Lol, yes that's what I'm referring to. Tmk, /el/ and /il/ both became /ø/ in some circumstances.Ælfwine wrote:I do love front rounded vowels.
I'm not sure how Italian definite articles play into this? Unless this is /eI/ /iI/ you are talking about.qwed117 wrote:I'd imagine the more Frenchy route of el and il are also possibilities. You should seek out multiple paths, not just one.Ælfwine wrote:Should I introduce front rounded vowels to my Hungarian inspired romlang?
I could easily innovate them from /wE/ and /wI/ like in the word /'battwErE/ > modern /'bat2r/ <batör>
Yay or Nay? [2011–2018]
Re: Yay or Nay?
Spoiler:
Re: Yay or Nay?
Right now I'm working on the pronunciation of the character 啞 in Ởnh·Vú and right now I have 2 possibilities:
1. It's usually pronounced as /a˦˧˥/ except when used as an adjectival verb meaning mute/dumb where it can be pronounced either as /a˦˧˥/ or /so˧˩˧/ depending on dialect and personal preference and many people may use both interchangeably
2. It's usually pronounced as /a˦˧˥/ but has 2 pronunciations when used as an adjective: /so˧˩˧/ when used to mean mute/dumb and /a˦˧˥/ when being used as an insult equivalent to calling some dumb/stupid/etc.
Which one do you guys think I should go with?
1. It's usually pronounced as /a˦˧˥/ except when used as an adjectival verb meaning mute/dumb where it can be pronounced either as /a˦˧˥/ or /so˧˩˧/ depending on dialect and personal preference and many people may use both interchangeably
2. It's usually pronounced as /a˦˧˥/ but has 2 pronunciations when used as an adjective: /so˧˩˧/ when used to mean mute/dumb and /a˦˧˥/ when being used as an insult equivalent to calling some dumb/stupid/etc.
Which one do you guys think I should go with?
Re: Yay or Nay?
Where did /a˦˧˥/ and /so˧˩˧/ come from? Do they both mean mute?All4Ɇn wrote:Right now I'm working on the pronunciation of the character 啞 in Ởnh·Vú and right now I have 2 possibilities:
1. It's usually pronounced as /a˦˧˥/ except when used as an adjectival verb meaning mute/dumb where it can be pronounced either as /a˦˧˥/ or /so˧˩˧/ depending on dialect and personal preference and many people may use both interchangeably
2. It's usually pronounced as /a˦˧˥/ but has 2 pronunciations when used as an adjective: /so˧˩˧/ when used to mean mute/dumb and /a˦˧˥/ when being used as an insult equivalent to calling some dumb/stupid/etc.
Which one do you guys think I should go with?
I think that option 1 is probably the best. Dialectal differences in register are common throughout the world.
Spoiler:
-
- korean
- Posts: 10373
- Joined: 12 Jul 2013 23:09
- Location: UTC-04:00
Re: Yay or Nay?
I prefer option 2, personally.
Re: Yay or Nay?
The first is borrowed from Chinese, the second is native. Both mean mute.qwed117 wrote:Where did /a˦˧˥/ and /so˧˩˧/ come from? Do they both mean mute?
Re: Yay or Nay?
If that is the case, then I definitely think that /a˦˧˥/ should be used to mean mute in a more formal sense, with /so˧˩˧/ being used in certain dialects to indicate an insultAll4Ɇn wrote:The first is borrowed from Chinese, the second is native. Both mean mute.qwed117 wrote:Where did /a˦˧˥/ and /so˧˩˧/ come from? Do they both mean mute?
Spoiler:
- Frislander
- mayan
- Posts: 2088
- Joined: 14 May 2016 18:47
- Location: The North
Re: Yay or Nay?
I concur, definitely use the Sinitic borrowing for the more formal situations, the power relations are just too unequal in the scenario for simple dialectal variation.
Re: Yay or Nay?
I think I'll with that option then. Do you think it'd be weird for the /a˦˧˥/ pronunciation to also occur in some compound words that act as insults such as 啞馬 [a˦˧˥ ma˧˥] (~dumbass/moron)? I think the /a˦˧˥/ pronunciation sounds a lot better there than something like /so˧˩˧ ma˧˥/Frislander wrote:I concur, definitely use the Sinitic borrowing for the more formal situations, the power relations are just too unequal in the scenario for simple dialectal variation.
Re: Yay or Nay?
both make sense.All4Ɇn wrote:I think I'll with that option then. Do you think it'd be weird for the /a˦˧˥/ pronunciation to also occur in some compound words that act as insults such as 啞馬 [a˦˧˥ ma˧˥] (~dumbass/moron)? I think the /a˦˧˥/ pronunciation sounds a lot better there than something like /so˧˩˧ ma˧˥/Frislander wrote:I concur, definitely use the Sinitic borrowing for the more formal situations, the power relations are just too unequal in the scenario for simple dialectal variation.
Spoiler:
Re: Yay or Nay?
Is using /ꝥ/ to represent [t͡θ] a good idea? This idea comes from from old english using /ꝥ/ as a abbreviation for þæt.
Gândölansch (Gondolan) • Feongkrwe (Feongrkean) • Tamhanddön (Tamanthon) • Θανηλοξαμαψⱶ (Thanelotic) • Yônjcerth (Yaponese) • Ba̧supan (Basupan) • Mùthoķán (Mothaucian)
Re: Yay or Nay?
Could a language gain an aspiration contrast from clusters with silibants?
I.e. ps ts ks > pʰ tʰ kʰ
Looks reasonable to me but idk
I.e. ps ts ks > pʰ tʰ kʰ
Looks reasonable to me but idk
-
- sinic
- Posts: 401
- Joined: 21 Jul 2012 08:01
- Location: Buffalo, NY
Re: Yay or Nay?
Yeah, that looks fine to me. It's pretty much just a debuccalization of /s/ to /h/.Ælfwine wrote:Could a language gain an aspiration contrast from clusters with silibants?
I.e. ps ts ks > pʰ tʰ kʰ
Looks reasonable to me but idk
Re: Yay or Nay?
Do any languages make a alignment distinction where masculine nouns use a marked nominative alignment, but feminine nouns use a marked accusative and neuter nouns use a marked genitive?
Gândölansch (Gondolan) • Feongkrwe (Feongrkean) • Tamhanddön (Tamanthon) • Θανηλοξαμαψⱶ (Thanelotic) • Yônjcerth (Yaponese) • Ba̧supan (Basupan) • Mùthoķán (Mothaucian)
- eldin raigmore
- korean
- Posts: 6352
- Joined: 14 Aug 2010 19:38
- Location: SouthEast Michigan
Re: Yay or Nay?
If you make one, the answer will be "yes".Parlox wrote:Do any languages make a alignment distinction where masculine nouns use a marked nominative alignment, but feminine nouns use a marked accusative and neuter nouns use a marked genitive?
....
Some natlangs do have a hierarchy of nouns/nominals/pronouns/pronominals that are accusative/nominative at the top and ergative/absolutive at the bottom.
If the hierarchy happens to be Fem > Masc > Neut, I guess that could be similar to what you're suggesting; or at least could look similar if you squint.
Have you tried looking at WALS.info for such a 'lang?
My minicity is http://gonabebig1day.myminicity.com/xml
Re: Yay or Nay?
I'm thinking of adding /r̥ l̥ j̊ ẘ/ <hr hl hj hw> to one of my langs.
Here's the phonology for reference:
/m m̊ n n̊ ŋ ŋ̊/ <m mh n nh ñ ñh>
/p t̪ t k b d̪ d g/ <p ṭ t k b ḍ d g>
/s ś h j w ɰ ɾ/ <s ś h j w ġ r>
/a ɛ e i u o ɤ/ <a e è i u o à>
Should I
A) leave them out
B) put them all in
C) put only <hr hl> in
D) put only <hj hw> in
Here's the phonology for reference:
/m m̊ n n̊ ŋ ŋ̊/ <m mh n nh ñ ñh>
/p t̪ t k b d̪ d g/ <p ṭ t k b ḍ d g>
/s ś h j w ɰ ɾ/ <s ś h j w ġ r>
/a ɛ e i u o ɤ/ <a e è i u o à>
Should I
A) leave them out
B) put them all in
C) put only <hr hl> in
D) put only <hj hw> in
Spoiler:
- eldin raigmore
- korean
- Posts: 6352
- Joined: 14 Aug 2010 19:38
- Location: SouthEast Michigan
Re: Yay or Nay?
My non-logical "gut" instinct is:qwed117 wrote: I'm thinking of adding /r̥ l̥ j̊ ẘ/ <hr hl hj hw> to one of my langs.
Here's the phonology for reference:
/m m̊ n n̊ ŋ ŋ̊/ <m mh n nh ñ ñh>
/p t̪ t k b d̪ d g/ <p ṭ t k b ḍ d g>
/s ś h j w ɰ ɾ/ <s ś h j w ġ r>
/a ɛ e i u o ɤ/ <a e è i u o à>
Should I
A) leave them out
B) put them all in
C) put only <hr hl> in
D) put only <hj hw> in
(C) would make your 'lang more different -- more "it's own thing";
but (s/b "and"?)
(B) would be more aesthetically pleasing -- to me.
I kinda think (A) would make your conspeakers' version of Alpha-Bits (TM) a lot less interesting and educational for their schoolchildren.
(OTOH how does Post's Greek division handle the uppercase xi Ξ or theta Θ ?)
My minicity is http://gonabebig1day.myminicity.com/xml
Re: Yay or Nay?
I don't know whether I want to introduce /ŋ/ into Qutrussan? I would probably romanise it as <ṇ>. If yes, should I also allow it word-initially? I tend to put it in conlangs a lot, but it feels a bit out of place in Qutrussan. Words like ṇuthur /ŋuθur/ sound nice though. If I do, I think /i u/ will have centralised/merged with /ǝ/ before it in the not-so-distant past, so things like yŭṇ /jǝŋ/ and rĭṇ /rǝŋ/.
Also, I am thinking about letting /ts dz/ function as fricatives when it comes to clusters, so things like /tsn dzg/ would be permissible.
Also, I am thinking about letting /ts dz/ function as fricatives when it comes to clusters, so things like /tsn dzg/ would be permissible.
- DesEsseintes
- mongolian
- Posts: 4331
- Joined: 31 Mar 2013 13:16
Re: Yay or Nay?
NayDavush wrote:I don't know whether I want to introduce /ŋ/ into Qutrussan? I would probably romanise it as <ṇ>. If yes, should I also allow it word-initially? I tend to put it in conlangs a lot, but it feels a bit out of place in Qutrussan. Words like ṇuthur /ŋuθur/ sound nice though. If I do, I think /i u/ will have centralised/merged with /ǝ/ before it in the not-so-distant past, so things like yŭṇ /jǝŋ/ and rĭṇ /rǝŋ/.
Yay oh yay!Also, I am thinking about letting /ts dz/ function as fricatives when it comes to clusters, so things like /tsn dzg/ would be permissible.
- gestaltist
- mayan
- Posts: 1617
- Joined: 11 Feb 2015 11:23
Re: Yay or Nay?
How about making [ŋ] the word-initial allophone of /g/?Davush wrote:I don't know whether I want to introduce /ŋ/ into Qutrussan? I would probably romanise it as <ṇ>. If yes, should I also allow it word-initially? I tend to put it in conlangs a lot, but it feels a bit out of place in Qutrussan. Words like ṇuthur /ŋuθur/ sound nice though. If I do, I think /i u/ will have centralised/merged with /ǝ/ before it in the not-so-distant past, so things like yŭṇ /jǝŋ/ and rĭṇ /rǝŋ/.
I like it.Also, I am thinking about letting /ts dz/ function as fricatives when it comes to clusters, so things like /tsn dzg/ would be permissible.