There are 13 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1a. tonogenesis rides again
From: Matthew Boutilier
1b. Re: tonogenesis rides again
From: Shair A
2. 30-Day Conlang: Day Ten; something completely different
From: Gary Shannon
3a. Inflecting nouns and pronouns for tense?
From: Gary Shannon
3b. Re: Inflecting nouns and pronouns for tense?
From: Wm Annis
3c. Re: Inflecting nouns and pronouns for tense?
From: Logan Kearsley
3d. Re: Inflecting nouns and pronouns for tense?
From: Roman Rausch
3e. Re: Inflecting nouns and pronouns for tense?
From: Njenfalgar
3f. Re: Inflecting nouns and pronouns for tense?
From: MorphemeAddict
4a. narrative tense evidentials
From: neo gu
4b. Re: narrative tense evidentials
From: Samuel Stutter
5. Kymna
From: Roman Rausch
6. New Conlang - Paqatyl
From: Jorge Melo
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1a. tonogenesis rides again
Posted by: "Matthew Boutilier" mbout...@nd.edu
Date: Wed Nov 10, 2010 11:53 am ((PST))
i have some ideas for tonogenesis. they aren't the standard voiceless cons.
> high tone, etc., but i think they're plausible so i thought i would
shamelessly post them and hope for comments.
in chronological order (if it matters; also, i'm using the pinyin numbers
for simplicity):
1) V: > V_1
e.g. lo:kam > lo1kam
basically, vowel length ceases to be phonemic (chronemic) and long vowels
are realized as ones with *high *pitch
2) VCVCV > V_4CCV
e.g. todumag > to4dmag ( > to4zma )
the syncope rule: wherever syncope occurs, the preceding vowel "compensates"
(to use a sufficiently vague term) by developing *falling* tone
3) VS > V_2
(S = semivowel)
e.g. pelwoi > pelwo2
basically, falling diphthongs become pure vowels with *rising* tone. yeah,
i know diphthongs =/= vowel+semivowel but here the difference is trivial
enough.
[4) none of the above - which will apply for most of the syllables in a big
word, and most monosyllabic words - implies no tone, or neutral tone, or
whatever.]
thoughts? does this make any sense whatsoever? should 2) and 3) be
reversed? wiki, fount of all knowledge, says that falling diphthongs often
have higher pitch on the more prominent first element ... but how universal
does this have to be?
thanks in advance.
matt
Messages in this topic (2)
________________________________________________________________________
1b. Re: tonogenesis rides again
Posted by: "Shair A" aeetlrcre...@gmail.com
Date: Wed Nov 10, 2010 2:09 pm ((PST))
I've done #1 in my conlang.
2010/11/10 Matthew Boutilier <mbout...@nd.edu>
> i have some ideas for tonogenesis. they aren't the standard voiceless
> cons.
> > high tone, etc., but i think they're plausible so i thought i would
> shamelessly post them and hope for comments.
>
> in chronological order (if it matters; also, i'm using the pinyin numbers
> for simplicity):
>
> 1) V: > V_1
> e.g. lo:kam > lo1kam
> basically, vowel length ceases to be phonemic (chronemic) and long vowels
> are realized as ones with *high *pitch
>
> 2) VCVCV > V_4CCV
> e.g. todumag > to4dmag ( > to4zma )
> the syncope rule: wherever syncope occurs, the preceding vowel
> "compensates"
> (to use a sufficiently vague term) by developing *falling* tone
>
> 3) VS > V_2
> (S = semivowel)
> e.g. pelwoi > pelwo2
> basically, falling diphthongs become pure vowels with *rising* tone. yeah,
> i know diphthongs =/= vowel+semivowel but here the difference is trivial
> enough.
>
> [4) none of the above - which will apply for most of the syllables in a big
> word, and most monosyllabic words - implies no tone, or neutral tone, or
> whatever.]
>
> thoughts? does this make any sense whatsoever? should 2) and 3) be
> reversed? wiki, fount of all knowledge, says that falling diphthongs often
> have higher pitch on the more prominent first element ... but how universal
> does this have to be?
>
> thanks in advance.
>
> matt
>
Messages in this topic (2)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2. 30-Day Conlang: Day Ten; something completely different
Posted by: "Gary Shannon" fizi...@gmail.com
Date: Wed Nov 10, 2010 3:01 pm ((PST))
Today's update is something completely different. To get a better feel
for the sound of the language I've been practicing speaking the
sentences with as natural a flow and rhythm as I can manage and some
of the sounds and some of the words just aren't working. So today's
project will be a minor overhaul of the lexicon and phonology. For
historical perspective I've made a complete copy of the page as it
appeared at the end of day nine.
The main page will get all of today's lexicon, phonology, and
morphology changes retroactively all the way back to day one. The
changes will also be applied to the cumulative dictionary pages, since
those need to reflect the latest state of the language.
The language is really beginning to develop a flow, and is beginning
to feel a bit more natural after ten continuous days of writing,
reading and talking to myself in it. Maybe after another week or two
of practice I might make an MP3 audio recording of part of the
translation text.
The language still doesn't have a name, though, and that kind of bums
me out, but I'm not just going to make up a name at random. The name
has to be "revealed" to me somehow in the process of doing
translations.
http://fiziwig.com/conlang/thirty_day.html
--gary
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3a. Inflecting nouns and pronouns for tense?
Posted by: "Gary Shannon" fizi...@gmail.com
Date: Wed Nov 10, 2010 7:33 pm ((PST))
The word order in my 30-day conlang puts the tense marking particle
immediately before the subject noun phrase or pronoun, and many of the
sentences I'm translating in the text I'm using have patterns like
(glossed in English) "Leave for the coast tomorrow will I." and "Told
me his secret did he."
As I talk to myself in conlang-X, and as my fluency improves, I'm
finding the natural tendency is to want to form contractions joining
the tense marker to the noun/pronoun because the same identical pairs
of tense+pronoun occur over and over, sentence after sentence. Those
pairs seem to be begging to be fused. Yet it seemed strange to
effectively mark the pronoun for tense until I recalled examples where
this is (sort of) done in English. Sentences like "I'll leave
tomorrow."; "I've seen him before.", attach the tense to the pronoun,
if only loosely. Now if I take the next step and actually fuse the
pair into a single word I could legitimately claim that I am
inflecting the tense marker for person, OR, it seems, I could just as
legitimately say that I am inflecting the pronoun for tense. The
situation is less ambiguous for nouns, where the only interpretation
is that I am inflecting the noun for tense.
What would make one interpretation of that phenomenon more
"legitimate" than the other? I rather like the idea of inflecting
nouns and pronouns for tense, not just because it seems a novel thing
to do, but because it seem like the "natural" thing to do in this
particular language. It's like those sentences are telling me that
this is how it "should" be.
Does the phenomenon of inflecting nouns and pronouns for tense exist
in any natlang? Is it too bizarre to consider? Or would it be an
evolutionary step worth pursuing?
Thoughts?
--gary
Messages in this topic (6)
________________________________________________________________________
3b. Re: Inflecting nouns and pronouns for tense?
Posted by: "Wm Annis" wm.an...@gmail.com
Date: Wed Nov 10, 2010 7:45 pm ((PST))
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 9:31 PM, Gary Shannon <fizi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Does the phenomenon of inflecting nouns and pronouns for tense exist
> in any natlang? Is it too bizarre to consider? Or would it be an
> evolutionary step worth pursuing?
It depends on what exactly you consider an inflection. It's not
entirely uncommon for certain things we'd consider inflections to
just be words with unusual accenting requirements. So, in
Chemehuevi personal pronouns often take the form of enclitics.
They must be attached to the end of some word, because they
don't have any accent of their own. But, unlike inflections that
are restricted by word class (only on a noun, only on a verb, etc),
these only care that they follow (i.e., are attached to) a content
word with an accent of its own.
I cannot recall any language that marks tense on pronouns, but
I have no trouble imagining a situation where enclitic tense
markers over time come to be restricted to pronouns.
--
wm
Messages in this topic (6)
________________________________________________________________________
3c. Re: Inflecting nouns and pronouns for tense?
Posted by: "Logan Kearsley" chronosur...@gmail.com
Date: Wed Nov 10, 2010 10:20 pm ((PST))
> Does the phenomenon of inflecting nouns and pronouns for tense exist
> in any natlang? Is it too bizarre to consider? Or would it be an
> evolutionary step worth pursuing?
I don't know about natlangs, but it exists in one of my conlangs. I
imagine it would start out with similar sort of development as
English, with tense/aspect morphemes just coincidentally being
associated with nouns, but the synchronic form leaves no good
interpretation other than that tense is carried on nouns. Any noun can
be marked for tense, and multiple nouns in the same clause can be
marked for different tenses, which allows for compact renderings of
things like "I expect to get used to it" (I-future probably like
it-indefinite) or "I like the way it used to be" (I-present like
it-past).
-l.
Messages in this topic (6)
________________________________________________________________________
3d. Re: Inflecting nouns and pronouns for tense?
Posted by: "Roman Rausch" ara...@mail.ru
Date: Thu Nov 11, 2010 1:03 am ((PST))
>Does the phenomenon of inflecting nouns and pronouns for tense exist
>in any natlang? Is it too bizarre to consider? Or would it be an
>evolutionary step worth pursuing?
Wolof has temporal pronouns which are conjugated while the verbs are
invariant. My knowledge about it amounts to its Wikipedia article, though:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolof_language#Pronoun_conjugation_instead_of_verbal_conjugation
In Talmit, I have at least something similar to tense inflection for nouns.
I have states as a separate part of speech. For example, to say 'I'm
sleeping' you say 'I sleeping-state-in' and to say 'I was sleeping', you say
'I sleeping-state-PAST-in'.
If one regards states as abstract nouns, it would be tense marking for
nouns. You cannot really analyze them as verbs, because they are marked by
postpositions like nouns.
I think that such things are well worth pursuing. The traditional parts of
speech once derived by Ancient Greek and Latin grammarians can often be
somewhat of an indoctrination and force one's thinking into defined
patterns. They suit Ancient Greek and Latin, but they needn't suit an
unrelated language. So I enjoy mixing those categories up a bit.
Messages in this topic (6)
________________________________________________________________________
3e. Re: Inflecting nouns and pronouns for tense?
Posted by: "Njenfalgar" njenfal...@gmail.com
Date: Thu Nov 11, 2010 1:06 am ((PST))
2010/11/11 Gary Shannon <fizi...@gmail.com>
> Does the phenomenon of inflecting nouns and pronouns for tense exist
> in any natlang? Is it too bizarre to consider? Or would it be an
> evolutionary step worth pursuing?
>
> Thoughts?
>
> --gary
>
Wolof seems to inflect its pronouns for tense:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolof_language#Pronoun_conjugation_instead_of_verbal_conjugation
I don't know what the etymological source of it is, but it is definitely
possible to have such things in a natlang.
Greets
David
--
Raash te feegatpin: nuukazet nhamaru'eng, shayip büngnetuk seepiit.
http://njenfalgar.4shared.com/
Messages in this topic (6)
________________________________________________________________________
3f. Re: Inflecting nouns and pronouns for tense?
Posted by: "MorphemeAddict" lytl...@gmail.com
Date: Thu Nov 11, 2010 3:50 am ((PST))
No idea is too bizarre to consider. Indeed, that's all the more reason to
consider them.
How do the nouns behave when they are not subjects? Do they still take the
tense marker when they are objects of verbs or of
prepositions/postpositions?
stevo
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 10:31 PM, Gary Shannon <fizi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The word order in my 30-day conlang puts the tense marking particle
> immediately before the subject noun phrase or pronoun, and many of the
> sentences I'm translating in the text I'm using have patterns like
> (glossed in English) "Leave for the coast tomorrow will I." and "Told
> me his secret did he."
>
> As I talk to myself in conlang-X, and as my fluency improves, I'm
> finding the natural tendency is to want to form contractions joining
> the tense marker to the noun/pronoun because the same identical pairs
> of tense+pronoun occur over and over, sentence after sentence. Those
> pairs seem to be begging to be fused. Yet it seemed strange to
> effectively mark the pronoun for tense until I recalled examples where
> this is (sort of) done in English. Sentences like "I'll leave
> tomorrow."; "I've seen him before.", attach the tense to the pronoun,
> if only loosely. Now if I take the next step and actually fuse the
> pair into a single word I could legitimately claim that I am
> inflecting the tense marker for person, OR, it seems, I could just as
> legitimately say that I am inflecting the pronoun for tense. The
> situation is less ambiguous for nouns, where the only interpretation
> is that I am inflecting the noun for tense.
>
> What would make one interpretation of that phenomenon more
> "legitimate" than the other? I rather like the idea of inflecting
> nouns and pronouns for tense, not just because it seems a novel thing
> to do, but because it seem like the "natural" thing to do in this
> particular language. It's like those sentences are telling me that
> this is how it "should" be.
>
> Does the phenomenon of inflecting nouns and pronouns for tense exist
> in any natlang? Is it too bizarre to consider? Or would it be an
> evolutionary step worth pursuing?
>
> Thoughts?
>
> --gary
>
Messages in this topic (6)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
4a. narrative tense evidentials
Posted by: "neo gu" qiihos...@gmail.com
Date: Wed Nov 10, 2010 10:03 pm ((PST))
I've been trying to find out what evidentials are used on narrative
tense verbs and more importantly whether they are marked. Google
telss me that there some inaccessible journal articles and books which
may cover that.
Thanks
Messages in this topic (2)
________________________________________________________________________
4b. Re: narrative tense evidentials
Posted by: "Samuel Stutter" sam.stut...@student.manchester.ac.uk
Date: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:25 am ((PST))
Which journals are they? I might be able to access them via my university
account for you
On 11 Nov 2010, at 06:00, neo gu <qiihos...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've been trying to find out what evidentials are used on narrative
> tense verbs and more importantly whether they are marked. Google
> telss me that there some inaccessible journal articles and books which
> may cover that.
>
> Thanks
Messages in this topic (2)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
5. Kymna
Posted by: "Roman Rausch" ara...@mail.ru
Date: Thu Nov 11, 2010 1:34 am ((PST))
My language Talmit (http://sindanoorie.atspace.com/Talmit.htm) now has a
little sister called Kymna. I'm sure you're all just wild about all those
exciting little details of how it is related to Talmit and to the
proto-language; and can't wait to learn about them, right? So here is a
historical description:
http://sindanoorie.atspace.com/Kymna.htm
They now both form the Tallic language family which I hope to further expand
over time. There is also a list of Proto-Tallic roots and their reflexes in
Talmit and Kymna:
http://sindanoorie.atspace.com/Etymologies.htm
Kymna's phonology is sort of 'Old Norse meets Latin', if it makes any sense,
and I'm actually very satisfied with it.
The nominal morphology has optional affectedness marking I posted about
earlier. The verbal morphology is not too exciting and still work in
progress. A curious thing is that it has only preverbs and no pre- or
postpositions whatsoever.
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
6. New Conlang - Paqatyl
Posted by: "Jorge Melo" dreck0...@yahoo.com
Date: Thu Nov 11, 2010 4:48 am ((PST))
I'm Kjor Olfaa from Brazil. I've just launched my conlang Paqatyl (formerly
known as Montsim), with a 3,000- word lexicon and a COMPLETE 40-page grammar.
Paqatyl is the most democratic conlang in the world, as it is based on
grammatical rules from approximately 400 languages.
Paqatyl Community Website (with free grammar PDF download):
paqatyl.proboards.com
Messages in this topic (1)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/
<*> Your email settings:
Digest Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
conlang-nor...@yahoogroups.com
conlang-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
conlang-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
