(Conlangs) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here [2010-2020]

[Davush]

What natlang does this griuskant sample audio recording sound like?

I'm curious to get some soundcheck from (linguistic ears of) other members here. Ignore the English bias within the voice pls. #shamelessadvertisement

Intonation and general sound remind me very much of Scandinavian. Was this an aesthetic you had in mind?

[Reyzadren]

To me, it sounds like Siwss German with a Scandinavian touch. This might be because of the accentuation patterns. It could also sound like Japanese, but the consonant clusters (there are some, right?) destroy that for me.

Yes, there are consonant clusters. The transcription, IPA, gloss and translation are available at the most recent post in the griuskant conlang thread.

Intonation and general sound remind me very much of Scandinavian. Was this an aesthetic you had in mind?

I did not strive for any natlang resemblance, but I don't mind it having the aesthetic of another known natlang. Anything in a conworld is bound to have some small similarity to something in the real world after all, intentionally or unintentionally.


Scandinavian from 2 people, huh? Cool~

[Shemtov]

Which of these systems for polypersonal agreement is more naturalistic?
The agent is a prefix and the object is a suffix or
There is a marker separating them, that denotes that the next affix is agreeing with the object

[sangi39]

Which of these systems for polypersonal agreement is more naturalistic?
The agent is a prefix and the object is a suffix or
There is a marker separating them, that denotes that the next affix is agreeing with the object

At first I would have said the first would be more "naturalistic", but I started thinking that you might be able to get away with the second one as well. I know some languages have explicit transitive morphemes, but I'm not actually sure how they work... *to the research*

[Vlürch]

What natlang does this griuskant sample audio recording sound like?

I'd say a cute cross between some Iranian language, some Slavic language and some Turkic language with a dose of Japanese and Korean thrown in. Sounds really nice. I don't really hear anything Scandinavian in it since that would just be due to the impression of it having pitch accent, which is found in Japanese, Korean, some Turkic languages and some Slavic languages, so basically most of the languages that it reminds me of anyway. If I had to say one language it makes me think the most of, I'd probably say Uyghur.

Which of these systems for polypersonal agreement is more naturalistic?
The agent is a prefix and the object is a suffix or
There is a marker separating them, that denotes that the next affix is agreeing with the object

I don't really know anything about polypersonal agreement, so take what I say with a grain of salt, but based on literally nothing except a misinformed gut feeling I'd say I think the former would make more sense if the language had SOV word order but the latter if it had any other word order. No idea why, though, so yeah...

[Pabappa]

I think polypersonal setups have different forms for the agent and patient, and often they are fused into a single morpheme. So no separation marker should be necessary. Also, id think the object would be closer to the stem of the verb, since objects are tied to their verbs while subjects are not.

[Shemtov]

I think polypersonal setups have different forms for the agent and patient, and often they are fused into a single morpheme. So no separation marker should be necessary. Also, id think the object would be closer to the stem of the verb, since objects are tied to their verbs while subjects are not.

I want the forms to be the same. Is that unattested?
Edit: l am basing my language on the Bantu languages, and for the most part, their subject and object morphed are the same, just separated by the TAM marker

[Reyzadren]

I'd say a cute cross between some Iranian language, some Slavic language and some Turkic language with a dose of Japanese and Korean thrown in. Sounds really nice. I don't really hear anything Scandinavian in it since that would just be due to the impression of it having pitch accent, which is found in Japanese, Korean, some Turkic languages and some Slavic languages, so basically most of the languages that it reminds me of anyway. If I had to say one language it makes me think the most of, I'd probably say Uyghur.

Slavic + Turkic languages? Well, griuskant has initial stress like Czech and has 8 similar vowels as Turkish does, so I guess those features might have latched on :P

Nice, thanks for all the replies.

[Mako]

I’m interested in designing a conlang that is suitable for Artificial Intelligence. However before doing so I’m interested in finding any existing conlangs that use a smallish number (500 to 1000) of root words to make compound nouns. I’m particularly interested in any conlang that makes compound nouns where the root words describe what the noun means. So if I’ve never seen the noun I can a very good idea what the noun means. If any one has any idea of existing conlang that make compound nouns with bounded morphemes I’d be appreciative if they leave a reply

Cheers Mako

[Pabappa]

https://mw.lojban.org/papri/gismu has about 1500, if my memory is accurate...

[k1234567890y]

I’m interested in designing a conlang that is suitable for Artificial Intelligence. However before doing so I’m interested in finding any existing conlangs that use a smallish number (500 to 1000) of root words to make compound nouns. I’m particularly interested in any conlang that makes compound nouns where the root words describe what the noun means. So if I’ve never seen the noun I can a very good idea what the noun means. If any one has any idea of existing conlang that make compound nouns with bounded morphemes I’d be appreciative if they leave a reply

Cheers Mako

I think I have done somethig similar more than once...I helped Ridley making Kavrinian...it now has 8000CWS entities, with 1692 non-derived entities(roots and affixes)

Lonmai Luna now has 6000+ CWS entities, with 2003 non-derived entities(roots and affixes)

Also, there's something called Globish, basically it is a reduced version of English with 1500 words

[holbuzvala]

So I've got an idea for an auxlang. I've noticed most auxlangs tend to go for the smallest possible phonetic inventory so that anyone can pronounce all of its words. However, I think this is not an appropriate way to go about it, as instead of having absolute sounds, one can have prototypical(? - this might not be the right word) sounds. For instance, you can say the phonology contains a /p/ and /b/ contrast; but depending on the speaker's original tongue this may manifest as a [ph]-[p] contrast, or a ejective-voiceless contrast etc. My groupings (allowed allophonic variation, in parentheses) and contrasts (dash-linked) thus far are as follows:

p-b
k-g
t-d

(w/v)
(j)
(s/ʃ/h/ç)

Now, based on this paradigm, do we think 1, it's worth including an '(l/r)' grouping?
and 2, should there be a voiced contrast between the sibilants to create a minimal pair of /s/ with /z/ (and their likenesses)?

[ixals]

So I've been trying to organise Cissian's consonant inventory into a table like the ones used in language grammars or Wikipedia articles but I don't know which approach to take. Should I be more superficial where everything is paired up but isn't the exact pronunciation (with actual phonemes listed below) like this? Or should I be precise and just do it like this? Or should I even leave out the soft consonants completely and treat them as allophones before /ʲa ʲe ʲi ʲo ʲu/ so it lines up with the Cyrillic script?

[Creyeditor]

I would do both. The best grammars always give a phoneme inventory and a segment inventory

[zyma]

I'd say go with both as well.

[Ælfwine]

I say go with the more broad approach, you could probably leave out the palatalization like you said as well.

[Void]

Can a nominative-accusative language derive from an absolutive-ergative proto-language?

Theoretically by making the passive tense into a regular present one, by some other eldritch means?

[k1234567890y]

Can a nominative-accusative language derive from an absolutive-ergative proto-language?

Theoretically by making the passive tense into a regular present one, by some other eldritch means?

yes, it is said that some Aleut-Eskimo languages are evolving into nominative languages. maybe you can do this: ergative-absolutive > neutral > nominative-accusative with differential object marking > full nominative-accusative language

as for the "making the passive tense into a regular present one, by some other eldritch means?" part, I am not sure.

[Birdlang]

How could I evolve this protolang?
/m n ŋ/ m n ŋ or m n ng
/p pʰ t tʰ k kʰ ʔ/ b p d t g k q or b p d t g k j
/f s ʂ ʐ~ɻ ɕ ç x h/ f s z r x j ĥ h or f s sh r x xy h xh
/l j ɥ w/ l y ÿ w or l y~i ÿ~ü w~u
/ɬ ʎ̝̊ ʟ̝̊/ Ɨ ⱡ ɫ or lh ly ll

/i y ʉ ɯ u e ø ɵ ɤ o ɛ œ ɞ ʌ ɔ a ɶ ɒ̈ ɑ ɒ/ plus length i ü ů ï u é ö ô e o è õ ø ŏ ò a ơ ä ɑ ɒ plus macron or i ue ui iu u e oe oh eu o ei ou ao oi oa a ee oo au aa plus : for length
/Ṽ/ Vƞ or Vnh
I’m trying to make 3-5 different languages out of thus

[eldin raigmore]

Can a nominative-accusative language derive from an absolutive-ergative proto-language?

Theoretically by making the passive tense into a regular present one, by some other eldritch means?

yes, it is said that some Aleut-Eskimo languages are evolving into nominative languages. maybe you can do this: ergative-absolutive > neutral > nominative-accusative with differential object marking > full nominative-accusative language

as for the "making the passive tense into a regular present one, by some other eldritch means?" part, I am not sure.

Is eldritch a voice? Or a case?