zompist bboard

THIS IS AN ARCHIVE ONLY - see Ephemera
It is currently Tue Sep 24, 2019 4:28 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 42 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Jul 27, 2016 2:11 pm 
Avisaru
Avisaru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 29, 2016 6:34 am
Posts: 838
Location: The North
Verbs. I love them, and so do Algonquian languages. The problem is that resources on Proto-Algonquian verbs are few and far between. I've done some snooping around, though, and this is what I've been able to put together. These next few posts will be on the core inflections of verbs in this language. These have had plenty of reanalysis and contamination from noun inflections and the conjunct order.

We'll start with the independent order. First off intransitives. Inanimate intransitives are the simplest to implement: it is just the bare verb stem for the singular and the suffix -(V)t for the plural.

šóópi
be_white.II
It is white/snow

míínot má'it
mííno-t má'i-t
berry-PL be_red.II-PL
The berries are red

Animate intransitives are somewhat more complicated, using a combination of person prefixes and suffixes.

Code:
     SING     PLUR
1st  na-      na--máán
INCL ------   'a--man
2rd  'a-      'a--mí
3rd  -0       -(:š)o
3'rd -t       -t


namiiθííh
na-miiθííh
1-eat.AI
I eat

'anapó
'a-napó
2-sleep.AI
You (sing.) sleep

napámáán
na-pá-máán
1-come.AI-PL
We (excl) come

mant
man-t
drink.AI-OBV
They (obv) drink

_________________
https://frislander.tumblr.com/

First known on here as Karero


Last edited by Frislander on Sat Mar 11, 2017 11:08 am, edited 7 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Aug 26, 2016 1:16 pm 
Avisaru
Avisaru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 29, 2016 6:34 am
Posts: 838
Location: The North
OK, haven't posted here in a while, so here is the transitive-inanimate inflection: it has seen a good deal of contamination with the conjunct order.

Code:
     SING     PLUR
1st  na--omóó na--amóón
INCL ------   'a--anon
2rd  'a--óón  'a--ašó
3rd  hi--ón   hi--óšin
3'rd hi--ótin hi--ótin


hitani hóóθikón
hitani hóóθik-ón
man speak.TI-3s
The man speaks of it

nakomomóó
na-kom-omóó
1-deflect.TI-1s
I deflect it

'ašoopónkašó
'a-šoopónk-ašó
2-see.TI-2p
You (pl.) see it

mó'ot manóón hi'isótin
mó'o-t manóón hi-'is-ótin
bear-OBV settlement 3-rampage.TI-OBV
The bear (obv.) rampages through the settlement

_________________
https://frislander.tumblr.com/

First known on here as Karero


Last edited by Frislander on Sat Mar 11, 2017 11:08 am, edited 4 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Aug 27, 2016 10:50 am 
Avisaru
Avisaru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 29, 2016 6:34 am
Posts: 838
Location: The North
OK, I've mentioned that there will be a northern and a southern dialect before. I reckon that the main dialectal differences should be in the fricatives. The Northern dialect has this inventory, and is rather conservative in this respect:

/p t k ʔ/
/θ s ʃ h/
/m n/

However, the Southern dialect will have this inventory:

/p t k ʔ/
/s ʃ x h/
/m n/

As you can see, this bears a strong resemblance to Crow or Mandan, which is what is intended (the nasals will probably also be denasalised in some environments, also like Crow). I have three possible schemes as to the correspondence sets of the dialects (R: Reconstruction, N: Northern, S: Southern, C: Central (an intermediate dialect). I will use in the reconstruction the symbols corresponding to their realisations in the Northern dialect).

Scheme 1
Code:
R  N C S
*θ θ θ s
*s s s ʃ
*š ʃ x x


Scheme 2
Code:
R  N C S
*θ θ θ x
*s s s s
*š ʃ ʃ ʃ


Scheme 3
Code:
R  N C S
*θ θ θ ʃ
*s s s s
*š ʃ x x


(Note that in schemes 1 and 3 the phonetic value of *š is undecided: the Northern dialect is clearly more conservative, but the weight of evidence is in favour of the other two).

I can't decide which one to use, or whether there is also a divergent dialect, which would merge two of the fricatives.

_________________
https://frislander.tumblr.com/

First known on here as Karero


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Aug 27, 2016 11:49 am 
Smeric
Smeric
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2015 6:44 am
Posts: 1998
Location: suburbs of Mrin
It seems more and more likely with each post that the dialects are mutually unintelligible.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Aug 27, 2016 12:53 pm 
Avisaru
Avisaru
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2003 4:56 pm
Posts: 690
Location: Gimaamaa onibaaganing
mèþru wrote:
It seems more and more likely with each post that the dialects are mutually unintelligible.

I wouldn't say that. If they share significant vocabulary, a few 1:1 correspondences like that would not be a barrier to communication. A similar situation obtained with the two major "dialects" of Arapaho (Arapaho and Gros Ventre), which differed phonologically in several important ways - and which Frislander's language is clearly partly modeled on.

Frislander: I have a few random papers and dissertations that cover aspects of Algonquian verbal morphology. I'm happy to send you what I have if you'd like? (PM me your email or something if you're interested)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 19, 2016 11:12 am 
Avisaru
Avisaru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 29, 2016 6:34 am
Posts: 838
Location: The North
While I'm agonising over the TA verb conjugation, here's some fun on SpecGram

_________________
https://frislander.tumblr.com/

First known on here as Karero


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 12, 2016 3:55 pm 
Avisaru
Avisaru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 29, 2016 6:34 am
Posts: 838
Location: The North
OK, I haven't done the transitive-animate inflection yet, and I think I've settled one something which I am happy with. This is tied in with settling on what the animacy hierarchy for this language is going to be.

I have settled on the hierarchy being basically the same as Arapaho: 1p>2>1s>3>3'>inanimate.

I'll start with the local forms for speech-act-participants. The direct forms are for 2-on-1s and 1p-on-2 and the inverse forms for 1s-on-2 and 2-on-1p.

Code:
DIR 2s          2p
1s  'a-         'a--imó
1p  'a--íman   'a--ímanó
INV
1s  'a--aθ      'a--aθamó
1p  'a--aθáman 'a--aθámanó


The non-local forms for non-SAPs are given here.

Code:
DIR 3'
3s  -ó
3p  -óóšo
3'  -ót
INV
3s  -i
3p  -iišo
3'  -it


Finally, here are the mixed forms for SAPs acting/being acted on (by) non-SAPs.

Code:
DIR 3s        3's        3p
1s  na--ó     na--ót     na--óóšo
1p  na--ónóón na--ónóónt na-ónóóni
12  'a--óno   'a--ónot   'a--ónoošo
2s  'a--ó     'a--ót     'a--óóšo
2p  'a--óšo   'a--óšot   'a--óšoošo
INV
1s  na--i     na--it     na--iišo
1p  na--inóón na--inóónt na--inóóni
12  'a--ino   'a--inot   'a--inoošo
2s  'a--i     'a--it     'a--iišo
2p  'a--išo   'a--išot   'a--išoošo


[Examples will arrive soon: right now I'm info-dumping.]

_________________
https://frislander.tumblr.com/

First known on here as Karero


Last edited by Frislander on Sat Mar 11, 2017 11:07 am, edited 3 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 25, 2017 10:22 am 
Avisaru
Avisaru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 29, 2016 6:34 am
Posts: 838
Location: The North
I'm still damnedly indecisive with my noun-inflection, and I've decided that (for the Northern dialect) the reanalysis will happen differently: the original plural is now only used for the proximate, and the obviative does not distinguish number. Thus the forms remain the same but the distribution differs from how it was (specifically, an obviative plural is now marked with -(i)t, not with -(:š)o).

Now for more on the verbs, and specifically the conjunct forms. The conjunct forms, it turns out, work quite differently from the independent forms. The number distinction has been lost in favour of making a pure person distinction (though this includes a special inclusive and obviates). The actual semantic distinctions made vary, but the general use is in subordinate clauses. In all the examples given below, it is glossed as a conditional.

The inanimate intransitive is simply a suffixed -i.

The animate intransitive is also rather simple, though the origins are somewhat complex: the 1st person derives from the merged 1s and 1excl, while the 2nd person derives from the original 2p.

Code:
1:  -(i)šóón
12: -(i)šon
2:  -(i)šá
3:  -(i)θ
3': -(i)tiθ


pašóón
come.AI-1. CONJ
If I come...

mó'o napóθ
bear sleep.AI-3.CONJ
When the bear sleeps...

miiθííhišá
eat.AI-2.CONJ
If you eat...

The transitive animate is again fairly simple, and the same reanalyses take place.

Code:
1:  -(o)móón
12: -(o)mon
2:  -(o)má
3:  -(ó)n
3': -(o)tón


Examples:

šoopónkomóón
see.TI-1.CONJ
If I see it...

hóópanomon
untangle.TI-INCL.CONJ
If we (incl.) untangle it...

hitanit tiiθáánotón
man-OBV open.TI-3'.CONJ
If the man/men open it...

The TA forms are gonna need a good deal more work, and I won't post on them here.

_________________
https://frislander.tumblr.com/

First known on here as Karero


Last edited by Frislander on Sat Mar 11, 2017 11:06 am, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 02, 2017 3:39 pm 
Avisaru
Avisaru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 29, 2016 6:34 am
Posts: 838
Location: The North
OK, I've settled on a set of TA forms for the conjunct I'm happy with. As otherwise the number distinction bar the 1st person inclusive is neutralised. The left column give the subject and the top row the object

Code:
   1        21       2      3    4
1  ----------------- -aθóón -óón -amóón
21 ------------------------ -on  -amon
2  -išon     -------------- -á   -amá
3  -imánθ   -aθon    -aθá   ---- -óóθ
3' -itimánθ -itaθon  -itá'  -iθ  -itiθ


Note that except in the 21- and 2- person object forms the /θ/ does not derive from the PA theme marker *-eθ but instead it the remnant of an original *t which was palatalised to *č as part of PA morphophonology before the subjunctive marker *-i, which is the set from which this is derived.

Examples:

šóópomóón
šóópom-óón
see.TA-1>3
If I see them...

pááθimánθ
pááθ-imánθ
bring.TA-3>1
If they brought me...

nopát móóθamá
nopá-t móóθ-amá
man-OBV fight.TA-2>3'
If you fight the men...

mó'o náθaθon
mó'o náθ-aθon
bear kill.TA-3>21
If the bear kills us...

_________________
https://frislander.tumblr.com/

First known on here as Karero


Last edited by Frislander on Sat Mar 11, 2017 11:05 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 03, 2017 3:27 pm 
Avisaru
Avisaru
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 7:39 pm
Posts: 859
Location: The Eastern Establishment
Good to see you're still working on this; it's impressive. Also, rereading it it's come to my attention that you've beaten me to a number of things I wanted to do with my Algolang, like the t > k > ʔ chainshift and *e > a...

Re: the conjunct, I'm pretty sure every Algonquian language retains more than one submode of the order (except for Blackfoot, which lost the conjunct), and since the submode endings come after the personal endings, the final -θ of the third person endings might change, too. A rule of thumb across Algonquian is that if a language decides to level out original *t~*č alternation, it will generalize the reflex of *t. So a noun like *nesiči 'my foot', plural *nesitari 'my feet' gets reflected in (e.g.) Cree as nisit, pl. nisita.* However, since you have final vowel loss, it's probable that the (unpalatalizing) conjunct subjunctive in *-ē and the (palatalizing) conjunct indicative in *-i will merge, and the iterative in *-iri caused palatalization anyways. In the participle, you'll get palatalization everywhere except the animate proximate...you might be able to back-form that into a gender/plurality distinction in other conjunct forms, if you wanted to...

*Arapaho is something of an exception in that it generalized palatalization alternation in inanimate nouns to animate nouns. In verbs, the story is more complicated; there aren't any conjunct modes distinguished only by the reflexes of palatalization, the old subjunctive hasn't survived, and there's been a lot of weird shuffling of what modes get used when, so...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 04, 2017 11:10 am 
Avisaru
Avisaru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 29, 2016 6:34 am
Posts: 838
Location: The North
dhok wrote:
Good to see you're still working on this; it's impressive. Also, rereading it it's come to my attention that you've beaten me to a number of things I wanted to do with my Algolang, like the t > k > ʔ chainshift and *e > a...


Since you given only the t > k > ʔ bit of the shift and not the r > t part as wll, I guess that means you'd have some other way or bringing back /t/, or would you actually be leaving that as a gap?

Quote:
Re: the conjunct, I'm pretty sure every Algonquian language retains more than one submode of the order (except for Blackfoot, which lost the conjunct), and since the submode endings come after the personal endings, the final -θ of the third person endings might change, too. A rule of thumb across Algonquian is that if a language decides to level out original *t~*č alternation, it will generalize the reflex of *t. So a noun like *nesiči 'my foot', plural *nesitari 'my feet' gets reflected in (e.g.) Cree as nisit, pl. nisita.* However, since you have final vowel loss, it's probable that the (unpalatalizing) conjunct subjunctive in *-ē and the (palatalizing) conjunct indicative in *-i will merge, and the iterative in *-iri caused palatalization anyways. In the participle, you'll get palatalization everywhere except the animate proximate...you might be able to back-form that into a gender/plurality distinction in other conjunct forms, if you wanted to...

*Arapaho is something of an exception in that it generalized palatalization alternation in inanimate nouns to animate nouns. In verbs, the story is more complicated; there aren't any conjunct modes distinguished only by the reflexes of palatalization, the old subjunctive hasn't survived, and there's been a lot of weird shuffling of what modes get used when, so...


The forms which have survived here are most definitely the palatalising conjunct indicative (why did I put subjunctive in that post? I don't know), but there's been a lot of levelling out and influence from other bits of the paradigms, e.g. regularising the -óón/on/á forms as showing exclusive and inclusive 1st person and 2nd person respectively, ot the -Vt suffix as showing an obviate agent. That would give a (fairly) regular -(š)it suffix for the iterative (Or maybe if I want an -(i)t suffix where the i only appears after consonants). I'm guessing it would be OK to extend this suffix to the independent as well?

I can certainly see why it would be *t that was generalised in the *nesiči/*nesitari forms due to the more regular use of the plural. I'll probably do this, which would give nahik/nahikot as the forms.

While we're on the subject of the conjunct, I've just been looking at the outcomes of the changed mode, and I'm wondering whether (whatever it ends up doing) I might be able to get away with a regularisation to lengthening for short vowels and infixing -oš- for long ones. Thinking about it, how about a shift of the indicative to take up the role of the participle while the changed mode takes on the original roles of the indicative in addition to its original function?

_________________
https://frislander.tumblr.com/

First known on here as Karero


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 04, 2017 3:01 pm 
Avisaru
Avisaru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 29, 2016 6:34 am
Posts: 838
Location: The North
One thing I haven't done yet are the independent pronouns. These are kept unchanged from the original PA forms, though with the merger of the singular and plural obviates as per usual.

Code:
   SING  PLUR
1  nííto níítanóón
21 ----- 'íítano
2  'ííto 'ití
3  šííto šití
3'    šíítot


These are not that often used, as you would expect.

EDIT: I've rethought the indefinite pronouns, the following is now out of date.

Quote:
There are also indefinite pronouns, which come in proximative, obviative and inanimate forms, with no number distinction made.

Code:
3: hošišo
3': hošišot
INA: 'í


Since Bloomfield gives no reconstructed demonstratives, I'm going to have to do a lot more digging, since the resources I already have don't seem to cover them. If anyone has any great resources please let me know.

_________________
https://frislander.tumblr.com/

First known on here as Karero


Last edited by Frislander on Fri Mar 10, 2017 1:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 04, 2017 3:19 pm 
Avisaru
Avisaru
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 7:39 pm
Posts: 859
Location: The Eastern Establishment
Goddard wrote a pretty meaty article on Algonquian demonstratives in the Frank T. Siebert memorial volume, which I've emailed to you.

Yeah, I was going to reintroduce /t/ from *θ and merge *r with /n/. *k and *h merge as /ʔ/, while original *s became /h/...I dunno, maybe that many unconditional sound shifts are noobish. :P

Quote:
Thinking about it, how about a shift of the indicative to take up the role of the participle while the changed mode takes on the original roles of the indicative in addition to its original function?


Totally plausible. Arapaho's affirmative mode (used where other languages use the independent indicative) descends from the conjunct participle (this also occurred in Micmac), while the original independent indicative is used in main-clause verbs that are negative, interrogative, or past. I've also sent you Goddard 2015 on the historical morphology of Arapaho.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 05, 2017 8:20 am 
Avisaru
Avisaru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 29, 2016 6:34 am
Posts: 838
Location: The North
dhok wrote:
Yeah, I was going to reintroduce /t/ from *θ and merge *r with /n/. *k and *h merge as /ʔ/, while original *s became /h/...I dunno, maybe that many unconditional sound shifts are noobish. :P


It seems to happen quite a bit in Algonquian as a whole.

Thank you for the PDfs, by the way. :)

_________________
https://frislander.tumblr.com/

First known on here as Karero


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 05, 2017 3:42 pm 
Avisaru
Avisaru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 29, 2016 6:34 am
Posts: 838
Location: The North
OK, I think I've come up with a nice system of demonstratives that make sense, so I'll post them here now.

There are 6 demonstrative roots encoding 3 distance contrasts and coming in animate and inanimate forms. The distances thus contrasted are proximal, distal and absent. the general trend seems to have been towards reinforcement of the animate forms with the inanimates more likely to have retained their original shapes.

Code:
     Ani    Ina
PROX móšom  móša
DIST hinan  hini
ABS  hišóóm hišá


The inanimate distal and absent are the only ones which continue a PA form unaltered, in this case *eni from set B and *eye· from set F. The animate distal form is derived from a reinforcing doubling up of the original form *ena, also from set B. The animate absent is from the original form from either set D or set F, *ewavka·/eya·ka· plus the common reinforcing particle *ma. The proximal forms incorporate the reinforcing prefix *ma·h- onto the original set A forms, with the animate additionally taking the reinforcing *ma again.

In terms of inflection the demontratives take the relevant nominal inflections when used pronominally, but are uninflected particles when used adjectivally, as shown in the following examples. The ordering of the adjectivally used forms relative to their head noun is variable: in the northern dialect they tend to precede the noun, while in the southern dialect the post-nominal order is preferred, likely out of Siouan influence since this ordering is otherwise not present in Algonquian.

móšat napííkomomóót
móša-t na-pííkom-omóó-t
PROX.INA-PL 1-bring.TI-1s-PL.INA
I bring these.

hišóón mííhit náθóóθin napó
hišóón mííhi-t náθ-óóθ-in napó
ABS.ANI bison-OBV kill-3>3'.CONJ-ITER man
The man who kills those bison.

hinan hitanííšo máθimiiθííhi
hinan hitani-:šo máθi-miiθííh-i
DIST.ANI person-PL all-eat.AI-PL
Those people eat it all up.

_________________
https://frislander.tumblr.com/

First known on here as Karero


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 11, 2017 11:03 am 
Avisaru
Avisaru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 29, 2016 6:34 am
Posts: 838
Location: The North
OK, this is a bit of a clear-up post. I've made a few more more minor tweaks to the sound changes, which (shouldn't) effect the examples or inflectional forms. The first is to remove the first sound change, C//#_[wy]. This is basically because it produces word-initial consonant alternations which I find I'm levelling out anyway and only really serve as an annoyance. The main motivation for this change was to provide variety in the shapes of the numerals, which become rather close in form given the sound changes, but that was before I realised that if necessary I could remould them or even straight up borrow some of them from Crow. Thus the motivation for the sound change is lost, so I'm scrapping it.

I'm also making slight changes to the way that clusters work. Now all of *š, *s, *r and *θ become glottal stops when appearing as the first consonant in a cluster. The ʔp clusters thus produced are mow simplified to p and the *Hm clusters now always behave as ʔm (I hadn't cleared that up before, so the verbal inflections were using *hm, which will need to be corrected).

I've also edited the word-initial *e change because it was shifting word-intial *e· to i·, which is not what I wanted, and I've also removed the changes for word-initial *y, since it did not occur in PA. finally, now only *we(·) merges as with o(·): with all other diphthongs the glide is simply lost. Thus the allophone of the plural after consonants is -o not -i as it was before.

The sound changes and example words are now

More: show
V=aeioáéíó
P=aeio
A=áéíó
C=ptkmnrhsčšθxçʔwy
G=wy
N=nhšθxçʔ

e/i/#_C
we/o/C_
we/o/#_
G//C_
/'/_V·
/'/_VCC
'//_V(·)C'
'//_V(·)NC'
V//V…V…_#
G//_#
o/i/_
a/o/_
e/a/_
·//_C(')V·
·//_NC(')V·
/·/V_h
·//_ʔ
[hʔ]//_
[sxçθrš]/ʔ/_C
s/h/_
k/ʔ/#_
k//_
ʔ//_p
t/k/_
r/t/_
/h/#_(')V
č/θ/_
š/s/_
i/y/[#V]_(')V
o/w/[#V]_(')V
·/y/[ia]_(')V
·/w/o_(')V
V//_(')V
w/y/_
y/š/_
·//_#
P/A/'_
V·/V²/_
'//_
C//_²
C//_²

hitani "man" from *erenyiwa
hi'í "woman" from *eθkwe·wa
hoθam "dog" from *aθemwa
hošatá "eagle" from *awe·ʔre·wa
'ánti "hawk" from *kenriwa "eagle"
mó'o "bear" from *maθkwa
míího "bison" from *mo·swa "moose"
θíípo "ghost" from *či·paya
šóópih "hare, rabbit" from *wa·poswa
nomá "fish" from *name·wa
híši "louse" from *ehkwa
napi "water" from *nepyi
hí'iká "fire" from *eškwete·wi
hoθi "arrow" from *aθwi
šíšóm "house" from *wi·kiwa·ʔmi
hóhan "stone" from *aʔsenya
'íísí "day" from *ki·šekwa·wi
manóón "settlement, village" from *menika·ni
hipí "river, stream" from *si·pi·wi
'inóópi "snow" from *ko·na·powi
ho'í "snake" from *aθko·ka
hó'i "land, country" from *askyi


Indefinite pronouns have been rethought, and now like in Crow they are identical with the interrogatives, continuing the PA forms with a suffixed 'í, the reduced form of the inanimate indefinite, giving the following:

Code:
ANI: hošáání
INA: híší


The interrogatives are always sentence-initial and focused and gain special intonation, while indefinites may appear in any position and do not receive any such treatment. WH-interrogatives take conjunct order inflections with initial change. Additionally, animate indefinites always take obviative agreement, while animate interrogatives take proximative.

híší nookiná?
híší n<o>okin-á
INDEF.INA hunt.T<change>-2>3.CONJ
What are you hunting?

hošáání namá'ošót!
hošáání na-má'oš-ót
INDEF.ANI 1-find-DIR>3'
I've found someone!

_________________
https://frislander.tumblr.com/

First known on here as Karero


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 11, 2017 11:33 am 
Avisaru
Avisaru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 29, 2016 6:34 am
Posts: 838
Location: The North
Quote:
I can't let this thing go, can I? I've been thinking about the interaction of length and tone, and currently I feel that the distribution is almost unnaturally skewed: unaccented vowels are mostly long except when they are word-final, and long vowels are always accented unless there is an accent directly following them. This seems to me to be a very unnatural distribution, and my solution would be to scrap the length distinction entirely. I'm thinking perhaps pull a Cheyenne (well not really, but you'll see what I mean): unless already accented, long vowels gain a high tone, while accented long vowels gain a falling tone. I'd need to rearrange the sound changes a bit, since I still want to lose word-final vowel length before the tone shift proposed here (i.e. ho'í "snake" would stay ho'í and not change to ho'î). I'd also get rid of that rule which shortened long vowels directly before other long vowels (which was partly causing this skew any way) and remove the vowel hiatus resolution.

Would people like to see this?


EDIT: forget this. I'm rethinking this whole thing, and I'm gonna start a new thread for it, probably tomorrow.

_________________
https://frislander.tumblr.com/

First known on here as Karero


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 42 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] 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