You're fine, most of Russia and Central Europe is below 500m. Unless you don't like it in which case just add an igneous province somewhere.Ahzoh wrote:*sigh* Though my map still looks topgraphically bare compared to that map of the Earth I reference. It seems that most of the Earth is either at sea level or above 500m.
What did you accomplish today? [2011–2019]
- gestaltist
- mayan
- Posts: 1617
- Joined: 11 Feb 2015 11:23
Re: What did you accomplish today?
Re: What did you accomplish today?
@kiwikami: I love your work!
@gestaltist: Glad to see you back!
I have started writing about the place where two of my languages are spoken. This falls under worldbuilding rather than making languages, but I thought it was worth posting here. There's only basic historical stuff as of now, but I hope to start writing about culture soon.
Thoughts and comments appreciated.
@gestaltist: Glad to see you back!
I have started writing about the place where two of my languages are spoken. This falls under worldbuilding rather than making languages, but I thought it was worth posting here. There's only basic historical stuff as of now, but I hope to start writing about culture soon.
Thoughts and comments appreciated.
Re: What did you accomplish today?
It's fine I guess. Just keep in mind that large, flat areas usually facilitate the spread of only few languages and deteriorate the change for smaller languages to survive.Ahzoh wrote:*sigh* Though my map still looks topgraphically bare compared to that map of the Earth I reference. It seems that most of the Earth is either at sea level or above 500m.
Wipe the glass. This is the usual way to start, even in the days, day and night, only a happy one.
Re: What did you accomplish today?
Eh? You're saying there will be less languages and they'll change slower?Iyionaku wrote:It's fine I guess. Just keep in mind that large, flat areas usually facilitate the spread of only few languages and deteriorate the change for smaller languages to survive.Ahzoh wrote:*sigh* Though my map still looks topgraphically bare compared to that map of the Earth I reference. It seems that most of the Earth is either at sea level or above 500m.
- Thrice Xandvii
- runic
- Posts: 2698
- Joined: 25 Nov 2012 10:13
- Location: Carnassus
Re: What did you accomplish today?
I coined some new words/characters late last night early this AM. they are related in structure: one is for the verb "to sleep" and the other is for the noun "night, darkness." The second character, when it is used with a different classifier, takes on the meaning of "fear" instead. I like the idea of characters having different but somewhat related meanings based on classifier, or something similar. Also, most characters serve double duty as both nouns and verbs and depend on context.
- Frislander
- mayan
- Posts: 2088
- Joined: 14 May 2016 18:47
- Location: The North
Re: What did you accomplish today?
That latter is a typo, it clearly should be "chance", but for the first point yes, since flatter topography encourages mobility and nomadism, both of which result in a lower population density and hence fewer languages.Ahzoh wrote:Eh? You're saying there will be less languages and they'll change slower?Iyionaku wrote:It's fine I guess. Just keep in mind that large, flat areas usually facilitate the spread of only few languages and deteriorate the change for smaller languages to survive.Ahzoh wrote:*sigh* Though my map still looks topgraphically bare compared to that map of the Earth I reference. It seems that most of the Earth is either at sea level or above 500m.
Re: What did you accomplish today?
Exactly, it should be "chance" like Frislander said. Sorry for creating confusion.
Wipe the glass. This is the usual way to start, even in the days, day and night, only a happy one.
Re: What did you accomplish today?
Well all the areas indicated as grayish-brownish are not quite a flat plain as there is still potentially 300m of difference in elevation.Frislander wrote:That latter is a typo, it clearly should be "chance", but for the first point yes, since flatter topography encourages mobility and nomadism, both of which result in a lower population density and hence fewer languages.Ahzoh wrote:Eh? You're saying there will be less languages and they'll change slower?Iyionaku wrote:It's fine I guess. Just keep in mind that large, flat areas usually facilitate the spread of only few languages and deteriorate the change for smaller languages to survive.Ahzoh wrote:*sigh* Though my map still looks topgraphically bare compared to that map of the Earth I reference. It seems that most of the Earth is either at sea level or above 500m.
Re: What did you accomplish today?
Fontifying a script for Lek-Tsaro. These are consonant pairs, and most of them were auto-generated by a script.
Right now, I'm having trouble with vowel diacritics. Not only are there a whopping 143 of them, but LibreOffice seems to clip them. I changed the ascender height from 800 to 1000 to adjust and put the diacritic in the y=800 to 1000 range, but that was to no avail.
If it helps, I'm using FontForge. If any of you want to help, I can send the .sfd file.
Edit: derp, turns out I had a copy of the font in both ~/.local/share/fonts and /usr/share/fonts. I was using a command to copy the .otf files into the latter location, but LibreOffice was reading from the former.
The creator of ŋarâþ crîþ v9.
Re: What did you accomplish today?
Does coining sleep work better than counting sheeps...Thrice Xandvii wrote:I coined some new words/characters late last night early this AM. they are related in structure: one is for the verb "to sleep"
Last edited by lsd on 24 Oct 2017 07:20, edited 1 time in total.
- Thrice Xandvii
- runic
- Posts: 2698
- Joined: 25 Nov 2012 10:13
- Location: Carnassus
- Dormouse559
- moderator
- Posts: 2945
- Joined: 10 Nov 2012 20:52
- Location: California
Re: What did you accomplish today?
I figured out the Silvish word for "hot", which turns out to be hòt /ˈhɔt/. It has other forms, but if you want to say a man is feverish, sexy or horny, that's the one you should go with.
Re: What did you accomplish today?
Oooh, what's the etymology for that if I may ask?Dormouse559 wrote:I figured out the Silvish word for "hot", which turns out to be hòt /ˈhɔt/. It has other forms, but if you want to say a man is feverish, sexy or horny, that's the one you should go with.
Native:
Learning: , , ,
Zhér·dûn a tonal Germanic conlang
old stuff: Цiски | Noattȯč | Tungōnis Vīdīnōs
Learning: , , ,
Zhér·dûn a tonal Germanic conlang
old stuff: Цiски | Noattȯč | Tungōnis Vīdīnōs
- Dormouse559
- moderator
- Posts: 2945
- Joined: 10 Nov 2012 20:52
- Location: California
Re: What did you accomplish today?
Latin calidus, as it happens, which is part of what surprised me.ixals wrote:Oooh, what's the etymology for that if I may ask?
Re: What did you accomplish today?
I am curious how you got "hòt" from that.Dormouse559 wrote:Latin calidus, as it happens, which is part of what surprised me.ixals wrote:Oooh, what's the etymology for that if I may ask?
Re: What did you accomplish today?
I bet it's "'ka.li.dum > 'kʰaɫ.do > 'xawt > 'hɔt".Ælfwine wrote:I am curious how you got "hòt" from that.
Is Silvish #k > h a regularly change? It's definitely a new one, I don't remember seeing it before. But "hòt" sounds very unique though!
Native:
Learning: , , ,
Zhér·dûn a tonal Germanic conlang
old stuff: Цiски | Noattȯč | Tungōnis Vīdīnōs
Learning: , , ,
Zhér·dûn a tonal Germanic conlang
old stuff: Цiски | Noattȯč | Tungōnis Vīdīnōs
- Dormouse559
- moderator
- Posts: 2945
- Joined: 10 Nov 2012 20:52
- Location: California
Re: What did you accomplish today?
Not quite. This form comes from the nominative masculine singular.ixals wrote:I bet it's "'ka.li.dum > 'kʰaɫ.do > 'xawt > 'hɔt".Ælfwine wrote:I am curious how you got "hòt" from that.
There is a regular change, but it's k > h / _a. It corresponds to French k > ʃ / _a. The result of the change is new, but it's been there in some form for a while. I'll unpack it below.ixals wrote:Is Silvish #k > h a regularly change? It's definitely a new one, I don't remember seeing it before. But "hòt" sounds very unique though!
The sound changes go something like this (starting from Vulgar Latin). The exact order might end up being a little different, but the result should be the same.
ˈkaldos > ˈkalts > ˈtɕalts > ˈtɕalt > ˈɕalt > ˈɕawt > ˈɕɔt > ˈhɔt
Re: What did you accomplish today?
Would never have guessed.Dormouse559 wrote:Not quite. This form comes from the nominative masculine singular.ixals wrote:I bet it's "'ka.li.dum > 'kʰaɫ.do > 'xawt > 'hɔt".Ælfwine wrote:I am curious how you got "hòt" from that.
There is a regular change, but it's k > h / _a. It corresponds to French k > ʃ / _a. The result of the change is new, but it's been there in some form for a while. I'll unpack it below.ixals wrote:Is Silvish #k > h a regularly change? It's definitely a new one, I don't remember seeing it before. But "hòt" sounds very unique though!
The sound changes go something like this (starting from Vulgar Latin). The exact order might end up being a little different, but the result should be the same.
ˈkaldos > ˈkalts > ˈtɕalts > ˈtɕalt > ˈɕalt > ˈɕawt > ˈɕɔt > ˈhɔt
Is this word normally derived from the nominative? I have [cç] where you have [h] it seems. (This word appears to be "tyalc" in my Pannonian Romance.)
- Dormouse559
- moderator
- Posts: 2945
- Joined: 10 Nov 2012 20:52
- Location: California
Re: What did you accomplish today?
Hmm, I'm not sure if you're asking about Silvish or Romance languages generally. Well, in Silvish most inherited adjectives derive their forms from the nominative, accusative and dative. In modern Romance languages, the word form comes from the accusative, but looking back, Old French and Old Provençal maintained the Latin nominative alongside the accusative.Ælfwine wrote:Is this word normally derived from the nominative?
Ah, okay. What does the <c> represent?Ælfwine wrote:I have [cç] where you have [h] it seems. (This word appears to be "tyalc" in my Pannonian Romance.)
Re: What did you accomplish today?
All three? Interesting.Dormouse559 wrote:Hmm, I'm not sure if you're asking about Silvish or Romance languages generally. Well, in Silvish most inherited adjectives derive their forms from the nominative, accusative and dative.
Okay, good to know. Then I guess my form shouldn't be tyalc but tyald [ˈcaɫd].Dormouse559 wrote:In modern Romance languages, the word form comes from the accusative, but looking back, Old French and Old Provençal maintained the Latin nominative alongside the accusative.
It is [t͡s] like in many Slavic languages, and Hungarian.Dormouse559 wrote:Ah, okay. What does the <c> represent?