The CBB

Nationality as an adjective:
Ek s deuc.

Citizenship as an adjective:
Ek s deuclandisc.

Adjectives can be nominalized by adding an article:
Ek s en deuc.
Ek s en deuclandisc.

The passives Siglisc has two passives 1. The dynamic passive, formed by sy (the subjunctive present of syn 'to be') in the present and hau syn (the indicative complex past of syn 'to be') in the past. 2. The static passive, formed by s (the present indicative of syn 'to be') in the present and fra (...

Siglisc - a Germanic conlang (1) and (2) that focus an argument are built with duh construction where the focused argument precedes the auxiliary and a possible subject (if not the focused element) precedes the main verb. like in (3). The verb can be focused only by intonation. The negator can howev...

The complementized dat is nearly always used. (1) I know that Jack built the house. Ek vit dat Jak hau beun de haus. sg1 know.PRS COMPL Jack have.PRS build.INF DEF.SG house Instead of a relativiser (dependent marking), relativized marker -n appears (head marking). (2a) I know that that's the house t...

Siglisc - a Germanic conlang The clauses nicely shows how analytic Siglish is. hi-n is the only bi-morphemic word. The clauses are so similar that I provide glosses and pronunciations only for the first two. [hi:n vɪt nɪʃ ɑn vɪt nɪʃ dɑt nɪʃ vɪt sɛn fʊʟ zai nɪʃ mɛ:t hi:] Hin vit nisc an vit dat nisc ...

Duhn construction Duhn is as heterogeneous a verb as its cognate in English. It's also used as an auxiliary for focusing an argument. The usage however differs from that of English. Siglisc is a V2 language. So any argument can precede the verb. Ek elsc yse. 'I love ice cream.' Yse elsc ek. 'Ice cre...

Numbers 1. yn /ain/ 2. za /tsa/ 3. try 4. fuj 5. fem 6. sex 7. siv 8. ac 9. neun 10. zin 'first' is fross. The other ordinal numbers are the same words as the cardinal numbers. They are used like all adjectives between the article and the head. Za man 'two men' En za man 'a second man' De za man 'th...

Palatalization revised Loss of rounded front vowels happens before palatalization. So velars preceding them do not palatalize. Merger of long and short /a/s happens after palatalization. Reappearance of vowel length distinction do to short and long vowels after them happens thereafter. When palatali...

The future will be formed with auxiliary sca, cognate of English shall.
'would' is either its past scu, or present conjunctive of haun heu. I'm not sure how they differ.

Ælfwine wrote:Me gusta!

Gracias

I'm considering adding a new phoneme namely ʟ. It generally appears as a word-final allophone of l in Germanic languages. j + l, which derives from front rounded vowels + l, becomes one phoneme ʎ which is later fronted to l which is the allophone of /l/ word-initially. So both [l]s are interpreted a...

Rounded front vowels Prelanguage had y: y ø: ø Like all long high vowels /y:/ was diphthongized and became /ɔɪ̈/ <eu> like in German. I'm actually not sure how the process went in German. Then it was merged with Protogermanic /au/. /ø:/ rose to /y:/ /y/ and /ø/ were merged. Phonemic length was lost....

HoskhMatriarch wrote:Don't (probably a small number of) languages also have (productive) zero-derived antipassives or antipassives that are formed by deleting the object agreement morpheme as well though?

That's an interesting note!
Do you have an example? Does some linguist analyse it as an antipassive?

How did Estonian develop its three vowel lengths?

The case system There are 22 cases. Two of them are purely syntactic: the nominative and the oblique. The other cases belong to paradigms: from - at - through - to State: excessive - essive1 - essive2 - translative Possession: addative(?) - genitive1 - genitive2 - dative Inside: elative - inessive1 ...

It seems I'll never get a good phoneme inventory for that lang. My latest attempt is basic 5 with rounding distinction of every phoneme. i y ɯ u <i ü ï u> e ø ɘ o <e ö ë o> ä ɶ (both low phonemes are central) <a œ > All of them have two/three lengths depending on the analyses above. New vowel harmon...

I think the English distinction should be called the progressive vs. everything else.

I made a system of 22 cases.
The agent marker is not a case. It is a case that can be added to any case form.
Verbs can often be omitted - not always.
'X gives Y to Z.' can be expressed X-ablative-agent Y Z-dative
'Z got Y from X' -> Z-dative-agent Y X-ablative

So what you propose seems very plausible.
I would just call the speaker knows hearer doesn't know form the specific indefinite.

Definiteness/specificity is usually divided in 4 parts. 1. Neneric: Men don't understand women. The cat has a long tail. (All man, woman, cat, and tail are neneric, i.e. choose the group of entities in question.) 2. Definite and specific: The boy bought some sweets. My mother is old. (The hearer can...