My Newest lang

A forum for all topics related to constructed languages
Post Reply
User avatar
Omzinesý
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4082
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 08:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

My Newest lang

Post by Omzinesý »

I have "accompleshed" some messages on this lang, so I thought to gather them in one place.

- Triconsonental roots, vowels express grammatical meanings
- compuound words have six radicals and their own vowel pattern different from that of any of the parts
- poly-synthetic
- two genders, masculine and feminine, differentiated by the stress, on the final syllable in feminines and on the penultimate one in masculines
- four noun cases, but only one core case
- verbs inflect in evidentiality/mood: ego-phoric, true, opinion
- adjectives are verbs in the relative inflection
- Underlyingly simple phonotax CV(C), but unstressed vowels can have elision

Most complex syntax:
[topic phrase][incorp.obj verb argument][adverb]
Omzinesý wrote:My new language project:

The verb allowes only ONE nominal argument, but the subject can be made an external topic "noun, it-verbs noun". One extra argument can be incorporated in the verb "noun, it-noun-verbs noun". So there can be quite many semantic nouns, however.
The whole "verb noun" verb phrase has only one stress on the last syllable like French.

This is a tri-consonental language and the incorporated noun is takes as the consonental radicals only, so a verb with an incorporated noun is NaNNaVVaV (where N is a radical of the noun and V is a radical of the verb)
Xing wrote:
Omzinesý wrote:My new language project:

The verb allowes only ONE nominal argument, but the subject can be made an external topic "noun, it-verbs noun". One extra argument can be incorporated in the verb "noun, it-noun-verbs noun".
Can the only nominal argument be both subject and object? What about indirect and/or secondary object? Can only subjects be topicalised?

This reminds me of how things work in some polysynthetic languages - in which, according to one analysis, verbs never take overt arguments, but all "arguments" are actually dislocated. (So that "Peter likes that girl" would be rendered as "That girl, he-likes-her, Peter", or something like that.)

How do you distinguish verb arguments from topicalised phrases? How do you handle, for example, reflexive contructions? ("Mary hit herself"; "John sent a letter to himself"?)
Omzinesý wrote:These are just preliminary thoughts but...

The one argument can be what we call subject in European languages. The language uses a kind of 'balanced passive strategy' i.e. the function of the argument is defined by verb form. Subject and object are not the best terms for the language but both the actor and undergoer arguments can be either external topics or arguments in the verb phrase. Pronominal affixes mark their roles. Focus can also appear in a cleft structure "It's bread I'm eating." Topic comes before the verb and is separated by a pause/comma.
Ditransitive stractures must either be incorporated "Boyfriend gift-gave Mary." or two clauses are used "Boyfriend, he-gave gift. It-got Mary." I think reflexive will be morphological.

A new polysynthetic lang.
Omzinesý wrote:My newest (still unnamed) canlang has the following noun cases.
It has only one core case.

Direct (maybe still called nominative in grammars) - subject, objec, and normally a clause-external topic
Locative - any adverbial; place, time, manner... that is not an argument of the verb
Vocative
Exclamative (Systemzwang called it so) - attracts rearers attention to an object or person "Hey, look, a bird", can be an external object too
My meta-thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5760
User avatar
Omzinesý
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4082
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 08:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: My Newest lang

Post by Omzinesý »

Code: Select all

Voiceless stops: p t k ʔ
Voiced obstruents: b-β, d-ð d͡ʒ-ʒ g-ɣ ɢ-ʁ* 
Implosives: ɓ ɗ ɗ͡ʒ ɠ
Nasals m n ŋ
Liquids: l ɾ
Fricatives: s ʃ ɧ χ h-f**
Semi-vowels: j w
Edit: Added χ and h-f that I had forgotten

*Voiced obstruents are plosives word-initially, after nasals and when there are two of them in line.
**[f] before rounded vowels /o/ and /u/, [h] everywhere else
All consonants, except χ and ɧ that were historically aspirated k and ʃ, have an "aspirated pair" written Ch. It causes a following vowel to have breathy voice. If there is no vowel following, the consonant is like its "unaspirated pair". "Aspiration" is still phonemically a feature of the consonant.

Wowels: (Accidentally quite English-y)

Code: Select all

/ij/[i:] /aj/[ai] /uw/[u:] /aw/[au]*
/i/[ɪ] /u/[ʊ]
/ɛ/[ɛ] /ɔ/[ɔ]
/a/[a]
The diphtongs of the first line sometimes behave like V+C and sometimes like V.
My meta-thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5760
Ambrisio
greek
greek
Posts: 475
Joined: 31 Jan 2013 07:48

Re: My Newest lang

Post by Ambrisio »

Neat!

I can't imagine what an aspirated implosive would sound like. I guess that it really isn't possible to produce aspirated implosives, because otherwise, they would have shown up -- in 4 or maybe even all 5 POAs! -- in Sindhi. Generally, I found Indian phonologies very systematic (with the possible exception of Tamil -- oddly enough, Tamil phonology feels more Australian than Indian, at least to me). Perhaps that stems from the tradition of Panini.
User avatar
Omzinesý
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4082
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 08:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: My Newest lang

Post by Omzinesý »

Yes, I think aspirated implosives are phonetically impossible, too.
Even phonetical voiced aspirated consonants are very rare (are they even possible to produce) and, in practice, what are called aspirated voiced consonants are breathy voice of the following vowel.

In this language, aspiration (or should maybe be said 'causes breathy voice') is PHONEMICALLY a feature of the consonants. PHONETICALLY, it is feature of the vowels, mostly. I'm not sure if the voiceless "aspirated" plosive should really be aspirated, as well as cause the breathy voice.

Historically they were real aspirates, but it can be that implosives cannot be aspirated in the proto-language, and the extension of the feature of beathy voice to them happened after it had ceased to be real aspiration, phonetically.

Thank you for the comment, maybe I should call them breathy voiced instead of aspirated.

The natlang that inspires this phonology is actually Zulu http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zulu_language#Consonants

Tamili is not an Aryan language, so it doesn't have an Aryan phonology.
- Aspiration is very PIE.
- Retroflexes are very Dravidan.
My meta-thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5760
User avatar
Click
runic
runic
Posts: 2785
Joined: 21 Jan 2012 12:17

Re: My Newest lang

Post by Click »

Omzinesý wrote:Tamili is not an Aryan language, so it doesn't have an Aryan phonology.
  1. It's Tamil, not Tamili.
  2. No one except you mentioned an Aryan phonology.
User avatar
Omzinesý
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4082
Joined: 27 Aug 2010 08:17
Location: nowhere [naʊhɪɚ]

Re: My Newest lang

Post by Omzinesý »

Click wrote:
Omzinesý wrote:Tamili is not an Aryan language, so it doesn't have an Aryan phonology.
  1. It's Tamil, not Tamili.
  2. No one except you mentioned an Aryan phonology.
Finns always put i at the end of every loan word.

Indian sprachbundi is mess of Aryan and Dravidan features.
My meta-thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5760
User avatar
Click
runic
runic
Posts: 2785
Joined: 21 Jan 2012 12:17

Re: My Newest lang

Post by Click »

Omzinesý wrote:Finns always put i at the end of every loan word.
This is English, not Finnish.
Omzinesý wrote:Indian sprachbundi is mess of Aryan and Dravidan features.
OK.
Post Reply