The Most Batshit Natlang Competition!
Re: The Most Batshit Natlang Competition!
Yeah, I'd like to learn Mohawk since it has no labials and labials are my least favorite consonants.
- marconatrix
- Lebom
- Posts: 234
- Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2006 4:29 pm
- Location: Kernow
- Contact:
Re: The Most Batshit Natlang Competition!
I guess it makes lip-reading difficult?Theta wrote:Yeah, I'd like to learn Mohawk since it has no labials and labials are my least favorite consonants.
Kyn nag ov den skentel pur ...
Re: The Most Batshit Natlang Competition!
But makes ventriloquism easy.marconatrix wrote:I guess it makes lip-reading difficult?Theta wrote:Yeah, I'd like to learn Mohawk since it has no labials and labials are my least favorite consonants.
"It will not come by waiting for it. It will not be said, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is.' Rather, the Kingdom of the Father is spread out upon the earth, and men do not see it."
– The Gospel of Thomas
– The Gospel of Thomas
- marconatrix
- Lebom
- Posts: 234
- Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2006 4:29 pm
- Location: Kernow
- Contact:
Re: The Most Batshit Natlang Competition!
Good point! I didn't think of that, hmm ...Xephyr wrote:But makes ventriloquism easy.marconatrix wrote:I guess it makes lip-reading difficult?Theta wrote:Yeah, I'd like to learn Mohawk since it has no labials and labials are my least favorite consonants.
Kyn nag ov den skentel pur ...
Re: The Most Batshit Natlang Competition!
Sure, more or less, but so what? Most of us don't know the etymology and historical pronunciations of every single word, so we're not helped.Theta wrote:Literally everything weird in English orthography can be explained by simple sound changes and historical preservation of spelling
I could be biased, but it seems to me that the Nordic languages are significantly less strangely spelled than English. Somewhat strange, but not that strange. Gaelic I don't know but it sure look weird to me. French would have been my first choice on the list of weird spellings. Chinese, like you said, is a different matter, but it's certainly complicated.finlay wrote:But from my limited experience of all of them, these all at least seem to be in the same "league":
Japanese, Chinese, Burmese, Thai, Tibetan, French, Gaelic in all its flavours (Irish, Scottish, maybe Manx), Swedish, Danish, Norwegian
Some different ways, yes (sj, sk, sh, sch - any more?), so it's difficult to predict the spelling from the pronunciation, but the other way is usually easy enough (compare "th" in English, among many others). Perhaps more importantly, it's a very peculiar sound.finlay wrote:Swedish's consonants seem very complex to me, particularly that sj-sound which has a lot of different ways of spelling it.
Only in some of them, I don't think it's even that common. The only one I can think of is a pretentious Stockholm sociolect. I admit I don't know all that much about northern dialects, but I do know it's far from universal.Theta wrote:Well they're all pretty similar and it's pronounced the same as <rs> in Northern dialects I believe.
Speaking of Germanic langs, V2 word order seems pretty weird.
I can think of various isolated pieces of weirdness that occur in different languages, such as huge phoneme inventories, or crazy polypersonal agreement, or those languages which have literally free word order (as opposed to free constituent order) so that you have to have agreement on absolutely everything. But few languages have more than one such weirdness.
Did anyone mention Dyirbal? That has quite a few peculiarities, doesn't it?
Re: The Most Batshit Natlang Competition!
Well sure, but that was more of a response to how some people are always saying 'Oh this is English, you know, no actual spelling or grammar rules everything is just random hurr'Chuma wrote:Sure, more or less, but so what? Most of us don't know the etymology and historical pronunciations of every single word, so we're not helped.Theta wrote:Literally everything weird in English orthography can be explained by simple sound changes and historical preservation of spelling
That kind of thing certainly doesn't happen on here, at least I haven't seen it except maybe once or twice, but I do hear it all the time in school and other places. Kind of just one of those things that grind my gears I guess.
Re: The Most Batshit Natlang Competition!
But then there are words which seem completely discrete from sound changes and historical preservation and all that jazz and are simply bizarre like loose vs. lose. The one with two vowels has a short vowel and the one with one vowel has a long vowel. How do you possibly explain that?Theta wrote:Well sure, but that was more of a response to how some people are always saying 'Oh this is English, you know, no actual spelling or grammar rules everything is just random hurr'Chuma wrote:Sure, more or less, but so what? Most of us don't know the etymology and historical pronunciations of every single word, so we're not helped.Theta wrote:Literally everything weird in English orthography can be explained by simple sound changes and historical preservation of spelling
That kind of thing certainly doesn't happen on here, at least I haven't seen it except maybe once or twice, but I do hear it all the time in school and other places. Kind of just one of those things that grind my gears I guess.
Re: The Most Batshit Natlang Competition!
Short vowel? What dialect is that?
Re: The Most Batshit Natlang Competition!
Hmm yeah, isn't it just a difference between /s/ and /z/ in pretty much every English dialect?
Re: The Most Batshit Natlang Competition!
[lus] vs. [lu:z]Lordshrew wrote:Hmm yeah, isn't it just a difference between /s/ and /z/ in pretty much every English dialect?
Loose vs. Lose
Re: The Most Batshit Natlang Competition!
Yep, compare <noose> /nus/ <news> /n(j)u:z/.Lordshrew wrote:Hmm yeah, isn't it just a difference between /s/ and /z/ in pretty much every English dialect?
It's not just before /s/ and /z/, I think, it's before (un)voiced consonants in general, like <bat> /bat/ <bad> /ba:d/. But then <fat> /fat/ <fad> /fad/...
Re: The Most Batshit Natlang Competition!
The difference is merely allophonic, though. So-called 'long vowels' are always shorter before a voiceless obstruent - e.g. /s/ - than before a voiced obstruent, such as /z/. The thing that is weird about 'loose' and 'lose' is the fact that the value of the consonant following the vowel is indicated by a difference in the spelling of the vowel, not the consonant.Viktor77 wrote:[lus] vs. [lu:z]Lordshrew wrote:Hmm yeah, isn't it just a difference between /s/ and /z/ in pretty much every English dialect?
Loose vs. Lose
Ah, the good old bad-lad split. Now that's another complication...Astraios wrote: It's not just before /s/ and /z/, I think, it's before (un)voiced consonants in general, like <bat> /bat/ <bad> /ba:d/. But then <fat> /fat/ <fad> /fad/...
Re: The Most Batshit Natlang Competition!
you weirdoAstraios wrote:Yep, compare <noose> /nus/ <news> /n(j)u:z/.Lordshrew wrote:Hmm yeah, isn't it just a difference between /s/ and /z/ in pretty much every English dialect?
It's not just before /s/ and /z/, I think, it's before (un)voiced consonants in general, like <bat> /bat/ <bad> /ba:d/. But then <fat> /fat/ <fad> /fad/...
Scottish accents tend to have it before voiced fricatives, /r/ and morpheme boundaries. But not voiced plosives. hence brood [brud] /brud/ and brewed [bruːd] /bru#d/. Before you mention, yes it's very fucking loose interpretations of the symbols which don't necessarily imply a trill, although that is infinitely more likely in Scotland than most of the rest of the anglosphere, nor a back vowel for /u/, nor fully voiced plosives.
Re: The Most Batshit Natlang Competition!
finlay wrote:you weirdo
Re: The Most Batshit Natlang Competition!
So is the contest still going? Noone's cast a vote in six days.
Re: The Most Batshit Natlang Competition!
Ok ok I vote Piraha.
Re: The Most Batshit Natlang Competition!
Indeed indeed.Lordshrew wrote:The difference is merely allophonic, though. So-called 'long vowels' are always shorter before a voiceless obstruent - e.g. /s/ - than before a voiced obstruent, such as /z/. The thing that is weird about 'loose' and 'lose' is the fact that the value of the consonant following the vowel is indicated by a difference in the spelling of the vowel, not the consonant.
Perhaps it's the road that's the goal? Or at least we need to present the candidates first.cromulant wrote:So is the contest still going? Noone's cast a vote in six days.
- Zumir
- Lebom
- Posts: 116
- Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 9:22 pm
- Location: On ur internets, spamming ur threads
Re: The Most Batshit Natlang Competition!
Anyone for Shapsug? it has a voiceless bidental fricative!
Edit: Nah, the contest's off.
Edit: Nah, the contest's off.
Zim ho Xsárnicja žovnyce.
-
- Smeric
- Posts: 1258
- Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:07 pm
- Location: Miracle, Inc. Headquarters
- Contact:
Re: The Most Batshit Natlang Competition!
Don't start a competition, demand to label the votes, then call it off just because the discussion was getting a little off track...Zumir wrote:Anyone for Shapsug? it has a voiceless bidental fricative!
Edit: Nah, the contest's off.
[bɹ̠ˤʷɪs.təɫ]
Nōn quālibet inīquā cupiditāte illectus hoc agō
Yo te pongo en tu lugar...
Taisc mach Daró
Nōn quālibet inīquā cupiditāte illectus hoc agō
Yo te pongo en tu lugar...
Taisc mach Daró
Re: The Most Batshit Natlang Competition!
Unusual maybe, but not all that weird if you think of it as VSO with mandatory fronting of exactly one constituent, usually the topic or subject (but sometimes a focused object or adjunct instead).Chuma wrote:Speaking of Germanic langs, V2 word order seems pretty weird.
Blog: audmanh.wordpress.com
Conlangs: Ronc Tyu | Buruya Nzaysa | Doayâu | Tmaśareʔ
Conlangs: Ronc Tyu | Buruya Nzaysa | Doayâu | Tmaśareʔ
Re: The Most Batshit Natlang Competition!
Wat?! You mean SOV, right? AIUI, that's what German is said to "underlyingly" be.cedh audmanh wrote:Unusual maybe, but not all that weird if you think of it as VSO with mandatory fronting of exactly one constituent, usually the topic or subject (but sometimes a focused object or adjunct instead).Chuma wrote:Speaking of Germanic langs, V2 word order seems pretty weird.
- Nortaneous
- Sumerul
- Posts: 4544
- Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
- Location: the Imperial Corridor
Re: The Most Batshit Natlang Competition!
Source?Zumir wrote:Anyone for Shapsug? it has a voiceless bidental fricative!
Edit: Nah, the contest's off.
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.
Re: The Most Batshit Natlang Competition!
I do mean VSO.cromulant wrote:Wat?! You mean SOV, right? AIUI, that's what German is said to "underlyingly" be.cedh audmanh wrote:Unusual maybe, but not all that weird if you think of it as VSO with mandatory fronting of exactly one constituent, usually the topic or subject (but sometimes a focused object or adjunct instead).Chuma wrote:Speaking of Germanic langs, V2 word order seems pretty weird.
Yes, German is SOV in most subclauses, and broadly head-final in most types of phrases, and the Germanic V2 order developed from SOV in all likelihood, so saying German is "underlyingly SOV" is definitely closer to the truth than saying it was "underlyingly VSO". However, synchronically speaking, V2 order, and especially the way that different elements can be highlighted by placing them before the verb in V2 clauses, feels very similar to what topic-prominent languages do with topic fronting. And if you analyse the preverbal constituent in a German V2 clause as a topic (which is often (but not always) its pragmatic role), the rest of the clause is typically ordered VSO.
Blog: audmanh.wordpress.com
Conlangs: Ronc Tyu | Buruya Nzaysa | Doayâu | Tmaśareʔ
Conlangs: Ronc Tyu | Buruya Nzaysa | Doayâu | Tmaśareʔ
-
- Avisaru
- Posts: 807
- Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 2:58 pm
Re: The Most Batshit Natlang Competition!
You left out French and Hindi.finlay wrote:But from my limited experience of all of them, these all at least seem to be in the same "league":
Japanese, Chinese, Burmese, Thai, Tibetan, French, Gaelic in all its flavours (Irish, Scottish, maybe Manx), Swedish, Danish, Norwegian
Re: The Most Batshit Natlang Competition!
French is there.TomHChappell wrote:You left out French and Hindi.finlay wrote:But from my limited experience of all of them, these all at least seem to be in the same "league":
Japanese, Chinese, Burmese, Thai, Tibetan, French, Gaelic in all its flavours (Irish, Scottish, maybe Manx), Swedish, Danish, Norwegian