American English Derived Collablang!

[zyma]

1. B
2. A
3. D (Shimo's suggestion)

Hmm. It's like it's telling me something.

No one's forcing you to participate if you're not happy with the way things are going.

[idov]

I meant that my choices have literally been "BAD". It's self-deprecating humor. I am happy with the thread, but would like to see the fruits of our choices so far, as well as getting into the messy grammar like Nachtuil. I see no contradiction here.

[CarsonDaConlanger]

Hey guys, I'm back! Sorry for ghosting, things just got really hectic. On the plus side, I qualified to the state tournament in impromptu speaking!

1: C

Spoiler:

e>ɛ

2: B

Spoiler:

/a/ will not palatalize a consonant.

3: D(Shimo's)

Spoiler:

ɛ o a ǝ>Ø/_# unless it makes an illegal syllable.

This puts our vowel inventory at
/i u/
/e: o o:/
/ɛ ǝ/
/a/

Consonants are at
/p b t d k g/
/f θ ð s z ʃ ʒ ç x ɣ h/
/ʋ l j w/
/l ʎ/
/n m ŋ/
+palatalazation
Will come up with grammar questions soon.

[zyma]

Hey guys, I'm back! Sorry for ghosting, things just got really hectic. On the plus side, I qualified to the state tournament in impromptu speaking!

No worries at all! I'm sure we can all understand how life can be.

Also, congratulations!

[CarsonDaConlanger]

Also, congratulations!

Thanks!

---

Stop!
It's grammar time!

1. Should our grammar move towards being more synthetic, or isolating?
A.Synthetic
B.Isolating

Other questions will be based off of this.

[spanick]

1. A

[zyma]

1: a

[Nachtuil]

Hmmm....I wish we had an option C for about the same. I guess going in A direction is more interesting than remaining static.

1. B

[CarsonDaConlanger]

Results are in, we will be getting more synthetic.

---

Now for more questions:
1. Should we cliticize prepositions?
A) Yes
B) No
C) Only some

2. Should we add a dedicated future conjugation to verbs?
A) yes
B) No
C) Another idea

[idov]

1. C
2. A

[zyma]

1: c
2: a

[spanick]

1. A
2. A

[Nachtuil]

1. a
2. a

[Nachtuil]

We need someone to break the tie!

[Nachtuil]

I'll break the tie by changing my own vote. Instead of 1.a. 2.a I will go 1.c 2.a

[CarsonDaConlanger]

In that case, The results are:
1C
2A
We can move on to how the hell that will work.
1:
I am open to various suggestions for 1C. I have a few Ideas:
of
on
in
to
at(loc)
at(dat)
Once we have a bunch, we can vote on which ones. I will probably take the most popular 5~10 depending on how many there are. \
2: Future tense
Should it be
A) a contraction based on will
B) something else

[idov]

1. I think it would be the best to cliticize some that end in obstruents, so <of> and <at> among those listed, unless they don't anymore due to sound changes. They could be realized as [v] and [t] and assimilate in voicing to any obstruent that starts the next word. Prepositions that end in vowel could get an excrescent approximant so that <to us> and <through us> would be realized as [tuwʌs] and [θɹuwʌs] respectively.

Spoiler:

<as at of off through to> as well as combinations like <into> are my suggestions.

2. B From <gonna>. It has the advantage over <will> that it always stands next to the main verb.

[Nachtuil]

I need to think on this. What are all our prepositions looking like after the sound changes?

I feel as though the /t/ in "to" would stick around and be an excellent candidate for cliticization.

I think that is a good point about "gonna" that Idov makes.

[CarsonDaConlanger]

Ok, so what I have so far are these:
-t(to (dat))
-at(at (loc))
-as(as)
-v(of)
-f(off)
-nit(into)
I think we can just go ahead an use these.

---

I have to return my school computer tomorrow, and I have limited usage of the family computer, so I won't be able to continue moderating this collab. It's been really fun, and I love seeing where this is going. If there's someone who wants to do it, I would love to pass the torch.

[Nachtuil]

Honestly, that works for me. Shouldn't into become "int" though?