes) and it also wouldn't let me [s]increase my post-count[/s]. So, please bear with my post-count whoring. It's my thread dammit, I can double or triple post if I want!

Somehow, this has become a part two instead of a simple errata post. Bear with me. I want to talk (modern) Kirroŋa's phonology a little more)


I've never really clarified by terminology, mainly because I haphazardly use different terms for the same thing myself. No more. I am sticking to a logical and unchanging set of terms for everything. Most of them should be obvious, but the ones that require explanation are:

Sonorant: This refers to the rhotics, laterals, and nasals: in other-words, non-obstruents that are not semivowels. These would be /m n ɳ ŋ l ɾ~ɺ r ɽ~ɻ/ <m n ṇ ŋ l ḷ r ṛ>.

Sonorants are a tiny bit restricted compared to other consonants. On their own, they are fully distinguished, but in clusters they are always homorganic. In addition, the retroflexes are more restricted: they only appear medially and finally; initially, they are only found in consonant clusters with retroflex stops and nasals.

In all honest, Kirroŋa should have a palatal nasal, probably spelled <ń> or <ñ>, formed from historical /nj/ clusters like the other palatal consonants. Unfortunately, I cannot pronounce palatals nasals well, and I tend to avoid sounds I have difficulty pronouncing as I forget to keep them distinguished and leave them moribund by accident. On the other hand, I have retroflexes in here and I suck ass at pronouncing those either (and you may notice that they're rarer than the dental/alveolar stops). The option's always on the table, I guess.

Rhotic: A non-nasal sonorant: /l ɾ~ɺ r ɽ~ɻ/ <l ḷ r ṛ>. These are special in that they are the only consonants allowed in initial consonant clusters (of course, /w j/ once were, but they caused gemination and disappeared). Note that the retroflexes only appear in the clusters <Ṭṛ Ṭḷ> initially (Ṭ = any retroflex stop or nasal). In phonotactical descriptions, these are referred to with R; e.g Kirroŋa's basic syllable structure is (C)(R)V(V)(C).

Resonant: A consonant with an approximant MOA, which possesses a vocalic counterpart. These are /w j h/, with the vocalic counterparts of /u i a/. In addition, these are split into two subclasses: /w j/ comprise the semivowels, while /h/ is a guttural resonant. Even all the way back in OK, these consonants had some very special properties:

-The semivowels could not be the last underlying consonant of a root (/h/ could, however)
-These three consonants could appear in consonantal affixes: prefixes, infixes, or suffixes which were either a bare -w -j -h, or which were VC (e.g aw ij). These suffixes behaved in unusual ways, and will expanded upon later. In OK, Cw# Cj# Ch# became Cuw Ciy Cah, which later became long vowels before consonants.
-The semivowels were the only consonants along with the rhotics that could enter initial consonant clusters.

In phonotactics, <Y> stands for resonants (I'm sorry if it seems confusing that rhotics get <R> but resonants don't)

Guttural: Either of the two glottal consonants in OK: /h ḥ/. These had some overlap with the resonants (more so with /h/ than /ḥ/).

Fortis/Lenis: These refer to stops: fortis stops are the aspirates, lenis stops are the non-aspirates (I probably wont be using these terms much however)

Lingual: Any non-labial lenis stop: <t d ṭ ḍ k g> (these are the stops which are palatalized by /j/). This is a neologism I made from the latin word for "tongue", as these stops are pronounced with the tongue as opposed to the lips like the labials are.

Geminate: This term refers to geminate and aspirated consonants, as they both derive from historical geminates. If I want to refer to geminated consonants alone, then I'll use the term lenis geminates (though I might just say "geminates" and leave it up to context).

Simple vowel: /a i u/.

Complex vowel: /e o y/ (underlying /ai au ui/)

Geminates and Kirroŋan verbal root shapes

The main reason I made this post. I've decided that final geminates in Kirroŋa CAN appear in roots with clusters (i.e something like pratt is now possible) when before it wasn't). The reason for this goes back to OK:

While (most) verbs are monosyllabic in Kirroŋa (or at least, all root verbs--most of the disyllabics appear to be secondary), verbal roots can take a few shapes that are normally not allowed for regular syllables; this is because verbs are supposed to be invariably suffixed, their bare/uninflected forms never appearing.

This is not unattested in real-life languages; Japanese, for instance, possesses a huge number of verbal roots which end in consonants (mainly from u-verbs which end in -Cu): mat- "wait", nobor- "climb, ascend", yom- "read", etc

All of these roots contain final clusters, such as hund "cut" (geminates are considered clusters). These roots have restricted forms, however: *hudn, for instance, doesn't occur. These final clusters are:

-Homorganic nasal+stop: hund "cut", eṇḍ "carry", tiŋk "smack, slap"

-Homorganic rhotic+(stop/nasal): irt wander aimlessly", halg "scream", toḷṇ "ring, strike, play a percussion instrument"

-Stop+Stop, with the restriction that retroflexes do not occur, and that the second stop must be a coronal (i.e /pt kt bd gd/): hapt "break", wakt "give"

-Semivowel+Consonant: pratt "reach in and grab", dagg "focus (on a task)"

It's that final one that explains verbs which have final geminates but initial clusters.

As said above, OK's resonants were a little special. They could enter final clusters in verb roots like the other sonorants could. The pronounciation of these consonatal resonants was unknown, but what was important was that they clearly kept their consonantal traits intact, as they did not merge with vowels. Instead, they behaved as any other consonant, assimilating into their adjacent consonants and geminating. Because of this, any CCVCC with a final geminate derives from OK CCV(w,j)C. Compare how OK praut "bite" and prawt "retrieve from reflexed in Kirroŋa:

praut > Kirr. prot "bite, chew"
prawt > Kirr. pratt "reach in and grab, rescue, save"

These verbs are sometimes called resonant cluster verbs to distinguish themselves from regular cluster verbs.

These also showcase some traits of OK phonemes. Of these cluster verbs, one can see a few patterns: cluster verbs with complex vowels are almost always one of two shapes:
(C)VCC: týpt "extract through cooking/burning", eṇḍ "carry"
CRVYC: drell "hypnotize, enchant, amaze", kropp "hack off, dismember, prune, clear out"

CRVCC complex verbs (like *trapt) are almost entirely non-existent. This is presumably because OK did not allow verbal roots to become too heavy, but semivowels were of a lower weight than sonorants and obstruents.

I could derive final palatals off of this; i.e OK *najṭ > Kirr. naṭc. I'm undecided on this. It would mean that jC and wC roots remain distinct, at least when C is a lingual stop.

A final note on geminates:

-Clusters can be geminated, such as in garabattru "usually begin to study".

-Consonants do not assimilate into geminates: they simply drop completely. Thus, "I was rescuing" (*na pratt-pan-a) is na prattani.

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

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 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