zompist bboard

THIS IS AN ARCHIVE ONLY - see Ephemera
It is currently Mon Oct 14, 2019 6:04 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 354 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 15  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 3:34 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Posts: 4545
Location: the Imperial Corridor
Dzere kharelelis bgulim dqumarzu da tuxorchi.
[dzere kʰarelelis bguɫim dʁumarzu da tuχortʃi]
dzere khar-eli-eli-s bgul-i da-q-u-marzu da t-u-xor-0-chi
heaven thing-COLL-COLL-ACC man-PRE.PL in_order_to-SUBORD-IPFV-nourish BEN 3MT.TOP-IPFV-carry-3I.ABS-into

Bguli umkharye dzerem dabqamdze da nja.
[bguɫi uŋkʰarje dzerem dabʁamdze da ndʒa]
bgul-i um-khar-ye dzere-m da-q-ba-mdze da nju-a-0
man-NOM.PL NEG-thing-INS heaven-GEN in_order_to-SUBORD-give-RECIP BEN 3MN.TOP-have-3I.ABS

Cor. Cor. Cor. Cor. Cor. Cor. Cor.
[tsor]
cor
kill

todo: redo possession structures to be copula + is at? / verb 'be at'

also old gehui sig
Cañ ɗe ǂhiip n|ay hwaa hwaa yaʔ ḷur.
N|ay ŋa xɛ ŋwe ŋa ǂhiip ɨx Cañ.
Khwɨ. Khwɨ. Khwɨ. Khwɨ. Khwɨ. Khwɨ. Khwɨ.

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 3:45 pm 
Avisaru
Avisaru
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 5:05 pm
Posts: 434
Location: /ˈaɪ̯əwʌ/
What's the deal with those three sentences?

_________________


Ο ορανς τα ανα̨ριθομον ϝερρον εͱεν ανθροποτροφον.
Το̨ ανθροπς αυ̨τ εκψον επ αθο̨ οραναμο̨ϝον.
Θαιν. Θαιν. Θαιν. Θαιν. Θαιν. Θαιν. Θαιν.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 5:18 pm 
Smeric
Smeric

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 11:15 pm
Posts: 1418
It's this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhang_Xian ... Kill_Stele


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 23, 2013 3:50 am 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Posts: 4545
Location: the Imperial Corridor
it's that, which became a running joke Elsewhere and ended up here because Im a fat gay and I want to go to Ice Hell ftw.

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 24, 2013 4:16 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Posts: 4545
Location: the Imperial Corridor
Three-way aspect/telicity distinction marked on absolutive. Atelic takes the prepositional case:

Bgul thame tuqari.
man.NOM soup-PRE 3MS-eat
The man is trying to eat soup.

Then there's the aspect distinction. Absolutive can be either NOM, ACC, or GEN, but no other cases. So for imperfective:

Code:
    SG      PL      SG      PL      INAN    INAN
NOM deqra   deqri   ebgul   ebguli  yandzo  emtaq
GEN deqram  deqrim  boglum  boglim  yandzom emtqam
ACC deqras  deqris  ebguls  ebgulyu yandzos emtaqs


e- + dqera :> edqera :> edqra :> edəqra :> dəqra :> deqra
e- + dqera + -m :> edqeram :> edqram :> edəqram :> dəqram :> deqram
e- + dqera + -s :> edqeras :> edqras :> edəqras :> dəqras :> deqras
e- + bgul :> ebgul
e- + bgul + -m :> ebgulum :> ebglum :> ebəglum :> bəglum :> boglum
e- + bgul + -s :> ebguls
e- + mtaq :> emtaq
e- + mtaq + -m :> emtaqam :> emtqam
e- + mtaq + -s :> emtaqs

so:
1. add e-, or y- if no initial consonant.
2. If >2syll., drop first vowel.
3. If this results in an illegal cluster, drop e- and insert schwa between first two consonants.
4. Schwa = o if preceded by labial, e otherwise.

Bgul qaris.
The man is eating.

Ebgul qaris.
The man eats.

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 24, 2013 10:41 pm 
Lebom
Lebom
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 8:25 pm
Posts: 175
Location: Trojan Country
Nortaneous wrote:
Three-way aspect/telicity distinction marked on absolutive.

What are the distinctions? I'm curious. Also, marking telicity/aspect on the subject is really odd, but equally cool. What's the rationale behind the different cases vis-a-vis aspect?

_________________
linguoboy wrote:
GrinningManiac wrote:
Local pronunciation - /ˈtoʊ.stə/

Ah, so now I know where Towcester pastries originated! Cheers.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 25, 2013 5:09 am 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Posts: 4545
Location: the Imperial Corridor
Atelic, perfective, imperfective -- though I'd probably call them 'incomplete', 'complete', and 'regular' for the purposes of this conlang. Atelic imperfective will probably exist, though it'd need some sort of circumlocution.

They aren't marked on the topic; they're marked on the absolutive -- so the object in transitive sentences. As for diachronic justification: prepositional case by itself can have a locative meaning, and my dialect of English has similarly constructed telicity-like marking on a few verbs, like "eating" vs. "eating on". (That's not atelicity in the second example so much as an... attenuative? diminutive? and Wikipedia calls it an aspect but it's orthogonal to tense/aspect distinctions... but it's close enough that I'm going to use it as justification for the construction here.)

Different cases because the absolutive can be either nominative or accusative, and some verbs take genitive subjects/objects though I haven't worked that out yet.

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 25, 2013 11:22 am 
Lebom
Lebom
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 8:25 pm
Posts: 175
Location: Trojan Country
Nortaneous wrote:
Atelic, perfective, imperfective -- though I'd probably call them 'incomplete', 'complete', and 'regular' for the purposes of this conlang. Atelic imperfective will probably exist, though it'd need some sort of circumlocution.

Sorry for the dumb question, but does this imply (basically) that telic verbs have a perfective/imperfective distinction, while atelic verbs simply have no distinction betetween perfective and imperfective? (e.g., "was eating/ate (some) cake" vs. "ate (up) the cake" vs. "was eating (up) the cake")

Nortaneous wrote:
They aren't marked on the topic; they're marked on the absolutive -- so the object in transitive sentences. As for diachronic justification: prepositional case by itself can have a locative meaning, and my dialect of English has similarly constructed telicity-like marking on a few verbs, like "eating" vs. "eating on". (That's not atelicity in the second example so much as an... attenuative? diminutive? and Wikipedia calls it an aspect but it's orthogonal to tense/aspect distinctions... but it's close enough that I'm going to use it as justification for the construction here.)

Different cases because the absolutive can be either nominative or accusative, and some verbs take genitive subjects/objects though I haven't worked that out yet.

I see... yeah, that makes perfect sense. Many natlangs (IIRC Finnish is among them) use different cases on the object to make telicity distinctions.

_________________
linguoboy wrote:
GrinningManiac wrote:
Local pronunciation - /ˈtoʊ.stə/

Ah, so now I know where Towcester pastries originated! Cheers.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 26, 2013 1:22 am 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Posts: 4545
Location: the Imperial Corridor
kodé wrote:
Nortaneous wrote:
Atelic, perfective, imperfective -- though I'd probably call them 'incomplete', 'complete', and 'regular' for the purposes of this conlang. Atelic imperfective will probably exist, though it'd need some sort of circumlocution.

Sorry for the dumb question, but does this imply (basically) that telic verbs have a perfective/imperfective distinction, while atelic verbs simply have no distinction betetween perfective and imperfective? (e.g., "was eating/ate (some) cake" vs. "ate (up) the cake" vs. "was eating (up) the cake")

Presumably an atelic imperfective form will develop, but it'll be some sort of circumlocution and I don't have enough of a grammatical framework to work out yet what that would be.

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 28, 2013 5:44 am 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Posts: 4545
Location: the Imperial Corridor
I think I forgot to mention that the nasals in this act unexpectedly: /m n/ can appear before any consonant, but /m/ assimilates to the POA of a following velar/uvular consonant -- so /mp mt mts mtS mk mq/ [mp mt mts mtS Nk N\q/ -- and /n/ never assimilates.

Also I'm not sure if I want a dark/light l contrast -- it'll be marginal if it exists but I'll work it out as the language develops.

Stress is probably penultimate but that's what I always end up doing in every single one of my conlangs so I might change it to initial, or have it vary based on syllable weight or location of the aspiration.

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 02, 2013 9:31 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Posts: 4545
Location: the Imperial Corridor
N>V derivation

1. -(y)a- 'to be an X' -- bgul :> bgulyas 'he is human'
2. -(a)q- 'to have (inalienable) an X' -- harx 'beard' :> harxaqts 'I have a beard'
3. Tsez-style essive/lative derivations, but these derive to verbs:
Code:
        at      from    to/toward
in      ex      Vmx     sh(i)x
on h.   et      Vmt     sh(i)t
on v.   echa    Vncha   sh(i)cha
under   edeq    VndVq   sh(i)d(i)q
at/near eri     Vndri   sh(i)ri   
through elya    Vnya    sh(i)la     

mtaq 'rock' :> mtaqandrits 'I am coming from near the rock', mtaqshidiqse 'it is crawling under the rock'

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 05, 2013 2:32 am 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Posts: 4545
Location: the Imperial Corridor
More derivational affixes.

-nux- causative:
Zha bguls qarinuxs.
1S man-ACC 0-eat-CAUS-3M.ABS
I am making the man eat.

-mod- causative:
Zha tkemabs npxotsmod.
1S ship-ACC 1.NEG-sink-CAUS-0
I did not sink the ship.

-lVch(V)- benefactive: (PRE)
Bgul akhis shiche tkrumilich.
man.NOM house-ACC snake-PRE 3MS-build-BEN-0
The man is building a house for the snake.

-ri- reflexive: (ACC)
Shichis qaliris.
snake-ACC eat-REFL-3M.ABS
The snake is eating itself.
Note the r...r - l...r dissimilation. l...l sequences dissimilate to r...l. Dissimilation does not occur if it would produce another sequence requiring dissimilation -- see kharelelis. r always dissimilates to dark l, even when surrounding vowels would predict light l. This distinction is not written.

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 05, 2013 5:20 pm 
Avisaru
Avisaru
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2003 10:42 am
Posts: 639
Location: Reykjavík, Iceland
I think what kodé was getting at as that generally telicity is not morphological but lexical. Certain verbal concepts cannot conceivably be made to not be atelic or vice versa.

Like say a concept like "know" is purely telic. As soon as you try to move it into atelic range semantically, it's not the same thing anymore. It could become "teach" or "learn" depending but neither is the same thing as "know".

Note how "walk home" is telic (passes the telicity test of adding "in an hour" after it) whereas "walk aimlessly" is not (you can't say "I walk aimlessly in an hour"). Would your language require a morphological marker on the verb "walk" in each of the cases?

_________________
vec


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 05, 2013 5:22 pm 
Avisaru
Avisaru
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2003 10:42 am
Posts: 639
Location: Reykjavík, Iceland
Put another way: "I walk-TEL home" cannot be turned into "I walk-ATEL home". By adding a terminus the concept becomes telic. Likewise: "I walk-ATEL aimlessly" could not be made into "I walk-TEL aimlessly" because then it wouldn't be aimless, would it?

_________________
vec


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 10, 2013 6:12 am 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Posts: 4545
Location: the Imperial Corridor
Right. So there's some semantic operations that would be taken care of with telicity here that would be translated with adverbs in English.

Yan jamts marishixts.
[jan dʒamts maɾiʃiçts]
yan jam-ts mari-shix-ts
1S.NOM[TEL.PFV] walk-1M home-ILL-1M
I am walking home. (note that locatives are verbs)

In jamts marishixts.
[in dʒamts maɾiʃiçts]
in jam-ts mari-shix-ts
IPFV.1S.NOM[TEL] walk-1M home-ILL-1M
I walk home. (pronouns are irregular here: yan, tse, lu :> in, esh, eł)

Yane jamts.
[jane dʒamts]
yan-e jam-ts
1S-POS walk-1M
I am wandering around.

I may as well take care of the atelic imperfective: q- + 'have' + absolutive in postpositional case.

Yane jqam a.
[jane dʒʁam ʔa]
yan-e q-jam 0-a-0
1S-POS SUBORD-walk 1T-have-3I.ABS
I wander around.

Note that 'have' is technically transitive, though verbs in q- don't take case marking. To put it in the second person so the topic marking shows up:

Tshe jqam ta.
[tsʰe dʒʁam ta]
tse-e q-jam t-a-0
2S-PRE SUBORD-walk 2/3TM-have-3I.ABS

Telicity marking on nouns is stolen wholesale from Finnish, though here it doesn't use the partitive. Piraha also apparently does it but I don't know how it works there.

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 10, 2013 6:31 am 
Sanno
Sanno
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 5:00 pm
Posts: 3197
Location: One of the dark places of the world
Also, telicity marking plus adverbs may be useful for more nuance sometimes. Eg "I walk-TEL aimlessly" may indicate perhaps walking with no reason to walk here or there, but a function to the walking overall, or perhaps a set period of time - eg the difference between wandering around, and wandering around to fill five minutes before your appointment.

_________________
Blog: http://vacuouswastrel.wordpress.com/

But the river tripped on her by and by, lapping
as though her heart was brook: Why, why, why! Weh, O weh
I'se so silly to be flowing but I no canna stay!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:46 am 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Posts: 4545
Location: the Imperial Corridor
More derivational morphology.
-dam N>N 'resident of X, inheritor of the properties of X location'
Harxs chems muqrishims taxlerims tse heldam chupxotsnux!
harx-s che-m-s muqri-shi-m-s taxleri-m-s tse helli-dam chu-pxots-nux
beard-ACC three-GEN-ACC day-PAR-GEN-ACC fucking-GEN-ACC 2S north-dam 3L.TOP-go_under-CAUS
Shave your fucking three-day beard, Yankee!

Imperatives are formed by fronting the object and leaving off the absolutive marker -- which drops for everything but the realis anyway. Topic marker stays. So you could just say Harxs tse chupxotsnux! "Shave your beard!" The vocative is pretty much obligatory though. Harxs chupxotsnux, tse! is also possible, but you can't front the vocative without adding another one: *Tse harxs chupxotsnux! isn't permitted, but you could have like Tse heldam! Harxs tse chupxotsnux!

There's something going on with the pragmatics of the standing/sitting/lying down marking on the topic affix but I don't know what yet. Beards normally sit -- so you could have:

Harx yane da meglits.
harx yan-e da me-geli-ts
beard 1S-POS BEN 3S.TOP-please-1S.ABS
I like your beard. (with these phrases Spanish-style instead of English-style, there's probably a more interesting way to do them but I don't know it)

but not *Harx yane da chuglits. If your beard is notably long, or waxed into a Jürgen Burkhardt thing, or something like that, you could have Harx yane da teglits. but that's marked.

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 15, 2013 11:32 am 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Posts: 4545
Location: the Imperial Corridor
And back to Pembrish. Lord's Prayer in ~1150

ure fæder þu þe on heofonun eart
sie þin nama gehalwud
becyme þin rice
gewerðe þin willa
on eorþan swa swa on heofonun
syle us to dege ure deglican hlaf
ond forgief us ure gyltas
swa swa we forgiefeð urun gyltendun
ond ne led þu us on costnunge
ac alies us from yflan

urɛ fɛːðɛr θuː θɛ ɔn hjɔvɔnʊn jart
sɨː θiːn nama jɛˈhaːlwʊd
bɛkymɛ θiːn riːtʃɛ
jɛˈwɛrðɛ θiːn willa
ɔn jɔrðan swaː swaː ɔn hjɔvɔnʊn
sylɛ uːs tɔ dɛjɛ uːrɛ dɛjlitʃan hlaːf
ɔnd fɔrˈjɨf uːs uːre gyltas
swaː swaː weː fɔrˈjɨvɛθ uːrun gyltɛndʊn
ɔnd nɛ lɛd θuː uːs ɔn kɔstnʊŋgɛ
ak aˈlɨːs uːs frɔm yvlan

There are a few things already evident here: the loss of contrastiveness of short æ, the confusion of final nasals, unstressed inflectional vowels, and high central vowels, and the beginning of the loss of the voiced velar fricative.

and ~1500: (nb: ywle ~ yfela from yfle ~ yfele, syncope ends up reapplying after y is lost)

wre feder þe þw in siofonen iart
gihaload bio þi name
cume þi rice
bio þi willa gidoun
oun iorþa soa oun siofonen
gif ws to dei wre deilici llaf
oand foriw ws wre gyutes
soa wey foriwþ wrun gyutendun
oand ne led þw ws oun noan costnunge
ac alyes ws froum yfela

uːrə vɛːdər ðə ðuː in ʃɔˈvɔnə
jiˈhaloə̯d bjɔ ðiː namə
kumə ðiː riːtʃə
bjɔ ðiː wilə jiˈdɔun
ɔu̯n jɔrðə soə̯ ɔu̯n ʃɔˈvɔnə
jiːf uːs toː dɛi̯ uːrə dɛi̯litʃə ɬaf
oə̯nd fɔrˈjuː uːs uːrə gɨu̯təs
soə̯ wɛi̯ fɔrˈjuːθ uːrən guˈtɛndə
oə̯nd nɛ lɛd ðuː uːs ɔu̯n noə̯ kɔstˈnuŋə
ak əˈlɨːs uːs frɔu̯m yfɛlə

~1700, beginning of standardization, I want to fossilize the subjunctive and have something else grammaticalize to cover it but dunno what besides 'let' or 'may' and that's exactly what English did, any suggestions? using scyle for now but dunno if that makes sense

Wre Feeder, the thw in siofone iart,
yhalod bio thy name.
Sciele thy rytje cume,
on thy wille ydoun bio,
oun iordde so oun siofone.
Yw ws toodey wre deilitje llaff,
on foryw ws wre sienes
so wey foryw hye the egein ws sien.
On ne led thw ws ountoo no temptasioun,
ac alyes ws froum ywle.

uːrə vɛːdər ðə ðuː in ʃɔˈvɔnə jarʃt
iˈhalɔd bjɔ ðiː namə
skɨlə ðiː riːtʃə kumə
ɔn ðiː wilə iˈdɔu̯n
bjɔ ɔu̯n jɔrðə zɔ ɔu̯n ʃɔˈvɔnə
jiu̯ uːs toːˈdɛi̯ uːrə dɛi̯litʃə ɬaf
ɔn vɔrˈjiu̯ uːs uːre sɨnəs
zɔ wɛi̯ vorˈjiu̯ hɨː ðə əˈgɛi̯n uːs sɨn
ɔn nɛ lɛd ðuː uːs ɔu̯ntoː nɔ tɛmpˈtaʃɔu̯n
ak əlɨːs uːs vrɔu̯m iu̯lə

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 25, 2013 12:22 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Posts: 4545
Location: the Imperial Corridor
bump

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 25, 2013 2:43 pm 
Smeric
Smeric

Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 12:15 pm
Posts: 2085
Location: Spain
Quote:
~1700, beginning of standardization, I want to fossilize the subjunctive and have something else grammaticalize to cover it but dunno what besides 'let' or 'may' and that's exactly what English did, any suggestions? using scyle for now but dunno if that makes sense

What about the subjunctive of an auxiliary verb like "be", "do", "make" or "have"; or else an adverb/phrase/interjection ("better", "hopefully", "rather", "maybe", "willingly" [or a borrowed one])...

In Iveriss I'm going to keep the synthetic subjunctive [Queme at ons dyn cyningryc, as opposed to indicative cymd or archaic cwymd] because it fits well with the Iberic languages substratum with which the speakers are prob bilingual or trilingual; but surely scyle makes sense, I currently use the cognates of shall for future too (and we all know subjunctive and future blur, cf. Sp "se lo diré cuando venga", Fr. "je lui le dirai quand je viendrai" and Pt. "dir-lhe-ei quando vier" - tenses used being, respectively, present subjunctive (Sp), future indicative (Fr) and future subjunctive (Pt)).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 28, 2013 12:11 am 
Avisaru
Avisaru
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 5:26 pm
Posts: 308
Location: Missouri (loves company!)
Me likes. It's cool to see it develop over time, see the direction it takes. I liked what you did with "eo", especially turning "heo" into [ʃɔ]. I do have a couple of quick questions about the language.
    What's the point of departure for this language? Is there a full setting for Pembrish?
    Where did the "y" in becyme come from?
    What's with all the different spellings for [ə] in 1500s Pembrish? I saw -e, -a, -un, and -en. Is that just orthographic archaism? Or the orthography showing grammatical distinctions no longer made in the spoken form?
    Where did the [k] in sciele come from?
I'm really digging this language, especially the orthography and its apparent Welsh influences. Looking forward to seeing more!

_________________
I am Ratatosk, Norse Squirrel of Strife!

There are 10 types of people in this world:
-Those who understand binary
-Those who don't

Mater tua circeta ibat et pater tuus sambucorum olficiebat!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 28, 2013 12:53 am 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Posts: 4545
Location: the Imperial Corridor
Herra Ratatoskr wrote:
What's the point of departure for this language? Is there a full setting for Pembrish?

The point of departure is before the io-eo merger, and it's set in Pembrokeshire (hence the name) with changed historical details that I worked out ages ago and have since forgotten.
Quote:
Where did the "y" in becyme come from?

Good question! I have no idea. I suspect it was an error introduced by following the oldest version of the OE Lord's Prayer that I could find.
Quote:
What's with all the different spellings for [ə] in 1500s Pembrish? I saw -e, -a, -un, and -en. Is that just orthographic archaism? Or the orthography showing grammatical distinctions no longer made in the spoken form?

That's just orthographic conservatism. I might need to backdate n-elision more and remove the final /n/s there.
Quote:
Where did the [k] in sciele come from?

Subjunctive, I think.

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 12:41 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Posts: 4545
Location: the Imperial Corridor
Permitted initial clusters in unnamed lang:

Code:
    p   t   ts  ch  k   q   b   d   dz  j   g   s   sh  x   z   zh  m   n   l   r   y
p       pt  pts pch pk  pq                      ps  psh px                  pl  pr  py
t   tp              tk  tq                              tx          tm  tn  tl  tr
ts  tsp             tsk tsq                             tsx         tsm     tsl tsr
ch  chp             chk chq                             chx         chm     chl chr
k                       kq                                          km      kl  kr 
q                                                                   qm      ql  qr 
b                       bq      bd  bdz bj  bg              bz  bzh         bl  br  by
d                       dq                  dg                      dm  dn  dl  dr
dz                      dzq     dzb         dzg                     dzm     dzl dzr
j                       jq      jb                                  jm      jl  jr
g                       gq                                          gm      gl  gr
s   sp  st          sk  sq                                          sm  sn  sl  sr
sh  shp sht         shk shq                                         shm shn shl shr
x                                                                   xm
z                       zq      zb          zg                      zm  zn  zl  zr
zh                      zhq     zhb         zhg                     zhm zhn zhl zhr
m   mp  mt  mts mch mk  mq  mb  md  mdz mj  mg                          mn          my
n       nt  nts nch             nd  ndz nj                          nm          ndr ny
l                       lq      ld  ldz                                             ly
r                       rq  rb  rd  rdz rj  rg                      rm  rn

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.


Last edited by Nortaneous on Thu Feb 20, 2014 10:57 am, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 06, 2014 11:28 pm 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Posts: 4545
Location: the Imperial Corridor
Arve recording http://vocaroo.com/i/s07vOK57YXvi

in standard it's
ˈʈʂʌi̯s gʊn ˈkʰuo̯ʂ vɪç ˈcʰaɔ̯n mʏˈtsah vɪç ˈgɛa̯rɐs, ˈkʰuo̯ʂ tsɪç ˈmaɔ̯l ɪn ˌxʷaɔ̯lʔˈmɛa̯r̥ɐmɪl, ˈjɔu̯xʷ r̥ɪç ˌʈʂʌi̯s ˈtsɔu̯ɪl tsɪç tsɪˈxʷaɔ̯l.
ˈtʰie̯χɪn die̯ ˈçʌn ʊtʰ dɪn ˈxʷɛu̯tsɪr dɪm ˈlʊi̯kʰɐr ˈʈʂøts ˈɛdɪ die̯ ˈmɛa̯tsɐ ˈxʷɔlɐh.
ˈtʰɛŋɐr ˈxʷaɔ̯dun ˈjɛa̯r̥ʏh ʏ ˈmie̯ʂ cʰɐn ˈmɛç.

but represented in the recording is a midland dialect that neutralizes a bunch of codas to ɐ, has xʷ > f, and fucks with the diphthongs in ways that i didn't quite get so i'm gonna canonize aɔ̯ > æu̯ as a feature of the dialect of some city that i will figure out once i find my damn maps

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 07, 2014 2:05 am 
Sumerul
Sumerul
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Posts: 4545
Location: the Imperial Corridor
and then I realized I didn't have any long texts in Insular Kett

[On a hill,] a sheep that had no wool saw horses. One of them was pulling a heavy wagon, one was carrying a big load, and one was carrying a man. The sheep said to the horses: "My heart pains me, seeing a man driving horses." The horses said: "Listen, sheep, our hearts pain us when we see this: a man, the master, makes the wool of the sheep into a warm garment for himself. And the sheep has no wool." Having heard this, the sheep fled into the plain.

Vántam cabé atwkéyngenn sáiran fenéuce ḩacént.
vant=am cabé atwkey-nge-nn sair=an fenéc-ue ḩa-cemb-t
hill=LOC wool 3S.REFL=have-NEG-GER sheep=TOP horse-PL PST-see-ACT.PFV

Hán áytwcangg ḩáir ifáic ḩaiásang,
hán áytw-cang=an ḩáir i-fait-s ḩa-iása-ng
one 3S.REFL-DAT=TOP wagon ADJ-full-ADJ PST-pull-ACT.IPFV

hánn réyrr lát ḩakáung,
hán=an reyn-r lát ḩa-káu-ng
one=TOP thing-COLL large PST-carry-ACT.IPFV

hánn létak ḩakáung.
hán=an létak ḩa-káu-ng
one=TOP man PST-carry-ACT.IPFV

Náhan sáir fenéucecang ḩatéut:
nah=an sáir fenéc-ue-cang ḩa-teu-t
this=TOP sheep horse-PL-DAT PST-say-ACT.PFV

posting this now so I don't lose it

_________________
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 354 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 15  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


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

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