New CBB

I like it!

You probably should consider describing the phonology of the tone system in more detail though. There's scope to do all sorts of interesting phonological things with tones!

_________________
Languages!
Native: Proficient: Decent: Have dabbled in:

For example?
This is my first time doing a conlang with tones, so i don't know much about them.

_________________
| | | (Nahuatl) | (Sanskrit & Pali) (Yaghan) | (Antregabua)
CrazyEttin's Lair

Well, a lot of tone languages have lots and lots of tone sandhi, so you could do something with that. A lot of tonal languages have weird phonations. It seems to be very common for a low or falling tone to be realized as creaky voice.

_________________
"Wait for the starvation of glaciers, chicken hamburger Noel Weber Arthur."

= | = | =

Also, from what I've learnt about tones in phonology, there's a rule that the underlying representation of the word can't have two of the same tone adjacent, although tones can be attached to multiple syllables in a row. (So, for example, something like [táká] would have one high tone attached to both syllables.) [That's called the Obligatory Contour Principle if you want to look it up.] This means interesting things can happen when you add an affix of the same tone as its base (for example, in Shona, a stem with a high tone changes it to a low tone if you add a prefix with a high tone).

Tones apparently also have a habit of moving around: in Somali, for example, you can't have a high tone at the end of a phrase, so it gets moved to the penultimate syllable if a syllable with a high tone ends up in phrase final position.

One thing to think about as well is that the phonological theory of tones I'm familiar with analyses them as on a separate 'tier' of the representation of the word, so that the string of tones is separate from the other segments of the word underlyingly, and is then linked to appropriate tone bearing units in the surface form.

_________________
Languages!
Native: Proficient: Decent: Have dabbled in:

Version 0.1!

Added the obligatory contour principle to the phonology, but kept the tone system otherwise very simple. Not really any other changes.

_________________
| | | (Nahuatl) | (Sanskrit & Pali) (Yaghan) | (Antregabua)
CrazyEttin's Lair

Cool! Glad to have been able to offer some useful feedback

_________________
Languages!
Native: Proficient: Decent: Have dabbled in:

Two mid tones can occur consecutively in a single word, right?
...
If you suffix a high-tone suffix onto a high-tone-ending base, why do you change the suffix's tone to low instead of to mid?
If you suffix a low-tone suffix onto a low-tone-ending base, why do you change the suffix's tone to high instead of to mid?
If you prefix a high-tone prefix onto a high-tone-beginning base, why do you change the prefix's tone to low instead of to mid?
etc.
...
Why did you choose to change the suffix's tone rather than move the base's ending tone earlier into the base? Similarly, why did you choose to change the prefix's tone rather than move the base's initial tone later into the base?
...
I am not saying the choices you made are unnaturalistic nor unrealistic; far from it! I'm only asking why you made the decisions you did make. Your reasons may have been purely aesthetic.

_________________
I am not responsible for the accuracy of my sources; they're responsible for their own mistakes, if any, and also responsible for defending their own statements if you disagree with them.

unaesthetic

_________________
Up in blue sky silly blimp goes by
Where it come from where it go
Ziggy-Zaggy it fly high

Because if there are two endings, eg. -ang and -áng, they would be identical if -áng changed to -ang instead of -àng when following a high tone.



Because the tone is phonemic, so moving it around would create serious confusion. The changing of tone from low to high or high to low in endings and prefixes doesn't create confusion, since only two tones contrast in those (Eg. you can have -ang and either -áng or àng, but never all of the three).



Actually my reasons were mostly to keep the system simple, since i've never created a tonal conlang before. In the next version of the lang, which i'm currently working on, i'm simplifying it even more into a pitch accent system.

_________________
| | | (Nahuatl) | (Sanskrit & Pali) (Yaghan) | (Antregabua)
CrazyEttin's Lair

That's a nice lang, phonology is silly but it's meant to be.
Expressing grammatical meanings by tones is a nice idea I have been planning to employ, too.
Have yoy got acquainted with Nilo-Saharan languages. I've heared they are crazy.

- How is your vowel allophony? Are /r/ and /v/ allophones of the closed vowel?
Does /a/ have any allophony?

- You said you are scrapping the tone system, but I still ask about your 0.1 version: how is the stress realised? Normally it is the tone that makes a syllable stressed. Your stress system is by the way very Finnish-y (my all langs have that).

-The plural marker was a line above something. What does it represent?

The only thing i know about them is that they're crazy.



Yes, [ɹ] & [β] are allophones of /ɰ/ (Or /ɯ/, if you prefer). /ɑ/ has no allophony.



The stress is realised as a dynamic accent. And yes, it's very finnish-y, i tried to avoid phonemic stress to keep the phonology ridiculously minimal, and first syllable just seems a good "default" position for the stress.



Lengthening of the syllable nucleus.

_________________
| | | (Nahuatl) | (Sanskrit & Pali) (Yaghan) | (Antregabua)
CrazyEttin's Lair

Thanks, CrazyEttin.

_________________
I am not responsible for the accuracy of my sources; they're responsible for their own mistakes, if any, and also responsible for defending their own statements if you disagree with them.

And Version 1 is finally here!

Why Version 1 instead of Version 0.2, you might ask.
Simple. I change major version number every time i have to scrap the whole vocabulary because of changes in the language.

...And yes, i will complete the parts about indefinite pronouns and subordinate clauses when i'm not so busy studying (=Trying to avoid studying).

Constructive criticism is very welcome.

_________________
| | | (Nahuatl) | (Sanskrit & Pali) (Yaghan) | (Antregabua)
CrazyEttin's Lair

What does mean?
Does this mean all conjunctions are roots, or does it mean all roots are conjunctions?


What does mean?
How can something that's never marked on nouns, be marked by adding something to the noun suffix?

_________________
I am not responsible for the accuracy of my sources; they're responsible for their own mistakes, if any, and also responsible for defending their own statements if you disagree with them.

Group "Root morphemes" contains the group "Free morphemes" which is identical to the group "Conjunctions".



What i meant with that is that since adverbs and adjectives are fully interchangeable, and word in absolutive, when used as modifiers, can modify both nouns (As genitive) and verbs (As locative), i wanted to say that ablative and lative can only modify verbs, and using them to modify nouns would just be ungrammatical. Now that you pointed it out, i see that i worded that very poorly in the pdf, sorry.

_________________
| | | (Nahuatl) | (Sanskrit & Pali) (Yaghan) | (Antregabua)
CrazyEttin's Lair

Where is the phone(me) inventary table?
How does your assimilating "vowel" assimilate to the glottal stop?

Why do you say your syllabic nucleus is not a vowel (the not vowel one)?
ɰ, ɯ are the same sound. It's just about the position in the syllable. ɯ is a coda, and ɰ is an onset. I can be wrong.


Because you are making an odd phonology, I can't help suggesting the bilarial trill /ʙ/ (the horse stopping sound). It could be allophonic variation too, with [r] maybe.

There isn't a phoneme inventory table, everything is in the text of the phonology chapter.
The syllabic consonant doesn't assimilate to the glottal stop, it's just [ʔɰ]. It's the only exception to that rule.



I know, but since every other allophone of that phoneme is written in IPA with a "consonant letter", i thought it would look better if i used ɰ.



No, there's enough allophony as it is.
Also, for some weird reason trill consonants are extremely hard for me to pronounce, and i like to be able to pronounce my conlangs.

_________________
| | | (Nahuatl) | (Sanskrit & Pali) (Yaghan) | (Antregabua)
CrazyEttin's Lair

You *can* be wrong, but not necessarily. According to the well-known online encyclopaedia, it may depend on the language:

_________________
constructedlanguages.net

Made a script for Chángtagxmta:

•Example
•Font

The script is based on latin alphabet, modified to better suit carving on stone and wood, the primary writing media of the Antregabua, and it's used only very rarely when writing on paper or other media.

And yes, i consider this a form of latin alphabet. If blackletter counts as latin, then this one definitely counts too.

_________________
| | | (Nahuatl) | (Sanskrit & Pali) (Yaghan) | (Antregabua)
CrazyEttin's Lair

What about a grammar of one?