vo1dwalk3r wrote: ↑20 Feb 2018 04:40
Also dropping word-final schwas might be problematic with words like podmǝ...
We could have metathesis in those cases. That would be the exception. Thanks for the document, much appreciated.
vo1dwalk3r wrote: ↑20 Feb 2018 04:40
Also dropping word-final schwas might be problematic with words like podmǝ...
idov wrote: ↑20 Feb 2018 16:59 If it isn't too late to give suggestions:
X. Let's develop a comitative case. Ossetic has it, and an Indo-European language could benefit from it.
X2. θs t͡ʃθs tx > t͡s ʂt͡s tx. The last one could become t͡ɕ or tʰ instead, but that isn't really hardening it. Alternatively, we could go back in time and make a subclause to Grassman's law to avoid it or other clusters in the first place.
Otherwise, ignore this.
I'm on my phone now, and I haven't looked at the document since this morning, but from what I remember, it looks great! Excellent job, as usual! A few minor things, though:vo1dwalk3r wrote: ↑20 Feb 2018 04:40 Also, I've tried to do a bit more of the declension system, which I've documented in a new and neater document here. I've tried to make it as clear as possible so we can see the patterns between nouns.
Ah, yeah I need to fix some ʃ's. I'm not really sure what to do with orthographizing /dʐ dʑ/; I originally had ⟨ǰ j⟩, but I felt like /dʐ/ was way to common so I switched to ⟨j⟩. Maybe we could do ⟨ǵ⟩ for the palatal, or go back to how it originally was. Probably we should vote on the orthography too, maybe other people can come up with their own romanizations.shimobaatar wrote: ↑21 Feb 2018 04:04 I think there were a few instances of, for example, /ʃ/ instead of /ʂ/ or /ɕ/. Also, might I request we find a way to distinguish orthographically between the two voiced affricates? I also remember being unclear in some cases regarding which stems listed for some nouns were used with which suffixes. That may have just been because I only got a chance to look over the document quickly, though. Similarly, some of the suffixes had question marks next to them or parts in parentheses, and I wasn't sure what those were meant to indicate.
The laryngeal lengthening rule does apply to both syllabic consonants and vowels, I should've specified. Otherwise, I think I would apply the iy > ī rule intervocalically but we could vote on that. I'm also not super sure about syllable boundaries, but what you have seems reasonable, although the stresses would shift. I would've had: /ˈoɪ̯.nas dwoː ˈtriː.as ˈka.two.ras ˈpin.ka switʂ ˈsapt.mǝ ˈatʂ.toːʊ̯ ˈniʊ̯.nǝ ˈdiʂ.mǝ/.shimobaatar wrote: ↑21 Feb 2018 05:16 Based on the sound changes and orthography in vo1dwalk3r's document, here are the numbers again:
*óynos > oynas /ˈojnas/ óynas "one"
*dwóh₁ > dwo /dwo/ "two"
*tréyes > triyas /ˈtrijas/ "three"
*kʷetwóres > katworas /kaˈtworas/ katwóras "four"
*pénkʷe > pinka /ˈpinka/ "five"
*swéḱs > swič /swit͡ʂ/ "six"
*septḿ̥ > saptmë /saptˈmə/ "seven"
*oḱtṓw > ačtōw /at͡ʂˈtoːw/ "eight"
*h₁néwn̥ > niwnë /ˈniwnə/ "nine"
*déḱm̥ > dišmë /ˈdiʂmə/ "ten"
A few notes:
I assumed that "S̩H > S̩̄" doesn't apply to vowels, just syllabic consonants.
I assumed that "sʃ ʃs > ʃ" also apples to /t͡ʃs/.
I assumed that "iy īy > ī" doesn't apply intervocalically.
I made some guesses about syllable boundaries.
vo1dwalk3r, let me know if you interpreted these rules differently, or if there's anything else I missed or assumed incorrectly. If so, "two", "three", and "six" might instead be dwō /dwoː/, trīas /ˈtriːas/, and swičs /swit͡ʂs/.
No worries! I'm sure we all understand that real life has to come first.vo1dwalk3r wrote: ↑26 Feb 2018 19:16 Sorry I haven't been super active recently, I've been quite busy but I should have more free time now. Although, getting so into this project has sort of backfired, since I've started my own IE language on the side haha. I've also been reading Fortson's Indo-European Language and Culture, which will hopefully give a better perspective on all this.
I do like <ǰ j> for /d͡ʐ d͡ʑ/, but that's a valid point about the frequency of /d͡ʐ/. Something like /t͡ʂ d͡ʐ t͡ɕ d͡ʑ/ <c j ḱ ǵ> could work. We probably should vote on the orthography, though, seeing as voting is the whole point of collablangs.vo1dwalk3r wrote: ↑26 Feb 2018 19:16 Ah, yeah I need to fix some ʃ's. I'm not really sure what to do with orthographizing /dʐ dʑ/; I originally had ⟨ǰ j⟩, but I felt like /dʐ/ was way to common so I switched to ⟨j⟩. Maybe we could do ⟨ǵ⟩ for the palatal, or go back to how it originally was. Probably we should vote on the orthography too, maybe other people can come up with their own romanizations.
Ah, got it! Yeah, we should definitely vote on those.vo1dwalk3r wrote: ↑26 Feb 2018 19:16 The parentheses around the -i in the locative singular is there because it's constructed both ways, with and without. In fact there are a lot of places where we should vote on which noun ending we're going to use (using this for the various reconstructions):
Spoiler:
What do you mean?vo1dwalk3r wrote: ↑26 Feb 2018 19:16 Alternatively, it might be interesting to do something slightly differently than what's reconstructed.
Oh, I totally forgot about the stress shifts. And yeah, we certainly have a lot to think about.vo1dwalk3r wrote: ↑26 Feb 2018 19:16 The laryngeal lengthening rule does apply to both syllabic consonants and vowels, I should've specified. Otherwise, I think I would apply the iy > ī rule intervocalically but we could vote on that. I'm also not super sure about syllable boundaries, but what you have seems reasonable, although the stresses would shift. I would've had: /ˈoɪ̯.nas dwoː ˈtriː.as ˈka.two.ras ˈpin.ka switʂ ˈsapt.mǝ ˈatʂ.toːʊ̯ ˈniʊ̯.nǝ ˈdiʂ.mǝ/.
One last thing: apparently the PIE pitch accent is hard to reconstruct and Ancient Greek and Sanskrit sometimes disagree on where it was located. We have a couple of options, we could not worry about it and just go with the reconstructions given, try to align to one of the two, or not align exactly with either in all cases (I don't think this is too much of a problem though in most cases). Once we get these last details all figured out I'll probably start my declensions document over so it's all consistent.