The Collablang Take II (Check first post oft)
-
- runic
- Posts: 2518
- Joined: 13 Aug 2010 18:57
The Collablang Take II (Check first post oft)
Alright, because we re starting "fresh", we may as well have a new thread to work on. We can do this like we did, or we could blow through some of the phonetics/phonotactics/what-have-you quickly. So far, we are looking at isolating.
Phonology
Consonants
/m m̥ n̥ n ŋ v~ʋ t k tθ~ts s ʃ h j ɰ l r tɬ/
<m mh nh n ng v t k tz s sh h j w l r tl>
Phonology
Consonants
/m m̥ n̥ n ŋ v~ʋ t k tθ~ts s ʃ h j ɰ l r tɬ/
<m mh nh n ng v t k tz s sh h j w l r tl>
Last edited by Thakowsaizmu on 15 Apr 2011 03:18, edited 1 time in total.
-
- MVP
- Posts: 1686
- Joined: 15 Aug 2010 20:03
- Location: California
- Contact:
Re: The Collablang Take II
Aha! I was thinking by fresh we meant just kind of with the grammar, but if were starting completely from scratch, it would probably be better to lay down some guidelines for the phonology, so we don't just run wild so to say.
-
- runic
- Posts: 2518
- Joined: 13 Aug 2010 18:57
Re: The Collablang Take II
We kind of went wild and then edited it all to fit later. But yeah, general guide lines are good.roninbodhisattva wrote:Aha! I was thinking by fresh we meant just kind of with the grammar, but if were starting completely from scratch, it would probably be better to lay down some guidelines for the phonology, so we don't just run wild so to say.
Re: The Collablang Take II
Oh, so we're starting completely from scratch? I see :-).
-
- MVP
- Posts: 1686
- Joined: 15 Aug 2010 20:03
- Location: California
- Contact:
Re: The Collablang Take II
Since we're doing something isolating, I think might be interesting to not do the normal kind of east Asian phonology. Then again, con-phonologies with a shit ton of stuff packed in...so maybe keep it minimal without making it...asiany. Perhaps an isolating language with very conked consonant clusters?
Re: The Collablang Take II
Yeah, I was thinking the same actually.roninbodhisattva wrote:Since we're doing something isolating, I think might be interesting to not do the normal kind of east Asian phonology. Then again, con-phonologies with a shit ton of stuff packed in...so maybe keep it minimal without making it...asiany. Perhaps an isolating language with very conked consonant clusters?
EDIT
I quite liked this vowel inventory that you posted in the random phonology thread, Ronin:
-
- MVP
- Posts: 1686
- Joined: 15 Aug 2010 20:03
- Location: California
- Contact:
Re: The Collablang Take II
Yeah! It'd be cool to use that one...
I'd like to vote for no voiced stops.
I'd like to vote for no voiced stops.
Re: The Collablang Take II
And I'd like to vote for unvoiced nasals (as well as voiced) .roninbodhisattva wrote:Yeah! It'd be cool to use that one...
I'd like to vote for no voiced stops.
Even if they're just allophones.
-
- runic
- Posts: 2518
- Joined: 13 Aug 2010 18:57
Re: The Collablang Take II
Actually I liked the vowels we had. But I'll be back in a bit.
- Ear of the Sphinx
- mayan
- Posts: 1587
- Joined: 23 Aug 2010 01:41
- Location: Nose of the Sun
Re: The Collablang Take II
It looks too Mandariny for me. I vote for glottalized stops and clicks.I'd like to vote for no voiced stops.
I'm for. :-)And I'd like to vote for unvoiced nasals (as well as voiced) .
What about adding some of [n̼ n̥̼ d̼ t̼ tʹ̼ ɹ̼ s̼ n̼ʲ n̥̼ʲ d̼ʲ t̼ʲ t̼ʹʲ ɹ̼ʲ s̼ʲ]?
Thrice the brinded cat hath mew'd.
-
- MVP
- Posts: 1686
- Joined: 15 Aug 2010 20:03
- Location: California
- Contact:
Re: The Collablang Take II
Oh god please no clicks. But voiceless nasals I could go for.
Re: The Collablang Take II
Ugh, sorry, I have to say no to the clicks as well.
Re: The Collablang Take II
So this is a thread to make a new conlang?
I could be with.
I could be with.
My meta-thread: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5760
-
- MVP
- Posts: 1686
- Joined: 15 Aug 2010 20:03
- Location: California
- Contact:
Re: The Collablang Take II
The voiceless nasals we could have arise from a h + nasal cluster, allophonically.
Re: The Collablang Take II
Yeah, I was thinking along those lines as well.roninbodhisattva wrote:The voiceless nasals we could have arise from a h + nasal cluster, allophonically.
Either that or when a nasal clusters with an unvoiced consonant.
But I like h + nasal better, so if everyone agrees, let's go with that.
-
- runic
- Posts: 2518
- Joined: 13 Aug 2010 18:57
Re: The Collablang Take II
I think we should go kind of minimal on the phonology. Kind of like we did for the other project, and then after a minimal thing is set up, throw in a few sounds that may have been missed but are a wanted by a creator.
Re: The Collablang Take II
I want to participate. Hey guys! :-D
I agree with Thak, but would much rather keep a minimal phonology all throughout. I really, really don't like complicated phonologies that are always being added to.
I agree with Thak, but would much rather keep a minimal phonology all throughout. I really, really don't like complicated phonologies that are always being added to.
Re: The Collablang Take II
I don't mind a minimal phonology.
To get the ball rolling: let's say that we'll use Ronin's vowel system, and then something like this for consonants: /m n (p) t k s ʃ h j l r/, with [m̥ n̥] as allophones of /m n/ when followed by /h/ or something.
And now everyone can suggest what they want to add or remove.
To get the ball rolling: let's say that we'll use Ronin's vowel system, and then something like this for consonants: /m n (p) t k s ʃ h j l r/, with [m̥ n̥] as allophones of /m n/ when followed by /h/ or something.
And now everyone can suggest what they want to add or remove.
Re: The Collablang Take II
Spoiler:
-
- runic
- Posts: 2518
- Joined: 13 Aug 2010 18:57
Re: The Collablang Take II
/K/
Although I really liked some of the vowels we had in the last one as well. Mostly /3`/
Also, word structure?
For now I say CV(C) maybe? Or even CV(n,m,nh,mh,t,k,lh) and retain our /s/ -> /t/ at the end?
Although I really liked some of the vowels we had in the last one as well. Mostly /3`/
Also, word structure?
For now I say CV(C) maybe? Or even CV(n,m,nh,mh,t,k,lh) and retain our /s/ -> /t/ at the end?