Yay or Nay? [2011–2018]

A forum for all topics related to constructed languages
User avatar
All4Ɇn
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1765
Joined: 01 Mar 2014 07:19

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by All4Ɇn »

I'm not sure if this the right place to mention it but I've been working on a sort of conlanging exercise. It's a Germanic language similar to Dutch and Low German which has technically removed cases from its grammar, but one that uses fossilized case usages so frequently that it's still practically a necessity to learn cases in order to properly speak the language. I was wondering if anyone would be curious in seeing a thread about this. [:)]
shimobaatar
korean
korean
Posts: 10373
Joined: 12 Jul 2013 23:09
Location: UTC-04:00

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by shimobaatar »

All4Ɇn wrote: 02 Oct 2018 00:26 I'm not sure if this the right place to mention it but I've been working on a sort of conlanging exercise. It's a Germanic language similar to Dutch and Low German which has technically removed cases from its grammar, but one that uses fossilized case usages so frequently that it's still practically a necessity to learn cases in order to properly speak the language. I was wondering if anyone would be curious in seeing a thread about this. [:)]
Yes, absolutely!
Nachtuil
greek
greek
Posts: 595
Joined: 21 Jul 2016 00:16

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Nachtuil »

All4Ɇn wrote: 02 Oct 2018 00:26 I'm not sure if this the right place to mention it but I've been working on a sort of conlanging exercise. It's a Germanic language similar to Dutch and Low German which has technically removed cases from its grammar, but one that uses fossilized case usages so frequently that it's still practically a necessity to learn cases in order to properly speak the language. I was wondering if anyone would be curious in seeing a thread about this. [:)]
Seems interesting potentially. I quite like low Germanic languages myself generally. I find it hard to conceptualise a situation where case remains fully understood but only exists in fossilised set phrases but knowledge of it is necessary to speak it properly though at the same time not necessary. Could it be that you have a prestige dialect that retains the use of case and it is more optional or diminished in common usage? I like the idea of a transitional state from case to non-case and again, I am enthusiastic about low Germanic languages generally. I would be interested in what you do with it for sure.
tseren
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 6
Joined: 12 Dec 2016 20:19

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by tseren »

Since pː → pʰ is attested, how likely is the opposite pʰ → pː in an intervocalic environment? Both [pʰ] and [pː] could be viewed as fortis realizations of [p]. Yea or Nay on making them interchangeable intervocalically such that:

p pʰ → f p \ V_V
User avatar
WeepingElf
greek
greek
Posts: 531
Joined: 23 Feb 2016 18:42
Location: Braunschweig, Germany
Contact:

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by WeepingElf »

tseren wrote: 08 Oct 2018 19:37 Since pː → pʰ is attested, how likely is the opposite pʰ → pː in an intervocalic environment? Both [pʰ] and [pː] could be viewed as fortis realizations of [p]. Yea or Nay on making them interchangeable intervocalically such that:

p pʰ → f p \ V_V
I'd say nay: [pʰ] is more likely to become [f] than [p]. The change you are asking about seems like leap-frogging to me.
... brought to you by the Weeping Elf
My conlang pages
User avatar
Lambuzhao
korean
korean
Posts: 5405
Joined: 13 May 2012 02:57

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Lambuzhao »

I bet someone already mentioned this, but anyway:

What happens when an aspect is argued without sufficient sway?
If it's neither 'yay' nor 'nay', does that make it 'gray' ?
:wat:
shimobaatar
korean
korean
Posts: 10373
Joined: 12 Jul 2013 23:09
Location: UTC-04:00

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by shimobaatar »

Lambuzhao wrote: 09 Oct 2018 03:35 What happens when an aspect is argued without sufficient sway?
If it's neither 'yay' nor 'nay', does that make it 'gray' ?
Sorry, but I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to ask. Could you perhaps clarify?
User avatar
gach
MVP
MVP
Posts: 513
Joined: 07 Aug 2013 01:26
Location: displaced from Helsinki

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by gach »

tseren wrote: 08 Oct 2018 19:37 Since pː → pʰ is attested, how likely is the opposite pʰ → pː in an intervocalic environment? Both [pʰ] and [pː] could be viewed as fortis realizations of [p]. Yea or Nay on making them interchangeable intervocalically such that:

p pʰ → f p \ V_V
Maybe, though I'd like to see real world examples of Cʰ > C: to be truly happy with the justification. My preferred development path would still be along the lines of

p > b > β > f
pʰ > p
ImageKištaLkal sikSeic
User avatar
spanick
roman
roman
Posts: 1336
Joined: 11 May 2017 01:47
Location: California

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by spanick »

Option 4 but maybe have one of the classes be quite rare compared to the others.
felipesnark
sinic
sinic
Posts: 413
Joined: 27 Jan 2013 02:12
Contact:

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by felipesnark »

I'm working on Denkurian's nominal declension system, and I think I am mostly satisfied with where I've ended up, except I'm not too sure about what I have for the genitive plural. I am using the example noun razh man, since it is a consonant stem:

Code: Select all

	sg.	pl.
nom.	razh	razhen
acc.	razhes	razhis
gen.	razhek	razhenek
dat.	razhev	razhiv
inst.	razhed	razhidi
In this set, the genitive plural ending is -(e)nek, which is basically the nominative accusative plural plus the genitive ending, instead of the normal oblique plural marker -i.

I was considering the following genitive plural markers:
  1. -(e)nek, as above
  2. -(e)kel, using an old collective affix -el
  3. -(e)ken, reversing the order of the case and plural suffix
  4. -inek, using both the oblique and nominative plural, plus the genitive ending
  5. Some other combination/order of the genitive affix -(e)k, the oblique plural -i, the nominative plural -(e)n, and the old collective affix -el
Thoughts? Suggestions? Thanks in advance!
Visit my website for my blogs and information on my conlangs: http://grwilliams.net/ It's a work in progress!
Ælfwine
roman
roman
Posts: 940
Joined: 21 Sep 2015 01:28
Location: New Jersey

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Ælfwine »

Honestly, having -ik as the plural in analogy with the dative and accusative might suffice, unless you are going for something totally regular and agglutinative.
My Blog

A-posteriori, alternative history nerd
felipesnark
sinic
sinic
Posts: 413
Joined: 27 Jan 2013 02:12
Contact:

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by felipesnark »

Ælfwine wrote: 17 Oct 2018 00:10 Honestly, having -ik as the plural in analogy with the dative and accusative might suffice, unless you are going for something totally regular and agglutinative.
I thought about that as well; I guess I saw the -ik option as appearing even more regular and agglutinative.
Visit my website for my blogs and information on my conlangs: http://grwilliams.net/ It's a work in progress!
User avatar
spanick
roman
roman
Posts: 1336
Joined: 11 May 2017 01:47
Location: California

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by spanick »

I like 1 and 4.
User avatar
Omzinesý
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4080
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 08:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by Omzinesý »

felipesnark wrote: 16 Oct 2018 23:44 I'm working on Denkurian's nominal declension system, and I think I am mostly satisfied with where I've ended up, except I'm not too sure about what I have for the genitive plural. I am using the example noun razh man, since it is a consonant stem:

Code: Select all

	sg.	pl.
nom.	razh	razhen
acc.	razhes	razhis
gen.	razhek	razhenek
dat.	razhev	razhiv
inst.	razhed	razhidi
In this set, the genitive plural ending is -(e)nek, which is basically the nominative accusative plural plus the genitive ending, instead of the normal oblique plural marker -i.

I was considering the following genitive plural markers:
  1. -(e)nek, as above
  2. -(e)kel, using an old collective affix -el
  3. -(e)ken, reversing the order of the case and plural suffix
  4. -inek, using both the oblique and nominative plural, plus the genitive ending
  5. Some other combination/order of the genitive affix -(e)k, the oblique plural -i, the nominative plural -(e)n, and the old collective affix -el
Thoughts? Suggestions? Thanks in advance!
It seems to be plural genitives that are most varied in languages. Finnish has enkeli-en, enkele-iden, enkele-itten, enkel-ten (and enkele-in) all meaning ' angels' ' Russian plural genitives are also famously difficult.
My meta-thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5760
shimobaatar
korean
korean
Posts: 10373
Joined: 12 Jul 2013 23:09
Location: UTC-04:00

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by shimobaatar »

Going by sound alone, I think I like options 1 and 4 the most.
jimydog000
greek
greek
Posts: 583
Joined: 19 Mar 2016 04:14
Location: Australia

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by jimydog000 »

gach wrote: 09 Oct 2018 14:12
tseren wrote: 08 Oct 2018 19:37 Since pː → pʰ is attested, how likely is the opposite pʰ → pː in an intervocalic environment? Both [pʰ] and [pː] could be viewed as fortis realizations of [p]. Yea or Nay on making them interchangeable intervocalically such that:

p pʰ → f p \ V_V
Maybe, though I'd like to see real world examples of Cʰ > C: to be truly happy with the justification. My preferred development path would still be along the lines of

p > b > β > f
pʰ > p
β > f is pretty rare and strange though.

If your okay with devoicing between consonants (like gach's β > f) you could try:
pʰ > b > bː > pː
p > f

or:
p > f
pʰ > p > pː
But like gach I'd expect pʰ to become f over p.

There is this one rule I found here: http://pbase.phon.chass.ncsu.edu/pattern/4231 . And that's it.

So... nay? Subjectively better option:
pʰ > f \ V_V
p > pː \ V_V[+stress]
A signature.
User avatar
gach
MVP
MVP
Posts: 513
Joined: 07 Aug 2013 01:26
Location: displaced from Helsinki

Re: Yay or Nay?

Post by gach »

jimydog000 wrote: 17 Oct 2018 17:40 β > f is pretty rare and strange though.
You can impose general devoicing of fricatives, though, in which case the change works nicely. Voicing distinction is anyway less common on fricatives than on stops (https://wals.info/feature/4A#2/19.3/152.9), so loosing voicing on fricatives is not out of question.


Edit: Continued in this thread. -Aevas, 2020-05-08
ImageKištaLkal sikSeic
Locked